» Site Navigation |
|
»
»
»
» Motorcycle Forums
|
|
 |
|
05-21-2008, 09:02 PM
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
FNG :)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Alabama
Posts: 16
|
1994 Road King opinions...Good or Bad ?
Guys I'm looking at a 1994 RK as a 2 up tour bike. It has around 35'000 miles and runs and looks good. I have never had a 1340cc HD that old, and I was wondering if any of you guys have a same or simular model bikes and if they have enough power and are reliable ? Any know issues with these models ? I guess I need to find out loan value also from NADA.
Thanks for any info you guys can provide.
|
|
|
|
Sponsored Links
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
05-21-2008, 10:48 PM
|
#2 (permalink)
|
|
IronButt
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Wherever I am...
Posts: 148
|
I have a '95 FLHT w/ 265,000 miles on it...it's pretty reliable...
I religiously do all the scheduled maintenance @ the recommended intervals.
As far as power...last year I put a S&S 113" & Baker OD6 in it cuz I didn't want to put a fresh top end on a old bottom end & I didn't want to subject a 200,000+ mile tranny to the torque & hp of the 113...
It powered us 2 up for 12 years w/ virtually no problems...
If I were looking @ an older evo powered bagger, I would go for a '97...
It opens up more options to you...but if the price is right on the '94...snag it!
Putt
|
|
|
|
|
05-21-2008, 11:55 PM
|
#3 (permalink)
|
|
FNG :)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Alabama
Posts: 16
|
Putt...whats the main difference in a 1997 ? A guy who is an excellent HD wrench told me to avoid 1999 and 2000 models due to mechanical reliablity issues. The 94 is a fair price but I just don't want to buy a bargin bike then be disappointed.
|
|
|
|
|
05-22-2008, 12:59 AM
|
#4 (permalink)
|
|
IronButt
Join Date: May 2008
Location: SE U.S.A.
Posts: 1,005
|
Rocko Rock-
If the bike looks like it really has only 35,000 on it. I'd snag it..
I have only 76,000 on my '97 RK no issues..
Difference is 94 was 1st year for RK, & in '97 was a new frame design, 3/4" longer & 1" lower frame at seat area..
One other difference started in '96 with rounded off switches at grips....
My 94 FatBoy is my main ride, but getting parts they now call it OLD  & call 96 & newer, NEW EVO's
The 1999-2000 were the first of the twincams , & had many teething problems.. I would avoid them also..
Good luck, a good evo RK is a sweet riding machine !!!
__________________
Bud 
Last edited by Buddy Seat; 05-22-2008 at 01:04 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
05-22-2008, 02:32 AM
|
#5 (permalink)
|
|
IronButt
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Wherever I am...
Posts: 148
|
There ya go RR...Buddy beat me too it...good luck bro!
If the price is right, buy it & if ya don't like it...hell...I might buy it from ya...
IMHO, a 35,000 mile evo RK, EG or RG is just getting broken in...
Putt
|
|
|
|
|
05-22-2008, 08:30 PM
|
#6 (permalink)
|
|
IronButt
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: portland
Posts: 145
|
I had a 95, it was a good bike, but the dimensions made it feel similar to riding a heritage with touring suspension, which was allright. It will probably seem a little underpowered compared to the new bikes especially when passing while 2 up. But I do have good memories with that bike, for what thats worth.
|
|
|
|
|
05-22-2008, 08:33 PM
|
#7 (permalink)
|
|
FNG :)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Alabama
Posts: 16
|
I appreciate the info guys. I have also been looking on J&P and other sites to check availability of aftermarket parts. If I snag it I gotta add some goodies to make it my own. 
RR
|
|
|
|
|
05-22-2008, 11:29 PM
|
#8 (permalink)
|
|
IronButt
Join Date: May 2008
Location: SE U.S.A.
Posts: 1,005
|
Plenty of goodies to be found to do your thing on it...
Just have to look..
And my stock 97 RK can still pass my buddy's 2001 TC, no problem..
__________________
Bud
|
|
|
|
|
05-25-2008, 05:03 PM
|
#9 (permalink)
|
|
FNG :)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Florida. North central
Posts: 8
|
Why not a 98 evo?
__________________
Panama Red, Panama Red, He'll steal your woman, then he'll rob your head. Panama Red.
|
|
|
|
|
05-25-2008, 06:17 PM
|
#10 (permalink)
|
|
IronButt
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Wherever I am...
Posts: 148
|
Nuthin wrong w/ a '98 evo, snapper...I guess I shoulda said '97 or later...
Putt
__________________
'95 113" bagger
'99 96" 'train
Don't hide 'em...ride 'em....
|
|
|
|
|
05-25-2008, 11:13 PM
|
#11 (permalink)
|
|
IronButt
Join Date: May 2008
Location: SE U.S.A.
Posts: 1,005
|
Well IMO '94 & '98 RK's both have some significance
'94 RK = 1st year for RK's
'98 RK last of the rubber evo RK's + 95th anniversary year
In time this could make both years collectable..(yes long time)
Kinda like a 1948 Pan= 1st year
& 1965 Pan = last of the tin-tops both quite collectable..
__________________
Bud
|
|
|
|
|
05-25-2008, 11:20 PM
|
#12 (permalink)
|
|
Hater of the dyno!!!!!!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: In a house
Posts: 5,129
|
Hi.
Nothing wrong with that there bike at all, the Kelly blue book value for that bike as a privet sale is 8975.00 as a suggested retail price.
link......
http://www.kbb.com/kbb/OtherVehicles...83&YearId=1994
__________________
I'm Just Sayin'...
2007 FLHT 103 CID SE-255
IDS drive W/30 tooth Andrews
K&N Air filter system
Vance & Hines Pro Pipe BP & FuelPak.
Torque(A bunch) HP(enough)
I have learned, Just say NO to Dyno's!
Member DooF Clenas , and proud of it.
Professional Rockat Surgen
Disclaimer.
I do not work for Vance and Hines, I just like their stuff. Any suggestions I make are to be used at your own risk.
|
|
|
|
|
05-26-2008, 12:22 AM
|
#13 (permalink)
|
|
IronButt
Join Date: May 2008
Location: SE U.S.A.
Posts: 1,005
|
my obsolete '94 Fatty has a higher value, just under $10K, & nada is at $10K.
I would have guessed the rubber RK would have been higher, than my Fatty...
But, I'm ok wit dat...
__________________
Bud
Last edited by Buddy Seat; 05-26-2008 at 12:26 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
05-26-2008, 09:11 AM
|
#14 (permalink)
|
|
FNG :)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Alabama
Posts: 16
|
I finally got to ride the 1994 RK yesterday. Nice looking bike, power was not as strong as the 02 Fatboy I have been riding. The motor had a lot of movement (shaking) I guess thats the rubber mount. I really couldn't feel it in the bike. It took curves well and had a soft but firm comfortable ride. It seemed to have more room than the 02 Fatboy. Over all the RK's are nice bikes. I want to ride a newer model RK within the next week. My wife rode the RK with me and complained about the bag bars rubbing the back of her legs. I guess I can buy bag support bars without the chrome bars in front of the bags ?
Last edited by Rocko Rock; 05-26-2008 at 09:50 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
05-26-2008, 11:27 PM
|
#15 (permalink)
|
|
IronButt
Join Date: May 2008
Location: SE U.S.A.
Posts: 1,005
|
Yep motor shaking like it's almost gonna jump out at idle is the rubber mounting system..
If you try a 97 or later RK, the new & improved 3/4" longer frame really makes more of a difference than what it sounds like..
Happy Hunting..
__________________
Bud
|
|
|
|
| Sponsored Links |
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
