Royal Enfield parallel-twin coming next year

[Penderic]

Royal Enfield 750cc parallel-twin coming next year .....  :pop

http://www.visordown.com/motorcycle-news-new-bikes/royal-enfield-parallel-twin-coming-next-year/26302.html

They are hiring people and making big plans for production facilities in England.

[Lannis]

Being a Britbiker with original 50's and 60's bikes myself, I understand why the Enfield single was and remains popular .... it doesn't have anything to prove; it can johnny-pop around the countryside and break down every once in a while and go really slow and that's all OK, 'cause it's cheap and historic.

But a parallel twin?   People are going to expect more out of that; they may even expect something like a Hinkley Triumph twin.   But if they get something anything LIKE the 1970 Royal Enfield Interceptor ... it's going to be an Edsel-sized sales disaster.   Those were terrible bikes even in their day, as opposed to the single.

But time will tell!

Lannis

[Penderic]

Absolutely right Lannis! I think that is why they have decided to move the origin of the new line back to Britain - a smart marketing move if you wanted to enter the international market and make a big splash.

[leafman60]

Quote:

Three new models using two new engine platforms | Future models to be developed in the UK | Legendary designer Pierre Terblanche recruited

There he is!

[leafman60]

A lot of folks were hoping for something like the "Musket"

[not-fishing]

But if they get something anything LIKE the 1970 Royal Enfield Interceptor ... it's going to be an Edsel-sized sales disaster.   Those were terrible bikes even in their day, as opposed to the single.

But time will tell!

Lannis

As one who prefers "positive vibes" I was thinking a Rickman Interceptor would be very smart.  I'd be in the market for one with a 270 degree timed engine and under 400 lbs.

[oldbike54]

 Hiring Simon Warburton... good , hiring Pierre Terblanche ... BAD .
 
  Dusty

[bacongrease]

 I can't see much for sales, unless it is Chinese cheap.

There are so many startups, & new models from established brands.

I Don't see it.

[Lannis]

As one who prefers "positive vibes" I was thinking a Rickman Interceptor would be very smart.  I'd be in the market for one with a 270 degree timed engine and under 400 lbs.

If you had to ride one, you wouldn't call those vibes "positive"!   :o   ;)

What I mean is, the Enfield single was attractive to a certain type of person because it was a direct, genuine descendant of the British Enfield of 1955.   Made the same way, with the same warts, eccentricities, and idiosyncracies, and looked the business, too.   ;-T

And I mentioned Hinkley because when they came out with the new Triumph, it had a name, configuration, and styling cues that "reminded" people of the old Speed Twin-derived bikes of 1937 - 1980, which was a worldbeater in its day and still a reasonably decent bike when it finally wore out its welcome among Gold Wings and GS850s.    But the new bike was NOTHING like the old Triumph, even though they made injector covers that tried to look like Mark II Amals, and like that.    However, the new Hinkley is a good bike by any standard, and combined with 40+ years of mainly good vibes from the original Triumph Twin, they've been a big success in anyone's book.

So with the "new" Royal Enfield Interceptor Twin they've got two choices:

1) Make it a direct copy of the 1970 twin, like the Single was; hey, it worked once, maybe it'll go twice.   If they do that, it'll be a nightmare and no one will buy one.   They'd rather have a Chang Jiang, and with good reason.

2) Make it a brand-new bike, with styling cues from the old RE 750, a la Hinkley.   I'm not sure that would work .... heckfire, people didn't know what the RE twins were back when they were NEW!   There weren't many around, and they didn't run for long when they were around.    There's just no "history" to help the new technology get accepted with the "cachet" of the old one.

I'm not hoping they fail.   I'm just not going to be blindly optimistic about its chances, in hopes of adding to some karma stream that will get the bikes sold.  

Lannis

[guzziownr]

They are hiring people and making big plans for production facilities in England. India

Design in U.K., production in India.  Middleweights are the flavor of the month -- Even at Guzzi. 

[Doppelgaenger]

If they can manage to charge a price for this new bike, or indeed any of the other stuff in their lineup, that is in line with the actual value of the motorcycle then they'll have sales. Their current problem is that they're charging too much money for badly made bikes. You can have terblanche design the best thing in the world, but if it's badly made it doesn't matter one damn how good the design is. Here's to hoping RE can make a bike for the modern age...

[mgfan]

Their "modern age" is in India. They have more customers there than the rest of the world combined. The new, emerging middle class don't want the same single cylinder model as the poor people ride, they want something bigger, faster, flashier! Sound familiar?    :BEER:

[Orange Guzzi]

Will they call them Obamacycles since he signed off on the trade agreement?

[leafman60]

The biggest thing that Enfield could do to improve their chances for anything they sell is to improve the quality and finishing of their products. Based on what I've seen, the Indian Enfields are crudely-made with clunky-looking componentry.

I'm sure they are getting better but they have a way to go.

[Kev m]

The biggest thing that Enfield could do to improve their chances for anything they sell is to improve the quality and finishing of their products. Based on what I've seen, the Indian Enfields are crudely-made with clunky-looking componentry.

I keep hearing (in this and other threads) that the Enfield's "LOOK" cheap or "LOOK" clunky.

Personally I love the look... again, it's retro, well, actual retro in some cases, but kinda like new old stock lol.

I have to wonder though, people seem to LOVE THEM. They outsold Harley in total units last year. They can't be all THAT BAD, can they? I mean mechanically, used within their relative narrow limits compared to modern bikes?

Are people judging on the LOOKS of how reliable they will be, or reports of problems? And are the reports of problems on the current years/models or on previous models which may have changed some build materials or components by now?

Maybe it's just wishful thinking on my part because they look great in the showroom... of course it's the smarmiest showroom I've seen in a long time, so that doesn't help their case.

 ???

[Dean Rose]

Maybe they'll get to the fire faster.

http://www.visordown.com/motorcycle-news-bizarre/royal-enfield-fire-engines/20540.html


Dean

[redrider]

I looked at a 500 with 4k. Rust everywhere with bubbling chrome on the silencer. How are the Buells holding up?

[Kev m]

How are the Buells holding up?

I just sold a PRISTINE 2001 S3T with 22k miles on it. Very little corrosion (some on the aluminum PM wheels, but that was my fault riding it a little last winter).

[leafman60]

I keep hearing (in this and other threads) that the Enfield's "LOOK" cheap or "LOOK" clunky.

Personally I love the look... again, it's retro, well, actual retro in some cases, but kinda like new old stock lol.

I have to wonder though, people seem to LOVE THEM. They outsold Harley in total units last year. They can't be all THAT BAD, can they? I mean mechanically, used within their relative narrow limits compared to modern bikes?

Are people judging on the LOOKS of how reliable they will be, or reports of problems? And are the reports of problems on the current years/models or on previous models which may have changed some build materials or components by now?

Maybe it's just wishful thinking on my part because they look great in the showroom... of course it's the smarmiest showroom I've seen in a long time, so that doesn't help their case.

 ???

Retro is fine. My comments about being crude are centered on the more detailed aspects of the machines.  I have a '53 Matchless 500 single and it's finished off better than the late model Enfields. I love the early-era design of the Enfields and the improvements they've made, though.

A friend was recently a dealer and, yes, there were problems with the bikes but maybe that's improving.

[Kiwi_Roy]

How about this one from the 70s
My favorite Enfield, 4 cylinder overhead cam, water cooled.

[Penderic]

Well I wish them good tidings! Hope they can compete now the new platforms, and hope they can get the quality and consistency we expect.

It would be real funny if they assembled one of the Royal Enfield 750 twins, maybe a special flag model,  in a factory in Thailand, right next to the Truimph's Thailand factory! Hah!  :D

Meanwhile....

[Kev m]

Retro is fine. My comments about being crude are centered on the more detailed aspects of the machines.  I have a '53 Matchless 500 single and it's finished off better than the late model Enfields. I love the early-era design of the Enfoelds and the improvements they've made, though.

A friend was recently a dealer and, yes, there were problems with the bikes but maybe that's improving.

 ;-T

Fingers crossed that they are improving. I do like the aesthetic simplicity.

[huub]

Retro is fine. My comments about being crude are centered on the more detailed aspects of the machines.  I have a '53 Matchless 500 single and it's finished off better than the late model Enfields. I love the early-era design of the Enfoelds and the improvements they've made, though.

A friend was recently a dealer and, yes, there were problems with the bikes but maybe that's improving.

your matchless has probably been restored half a dozen times since new, they werent exactly brilliant to start with.
the bit bikes i own werent that brilliant
enfield chrome and paint isnt up to honda standards ( neither is guzzi chrome ), but if you want a honda you should buy a honda.  :beat_horse


i have a couple of indian enfield bullets , i have friends have English built bullets , if anything metallurgy in the indian bullets is on par with the english built bikes.
the old iron barrel bullets are strictly speaking not retro, they are actually the same bike being  produced since the fifties.
a retro is supposed to be a modern bike made to look like a classic.
 
my iron barrel enfield  never broke down during the couple of years i used it as daily transport. ( 60.000 km?)
the only issue running one as daily transport was it needed very regular maintenance.
They used to fail big time on quality control, with bearing fits being al over the place, but that has been corrected a decade ago.

one real problem with bullets is aftermarket parts,
india has a huge cottage industry producing enfield parts of pretty variable quality
anything on a enfield can be had as aftermarket part.
some parts are amazingly cheap, in india you can pick up a complete piston kit for 14 euro
it shouldnt be a surprise that a 14 euro piston is probably junk,
still people fit those and blame the enfield if it breaks down.
finding good parts can be a challenge, when i needed a big end bush for my 350 i went through a box of 20 before finding one good enough to fit.
even then i had the conrod chromed to get the fit up in the conrod tight enough.

i have friends in the enfield club that did over 100.000 km with a old iron barrel bullet without opening the engine ,for the new enfields that is the norm.
i have yet to come across somebody who matches that on a guzzi nuovo falcone , despite the guzzi being designed 25 years later.

[Daniel Kalal]

How about this one from the 70s
My favorite Enfield, 4 cylinder overhead cam, water cooled.

this is what that same Peter Dent Enfield/Hillman looked like in 1978 when I came across it in Montana:


Later, he changed out the Enfield transmission for one from Norton.

[Loftness]

I keep hearing (in this and other threads) that the Enfield's "LOOK" cheap or "LOOK" clunky.

Personally I love the look... again, it's retro, well, actual retro in some cases, but kinda like new old stock lol.

I have to wonder though, people seem to LOVE THEM. They outsold Harley in total units last year. They can't be all THAT BAD, can they? I mean mechanically, used within their relative narrow limits compared to modern bikes?

Are people judging on the LOOKS of how reliable they will be, or reports of problems? And are the reports of problems on the current years/models or on previous models which may have changed some build materials or components by now?

Maybe it's just wishful thinking on my part because they look great in the showroom... of course it's the smarmiest showroom I've seen in a long time, so that doesn't help their case.

 ???

I think the modern Enfields (the fuel-injected versions) are great bikes.  They're not for everyone, or everything, but taken for what they are, old-school single thumpers, they're great.  They're hugely popular in India, and they use them for just about everything a motorcycle could possibly be used for.  And their sales in the US were up big time last year, as you pointed out, though I'd say that was mainly due to the release of their Continental GT which we couldn't keep in stock.  People gobbled that thing up, even though it wasn't much of a mechanical leap from any of their other models.  It was more of a facelift. 

[Don G]

I have owned a quite a number of Royal Enfields, what stands out is the mileage that they would attain compared to lets sat a BSA A65 or any Triumph 650 twin, the Enfield MK2 interceptors were a good engine, just another case of too little too late. One thing that Enfield got correct was engine balance! You have to ride one to see what I mean, why couldnt everyone else get this right? Another strong point in Enfields favour was it was a simple design, easy servicing and robustly constructed for the most part. I am glad to see that they are considering a twin, package it up in the cafe racer mode for the cafe nuts.  ;-TDonG

[ken farr]

I hope they make a quality product, and do well.

I am waiting.....


kjf

[V7BRIAN]

"A friend was recently a dealer and, yes, there were problems with the bikes but maybe that's improving. "

Are you talking about Moto Guzzi or Royal Enfield??? :o

[Kiwi_Roy]

this is what that same Peter Dent Enfield/Hillman looked like in 1978 when I came across it in Montana:


Later, he changed out the Enfield transmission for one from Norton.

And it's still a work of art in progress, I haven't seen it lately, he told me he's working on the wheels, making new hubs etc.
Yes, a Norton gearbox turned on end.
As you can see he has made quite a few improvements since then, all hand built from the front forks to the tail-light, mirrors, fenders, muffler, the lot.

He has owned this bike from new.

[leafman60]

your matchless has probably been restored half a dozen times since new, they werent exactly brilliant to start with.

LOL

Hubert!

1. One Matchless is restored the other is original. The fasteners, and fit-finish looks better on the old Matchless than the recent issue RE's that Ive seen.

2. The old british bikes weren't weren't brilliant to start with and many aren't brilliant now!

I'd love to have an English-built Royal Enfield (single or twin) but they are rare to find.  

The new bikes-

Hey, if you love 'em, that's fine.  I like them too!