I also found interesting the comment that the 1854 c.c. V-Twin makes more torque than the V-Max. It is clearly stated, and not merely implied.
So, less engine height, better fuel mileage (being seen by most all posting owners), greater torque than both V-4 versions of the prior and current model that carries that engine, and 110 mph, on any bike, is 110 mph, if you need to run down the road at that speed. I don't...now, with this bike so much fun to ride and operate, I have in fact (as I stated already) dropped my average highway speed, 15 mph lower) than my mostly always, 75 mph cruise on my Wing....for I am so enjoying the entire ride envelope, getting there faster, is no longer a ride equation. It is the total ride, that now is the equation. Same feelings for my co-riding wife. We are relaxed, love the road feel of this bike, love the 'thrum' of the matured pipes....simply love the whole envelope. 60 mph cruise is now very cool with us....BUT, I will use the full torque and throttle for passing on two lanes, always. When I need that performance, man...it is there!
The actual comment, not implied, that the older V-4 and its current version, the Max, need twice the rpm to bring on that engine configuration's max torque was also a 'ear note' for me. They need over 6,000 rpm, while my SVTC produces max torque at less than 2,700 rpm. So more actual torque, at half the rev's needed by the V-4's, and a more quiet less high buzz output. There were many reasons that they went to this type of motor and NOT as so many current V-4 owners like to espouse...they did it because it was a 'cheaper' route. Not at all....that is just plain 'fake news'...lol.
BTW Chief, they clearly low-balled (really low balled...) the estimated MPG figure, for even in this video, he clearly again stated that we claim 34 mpg, but other riders "have gotten more". No kidding sir...no kidding, 'have we got more!!!!'
Like 33 percent more, all the time...every tank...