Harley has some good years and some bad ones, too
I will say "Nobody beats Harley for quality".
Do not confuse that comment with "Harley builds the best motorcycle". They don't. But they do build with quality materials that hold up well.
They do not have the best design nor are they the most dependable or have the smoothest engine or ride. But they do make bikes that age better than most. I had a 20 year old Heritage and the paint was better after 1\5 of a century and 45K miles than any other bike I have owned. How many posts are here about the quality of Honda's paint. I can park my black 3 year old Valkyrie with 21K next to my black Springer --also with 21K miles and if you had to go by condition alone you would not be able to distinguish between the bike that is 3 years old and the one 16 years old. With the VRod, they proved that they can design a great bike that is dependable and powerful---even if it is not--nor ever was popular. They were great bikes for what they were meant to do.
Many Harley owners will tell you that they own a Harley for no other reason than they just want a Harley. Nothing wrong with that, I guess. I have owned a number of Metric Cruisers and ---try as they may---they cannot duplicate the Harley thump. The big Star bikes come as close as possible.
I will agree that the pre-EVO era was a nightmare. I think the 90's thru 2006 were their best years---JMHO of course. When I demo the new bikes, they just don't feel the same. They are very tame and feel domesticated and house broken.
What you have been reading is the ramblings of a bored warehouse supervisor who is through for the week and still has 2 hours to kill before the weekend starts. BTW---rode the Valkyrie to work the last 2 days. Love it just as much as the Springer.