– Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Victory Unveils 104 Horsepower, 1179 cc Octane



After plenty of hype, Victory has introduced the Octane production machine, Claiming 104 hp and 76 foot/pounds of torque from an 1179cc v-twin, the Octane promises to be the fastest, most powerful Victory ever. Perhaps the biggest news is the relatively low price starting at $10,499 U.S. Visit Victory’s web site for additional details: Here are some photos, the full press release and specifications from Victory:

Every high-octane horsepower enthusiast is familiar with the muscle car formula: take a big motor, insert it into a lightweight chassis, then delete any creature comforts or other unnecessary accessories. What’s left is just what you need to go very fast, and nothing else.

The all-new 2017 Victory Octane is the two-wheeled expression of that concept, with a modern twist. This is raw adrenaline that rules the streets. A 1200cc, liquid-cooled V-twin—Victory’s first-ever liquid-cooled engine—utilizes dual overhead cams and four-valve heads to rev beyond 8000 rpm and put down an authoritative 104 horsepower. That’s more horsepower than any Victory motorcycle ever built. And weighing just 528 pounds, it’s the lightest Victory motorcycle ever built, too. No surprise, then, that Octane is also the quickest Victory down the quarter-mile, and the fastest from 0-60 mph, too. And with a price starting at just $10,499, Octane runs in a class of its own.

A stiff and light cast-aluminum frame transmits every last one of those horsepower directly to the pavement. Sharp steering geometry, a tight, 62.1-inch wheelbase and 32-degrees of available lean angle deliver agility previously unknown to American V-twin motorcycles. Muscular styling cuts an undeniably modern profile and a sportbike-inspired bullet cowl improves airflow over the rider at the triple-digit speeds Octane is built to achieve.


Developed from the Project 156 prototype that was tested at the most demanding racing event in the world—the Pikes Peak International Hill Climb™—the 60-degree V-twin features short-stroke engine geometry just like the Project 156 racer to allow higher engine rpm and more horsepower, and a quick-revving engine response more like a sportbike than any traditional American V-Twin. An electronically metered 60mm throttle body feeds high-flow, 4-valve heads operated by dual overhead cams, and liquid cooling quenches the heat that is the byproduct of generating 104 horsepower and 76 foot-pounds of tire-shredding torque. Geared short for quicker acceleration, Octane can sprint down the quarter-mile in 12 seconds and rush from 0-60 mph in less than four seconds. With the heart of a racer, Octane has power to burn. 



Raw power is only half the musclebike equation. You also need a solid chassis that can transmit all that power to the pavement and also hold a tight line when bent into a corner. Octane’s solid-mounted powertrain is a stressed member that connects cast-aluminum front and rear frame sections, with twin tubular-steel backbones for added reinforcement. This rigid assembly is suspended up front by a 41mm fork equipped with dual-rate springs for solid front-end feedback over any type of pavement, and out back with stylish laydown shocks mounted 53 degrees off-horizontal, also equipped with preload-adjustable dual-rate springs. Oversized, 298mm disc brakes with stainless-steel lines at both ends wait at-the-ready for those rare occasions when you want to shed speed, instead. Cast aluminum, 10-spoke wheels are sized and shod for sure-footed handling. The 18-inch front wheel wears 130/70-18 rubber, while the 17-inch rear wheel is wrapped with a 160/70-17 tire. A low-slung solo saddle that rides just 25.9-inches above the pavement, an equally low pullback handlebar and semi-forward-set foot controls create a riding position that looks properly badass but still provides adequate support when the rider grabs a big handful of throttle and the bike wants to rocket off the line.  


There are no smooth, flowing lines here. Octane is the most aggressive Victory motorcycle ever built, and the styling has been revised to suit with harder lines, sharper creases, a more-pronounced center spine and other details that make Octane look leaner and meaner than any American motorcycle ever before. The bullet cowl is standard equipment and screams to oncoming traffic that this bike is built for speed—the only thing other riders are going to see is the LED taillight disappearing into the distance. Chrome won’t get you home, so there’s hardly any shiny stuff on Octane. The bulk of the chassis, running gear and powertrain are blacked-out, and Matte Super Steel Gray bodywork looks all business. Even the tank badge has been cast in gray instead of the traditional Victory red to create a modern, monochrome look.



Based off a proven Polaris® platform, Octane uses a significant number of unique parts specifically designed and engineered to deliver the high-performance, raw-adrenaline riding experience Victory riders demand. With a high-revving engine character and surprising high-rpm power hit, it behaves more like a sportbike than any American V-twin that has come before. With unexpectedly low weight and lots of available lean angle, a well-ridden Octane will embarrass many replica-racers down a twisty stretch of pavement. And with pricing starting at just $10,499, it’s less expensive than most supersports—and tougher looking, too. Fast, capable, stylish and affordable, Victory’s Octane is the formula for the Modern American Musclebike.


DRY WEIGHT 528 LB. (240 KG)


BORE X STROKE (MM) 101.0 X 73.6MM








FRONT TIRES 130/70-18 63H
REAR TIRES 160/70-17 76H


SEAT HEIGHT 25.9 IN. / 658 MM
WHEELBASE 62.1 IN. / 1578MM
RAKE/TRAIL 29.0°/ 5.1 IN. / 130MM




See more of MD’s great photography:



  1. todd says:

    Did anyone catch in the latest Cycle World where Peter Jones writes an article titled “This Bike Sucks”. It just so happens the feature/cover bike is the Octane. Apparently the CW staff found it a challenge to report on the bike honestly while still considering the interests of Victory… or that’s how I interpreted it.

  2. Rene says:

    Imo victory fell short,it could of been so much more, it could of started a new moto movement. (Well maybe?) It’s a nice looking bike and the numbers aren’t that bad, not great I know, but respectful for the that type of platform. Till next time I guess.

  3. Dan says:

    Sorry guys but I was hoping for a standard or a sport platform with with the pikes peak 156 . Another thing is encourage not rage on a new bike we whine about not having enough domestic options but never do anytihing as a consumer to postively express this to companies . Danny rests his peace .

  4. chris says:

    Very disappointing indeed! After seeing the project 156 bike and hearing all the talk that Victory was going to become a performance brand we see this rebadged Indian scout with a slightly bigger engine Now I really hope E.B.R. is successful in there come back because it sure doesn’t look like any other American company is ever going make a true performance bike.

  5. Dirty Bob says:

    Not a cruiser and not a street bike. Yet it closely runs with a Sportster 1200 (tweaked, 96hp). It doesn’t impress me much. No way can it be compared to a v-rod!

    • HS1-RD-CX100-VFR says:

      If we get past the house of lies the marketing efforts built, we are left with the reality you are posting about. This bike is not anything defineable or of value, except for being somewhat cheap in comparison to other American bikes. It is not “American Muscle”, unless American muscle is half of that from Germany, Japan, Italy, and Austria. It isn’t a “performance cruiser” because no one actually goes performance cruising, and others that portend to be this are so much more in every means that can be measured. Style is subjective, but I have to think that few cruiser people are excited about the looks of this thing. It isn’t a heritage bike because Victory doesn’t really have any. It isn’t a street flat tracker, a street drag bike, a starting point for a custom, a bike with enough range to ride a scenic route, or something that holds it’s own on tavern row. It’s just a big build-up to a product that is really just a big nothing. Well, unless you want to look stupid-silly in a full face helmet, with feet forward, while sliding on a surface that has been powdered by a production crew.

  6. daveA says:

    Ok, after reading all of these comments I’ve come around. I agree that this bike is awful. I mean, it can’t possibly hang with a ZX14 in the 1/4 mile, it can’t carry a fraction of the stuff that a Gold Wing can, and it’s a ripoff as well, what with coming equipped with 1/2 the wheels that my Honda Accord came with. Plus the Accord came with Nav and a rear window defogger. Let’s see your rear window defogger, Mr. New Victory. Ya, I thought so…

    I don’t know what I was thinking.

    • Provologna says:

      Respectfully, if your post is a reply to the myriad and almost universal moans here, your reading comprehension leaves much to be desired.

      “Victory” (no pun intended) built and heavily marketed a Pike’s Peak race prototype. In the unlikely case you recently awoke from a coma, such bike has as much in common with the vehicles you listed as dog food has with a gourmet meal served in a 5-star restaurant, by a server in a tuxedo.

      Now they released another in an ever-growing line of “performance cruisers” which a thirty year old 750cc Japanese standard would blow off the road on a mountain pass.

      Frankly, I have doubts you read even a fraction of the comments, as the following was repeated at least a dozen times. Victory earned their tongue lashing by over promising and under delivering, a cardinal marketing sin. This is the very essence of the complaints, and you ignoring it only further highlights it.

      If they had simply promised just another generally boring cruiser performance clone, there would have been about 1/20th the number of posts or less, little vitriol, and several yawns.

      Your post perfectly defines a “straw man” argument. You sarcastically mock the presence of non-existent complaints.

  7. HS1-RD-CX100-VFR says:

    This whole debacle gets down to a very insincere public relations machine writing big expectation checks that they never intended to cash. They exploited the premise that a major American manufacturer was going to fill a huge, 70 year old, sucking vacumn by offerring some kind of a non-cruiser based performance machine to garner big attention. They delevered a slightly warmed over Scout with zero aspirations of being anything more. They were simply schmarmy and intentional liars from beginning to middle to end. This stench may sink the Victory badge. It has for me, and I would have bought one if the premise had been fulfilled. I wasn’t even expecting the product to be a full-on sport bike. Certainly, more than this was being foreshadowed, though. Just go away and die Victory. Maybe honest people will pick up the pieces.

  8. Jeremy in TX says:

    Hmmm. An Indian 750 has just been approved for AMA flat track racing. Time to get it our hopes up again ladies and gents?

    • Bob says:

      Details, please.

      • Jeremy in TX says:

        There aren’t too many details available. AMA just approved an all new Indian 750cc twin engine for competition in flat track. As far as I know, the engine was designed from the ground up as a race-only design and is not a sleeved down Scout engine. I imagine someone is wrapping a frame around it right now, but I haven’t seen anything on that.

        So now we can all blather on for the next twelve months on how likely the production bike inspired by this is going to be something all new akin to the taste of a Ducati Scrambler (or possible just another Scout variant along the lines of those RSD street tracker Scouts). Or will they pull the rug out from under our hopes and introduce an all new small displacement cruiser? Let the dreaming begin.

  9. DaveA says:

    It’s more than a little ridiculous that almost every complaint in these comments comes from a person who isn’t even close to the target demographic of this bike. If you aren’t a potential Sportster buyer, you aren’t the target market here. Get over yourselves already.

    When viewed as competition for the Sportster, this bike is a home run. Not everyone is going to go for the retro look of the Scout, and for folks who are more inclined towards hot rod looks and modern lines, this bike is the perfect compliment to the Scout.

    As for the whole ‘V Rods are vastly superior thing,’ please. This bike weighs about 70 pounds less than a V Rod, and the only place a stock V Rod makes 120hp is in the brochure. Also, having ridden both (Scout, not this Victory) I can tell you that it feels more like a 170 pound difference). It’s also interesting to note that there have been a couple of comparos that pitted the V Rod against the Scout and the Scout is undefeated as far as I know.

    If this Victory isn’t your cup of tea, that’s fine. It isn’t mine either, because I’m not a cruiser guy. But, to dismiss it as failure because it’s not a sportbike, or not 160hp, is more than a little silly.

    • todd says:

      You don’t have to be a Republican to complain about Trump.

      • mickey says:

        or a democrat to not trust Hillary

        This would be a poor read if it was only commented on by the 3 people who have liked this motorcycle

    • Auphliam says:

      Yes, when viewed as competition for a boat anchor it’s a veritable rocket ship.

      Now, run out there and find one single piece of Victory press material from the past year+ that says the Porject156 bike will serve as inspiration for a Sportster killer.

      • Stratkat says:

        yes!, yes!, YEEEESSSSS!!!!

      • Scott says:

        Auphliam: Best reply on this thread. 🍻

      • daveA says:

        I tried to meet your challenge and I failed. I admit it. Try as I might, all I could find was material leading me to believe that it was a GSXR assassin. My mistake.

        • Provologna says:

          Your sarcastic and disingenuous reply only further cements what a “straw man” post was your original complaint about posters here. Can you find one post where someone expected a “GSXR assassin?”

          I read all or almost all the posts here. The biggest failures are posts that attack the messengers of bad news, posters with exceedingly strong negative reaction to the bike, which is about 95%+. It is fail to defend and promote this bike by personally mocking those who dislike it.

          It’s called an “ad hominem” attack, Latin for “against the man” (or woman). It always indicates utter failure for the person using such tactic. It’s akin to two kids arguing, and one says, “You stink,” or other such nonsense.

          Admittedly, there were a few posts where persons listed simple reasons why they liked this bike, and that’s 100% fair, fine, and appropriate.

          For the 100th time: What this bike is, is utter fail compared to what the OEM promised. It’s possible that this is true, and to the majority it’s crystal clear, closed case. It’s possible to still love this bike in spite of the dishonesty. It’s also OK to say you love the bike without mocking those who see only the failed promise and shall not soon get over it.

          Maybe you should try that last option?

          • daveA says:

            1. I don’t love the bike. I’m not a cruiser guy.

            2. Please quote here an OEM ad copy item that promises more than the highest performance $10k cruiser that exists, by a pretty large margin, which is what this bike is. If you can do so, I’ll gladly apologize for all of my comments.


  10. Michael H says:

    For those making the comparison with a V-Rod, the price of a V-Rod Muscle is $16,449 on the HD website. The price of the Victory Octane is $10,499 on the Victory website.

  11. Skif says:

    This bike is for those who liked a lot about the Indian Scout but were put off by the fenders and engine heads. I expect an Octane Sixty soon for just under $9K. It will be this bike with Scout Sixty internals so it is basically already in production. They will remove the headlight cowling, differ the sideplate and paint it another color (not red) to make it look a little different. For the price it will be a good bike too. I don’t know about their crazy marketing dept. but their basic business plan is lockstep Harley and very predictable.

  12. JPJ says:

    Polaris: Victory / Indian, These are solid built bikes, from an American manufacture. Motorcyclist will vote with there money. Yes it’s not a groundbreaking machine like the “156 Project”. Sure it’s a slightly tweaked Scout. Just look at the raw numbers, 104HP, 76ft lb torque, 528lb dry weight,low MSRP vs.the competition. This will be a fun bike to ride.

  13. Mad Mick says:

    104 hp, single front disc brake, forward controls, no ABS, no TC. This is supposed to be & I quote Victory “an American muscle bike”. Have to be kidding. Sporty? Dont think so. A Vrod pumps out 120 HP; the Griso 120 HP while the new xDiavel has 156. Wake up Victory. This should have ABS, twin front discs, mid controls, bigger tank ( one dissimiar to Scout’s tank) with 140 HP. Why didnt they make engine capacity bigger? 1300 or 1400 cc?

    • Mad Mick says:

      Just checked the specs for the Octane on the Australian website. It comes with ABS as standard. It would be likewise in Eurooe & the UK. Why nit in USA?

      • Jeremy in TX says:

        Because we are convinced that we are so much better at emergency braking than the rest of the world.

        • Scott says:

          Nah, it’s because if Americans touch the front brakes, we’ll go right over the handlebars!

          Doesn’t happen everywhere else, though…

    • daveA says:

      A 120hp Griso. Really. There isn’t a stock Griso on Earth that makes over 100hp on a dyno. Also, the Griso isn’t a cruiser. V-Rods do make 120hp though, as measured at the brochure. But, of you put the $6000 dollar savings you get with the Victory into the motor, I;m gonna guess you’d be eating VRods for brunch.

      Regarding the xDiavel, (2) of these Victories put together make around 200hp, and still cost about $2500 less than one xDiavel.

      Plesae tell us more about the bikes that directly compete with this new Victory model.

      • mickey says:

        yea as measured at the brochure. Dyno charts for a stock Vrod I have seen put rwhp at about 105-107.

        and a 8v Moto Guzzi Griso puts out about 95 hp at the wheel

        I’m guessing this 104 hp Victory is at the crank as well and on a dyno will be in the upper 80,or low 90 hp range

        we already know the 100 hp Scout puts out in the mid 80’s

        and the mighty FZ09 everyone quotes 115 HP actually puts down about 105 hp in A mode where it’s unrideable and 95 in B mode where most people ride.

        I just wish they would all quote rwhp…and full tanks of gas on weight

  14. Ricardo says:

    The only good thing about this is the price. But the V-Rod is much better engine with more power close to 120 HP and 72 of torque. I guess I’ll stick with my 2003 V-Rod for a while…

  15. carl says:

    I have had many bikes, pretty much every sportbike out there, from gsxr1000 to Kawi zx14, a few Harleys and a Goldwing GL1800. I now own have a Victory Cross Country Tour, and yes to me for a 1731CC motor it is way underpowered, even compared to the Goldwing. I came of the wing to the CCT and people who think a Goldwing is comfortable haven’t ridden a Cross country or Vision. Each bike has its purpose and if you want a trouble free, COMFORTABLE long distance 14 hr day bike, can’t beat a Victory. Still a big v-twin turd but great highway distance bike and I’m more concerned how I feel after 14 hours on the road, than what brand I’m riding. So Victory does make good bikes, but this one to me I will agree just another cruiser pretending to be a sportbike wannebee. Victory failed.

  16. azi says:

    Marketing lied to me! HOW CAN THIS BEEEEE????

  17. Asphanaut says:

    I wonder if Victory really intended to produce something more like the 156 pikes peak racer but just couldn’t get frame, suspension, emissions, styling, etc… dialed in time to pull it off within marketing deadlines so they shoe-horned their effort into a scout configuration just to make corporate deadlines. The 156 was fast but might’ve been unreliable and looked like a hot mess in it’s pike’s peak racer form. So maybe they just ran out of time?

  18. Roger says:

    Hmm, Looks like a Scout copy to me. Perhaps the Indian will go down in defeat to Victory….

  19. wally says:

    This bike looks very familiar…..the Indian Scout perhaps?? Polaris is using a page from the GM playbook, badge engineering.

  20. Jeremy in TX says:

    Are there any true cruiser guys on this site? I am curious to know what the consensus is in cruiser world.

    Is a US-made, $11,000 “sporty” cruiser creating a lot of positive buzz out there among the cruiser ranks?

    Is it getting the “meh, it’s not a Harley” treatment?

    Or is it just irrelevant because it has a radiator, no heritage and impressive specs (for the category) in a market that really doesn’t value impressive specs?

    • Tommy D says:

      I have two Harley’s (next to a Ducati 996S track day bike ) so I guess I can answer. This bike is marketed at the recent trend toward courageous people pulling outrageous wheelies big V-Twin’s. Notice the wheelie photos in the release stock photos? I personally don’t get it but if a company can eak out a few percent of market share to keep their manufacturing going then more power to them. You do see the Victory Baggers mixed in the bikes at events. Someone bought one and thought it looked cool and was affordable. Not my type but it works for some.

    • Jamo says:

      I am a cruiser guy. and I can’t wait to go slow faster.

      I had a Victory for a while, an early one. Victory tried to appeal to disaffected Harley riders. IT doesn’t work too well. A lot of the cruiser appeal is the retro Harley product (read: Classic Look) and lifestyle. Harley riders are nice, pleasant people to hang with, both at the dealership and on the road. They are not disaffected.

      If you want something like this, a V-Rod is this on steroids.

  21. Jeremy in TX says:

    Amazing the number of people that felt the need to say their their piece on this (almost unanimous disappointment). Not just on this site, but others as well.

    I know people think cruisers are where the money is at (not entirely true, IMO – Harley Davidsons are where the money is at. Time will tell if Polaris found that same formula with Indian, but I think it is safe to say that they sure haven’t found it with Victory in the past.)

    Considering Victory’s small sales footprint, I still contend they would have more successfully gained some market share with a sporty standard than they will with a sporty cruiser. I just don’t think there are a huge number of people interested in riding an oxymoron. I could be wrong.

    • red says:

      it’s not the standard let down this time since they showed us the Pikes Beak bike. It’s an eye-poke with a nipple twist.

      • Tom K. says:

        Eggzackley, Red. This is the perfect reply to Dave A’s post at 08:54 on the 25th. And, by the way, you are a metaphorically gifted gentleman, good ‘un.

    • Dave says:

      Re: “I still contend they would have more successfully gained some market share with a sporty standard than they will with a sporty cruiser.”

      I think they know the opportunity is getting into the larger import bike/PWC/ATV dealers as a credible competitor to HD, where the customer may be less inclined to accept an import cruiser. Tho brands they’ll share floor space with all have compelling sport bikes and sport standards and a more tech-driven customer has historically proven to be more accepting of imports..

  22. Jamo says:

    Nice horsepower, but it looks like a Nessie. And you have to hang with the Victory crowd.

    • Grover says:

      “And you have to hang out with the Victory crowd”.
      Too true! I was invited on one of their rides by an acquaintance and all they did was bash Harley riders and their bikes (I was on a Yamaha). It gets really old really fast. They were quite an irritating bunch to be around and I was glad to be rid of them. Lesson learned.

  23. Gary says:

    A bit of a let down, really. I’m sure this is a fine bike but it should have been introduced under the Indian brand as the Scout Sport (which was an original variant in the 1930’s). Victory could have brought something a little more novel to the market if the Octane (or whatever) broke cover as a super sport and/or street fighter model…with aspirations to morph into an ADV or sport tourer in the next development cycle. Wouldn’t it be nice if America could produce something among these breeds, that would be competitive against European metal? News flash: not all Americans love cruisers.

    • Jeremy in TX says:

      The new engine on paper has an almost immaterial increase in Power vs. the Scout (I assume they are citing hp at the crank here.) Maybe it seems much sportier in actual use than the specs would indicate, but I don’t think it would be enough to warrant a Scout Sport designation.

      • Gary says:

        True. And to that extent, it wouldn’t be inconceivable to extract another 30% out of an engine with these basic specifications. In fact a “sport” designation could be justified with chassis improvements to the brakes/suspension/geometry, but alas we are not seeing that either. Lost opportunity in my opinion.

  24. red says:

    I feel like Polaris pulled the old Lucy/Charlie brown football trick on us.

  25. Sportourpa says:

    What a huge disappointment.I had such high hopes after seeing the 156 challenge Pike’s peak.
    I was expecting to see a standard or sporty twin with good suspension and non cruiser ergonomics.
    A bike in various versions, standard,sport touring ,GT and adventure touring would have been awesome
    and not that difficult to achieve.
    We already have enough cruisers. We really don’t need another one!

  26. Meh says:

    People who want SV1000Ns can buy a used one. That simple and problem solved.

    Entry level bikes compete against used bikes as well as new machines so that’s risky business trying to sell a disposable machine. The world is full of cheap, low mileage Sportsters.

    The Octane could be a good candidate for modification. It’s cheap enough to buy, strip off any extra crap, and fit with sportbike front forks and capable brakes. Not that hard if you are serious, and if you aren’t serious don’t do it.

    Victory could sell a dual disc brake kit as an option. More profit, and if sold separately a lot more profit because most people don’t wrench their own machines.

    People wanting refined, reliable, serious sportbikes buy from Japanese or European manufacturers. These are all global corporations so their nominal country of origin means nothing.

    I predict Octane will sell decently. The bigger Victory models are pigs by comparison, quite like bloated Harleys in that respect.

    The styling of the Octane top end should be carried over to the Scout, whose top end looks like someone left the beauty covers off a 1980s Jap bike.

    • mickey says:

      Meh says “People wanting refined, reliable, serious sportbikes buy from Japanese or European manufacturers.”

      Do they have any other choice? That’s the problem in a nutshell, and the cause for all this dissention.

  27. old guy says:

    Wow all that hype for nothing. I will keep my 09 XR1200 and smile all the way home. Just picked up a 2005 ZRX1200R minty shape with 12000 miles on her. Fast and comfortable and it is a great looking bike too!I am interested in the new Guzzies.North American makers are way out of tune.

  28. Mick says:

    What really rubs me the wrong way is that they even mention the Project 156 bike in the press release just to rub your nose in it.

    The motorcycle market is stratified. The 156 bike is basically a street tracker. This Octane rig is a cruiser. Never the twain shall meet. You might be able to get away with a scrambler type thing because it is about the same size and shape, with about the same ergos. A cruiser is not. The people here are obviously NOT too stupid to figure that out.

    It’s even a bad package to make a street tracker from. Job one would be something like “build frame”. They may as well just sell the engine system at a nice price. It’s about the only part suitable for the job.

    • Peter says:

      Agree, total marketing fail. If they were going to build a power cruiser the whole time, they might as well have built a drag bike as the marketing ploy. Even then, no drag bike has FWD controls.

      Its like the marketing team didn’t speak to management. I’m sure management made the decision that they had to use the Scout frame rather than having the freedom to build a sport frame. Had they matched the marketing campaign to the reality of what the bike was going to be, I think most people wouldn’t feel nearly as disappointed and betrayed.

    • Dave says:

      I think it’s no more disingenuous than the auto industry using racing as a marketing engine. I don’t think anybody believes their F-150 shares anything in common with a Baja truck, or their Impala shares anything with a NASCAR. It is done to hint that the technology came from something inspiring and not just an engineering group. It’s just marketing, just like everyone else does.

      • Jeremy in TX says:

        I don’t think they are being disingenuous, either. But I do think their marketing efforts created a lot of excitement and intrigue in a target market that Victory didn’t intend to target. That is why there is so much disappointment being vocalized. Those who were hoping for a sporty standard are just collateral damage to Victory’s marketing campaign.

        I wonder if the target market Victory was trying to engage actually responded to Victory’s message with the same anticipation for their vision of the bike to come and if their reaction to the unveiling was full of ooo’s and aaaaahhh’s in contrast to the negative reaction of the non-cruiser consumer we see on this site and others.

        • azi says:

          Marketing lied to me! How could such a thing ever happen??????? 🙂

        • todd says:

          Did cruiser magazines (like Easyrider?) even pick up on the Project 156 story? I imagine those types of markets would have been oblivious to a prototype race bike. I think they definitely pointed their stick in the wrong direction – or they got nervous and decided to change directions sometime after the fact.

  29. Richard says:

    Isn’t this just a tarted up Indian Scout or am I missing something?? 104 horsepower!! That’s not a lot now days. I can’t really see any wow factor about this bike, I was expecting 140+ horsepower at least and a more purposeful look. It says that it is Victorys first water cooled engine?? Well yes sort of.I think the Indian Scout is water cooled if my memory serves me correct??!!

  30. Gary says:

    Ok guys, the tank is similiar to the Scout, but not the absolute same, yes the pipes are pretty similiar. The side covers are completely different, the engines head and cylinder are different, the rest of the engine is similiar. A lot is similiar to the Scout, some is different. The Octane still has cruiser as it’s main genre. I agree, still competing with Hardly Davidson. Nice try Victory, but no weo for me. Still a different model, with maybe a little to much the same. Maybe someday.

  31. mike says:

    What is Polaris thinking? Although the Octane is a lovely looking bike, it really is just a rebadged Scout. The TANK is straight off the Scout. Personally think this bike will cannibalise sales off the Scout. This bike should have been differentiated more from the Scout. Why not a different shape tank with a much larger capacity? What a no brainer! I was gob smacked when I first saw the tank. Who runs Victory’s Marketing and Design Departments? Bean counters. Looks like it.
    The publicity blurb reckons this is a sporty cruiser. Really? Why only one disc up front, no ABS & forward controls? It should’ve had fake finning like so that it would look like an air cooled bike. Triumph have done it with their big cruiser as well as the new Bonnies. Why couldn’t Victory? So disappointing after all the hyperbole in the pre-launch press releases. They raised our expectations & under delivered. I thought (wrongly it appears) that Indian is old school while Victory is more performance oriented.
    Hopefully this bike will become a platform for other derivatives. One positive note. I do like the fly screen & the overall styling of the bike. Unfortunately if I want a colour scheme other than matte grey, I’ll get the Scout. Judging by the reaction of other readers, Polaris should take note. Your Marketing team should get a BIG kick up the pants for literally stuffing this up. I own a Victory & I think the Freedom motor is stupendous. I’m an old fart (65yo) but I was fuming when I went & saw the Octane at the dealership. I drove miles to see a Scout with a grey paint job. How about BLACK or BLUE or RED with racing stripes etc. etc..
    Cannot believe how backward a step this is. Of course when it starts selling well and it will at this price, management will get all smug and give themselves a pat on the back. Well think again! At this point in time, the only two bikes on my “next bike” list are the Moto Guzzi Eldorado and the new Ducati xDiavel. Twin discs up front, ABS, TC, ride by wire, riding modes, TUBELESS tyres (with their spoked wheels). And they really do handle well. 104 HP. Is that really sporty? VRods pump out a lot more but would never buy one as they have forward controls. The new xDiavel pumps out 160 HP. And you have the option to change to mid controls on the Ducati.
    Sorry but Polaris has missed the mark big time. Suggest you do what HD does and go out and talk to Victory owners. IMO Victory is missing out on so many potential sales e.g. there is only one colour offered for most models. Seriously? Look at HD. Options everywhere. This is why they outsell you 20-1 yet Victory have a superior motor and technology.

    • Neil says:

      It’s a Scout. The problem is, these designers can’t see past their own vision. They can’t see the larger picture. I can see it with some mini apes. Ok it would be cool rollin down the Boulevard. But it’s not ground breaking. A decent cruiser though.

    • motorico says:

      All of the other Victory cruisers have a similar tank shape. They seem to make the most of part reuse. I don’t like the Victory tank or that frame with acres of space in front of the tank.

      This bike just crushed my hopes for Victory. It’s like they want me to get that XSR 900.

  32. Scott says:

    Now I’m even more disappointed!

    I went to the IMS in Phoenix, and right in the middle of the Victory display was the Urs Erbacher 156 “Ignition” concept bike, and in the flesh it’s really a beauty! It caught my eye immediately. It’s still way too low in the rear, but damn, all they would have to do is raise the rear end 3 or 4 inches and install some mid/rear controls and it would be a fantastic bike.

    I spoke to the lady in charge of their display, and she told me I’m definitely not the first one to mention how underwhelming the Octane is, and that THIS is the direction they should have been going. I told her Victory should be an alternative to H-D, not just another version of them. She says she reports all of this feedback to Corporate, so maybe our voices will be heard…

    • Tyler says:

      Too true, I went to the IMS in Miami back in January and was totally smitten with the 156 and the “prototype” bikes they had based upon it. And like you, in speaking with the folks there from Victory they all seemed in agreement that this was the more sport-oriented variant of the Scout, intended to use a similar engine architecture but to be a different bike entirely. Then to find this is what it turned in to is a total waste. Glad to hear that they are listening…

  33. sherm says:

    I think Victory should commission Eric Buell to wrap a musclebound sportsbike around that motor. It’s a better place to start than a Sporty motor. Go up against the big KTM’s.

  34. John says:

    Very disappointed was hoping for more hp and a different pipe set up than the scout

  35. Hot Dog says:

    There are lots of sad, long faces here and I’m one of them. Most buyers worry more about their perceived credibility and ability to fit in with the crowd. I was hoping for something along the lines of a Suzuki SV1000N, I had one and it was a great bike.

    • moto says:

      Anything that would be closer to a small standard would be embraced. How about something based on an entry level standard, then maybe Victory could get some buyers into the next decade or two.

    • Tank says:

      The SV1000N was a great bike. The problem is they didn’t sell well. Victory doesn’t want to copy a bike that didn’t sell. I think times have changed and a SV1000N type bike would sell, but the slowing economy isn’t encouraging companies to make any big gambles.

    • pacer says:

      I was thinking it would take inspiration from the tubed Buell Lightnings. They were fun to ride at sub 100mph speeds. Just a fun street bike that would wheelie if asked. KTM will soon win over that crowd with their Duke 890(?). Victory could have been a player in the mid size performance market. I think if you were going to jump in the performance arena this is a good place to start. First, it’s easier to show up with competent machinery. Two you are offering a bike that promises fun without being too intimidating. I think that is spot on to a potential buyer walking into a victory showroom. A quality offering will for sure poop on the budget minded Kawi and Suzook options. If Yamaha would offer an M1 version of the FZ09 they could also be a player.

  36. Makes sense if you are a Polaris dealer.

  37. hans says:

    To me it is just a rebadged Scout , No ABS and a single disc up front with a 100HP motor. Suspension probably nothing to write home about either. But the absence of ABS is a big one. Would not buy a bike without ABS anymore. I learned my lesson, fortunately it ended well.

  38. Dale says:

    Fabulous bike, especially for the price. Now, if they can just move those pegs back, and raise that seat up….

  39. EZMark says:

    Start with the potent Indian Scout, add a few HP, make the chassis full size but 23 pounds lighter. Sounds like a winner.
    My only complaints are the single front disk brake and the 3.4 gallon tank. No motorcycle should have less than 4 gallons of fuel.
    As cruisers go, this one is all performance.

  40. waitman says:

    Remember the tragic plane crash that stopped this effort? I am one of the foolish that was hoping Victory could at least lean in this direction. Sure wish Highland had happened.

  41. mickey says:

    Octane. 104 hp
    Scout 100 hp
    Scout 60 80 hp

    Polaris’s version of ride modes

  42. Scott says:

    I’m starting to think that picture above isn’t really a smoky burnout…

    It could be that due to a lack of brakes, he’s getting ready to “LAY ‘ER DOWN!” to avoid hitting a truck or something… ⚓

  43. My2Cents says:

    I try to like all motorcycles, the odd divisions among riders a lost cause. I don’t know I’m pretty happy checking the weather and going out one wheels steering the other pushing, Folk who not only pocket themselves in and then section the pocket into sub-pockets, too funny. Again I’d ride that machine and enjoy the day.

  44. azi says:

    Nothing says performance like 41mm non-adjustable forks and a single 2-piston front caliper. So much weight saved by carrying only 3.4 gallons of fuel.

    Somewhere in Victory marketing dept, a scorned middle management director: “That Indian brand seems to be selling a lot of Scouts. We need to grab a slice of that market.”

  45. Hippy says:

    Victory did it backwards. They started with the hype of a race bike, to get everyone salivating for something new, powerful and American. Then they teased us with two custom bikes, to get the modifier guys worked up. Now they finally come out with the actual bike, and all the air was out of the balloon. Almost like the old bait and switch (ie. Here’s a Shelby, but we will only sell you a base model, and you can buy all the parts to make your own).
    Would have been better to launch the bike, then quickly custom, and then race. (Although 156 was basically the engine test). This would have started a ball rolling down a very large hill, instead of rolling it into a disappointing wall.
    Love my Victory’s but to me a swing and a miss. Will do well for shorter and / or newer riders, also the Sportser style crowd.

  46. Cyclemotorist says:

    I like it!

    But Harley Davidson could make a few changes to the 1200 Sportster that would help considerably. They should counterbalance the engine so they could go back to solid mounting the engine. The Sportsters with non rubber mounted engines were much lighter.

    It would require a big redesign to include balance shafts. But that would give HD the opportunity to upgrade the engines in other ways. It would be interesting to see the results of such an effort. However the Victory would probably still out perform the Sportster 1200.

    • Butch says:

      Rubber mounted Sportsters were a step backwards.
      Added about 70 lbs to an already slow bike.
      Did away with the “trap door” which means the cases must be split to service the tranny $$$$$.
      Most Sportster buyers could care less about the specs, they just want to an affordable Harley.
      Instead of redesigning the Sporty mill they opted for the new 750.
      Love em’ or hate em’, HD knows how to market their products.
      Looks like Victory decided to ” play it safe” on this one.
      Time will tell if it was a wise choice.

      • Jeremy in TX says:

        I’ve ridden a solid mount Sportster. It didn’t go any more backwards than that. A truly horrible bike that was.

        • Scott says:

          I rode an XLCR back in the early 80’s. I don’t know what version of the Sportster that was – I assume that wasn’t the rubber-mounted engine – but I do remember that it vibrated so badly at idle you couldn’t see straight. It was pretty torquey, which was nice when you wanted to accelerate from one speed to another without downshifting (don’t start with me, Todd, “torque” does make a difference), but other than that my GS750 was better in every way…

          • todd says:

            I’ve ridden a couple Sportsters myself. They have such terribly small power bands I had to use every one of the gears to get myself up to 65. Acceleration was dismal for such a large engine and, yes, I also had to downshift often to accelerate.

            I’ve owned (and still do) a number of “torquey” pushrod twins and they work just fine for cruising around and not expecting much performance. My overhead cam triple and four, however, have much broader power bands, can spin close to ten grand if needed and can make it to 65 with one or two gear changes in a much shorter amount of time. They will also cruise around at low power just as well as the Sportster but they are much lighter, much more comfortable and will accelerate away much harder when I’m done with the cruising. I think my opinion is pretty valid since I own both types of bikes and am not prejudiced against one type, like many are.

            I’m not starting anything, I’m just responding to my name being called.

          • Scott says:

            It occurred to me the bike I rode back then was an XR1000, not an XLCR. Whatever. It was enough to turn me off Harleys. And no HD I’ve ridden since then has convinced me, either…

      • Sportsters were unridable above 60 mph before rubber mts. Nevermind the weight.

        • mickey says:

          I’ve had two Sporsters, a 59 and a 94 and I’d agree with that. Above 55 mph they were miserable to ride. Below 55 they were tolerable except for the suspension, but above 55 just miserable machines.

          • Provologna says:

            Ride the Ulysses. It shall make you love the Sportster.

            Sportster motor in any chassis is anathema for “sport” and/or “performance.”

          • beasty says:

            Hasn’t been my experience. I’ve owned several(16) Sportsters and they were just fine above 55mph. Of course, I’ve owned several older Triumphs and a Norton Atlas back in the day, so my comparisons may be different than yours.

          • Scott says:

            Wow. That’s a lot of Sportsters.

          • mickey says:

            Sounds like he hasn’t ridden anything that didn’t shake like a dog after a bath and therefore has no basis for comparison

        • beasty says:

          That could be said about a lot of bikes in the same class. Having owned several older Triumphs and a Norton Atlas, an EVO Sportster is a walk in the park. Frame mount or Rubber mount, they are reliable bikes, sell well, resell well and are nowhere near as bad as the nonsensical hype spouted by folks who are stuck in the 60’s and who rode a buddys’ uncared for ironhead one time.

  47. Michael Haz says:

    Victory didn’t need this bike. It was already available at Indian dealerships. What Victory needed was a long-overdue re-design of its ground breaking (and long neglected) Victory Vision. The Vision was a game changer when it was new. It is a heckuva bike- good weather protection, electric windscreen, all-day comfort, etc.

    It is long overdue for a new topcase and saddlebag design. And maybe an upgrade of all the switchgear, adding bluetooth, some better colors, the ability for factory customization, a few more horsepower, etc.

    A revived Vision could cut into the heavyweight touring market. It’s almost like Polaris wants to kill the Victory brand in favor of investing in Indian touring bikes. Ya think?

  48. JT says:

    Wow…The excitement…an hot rod Scout…wake me up please.

  49. blabla says:

    104hp… it’s a lot!!… to be stopped by 2 pots front and 1 back.
    And the suspenders will make the ride a thrill.

  50. JDB says:

    Was really hoping for a production Project 156. So Victory I just went out and bought an S1000R today. So disappointing…appears you feel you are stuck in the same design philosophy as Harley.

  51. teelee says:

    Looks better than a Triumph Tbird Storm

  52. Scott says:

    The 2016 Victory Octane:

    Because… ‘Murica. 🇺🇸

  53. Dino says:

    I hope it sells well… Not for me, but if it does well they may get the juice to put that motor in a more standard chassis…

    C’mon, Victory… we KNOW you wanna do it!

  54. Grover says:

    While the readers of motorcycledaily may not like this bike, there’s a whole world of cruiser guys/gals that will line up in droves to buy this thing. That’s who it’s aimed at, not you. Like 99% of the posters here, I will never own a Victory or Indian motorcycle until they offer something other than a ridiculous cruiser. Pikes Peak racer my A$$!

  55. Tank says:

    What Polaris needs is a CEO like Steve Jobs. Someone with balls and brains. Steve wasn’t afraid to take chances and make something different. Easier said than done, I guess.

  56. Brian says:

    If it runs as good as it looks… I’d say they nailed it!

  57. Max Frisson says:

    Add my name to the long list of very disappointed consumers. 62 inch wheelbase, forward controls, conventional forks and a single disc mean this is NOT a performance motorcycle and all the hype is well-written b-llsh-t.

    The Vision has not had a revision since introduction, their baggers have a turning radius some 5 feet greater than a BMW RT or HD Road King. Polaris is not breaking new ground.
    Cruisers are dying folks, a standard would have been nice.

    This re-made Indian Scout shows Polaris is becoming Harley, rename it and call it new.

  58. Butch says:

    104 hp/76 ft lbs.
    At least you can burn more rubber leaving the local watering hole.
    Which is about all this bike is good for.

  59. The Spaceman says:

    I hope they have these in Daytona for Bike Week demos. I’d like to at least ride one and see if it’s a platform I could modify to suit. Like mid-controls etc. I’ve wanted to own another US built bike since I sold my shovelhead, but HD has nothing I want.

  60. Wendy says:

    Nice they stole the styling clues from the Late, lamented Sons of Anarchy. Same relationship to reality, too.

  61. Aussie mike says:

    I own a Hammer S. White with red stripes. Love it. Also love the Scout.. Went to the dealership at Five Dock, Sydney Australia. The Octane looks great. Finish is good; reasonably priced. Same price as a Sportster 1200. Will definitely be quicker. Hope Victory does well. However I was disappointed for the following reasons.
    1. Only one colour is available 2. No ABS 3. One disc up front for such s powerful bike. Should be twin discs. 3. The tank looks very similar to the Scout’s tank. Looks like a Scout. Believe this is a glaring miscalculation. It should have provided a bigger capacity as well. 4. Why not put faux finning on cylinders like the new Triumph Bonnevilles?
    No wonder Indian sells twice ss moany bikes as Victtory here in Oz. even though Indian’s model range is less than half if Victory’s & they are much more expensive. To Victory’s Design Dept, suggest you have a look at the new Ducati XxDiavel. Twin discs, ABS, TC etc plus 160 hp from 1200cc. That’s what I was expecting. Something totally different from the Dcout. What do we get? Another Scout with a boring denim paint job. Good; should have been more. Sorry but i was expecting something with a more sporty bent.

  62. BP in AZ says:

    These comments are hilarious, people really think Victory/Indian/Polaris are gonna make some kinda non-cruiser. Why? Sport tourers, adventure bikes, sportbikes, they already are covered in the marketplace. The money is in cruisers, heavy or light. Bikes are just the beginning, then parts, accessories, clothes, that’s the money. A couple hundred naysayers here mean nothing to Polaris or HD. You weren’t going to buy one anyway.

    • Stratkat says:

      Why???? because they promoted the Pikes Peak motorcycle and we were hoping they kept it a bit more in that direction!

      • TimC says:

        THIS. All the hype – which basically made things out to be a rebooting of the brand now that they have Indian for cruisers – and now…this. Badge-engineered Scout, yay

    • mickey says:

      because cruisers weren’t already covered in the marketplace?

      Because Victory Indian Polaris already makes a line of cruisers. And in fact two of them are nearly identical to this one

      Because an American manufacturer can’t make a standard to go along with their line of cruisers?

      Heaven forbid an American mfg break out of their little secure little world

  63. WSHart says:

    First off, the seat height alone keeps the idea of mid mount pegs at bay for people of average height. Your knees would be in your face. If you’re so short that you’re the last to know it’s raining, maybe. Ridiculous.

    Secondly, a Scout by any other name…So many people didn’t buy a Scout because the gas tank is too small to actually go anywhere. Note to Victory/Polaris. HD finally put a 5 gallon cell in the V-Rod after a few years because people want to actually ride further than “around town”.

    This newest, most powerfullest Victory of all has but a single pathetic disc brake up front? Cheap and screams low performance. We were hoping for Silver and we got Scout. 8-Ball Scout. Hi-Yo Cheapo.

    As to the childish few that think Polaris should buy Buell – Why? No one else bought them when they were on the showroom floor. And that’s why they’re out of business. Again. Nobody wants one. Buell isn’t a genius, mechanical or otherwise.

    And neither is the idiot that came up with the Foctane.


  64. jim says:

    I expected to be disappointed and Victory delivered unfortunately.

  65. Quay says:

    Wow, such negativity!
    I have owned (and do own) nearly every type of bike from dual-sport to liter sportbikes to a Hayabusa. I also own a 1200 Sportster. While the Sportster suffers from all the well known low-performance drawbacks, it is nonetheless, pretty pleasing to “just ride”, and even cracks down impressive fuel economy for those days when I don’t feel like stopping at the ATM often while on 400-500 mile rides.
    Clearly, Victory has the Sportster in it’s sights, And by all appearances, the Octane at it’s current price point, is staged to give the Sportster a knockout blow.
    And why shouldn’t Victory go after the cruiser market? In the U.S. it’s a big chunk of change waiting to change pockets.
    Keep in mind that the Octane will be only one of a few versions on this basic platform.
    However, Victory did do a dis-service with all the hype about how the Octane was going to literally set the asphalt on fire, with the promise of top-tier performance. I think most folks assumed from that line of propaganda, it would have 125+hp, and considerably more than a 32 degree lean angle.
    Even at that, for anyone who might want a performance oriented cruiser, the Octane will push a lot of the right buttons – especially at that price.
    Despite the lack of support on here, I expect the Octane will have pretty robust sales.
    More sales lead to more models that suit more riders, and to more improvements to suit even more riders.

    • KenHoward says:

      “Keep in mind that the Octane will be only one of a few versions on this basic platform.”

      It’s this “basic platform” that’s the problem (except for cruiser fans).

  66. Bruce says:

    12.9l gas tank. The same reason we didn’t buy the Scout for my wife.

  67. TimC says:

    “It’s decidedly un-bold.”

    (Dr. F, MST3k, The Starfighters, “Cowboy Mike’s Ricochet Bar-B-Que Sauce” skit)

  68. Dave Joy says:

    If it wasn’t for the radiator it looks just like a bike that Harley Davidson are trying to make the Sportster look like! Just another boring American Cruiser. Blacked out engine and matt grey paint has all been done before! Yawn! Just let Harley get on with their own thing, keeping the old bikers happy until there are no more left and come up with something revolutionary!

  69. Gil says:

    I am SO disappointed! I couldn’t wait for this reveal to see it. As a sportbike rider, I was hoping for an American musclebike along the lines of a Ducati Monster, Diavel, Triumph Speed Triple, or even Victory’s version of what Buell used to be. Don’t get me wrong. The Scout is a cool bike, but I’m not into this rebadged pseudo café-style Scout. That would be too easily accomplished just by modifying the Scout! Victory, give us the project 156 bike, cleaned up just a little for the street. Inverted forks, belt drive, monster radial mount brakes, oversized cool looking exhaust, offer both spoke and superbike-looking alloy wheels…like a bike that was designed to tear up curvy mountain roads. If you do this, you will have a whole new clientele in your shops without losing your loyal cruiser bike folks!

  70. My2Cents says:

    Looks cool, goes like stink but that seat is odd.

  71. Bart says:

    I wonder what Don Canet will say/write about this.

    That story will likely be handed off to another editor.

    They went for the Sportster market and may get it.

    Not something I would want on my resume.

    • beasty says:

      “They went for the Sportster market and may get it.” Probably not. Yamaha tried it with the Bolt, and after the initial excitement, Bolts now languish on the showroom floor. Harley has stuff on the shelf that could produce instant competition for this.

  72. Well this is disapointment, I liked it the first time when it was called the “SCOUT”! I really was hopeing for more than a rebadged Scout. The Scout is a great bike but I had hoped Victory would go another direction and give us a sporty vtwin with standard ergos. DISAPOINTING !!

    • Norm G. says:

      re: “I liked it the first time when it was called the “SCOUT”! I really was hopeing for more than a rebadged Scout. The Scout is a great bike but I had hoped Victory would go another direction”

      pfft, what a rip. (Travolta voice)

    • Norm G. says:

      re: “I liked it the first time when it was called the “SCOUT”! I really was hopeing for more than a rebadged Scout. The Scout is a great bike but I had hoped Victory would go another direction”

      pfft, what a jip. (Travolta voice)

  73. Larry K says:

    I wonder if they are listening to our comments. I have been waiting for this to be released hoping it would be a real motorcycle. It ain’t.

  74. North of Missoula says:

    Now that the horse has left the barn we must consider that possibly a 104 HP sub 1200 CC production v twin is a big step for Polaris. Baby steps so to speak. If this engine proves reliable we might see further steps in the right direction from a company that is not Harley Davidson. Maybe we are being too harsh.

    • Asphanaut says:

      NoM, you might be right. I’m pretty disappointed by the Octane especially given the “156” hype and all. But, Victory is saying that they want to take “AMERICAN motorcycling” into the 21st century and if by “American Motorcycling” they mean “cruisers” then, well, I guess they’ve done it. And I’m sure everyone that thinks a faster cruiser is cool will be happy. Hopefully for Victory’s sake there’s enough of those folks to keep them in the black and looking for more niches to fill. I admit the niche I was hoping for is pretty competitive and filled with the KTM’s, Ducati’s, Aprilia’s, and BMW’s, of the world, so maybe Victory made the smart call to wait until they can find more than 104 HP and less than 528 lbs before they jump into that pool.

  75. TunaPete says:

    How is this fundamentally different from the Scout? What a disappointment!

  76. todd says:

    “76 foot-pounds of tire-shredding torque”

    I hope they realize 76 ft-lb of torque might be what you use to tighten a lug nut but definitely not enough force to shred a tire. I think they’re confusing torque with power again. Why am I not surprised?

    Excuse me for not seeing this bike as any different than any of the other cruisers available.

    • North of Missoula says:

      600cc gsxrs are more than capable of shredding tires, torque without horrsepower is useless, HP alone can get the job done with enough RPMs

    • MGNorge says:

      Are we going to get into the horsepower is everything and torque means nothing nonsense again? It not as simple as you think.

      • North of Missoula says:

        It is simple HP=(TxN)/5252


      • todd says:

        Torque does not mean nothing, it just doesn’t give you enough information. Power is the end-all, the result, the apple to compare. Power considers torque and power is a measurement of what the torque can actually deliver. Think of torque as effort and power as results. Just because someone puts in a lot of effort doesn’t mean they will get more work done.

        Have you ever removed a nail from a piece of lumber? Did you pull really hard on it ( high force/torque) or did you go to the tool chest and grab a claw hammer? It took a lot less force but got more work done. You used the hammer to apply more power to remove the nail than what you could muster with your bare hands.

        Do you start your ride out in first gear? Why? The engine produces the same amount of torque regardless of what gear you’re in. Why does the bike accellerate harder in lower gears? Because those gears multiply the amount of torque to the rear wheel for any given road speed (power) than there would be for a higher gear.

        I’ll always call it out whenever misinformation is being used for marketing purposes.

        • MGNorge says:

          For marketing purposes? Who’s? If anything it’s been horsepower that has been bandied about frivolously over the years.

          For evidence of tire shredding ability let’s cite an example that admittedly is in the extreme. Many times looking to the extreme brings issues to closer scrutiny. Take a tiny GP machine of years back. Let’s use the Honda RC148, the 5-cylinder 125cc bike as an example. High on relative horsepower but being only 125cc not much torque developed and what was, covered a relatively short rpm band. It employed an 8-speed box so as to keep the engine on the boil and accelerating. It was said that it was capable of producing maybe 35 horsepower. Now, saying any 125cc bike as tire-shredding takes a bit of imagination but here you have a very high horsepower bike with a very narrow power band (1,000 rpm). But that bike was very hard to launch because of the lack of torque down low. Keeping in mind that gearing and friction of the rear tire to the road surface come into play also.
          To help with the inter relationship between horsepower and torque I use this example. You are correct that horsepower is the result but I think you are too sensitive to talk of torque from what you write. Take a sewing machine that has the job of sewing down through multiple layers of leather. There are always variables involved and I won’t cover inertia but let’s say this sewing machine has the torque to punch down through 10 layers of leather. Eleven layers would stall it and there’d be no output. but once back to 10 layers all is good. If this sewing machine can do this at let’s say 10 rpm (strokes) you’ll get output and a certain amount of work done (horsepower). If that same machine could continue to do so at 20 rpm output will double. But, if torque output should start to drop pressing beyond 20 rpm (as engines do as efficiency drops and friction increases) horsepower or output may drop too as maybe at increased rpm it could only punch down through seven, then six and so on.
          Let’s not forget too that in the minds of many when they speak of an engine producing lots of torque what they really mean is that it produces great punch at lower rpm with good throttle response. Peak torque figures tend to be in the same ballpark for a given displacement. As you spin an engine higher through design and breathing to support it the torque band moves upward and tends to narrow because peak breathing efficiency is supporting a high rpm and horsepower output.
          I know from what you write that you’re a proponent of multi’s producing high horsepower and don’t understand what people see in lower output but torque right off the bottom motors. Have a look at the many diesel proponents, the biggest trait in driving them that they like is the punch down low with gearing to suit that doesn’t requiring wringing the snot out of the motor to extract full performance, even if it is less performance than the next guy with the hyper V8 under the hood.
          Again, I think you’re too sensitive to talk of torque. I am more than sure the Octane can light up the rear tire, so what’s the big deal?

          • todd says:

            Ok, let’s consider that Honda 125. 125s have 9 it 10 lb-ft of torque. That means some kid on a bicycle can produce ten times as much torque. Care to guess who can accelerate faster – or make it to 130 mph?

          • North of MIssoula says:

            We can not remove inertia from torque because on a reciprocating piston engine a large percentage of the torque is related to reciprocating mass. Let’s face it, today’s engines all run similar compression ratios and develop lots of combustion pressure. The difference in torque between engine designs comes down to reciprocating mass. Large stroke large displacement engines with big pistons have a lot more torque than short stroke smaller displacement engines, basic physics.
            Reciprocating mass is the enemy of sport bikes for two reasons, 1. It means heavy engines 2. A large reciprocating mass is detrimental to quickly building RPMS which in turn means that it is detrimental to building power rapidly.
            However if you are basically idling around in heavy traffic all day you can not beat the heavy low end tractable torque of a Harley Davidson.

          • todd says:

            Let’s not also forget that, the higher you can rev something the lower you can gear it. Just like first gear, lower ratios multiply the torque more for even more thrust or – torque at the rear wheel.

          • MGNorge says:

            There’s a video of the RC148 on YouTube and I’d wager a kid on a bicycle would get off to a much quicker start than the motorcycle. The RC148 has to slip its clutch to death before it hooks up and starts to accelerate with any authority.
            I still think you have this aversion to any talk of torque as being just talk. That somehow horsepower is of sole concern. I say you’re missing the point. That horsepower being work done over time is simply torque developed at a particular rpm. To develop even higher horsepower requires torque being developed at even higher rpm or not fall off too much as rpm increases. I’m not sure why you feel so strong about this crusade you seem to have taken.

          • mickey says:

            Torque makes you go

            Horsepower makes you go fast

          • todd says:

            Remember gearing? That RC148 is geared for fifty in first. It only needs to take off from a start once and that’s in heavy traffic. Now think of a 35 horse CR125 motocrosser. You could pull a loaded trailer up a mountain in first gear on that thing. It’s torque at the rear wheel after it gets multiplied through the transmission that determines rate of acceleration, not the torque at the crank.

            I just get tired of hearing all the misinformation about torque. I used to be a power train development engineer in the automotive industry, now I’m on to liquid rocket propulsion in the aerospace industry. I understand thrust and acceleration enough to have some say on the topic.

          • MGNorge says:

            “Torque makes you go
            Horsepower makes you go fast”

            Very simply put I guess you can think of it that way. As with the bike I used with an example above, the 5-cylinder 125cc bike, with its relatively high horsepower but meaningful torque developed way up high and only about 1,000 rpm wide, mixed with GP gearing it is terribly slow to get off the line. Once on the boil it needs to use every one of its gears often to keep it there. That’s tolerable on a race bike but if it were put on a street with normal gearing it would be terrible as you’d most likely need even more gears to be tractable down low to reaching its full potential at the top end. I think most of us have watched bikes and cars being run on dynamometers. What they are measuring is torque or force at every given spot along the power curve. From that horsepower is an easy calculation. As torque, or force on the rollers starts to taper off at the high end, horsepower can still increase through increasing rpm until torque drops too fast and horsepower starts to taper too.
            I’m sorry for the tirade, but torque is meaningful, it is developed all along the power curve and is what is directly measured on a dyno. To dismiss it or exclude it as being insignificant is leaving out a good part of the story. If someone wants to “cruise” on a high-output multi that fine, I’ve done that myself. But some people, maybe lots of people considering the number of Harleys sold, like a bike where the meat of its power is lower down in the rev range and don’t need to rev their bikes to redline to extract the power they want. They like the added punch right off the floor. Just like trials bikes don’t use highly strung engines, they are looking for tractor like qualities to help them through and over obstacles. Their engines are thought of being very torquey. A multi could develop like or even more torque and higher horsepower but keeping a motor such as that in it powerband under such tight conditions would be extremely hard to say the least. I’m of course ignoring the added bulk and weight a multi would have also.
            On a side note, I was reading the other day that many Euro car makers are adopting a .5 liter per cylinder, undersquare (longer stroke) engine design as being the most efficient in regards to emissions and power output of small turbo motors. These newer designs often produce comparable torque and horsepower figures but at lower rpm than previous designs. With this new design direction they are taking note of the area between and under peak torque and hp points and that area is a good deal greater than in the past. Interesting stuff!

          • mickey says:

            MGNorge, I know that’s over simplication and one is as important as the other particularly in a streetable motorcycle, .however the bikes that want to tell you you can haul 500 pounds of passenger and gear and ride across the country up and over mountain passes are quick to tell you their torque numbers and loathe to quote horsepower figures, while the one’s that want you to know you can beat their competiton on top speed or how fast they can get around one lap of Leguna Seca will quickly boast their horsepower numbers but you would be hard pressed to read what they say about torque.

          • Tom K. says:

            Normally, I know better than to argue with rocket scientists, but my two cents is that the argument gets un-necessarily over-complicated. Take the example of the 125cc, high-revving, 35 hp Honda. Now, compare it to a larger displacement 35 hp bike, maybe like a 500cc single, with a much lower redline, but delivering greater torque. Assuming the same aerodynamics, optimum gearing, and weight, they will both have the same top speed (a good measurement of peak power). However, the big single will be MUCH easier to ride, have much better roll-on acceleration anywhere in the rpm range below peak power, and will probably be quicker in the 1/4 mile. Why? Greater torque, even with identical peak horsepower figures. The old steam-engined tractors had laughably low horsepower, but massive torque, making them ideal for slogging a heavy piece of iron through deep soil. With the proper gearing, the little Honda’s engine could do the same thing. That is, until it hits a hard patch, then the little guy stops dead. The steamer just slows down a little and pulls through the hard spot. My respect to both of you guys, you both make great points. But I agree with Mr. Norge, torque matters.

    • Dano says:

      Now that right there is funny!

  77. Bob says:

    They showed us what could have been with the Project 156, then they give us this?

  78. Archie says:

    It never fails. Every time a manufacturer introduces a new bike, here come the nattering nabobs of negativism. They sit back on their fat butts staring at their monitors, detailing every way the manufacturer has failed. Most often the manufacturer has personally let them down by not making their bike like some other, completely different bike. “It’s not as fast as a V-Max, and it’s way heavier than the new R1. Plus, it doesn’t look like a streamlined Henderson. What a failure.”

    There is nothing wrong with this bike that can’t be fixed with a couple of cans of spray paint. If you don’t like it as much as some other bike, buy that other bike.

    • Provologna says:

      That’s almost as pathetic a post as the long gone (thank God) Hyosong corporate poster. You use the exact same argumentative method you condemn. Hypocrite, much?

      It’s even worse than that: we condemn an inanimate object, a motorcycle. You condemn your fellow posters. One is worse than the other. Do you know which one?

      BTW, your phrase “every time” is dead wrong. You can’t even get your facts straight!

      Not a Harvard debate club President, I guess?

      • Archie says:

        So I am a hypocrite because the only thing I want is another color, but you condesdendingly suggest that I am not the Harvard debate club president and then criticize me for criticizing other posters.

        I suggest it is you who are pathetic.

        • Provologna says:

          I labeled your post as pathetic. I never labeled you as pathetic.

          The hypocrisy in your post is to criticize posters for criticizing the subject bike. If it’s bad to criticize the bike, then how or why do you get a pass for criticizing posters? You even stoop so low as to attack unknown person’s body parts. That’s downright strange.

          I asked if you know that personally attacking your fellow posters is infinitely worse than your fellow posters heaping hate on a bike. In your reply, you unequivocally proved the answer is no. Well I’m here to help: the former is worse than the latter.

          I apologize for my swipe about the debate club. I admit it was harsh, and am sorry for the sarcasm.

          Hoping your spray cans work out well, really, no sarcasm. And wishing you happy, safe rides.

          Peace, and out.

    • Geoff says:

      Thought Spiro was dead??

  79. mickey says:

    This is the most agreement I have ever seen on this site. Almost 100% unanimous. Lol

    • Provologna says:

      They set themselves up for it, with all the “performance bike” tripe (lies). If they had just clarified it all along, as a “performance cruiser” they could have spared themselves some of this misery.

      Better to under promise and over deliver than to over promise and under deliver.

  80. bmbktmracer says:

    Obviously the designer is related to the CEO because anyone else would have been escorted from the building.

  81. Sean says:

    Styling is boring but that motor and relatively light weight should make it a fun ride.

  82. MeanChuck says:

    As a guy who really likes “power cruisers” and “sport cruisers” I am underwhelmed by this barely different Scout. Where is the Diavel or Griso competitor?

  83. T_revs says:

    My 2005 VRSCR Streetrod will blow this into the weeds…. this bike ain’t nothing new. VERY disappointed

  84. Mr.Negative says:

    Well, it’s official – I hate Victory/Polaris. They wanted to compete with Harley Davidson I guess, and now they are them. I’ll just call them HD2 from now on. I can’t wait for all the exciting new paint schemes.

    • John says:

      This is why they should buy Buell. They obviously have no will do design anything useful, the least they could do is buy something already done for them.

  85. John says:

    To quote Jean Baptiste Emmanuel Zorg – “Very disappointed”

  86. randy says:

    isn’t that the same HP as a indian scout?where’s the new high HP engine from the pikes peak racer?When is flat paint going to go out of style?How about a passenger seat standard?A single disc in the front?Too much price point and not enough muscle cruiser.Fail.

  87. Josh says:

    I agree with everyone of you who posted here, and everything that you said.

    This is what you get for not buying a ZRX1200.

    Quite simply- the factory bean counters have been burned too many times.

  88. Greg says:

    How do you get from Pike’s Peak to this? What a waste.

    • Scott says:

      MUCH more like it! Not the graphics, of course, but I really think a layout like this (with the appropriate parts – for instance, brakes) would be a hit. Let’s see if Victory is ever willing to go out on that limb…

      • Michael Haz says:

        The bike was built by an Indian dealer near where I live. The dealership owner is a long-time custom bike builder and engine tuner. He has a dyno room on the showroom floor and happily dynos “built” HDs agaisnt stock Indians.

      • Jeremy in TX says:

        If this is the marketization of project 156, then they have already told us what they think of that limb.

  89. Gham says:

    Wow,after reading the comment section I can just see some engineer sitting in Polaris with a very smug “told ya” look on his face.

  90. notarollingroadblock says:

    My first thought is that Polaris is following the General Motors plan: give the same vehicle a little different treatment, and give it a different brand and model name in hopes someone will be suckered into liking one over the other. Is this a bad idea? After all it did give us the ’77 Buick Century and the ’77 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme!

  91. North of Missoula says:

    The Diavel X has 150 HP, 95 ft lbs torque, weighs 485 lbs dry, and has a 41 degree lean angle. It blows the Octane away in every respect.

    • Don says:

      At $20,995, it’s also almost double in price. It better blow it way in every respect…

    • Jeremy in TX says:

      Since you can buy two of these for the price of one Diavel X, that means you get 208hp, 64° of lean and two front brake discs.Of course the downside is that you are also twice as lame.

  92. relic says:

    I am compelled to join the orgy of slaggi ng. The tank is a total rip of the xlcr of the 70s. It is probably a good bike, but not the game changer that victory needs.

  93. yellowhammer says:

    Why the fake fender struts?

  94. mechanicus says:

    “SHARP-EDGED STYLING There are no smooth, flowing lines here.” Like this is a good thing? Sheesh I dont understand these people….

    • Scott says:

      I actually like the “sharp-edged styling”. It’s the ONLY thing that sets this bike apart from the millions of other cruisers on the road.

      It’s the whole idea of it being just another cruiser that makes me yawn…

  95. mickey says:

    Geezalou (shaking head). Like most everyone else I am so disappointed. Not by what it is…it is what it is and not bad looking for what it is. No,I am disappointed for what it could have been. This isn’t even a step in the right direction. This is a step to the side, not a step forward. Seriously all this hype for a scout with 4 more hp? So sad.

    If the buyers of this bike ever find themselves in the position of that guy sliding above you know what’s going to happen? Chopped throttle, ferocious high side and a bunch of blood pooled up in a dew rag.

  96. Louis says:

    Are we going backward by listing “dry weight” again? I thought we were through with manufactures listing that usless specification. Victory, you need to put the “wet weight” on your spec sheet. We potential buyers are too savvy to fall for that dry-weight nonsense again.

  97. Blackcayman says:

    Its NOT that we didn’t know Victory was going to come out with their own version of the Scout platform. Modern manufacturing and economies of scale guarantee it.

    What we object to is getting teased with a Project 156 Bike, then suffering through MONTHS & MONTHS of Marketing Hype only to be shown this. (cue quiet fart sound)

    We should’ve gotten a True American Street Tracker Standard. A feet below your seat, sit up and beg riding position with 43mm sportbike forks with twin disc brakes and 130-140 HP.

    “IF” they would’ve, the entire motorcycle market would take notice that something great is happening at Polaris Industries.

    The following week they could’ve thrown the cherry on top and released this octane for the cruiser faithful.

    But no….all the hype and fluff for this little cupcake.

    Sure its better than a Sportster in every way – THAT’S not saying much (wife has a 1200 Custom)

    • Jeremy in TX says:

      “We should’ve gotten a True American Street Tracker Standard. A feet below your seat, sit up and beg riding position with 43mm sportbike forks with twin disc brakes and 130-140 HP.”

      I’d have probably taken one of those with the standard 104hp.

    • Scott says:

      Basically, it should have been the Ignition concept, but a little taller and a little shorter wheelbase. It didn’t have to be a “sport bike”.

      But this Octane? Pssh. They should have called it the Unleaded.

  98. LarryC says:

    Wow, an Indian, er, Victory V-Rod. Bet it sells just as well too. Problem is, cruiser guys aren’t interested in “fast.” Fast guys aren’t interested in “cruiser.” The market for bikes like this becomes vanishingly small.

    Same HP as my ’06 Tiger but 50 lbs heavier (“just” 528 lbs). The Tiger was never marketed as “fast” but would kill this thing. Too bad that any American motorcycle company is afraid to build anything but a cruiser.

    (Motus doesn’t count.)

  99. st1100boy says:

    I’d personally rather scrimp and save and wait until I could afford a secondhand XDiavel over an Octane, but @Neal is right: This probably is the best $10k cruiser going right now.

  100. ben says:

    We are inching closer to something interesting. I do not like cruisers, will not buy a cruiser. I appreciate the performance and attitude but this is clearly a cruiser. why cant we have this motor in a standard ?

  101. Tank says:

    If Victory wanted to make a bike that lets you “go very fast, and nothing else”- mission accomplished.

  102. In the year of hyperbola………….that’s not a Buick.

  103. MorganW says:

    This is a huge disppointment after Project 156. Surely there’s a market for an American v twin that’s more like a Monster than a Scout with a slightly diffrent tank?

  104. Karlsbad says:

    Just what the world needs another foot forward no suspension POS I am just curious if any one really thinks Victory, Indian, or Harley will ever build anything that even closely resembles a sport standard. I often wonder if all the folks buying cruisers have ever even sat on a V-Strom, a GS, a Varedero, an NX a Stelvio a Tiger a CB a Tenere or any of the other 10-20 bikes that have real suspension real brakes all day comfort and the reliability of a stone. Every time I go out for a ride and pass all the clones (and yes for a brief time I fell in that trap) I have to grin as I imagine to myself are people really that dumb?

  105. Paul says:

    Is it the Indian Scout with a different paint job ?

    • TexinOhio says:

      Back end is off the Gunner/Judge for sure. Tank off the Scout and then stretched a bit.

      • TexinOhio says:

        They also keep using the term muscle bike. Wasn’t that the Judge, then the Gunner and now this thing?

  106. tuskerdu says:

    very disappointing.

  107. Guzzi Guy says:

    Victory is chasing the money, not the enthusiast. While I’m as disappointed as many who were looking for more of a standard or ST rather than ‘just another cruiser’ the standard and ST market is only a fraction the size. Mass marketing vs. niche and the bigger market wins every time.

    One can only hope that a more standard derivative is offered in the not too distant future. Perhaps a tracker kit like Storz offers for Sportsters could be developed?

  108. Ax1464 says:

    I think Victory has shot themselves in the foot after hyping the Octane and then releasing nothing more than a rebadged Scout. WTF?

  109. TF says:

    That photo of the guy drifting the corner with his legs sticking straight out in front of him looks so forced and unnatural……something akin to BMXing a Schwinn Stingray.

  110. Asphanaut says:

    Race-Bred? Project 156? Ironic they refer to a race that they didn’t finish… and to a race with a 156 corners when the company can’t seem to turn even one.

    I bought a Victory in 1999 when they were the first new American manufacturer in 50 years or whatever… 17 years later and they’ve reduced themselves to just… whatever.

  111. Tommy See says:

    I love v-twins and had a dream that Polaris built a sport touring Vee that looked like a Ducati. Oh well dream on America.

    • TF says:

      How about a nice light version of this motor in a Monster-like chassis? I would hope they would sell more copies than they do with this lump. Maybe not….

  112. North of Missoula says:

    If this is an example of American innovation God help America

    • Tom K. says:

      What N.o.M. said. We had hopes of the Pikes Peak Racer, but we got a ’78 AMC Pacer. Isn’t being the “fastest, quickest, Victory ever built” on par with being the tallest Munchkin in Oz?

  113. Scott says:

    Well, that was disappointing.

    I suppose that if I were in the market for a Sportster type thing, I would definitely buy this one instead…

    But I’m not. So I won’t. NEXT!

  114. waitman says:

    Swing and a miss…knew there was a reason I will never own a Victory. That’s okay…they haven’t lost any sleep over failure to capture my business to this point nor will they in the future. Life’s too short. Find one you like elsewhere. I think this dead horse requires no more beating.

  115. Chris R says:

    I just don’t understand why manufacturers don’t understand that forward controls should not be used on a sporty type of cruiser. Harley ruined the vrod with forward controls too. These bikes should come stock with mids and offer forwards as an option.

    • Geoff says:

      Agreed, First thing I thought is I would like one, then checked foot position and that’s it. No Way.

  116. Peter says:

    This also, in my opinion, dilutes the Indian name. Now Indian vs Victory is nothing more than a styling exercise between the two. This isn’t fooling anyone…

  117. Peter says:

    UUUUUUUUGHHHHHHH!!!!! FWD controls, and an ass on the ground seat height. They can’t even muster the ergos of something like an XL1200R (Sportster Roadster) with a 30″ seat height and mids.

    • Don says:

      That bike (XL1200R) was a non-seller for Harley – even after several years of trying and adding a fully adjustable suspension. People here are disappointed because the Octane doesn’t marry a cruiser with a sportbike. I think, even if they managed to do that, it would be too far out in front of the curve to sell in quantity. When you look at the Octane from the point of view of someone thinking about buying a cruiser (a younger buyer)this thing is hot and affordable. I do agree that it needs a second front brake or, maybe better, a larger diameter single disk and better caliper.

  118. TexinOhio says:

    Note to Victory: Please just make dual disc upfront standard please…

  119. Tom R says:

    Put this motor in a sport touring chassis with ABS and with a riding position that I could stand for more than 5 miles, and Victory would get me into the showroom. Otherwise this is pretty much a repeat of the V-Rod: great motor totally wasted in yet another cruiser model.

  120. mkviz says:

    Well Harley has nothing to worry about after seeing the abomination.

    • Archie says:

      Nothing except declining sales and the inability to meet customers’ power expectations and emission and noise laws with the same, slice-of-a-cropduster engine.

  121. MGNorge says:

    This really doesn’t surprise me especially considering the cost of entry and the cruiser crowd it’s meant (mostly) to appeal to. Bring in the added bling and higher spec engine, etc. and it ain’t going to go out the door for $10.5! So, if Victory was to make it all happen for $14-$15 large would you be standing at the door with money in hand to get one?

  122. pistoldave says:

    Well, I should have known better, but I was trying to be optimistic, hoping against hope that an American manufacturer would finally build something really cool and break out of the overweight underpowered feet forward garbage that has defined American bikes for they last 100 years or so. I’m sure this is a fine motorcycle in and of itself, but viewed through the prism of what could have been, it’s as lame as lame could ever be. This bike is definitely a victory: For the forces of mediocrity.

  123. Buzz says:

    I think it’s nice looking and it’s pretty clear what Polaris is up to with the two brands.

    Victory will be the “modern cruiser” and Indian will be the “old Timey” cruiser.

    Anyone thinking that they were going to build something like a GSX1000 doesn’t understand that sales numbers keep you in business. Performance numbers don’t.

    These things will likely fly out the door.

    As good as a GSX1000 is, it’s a floor anchor.

    • Dave says:

      Re: “Victory will be the “modern cruiser” and Indian will be the “old Timey” cruiser.”

      To my eye, they’ve blurred the line between them too much. As someone mentions elsewhere, this is more of a hopped up Indian Scout than a Victory model. I think they’re both fine bikes but since I’m not a cruiser guy, I’ll hold out hope that they do a dirt-track inspired sport standard. That’s as close to a sport bike as this make is likely to ever get, and probably the sensible play to get there.

      Remember, this customer is Camaro, Dodge Charger, F-150, not Ferarri & Lamborghini. To them, THIS is a high performance bike, a MUSCLE bike, not a crotch rocket.

  124. Spike says:

    How long until they unleash the rebates?

    And, the Scout isn’t an Indian anyway. Hell, Indian isn’t even a ‘true’ Indian. Last I checked it was the 4th or 5th incarnation of that brand that was built in…..wait for it…..Springfield Massachusetts. The only thing that links the heritage? Both states begin with the letter ‘M’. Posers at best.

  125. Provologna says:

    For all motorcycles marketed for “performance,” outlaw forward foot controls.

    The bike looks great…for motorcyclists who don’t care about cornering velocity.

    A super, ultra, finely polished turd.

    If they had cloned Harley’s XR1200R w/Victory motor, accents, and improved performance throughout, I’d visit the dealership.

    But no, we get this piece of dawg meat.

    • Randy Singer says:

      Harley’s XR1200 didn’t sell, and isn’t even offered anymore. Harley’s V-Rod has always been a disappointing seller. The sport bike market has been in the tank recently.

      However, Harley’s Sportster has always sold really well. The Victory Combustion is just like a Sportster, only with a lot more horsepower, it costs less, it’s more modern in every way, and it has sportier styling. I’m sure that it will fly out of dealership’s doors.

      Victory has to build what will sell well and make them the most money. Hopefully this model will be a success, and then it will be natural for Victory to build a high performance model based on this platform.

      • Jeremy in TX says:

        I think the XR1200R didn’t sell well because it was still a Sportster powered by an antique. What if the XR had weighed 450 lbs instead of 600 lbs? Or had this Victory engine instead of that archaic, flatulent paint-shaker? Or actually looked good?

        • mickey says:

          The XR 1200 needed some help in the looks dept. Cosmetically it was a mess. It was supposed to look lithe and lean and mean like an XR 750 flat tracker. But it looked fat and bloated and squared off. It looked “thick”. A regular 883 looked skinnier, more sporty. Plus like Jeremy said it had a pig of a motor. Great idea, poor execution.

          I have seen some cafe’d Sporty’s that would sell a lot better than the XR on looks alone.

        • Provologna says:

          Jeremy, I think we were separated at birth! (Well, maybe.)

          You stole the text right off my display. I bet XR crank HP was in the high 60s/low 70s maximum! And the low RPM shaking was illegal in 50 States! Mid-band power was adequate, and the rest you can toss.

          An Octane only 80% of what it could have been (with this motor) would have been an awesome bike.

          • Jeremy in TX says:

            Lol. Well to be fair, the XR actually made about 80 hp at the wheel. I think they used the Buell XB heads with different cams. Of course the weight of the thing definitely made it feel like a bike with no more than 70 hp.

  126. Jabe says:


  127. Chris R says:

    I think they had the ability to do something great and totally missed the mark. Forward controls have no place on anything sporty like this and there is nothing muscle about that ugly exhaust. If they went with mid controls, dual disks up front and a 2-1 exhaust this thing would have been sick. I really wanted to give them my money too.

  128. ledcat says:

    I was really hoping an American manufacturer has finally made something for me. All that hype for project 156, for what, forward controls, single disc front brake, I don’t get it? How does this set it apart from the Scout? Are we really still doing the matte color thing, and what about the swingarm sized for a rebel 250? I am headed for the Tiger Sport.

  129. Jeremy in TX says:

    All that hype and media coverage just to introduce a rebadged Scout with a whopping 4 additional hp? I’m just shocked.

    Wait… no I’m not.

  130. Selecter says:

    You know what I like least about “surprises” like this? Everything I like about a bike like this is offset by something I dislike even more. And even the good qualities I can think of must be appended by the disclaimer “for a cruiser”. I don’t even have a particular problem with cruisers – there are plenty I’d like to ride or own sometime, but why deal with the caveats when you don’t have to?

    104HP? Wow, pretty good… for a cruiser.
    31 degree lean angle? Wow, pretty good… for a cruiser.
    $10,500? Good value… for a cruiser.
    Claimed 12-second 1/4 mile? Pretty fast… for a cruiser.

    Then you put any respectable standard from the same price bracket (GSX-S1000, Street Triple R, XSR900, Shiver 750) and you give up only the super-low seat height and nonsensical ergonomics of the cruiser, and end up getting lower weight (by over 100 lbs. in some cases), better brakes, better suspension, mind-boggling power-to-weight, and still great build quality, reliability, everyday livability, and day-long ergonomics.

    • Jeremy in TX says:

      Yes, but do these other bikes you mention look right when paired with a patched-in leather vest or denim or doo-rags? I didn’t think so. BAM!

      • Selecter says:

        Ouch! I just got incinerated!!!

      • Asphanaut says:

        I think you probably just nailed the genesis of this machine. Victory management met with marketing and engineering and said, “we need to make a splash with a new bike; ideas?” A marketing guy ran away and came back a few minutes later with a denim jacket with sleeves cut off and a few Gulf oil patches. An engineer ran off and within a few minutes was back with a radiator and a big grin. Management looked back and forth at the disparate ideas and said, “do it.”

  131. Blackcayman says:


    This is barely a “lightly-tarted-up” Scout.

    Where are the upside down forks, twin discs, standard ergos and 130-140 horses….

    All the hype of “Project 156” and then they let this slow fart out.

    This is what everyone EXPECTED they would do with the Scout platform. All the hype should’ve meant something greater.

    Can I get an AMEN?

  132. Neal says:

    It’s no world beater but its probably the best $10k cruiser ever built. I like that they include the little fairing instead of putting it in the accessory catalog. The engine looks like a gem. I’ll be taking a close look at it when I’m shopping for a replacement for my stolen sportbike.

  133. st1100boy says:

    I’ve been rooting for Victory, but I think they may have blown it. They didn’t go far enough. Single front disc? Spindly forks? Only 104 hp?

    On the other hand, the one trump card the Octane has is its price. That’s very attractive indeed. Makes a Sportster look lamer than ever.

    • Selecter says:

      Victory/Polaris is in my home state, and I’ve been pulling for them for a long time, but it’s apparent now that, despite the hype and posturing, that they’re pretty well half-assing it. The cruiser bit is a cop-out. They can’t compete with actual “performance machine manufacturers”, so they target the one target they can hit – our local heavyweight-cruiser manufacturer that can’t make a bike get out of its own way to save its life. Nice work, guys!

    • KenHoward says:

      “They didn’t go far enough. Single front disc?”

      But it’s only for “those rare occasions” – that you need to stop. They “didn’t go far enough?” That’s for sure. After all the Pikes Peak racer publicity, they went for a slightly sleeker-looking (?) Indian Scout. Basically, they went… no where.

  134. Larry K says:

    Remember in “Easy Rider” when Captain America told Billie “We blew it”?