Road King advice wanted.

[Akulaking]

I’m looking at buying an older Road King to add to the stable, had a couple of Sportsters a few years ago and now have a yearning for a big Harley. I love the look of the Road King, a bit old school cool. Been watching Wheels through time a bit too much!
So, after learning some models had cam bearing issues, some had cam chain tensioner issues etc, I’m not sure which year to go for.
A dealer has a lovely 96 model and a nearly as lovely 08 model. Both low mileage mint looking bikes. 12 years difference, same price £6999, same dealer.
Any thoughts from the Harley contingent?

 

[brut33]

It was only the 88 (1450cc) engine that had the cam chain tensioner issues, which was sorted for the 96 (1573cc) engine.

I'm a bit baffled by the 12 years difference.
The 96 engined bikes were from 2007.
Therefore the 2008 bike you've seen should also be a 96.

PS, I agree about the older more classic looking bikes. I'm not into the newer blacked out models.

 

[Akulaking]

It was only the 88 (1450cc) engine that had the cam chain tensioner issues, which was sorted for the 96 (1573cc) engine.

I'm a bit baffled by the 12 years difference.
The 96 engined bikes were from 2007.
Therefore the 2008 bike you've seen should also be a 96.

Sorry I meant a 1996 and a 2008 model year.

 

[Nice 'n' Fat]

I'd go for an Evo

 

[brut33]

The 1996 would be an Evo engine. The twin cam was produced from 1999 onwards.
I'd go for the 2008 bike.

 

[Robbo1200ADV]

Had 1997 Road king and have a 2006 Fat boy
The EVO RK was a lovely bike , if it has the cast wheels and hard boxes go for that , they are lovely and smooth

 

[Akulaking]

These are the bikes in question. 11 years apart. (Not 12)
Silver one, one owner, 12k miles 2007
Blue and white one 1996 2 owners, 7k miles.

 

[oblertone]

1996 = Classic Insurance

 

[Akulaking]

1996 = Classic Insurance

Good point.

 

[Nice 'n' Fat]

Deffo the Evo although to me it's a grand too expensive

Probably the best engine H-D ever built

 

[squibb34]

The 1340 Evo looks nice, but has a strange MOT history & back story, so I think I would pass unless I was able to deal with the owner directly to delve a little deeper. Looking at their catalogue, presumably PM M/Cs are selling customer bikes on commission SoR.

That would leave the 2008 bike - it's a standard seat, but the chassis look low to me & the lower frame rail odd. I guess it could just be the camera lens/angle. Still it's been ridden to/from the MOT regularly once a year & hopefully had the benefit of the odd oil change from time to time.

It's a shame their EG 110 CVO is over 40k miles, as that would otherwise be my admittedly biased choice.

Just my take - go check them out if they float your boat.

 

[Akulaking]

The 1340 Evo looks nice, but has a strange MOT history & back story, so I think I would pass unless I was able to deal with the owner directly to delve a little deeper. Looking at their catalogue, presumably PM M/Cs are selling customer bikes on commission SoR.

That would leave the 2008 bike - it's a standard seat, but the chassis look low to me & the lower frame rail odd. I guess it could just be the camera lens/angle. Still it's been ridden to/from the MOT regularly once a year & hopefully had the benefit of the odd oil change from time to time.

It's a shame their EG 110 CVO is over 40k miles, as that would otherwise be my admittedly biased choice.

Just my take - go check them out if they float your boat.

Yes the Evo mileage is odd, there is some confusing comment about it having a two year Speedo which doesn’t make much sense, also the first mot was done in 2008 meaning it’s almost certainly an import. Coming into the country with less than 7k miles at 12 years old seems a bit suss too.
The other one is a UK bike at least, and as you say been run to the mot station and back most years, with little other use.
Didn’t notice the low frame rail, the Evo looks similar?

Thanks all for the input.

 

[Clifton]

08 was somewhat of a transition year for the Tourers. It was the first year for the 96, 6-speed, large tank, throttle by wire, and a few other electrical changes, and final year for the old chassis and exhaust.
Between the two I think I lean toward the 1996 Evo if it checks out. Is that blue and white a factory colour offering? I don't recall ever seeing it but they well could have made different colours for Euro markets.

 

[twizzle]

Evo parts like exhaust y piece (can crack) are getting harder to source

 

[twizzle]

Having had an Evo for years - I’d go for the newest twin cam you could afford

 

[Clifton]

The 2008 96 makes a little more power for long distance touring especially 2-up, than an Evo. But for casual riding and to keep long term I think unmolested Evos will likely hold their resale value better than 2008 and older Twin Cams. I didn't realize Evo parts have become hard to source though. For actual riding, my Twin Cam preference would be for one with the new chassis which would be 2009+.

 

[donkeydoo]

I have a 03 twin cam, cam chain tensioners do need checking and probably renewing, which I managed myself. Alex at Fast lane headwork is great if you need help advice..

 

[donkeydoo]

Evo looks nice. and a lot cheaper

 

[Doris]

Having had an Evo for years - I’d go for the newest twin cam you could afford

This…

 

[Captain jack]

The evo will sound nicer potato potato, carb not fuel injected. It will also be happier at 65 rather than 75. The later bike will idle higher and be happy at 75 plus. However, inside and outside it has been made with “economy” in mind