Motorcycle brands and claimed age

[Fredrik]

Hello.

One thing that for some reason bothers me is how many manufacturers imho lie about their brands age. For example Indian claim to have ”made bikes since 1901”, that is bs! Indian went bankrupt in 1954 and disapeared with no bikes made for like 50 years. Same now for BSA, Horex, Benelli etc. Claimed to have made bikes since xx when the only thing they have in common with the first bikes is the name. How can it even be legal……

[Dirk_S]

Welcome to the world of marketing.

[mtiberio]

relax in the knowledge that Moto Guzzi is #2 to Harley for "continuous" manufacture.

[Fredrik]

relax in the knowledge that Moto Guzzi is #2 to Harley for "continuous" manufacture.

Well, Husqvarna is the oldest in continious production.

[Scud]

Husqvarna started motorcycles in 1904, one year after Harley. But as a company Husqvarna goes back to 1689. But on the other but, The motorcycles aren't part of that original company anymore. And some would say they are not even Husqvarnas anymore - just good looking KTMs. It's complicated...

It's true that a brand, such as Indian or BSA started in a given year, the continuity is another story. As for the re-boot brands... if somebody managed to get the rights to the brand, then they have the rights to it's past, present, and future.

[lucky phil]

relax in the knowledge that Moto Guzzi is #2 to Harley for "continuous" manufacture.

Incorrect I'm afraid. The #1 goes to Royal Enfield. The Indian company was a joint venture between the Indian arm and the original British company. When the parent British company went out of business the Indian arm/subsidiary just kept on producing the same bikes. longest continuous brand in the world. 120 years this year.

Caio 

[PJPR01]

Ahem...if Moto Guzzi has been producing since 1921, and Husqvarna since 1904, how can Guzzi claim to be the longest continuously producing European manufacturer of motorcycles?

[lucky phil]

Ahem...if Moto Guzzi has been producing since 1921, and Husqvarna since 1904, how can Guzzi claim to be the longest continuously producing European manufacturer of motorcycles?

Italian mathematics?

Ciao

[Fredrik]

Husqvarna started motorcycles in 1904, one year after Harley. But as a company Husqvarna goes back to 1689. But on the other but, The motorcycles aren't part of that original company anymore. And some would say they are not even Husqvarnas anymore - just good looking KTMs. It's complicated...

It's true that a brand, such as Indian or BSA started in a given year, the continuity is another story. As for the re-boot brands... if somebody managed to get the rights to the brand, then they have the rights to it's past, present, and future.

Husqvarna made their first bike in early 1903. I am swedish and have visited the Husqvarna museeum several times.

Royal Enfield, well, not realy true based on the india made Enfields was not sold as Royal Enfields until early 2000. Again, marketing……

[Fredrik]

Ahem...if Moto Guzzi has been producing since 1921, and Husqvarna since 1904, how can Guzzi claim to be the longest continuously producing European manufacturer of motorcycles?

True, strange because Husqvarna have made bikes all the time. But ok, Cagiva bought the factory in 1988-89, but still constant production since 1903.

[Tom]

I have a Harley Davidson 1/2 helmet given to me.  The inside label says made by AGV.  If you pull up the removable liner you'll see "Made in Malaysia" next to the foam liner.  🤣

[Dimitri_Harkov]

I can totally see why Husqvarna 'does not count'. What we have now is totally unrelated to what they were in everything except the name.

Royal Enfield lived on in India and at least imho their claim is therefore legit.

Guzzi never moved an inch and dispite several changes in ownership stayed 'original'.

Indian on the other hand... Just a revived brand like Husqvarna, BSA, Benelli...

[Tom]

What ever works to sell your product. 

[lucky phil]

Husqvarna made their first bike in early 1903. I am swedish and have visited the Husqvarna museeum several times.

Royal Enfield, well, not realy true based on the india made Enfields was not sold as Royal Enfields until early 2000. Again, marketing……

I suppose applying this logic Harley Davidson stopped being Harley Davidson when AMF bought them out and they became AMF Harley Davidsons. Even displayed it on the the side of the bikes.

Ciao

[Kev m]

Meh...

Lie?

I'm like Obi Wan, it's all true, from a certain point of view.

So what's the view?

Brand?

Company?

Constant production of motorcycles?

Constant mass production of motorcycles?

At the end of the day, who gives a crap.

You're only as good as your latest creation.

Judge something by the merit of its very existence I say.

[Dirk_S]

What’s old is new again:

https://wildguzzi.com/forum/index.php?topic=78115.0

[LesP]

True, strange because Husqvarna have made bikes all the time. But ok, Cagiva bought the factory in 1988-89, but still constant production since 1903.

I would disagree (for the sake of history) having one 1986 400WR (since 1987) and two 1968 MF's (real Husqvarna's made in Sweden by Swedish people, I still have the signed build card for my WR.
Husqvarna could be divided to before the known 2 strokes of the mid 1960's and some would say real stopped at the previous 4 strokes perhaps in the same vein as what is a real Norton (certainly not a Commando for some)

Once Cagiva muddied the waters of Husqvarna around 1988 the bloodline changed, enough for the birth of Swedish Husaberg which got diluted eventually via KTM.

[twowheeladdict]

Careful listen or read the marketing materials. They don’t lie, they just phrase the words carefully.

Originated.
Since.
Produced.
Continuous.
Oldest US.
Oldest Italian.
Oldest Company. (Made other things before motorcycles)
On and on the marketing spin continues.

[9fingers]

Incorrect I'm afraid. The #1 goes to Royal Enfield. The Indian company was a joint venture between the Indian arm and the original British company. When the parent British company went out of business the Indian arm/subsidiary just kept on producing the same bikes. longest continuous brand in the world. 120 years this year.

Caio

Correct!
Scott

[Fredrik]

I can totally see why Husqvarna 'does not count'. What we have now is totally unrelated to what they were in everything except the name.

Royal Enfield lived on in India and at least imho their claim is therefore legit.

Guzzi never moved an inch and dispite several changes in ownership stayed 'original'.

Indian on the other hand... Just a revived brand like Husqvarna, BSA, Benelli...

You need to get your facts right, Husqvarna have been in continious production since it was founded. Different owners yes, but still in production. What i refer to is brands like Indian that not did make any bikes at all and then claim to be the oldest brand on the market. Ok, then is Hildebrand & Wolfmüller the oldest based on you can buy new copies of them. 

[Fredrik]

I heard that Suzuki has been making motorcycles since the Azuchi-Momoyama Period. Must be true it was on the internet. 

Anyone here have a 1573 DL650 as proof?

It must be true. 😅

[Dimitri_Harkov]

You need to get your facts right, Husqvarna have been in continious production since it was founded. Different owners yes, but still in production. What i refer to is brands like Indian that not did make any bikes at all and then claim to be the oldest brand on the market. Ok, then is Hildebrand & Wolfmüller the oldest based on you can buy new copies of them. 

It doesn't make any difference to me if there have been bikes called 'Husqvarna' in continuous production.
They ceased to be what they were a long time ago.
Husqvarna is just some kind of KTM knockoff nowadays.

As a Swede I would be ashamed that they are still allowed to carry the Husqvarna badge.

Cheers,
D.

EDIT: I think it is appropriate to add that I actually really like the bikes.
I seriously considered a 401 until I found out I'm much too small to ride it in confidence.

[Scud]

I would disagree (for the sake of history) having one 1986 400WR (since 1987) and two 1968 MF's (real Husqvarna's made in Sweden by Swedish people, I still have the signed build card for my WR.
Husqvarna could be divided to before the known 2 strokes of the mid 1960's and some would say real stopped at the previous 4 strokes perhaps in the same vein as what is a real Norton (certainly not a Commando for some)

Once Cagiva muddied the waters of Husqvarna around 1988 the bloodline changed, enough for the birth of Swedish Husaberg which got diluted eventually via KTM.

Husaberg was awesome... The MV era Husqvarnas were fabulous (I've had 3). The brief time with BMS was terrible. But since KTM was influenced by Husaberg, then brought in Husqvarna, its homecoming in a weird sort of way for Husky. It takes passion and money to either revive a brand or "rescue" it (from BMW) and keep it going. I was impressed the KTM Group brought back the blue and yellow for Husky, outfitted it with higher end components and actually made it a premium product (over KTM). And they kept the traditional shock linkage, which contributes to Husky's legendary stability.

So not the same bike as before, but everything evolves. I think the point here is that someone has cared about Husky continuously and kept it going. Same for Royal Enfield, Moto Guzzi, Harley, etc. Not true for Indian, Triumph, Norton, BSA, etc. But it still takes passion to revive a brand and I can respect that.

Then we have the car/motorcycle companies, like Honda and BMW, that show no signs of stopping. Making cars and bikes seems like a good strategy to have enough money to hold on to your motorcycle business.

[tetarabra]

Peugeot since 1898 ?   
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_motorcycle#:~:text=In%201898%2C%20Peugeot%20Motocycles%20presents,motorcycle%20manufacturer%20in%20the%20world.

[lucky phil]

Peugeot since 1898 ?   
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_motorcycle#:~:text=In%201898%2C%20Peugeot%20Motocycles%20presents,motorcycle%20manufacturer%20in%20the%20world.

A Scooter isn't a Motorcycle, it's a Scooter.

Ciao

[Dirk_S]

A Scooter isn't a Motorcycle, it's a Scooter.

Such is the murkiness of labels:

[lucky phil]

Such is the murkiness of labels:

I remember when this qualified as a "sidecar" for racing. A 3 wheeled Mini Minor basically. Variations become more defined over time and evolve into their own distinct categories. Royal Enfield still winning for mine:)
Ciao

[Turin]

You could argue this case for Triumph. The factory shut down in 1983, but new Bonneville's trickled out of small shops under license until the new Gen prototype engine was up and running.

End of the day, it doesn't matter.

[lucky phil]

You could argue this case for Triumph. The factory shut down in 1983, but new Bonneville's trickled out of small shops under license until the new Gen prototype engine was up and running.

End of the day, it doesn't matter.

But it does, it does 

Ciao

[bad Chad]

There is enough conflicting info in this thread to make it a - thread!