Considering a Rocket vs an Indian

RKTNMYPKT said:

This may be a joke posting, has anybody taken a good look at his avatar?

Click to expand...

EasTexRIII said:

Ok, I'll do my best attempt at a Jim impersonation..............
If you choose the Rocket, you will look just like your avatar within a few miles

Click to expand...

RKTNMYPKT said:

I've been riding motorcycles for over 35 years and I have never owned any brand of motorcycle for more than two years at a time.

However I rode the R3T for 5 yrs and the Roadster for 3.
The reason for that is because the Rocket is such a fabulous motorcycle. And is in a class all of its own.


I would agree with everything everybody has to say about the Rocket, except for perhaps BillyIndiana's comments about the R3T being a complete and ready to go Motorcycle as compared to the Chieftain. as far as touring motorcycles go the R3T does not hold a candle to the Indian chieftain.

The chieftain has all of the amenities that a true touring motorcycle should have, where as the rocket touring has a windshield, floor boards, bags and a ton of torque and horsepower.

The rest of the stuff could be added of course.

Where as adding horsepower and torque to the chieftain would be an expensive and very limited proposition.

The only reason I no longer own a Rocket is because after eight years I was ready to try something new and I loved the looks of the Indian , and I could not afford to have both.

of course the biggest adjustment from going from a Rocket to an Indian is the horsepower and torque or lack there of.

The first time I ran out of throttle on the Indian and had to downshift while going up a long uphill grade my thoughts were WTF!

But now I am used to the Indian I know what to expect from the bike and I absolutely love it. I routinely get my Indian up to 100 to 110 mph without any trouble at all. The only difference being is that you cannot maintain that speed on a hill without downshifting on an Indian,but on Rocket you wouldn't even have to think about it

It all comes down to what you want from a motorcycle.

Test ride both, let us know what you decide.

EDIT:

If it helps you make up your mind your not going to find a better group of guys and gal's that are on this forum

The guys over on the Indian forum are mean to me

Click to expand...

BillyIndiana said:

Let me clarify myself. You are correct the Chieftain's fairing is wonderful. The adjustable windscreen rocks on that bike. I was looking at the Springfield. The dealer did not have a demo of the Springfield as it was new to the market. Hence I took the Chieftain for the weekend as a demo. Give the dealer credit for telling me to take it for the weekend. I really think he was trying to up sell me and I loved the Chieftain, but I would have upgraded to the Roadmaster and at that point the pricing was getting out of control.

I do not need or want a radio on the open road. I like to hear, feel, and see the world around me. I like to hear the engine working and the tires on the road. I like to get lost in thought as the miles fly by. When I stepped back and thought about what I wanted out of a bike the Rocket was my choice.

All Indian motorcycles are awesome bikes and anyone that decides to go down that path would definitely have my respect.

Click to expand...

RKTNMYPKT said:

I've been riding motorcycles for over 35 years and I have never owned any brand of motorcycle for more than two years at a time.

However I rode the R3T for 5 yrs and the Roadster for 3.
The reason for that is because the Rocket is such a fabulous motorcycle. And is in a class all of its own.


I would agree with everything everybody has to say about the Rocket, except for perhaps BillyIndiana's comments about the R3T being a complete and ready to go Motorcycle as compared to the Chieftain. as far as touring motorcycles go the R3T does not hold a candle to the Indian chieftain.

The chieftain has all of the amenities that a true touring motorcycle should have, where as the rocket touring has a windshield, floor boards, bags and a ton of torque and horsepower.

The rest of the stuff could be added of course.

Where as adding horsepower and torque to the chieftain would be an expensive and very limited proposition.

The only reason I no longer own a Rocket is because after eight years I was ready to try something new and I loved the looks of the Indian , and I could not afford to have both.

of course the biggest adjustment from going from a Rocket to an Indian is the horsepower and torque or lack there of.

The first time I ran out of throttle on the Indian and had to downshift while going up a long uphill grade my thoughts were WTF!

But now I am used to the Indian I know what to expect from the bike and I absolutely love it. I routinely get my Indian up to 100 to 110 mph without any trouble at all. The only difference being is that you cannot maintain that speed on a hill without downshifting on an Indian,but on Rocket you wouldn't even have to think about it

It all comes down to what you want from a motorcycle.

Test ride both, let us know what you decide.

EDIT:

If it helps you make up your mind your not going to find a better group of guys and gal's that are on this forum

The guys over on the Indian forum are mean to me

Click to expand...

RKTNMYPKT said:

I've been riding motorcycles for over 35 years and I have never owned any brand of motorcycle for more than two years at a time.

However I rode the R3T for 5 yrs and the Roadster for 3.
The reason for that is because the Rocket is such a fabulous motorcycle. And is in a class all of its own.


I would agree with everything everybody has to say about the Rocket, except for perhaps BillyIndiana's comments about the R3T being a complete and ready to go Motorcycle as compared to the Chieftain. as far as touring motorcycles go the R3T does not hold a candle to the Indian chieftain.

The chieftain has all of the amenities that a true touring motorcycle should have, where as the rocket touring has a windshield, floor boards, bags and a ton of torque and horsepower.

The rest of the stuff could be added of course.

Where as adding horsepower and torque to the chieftain would be an expensive and very limited proposition.

The only reason I no longer own a Rocket is because after eight years I was ready to try something new and I loved the looks of the Indian , and I could not afford to have both.

of course the biggest adjustment from going from a Rocket to an Indian is the horsepower and torque or lack there of.

The first time I ran out of throttle on the Indian and had to downshift while going up a long uphill grade my thoughts were WTF!

But now I am used to the Indian I know what to expect from the bike and I absolutely love it. I routinely get my Indian up to 100 to 110 mph without any trouble at all. The only difference being is that you cannot maintain that speed on a hill without downshifting on an Indian,but on Rocket you wouldn't even have to think about it

It all comes down to what you want from a motorcycle.

Test ride both, let us know what you decide.

EDIT:

If it helps you make up your mind your not going to find a better group of guys and gal's that are on this forum

The guys over on the Indian forum are mean to me

Click to expand...

TriumPhil said:

Jamie, I believe that just as soon as you've taken both for test rides, you'll answer your own question. I've been riding for nearly 52 years, have owned about 16 motorcycles and ridden hundreds of others. The R3 is hands-down the most satisfying, fun and quality built of 'em all.

As RKTNMYPKT has already mentioned, even though they are fundamentally different machines in most every way and despite the fact that Indians are better equipped out-the-door for touring, I cannot see the added value in the Indian reflected in its inflated price. For $2-5K (or more if you choose)you can deck out an R3R with all the touring bells and whistles anyone could need and the result will be a better built, better performing, more comfortable and considerably less homogeneous (read, "boring") steed.

Why would you possibly opt to own a more expensive, inferior and far more common ride when you can have your very own belle of the ball? No offense to any Indian aficianados, but this comparison does not compute for me.

Click to expand...

EasTexRIII said:

That cake woulda looked good sitting on your tank on your Christmas card photo though.............

Click to expand...

JamiePT said:

The aviator is a statement to the fact that I don't own a bike and I feel like I stand out like a *****on a cake around here. When I pick up a bike hopefully soon I'll change it to whatever I buy.

Click to expand...

JamiePT said:

The aviator is a statement to the fact that I don't own a bike and I feel like I stand out like a *****on a cake around here. When I pick up a bike hopefully soon I'll change it to whatever I buy.

Click to expand...