..............
And that function would be... to remind us of how bad motorcycles really were in 1930?
As bad as 1930? You're reaching there, sunshine. :neener
Solid state ignition, no oil leaks, bullet proof reliable, 0-60 in less time than almost all autos on the road today? Compare that to a production 1930's Indian, or HD.... or Triumph for that matter.
When I got back into riding 12 years after my son was born, I decided to buy that Marauder..... specifically because it was low tech, low HP, and low to the ground. (I also thought the inverted fork would be better than it turned out to be... price point POS)
It's tough to exceed the posted limit by more than 10-15 MPH without physical reminders of what you are doing.... sparks, and the like. Lower HP, meant that there was more time to think about it, on the way to illegal speeds. And the speed I could reach was nowhere near as 'stupid fast' as I can attain on the fizzer.
I bevelled the crap out of the pegs and my boot heels on that bike. Dragged stuff in many many turns. Yet, I was not at as much risk doing so, as on the FZ..... when you get 'too hot' on a cruiser, the penalties are a bit less than on something with more vigor. Braking distances are non linear.... starting the maximum effort stop from a lower initial speed is not a bad thing. That Marauder, tapped out in top gear wouldn't break 100 MPH with a windscreen on it. Granted, hitting higher speeds than that is fun on occasion; but my liscense really doesn't benefit from it. :lao
Long wheelbase bikes with a lower center of gravity are more stable in braking evolutions. Long wheelbase bikes with more rake and trail are also more stable at moderate speeds... with modern frame design, there is no flex, so the parts work as designed.
I do find myself looking at Lincolns much more often than I used to.... there's something about the ride you get out of a long wide wheelbase, that is not going to happen with a 'euro tuned' suspension on a smaller chassis. 
