Royal Enfield twin

[Seeker]

I've been following this bike's development for a while and it has now been announced at the EICMA show. The leaked reports said it would be a 700cc twin but it is actually a 650cc.

http://www.visordown.com/motorcycle-news-new-bikes/royal-enfield-reveals-two-new-650-twins-eicma

I like retro styling generally and these bikes look good to my eyes but I don't understand how you can start with a clean sheet of paper and produce a modern OHC 650cc engine that only produces 47 hp and 38 ft/lb of torque and then make a bike that weighs 200 kg. Maybe it's a durability/longevity concept with the home (Indian) market in mind?

[Grim-Lock]

Makes it A2 learner legal too like the Honda 500s


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SV650rules]

I wouldn't like to go too fast on roads in India, don't forget cows have complete right of way over traffic. This bike probably uses as many parts from existing Royal Enfield models as possible. Guy Martin chose a Royal Enfield for his TV tour of India, no good taking an exotic bike as if it broke down it may never get fixed. I bet octane of available fuel is limited as well. As long as seat can carry 5 people and a crate of chickens it will sell well.

That cut-off front mudguard on the one model may be asking for trouble on Indian roads, especially with the oil cooler radiator.

[R1ffR4ff]

A couple of years ago I saw three,"Ladies" riding around the small country roads I like around here on the UK re-built/built REs and they did look retro-cool and sounded awesome :)

It's nice to have variety in the World IMHO :riding:

https://royalenfield.com/images/data/motorcycles/slider1/desertstorm_left-side_600x463_motorcycle.png

https://royalenfield.com/images/data/motorcycles/slider1/bullet-500-marsh-grey.png

[Bibio]

I suppose my point is that a 1968 Triumph Bonneville produced 46 hp and 37 ft/lb torque and only weighed 165 kg. The engine was based on Edward Turner's Speed Twin, a 1937 design. I'm sure by modern standards the 1968 engine would be considered "dirty" but allowing for cleaning up the engine emissions I would have expected more power (and less weight from the complete bike) from a new design. Still, it's always easy being an armchair critic who has never designed a bike in his life and I don't what their design goals were.

the people buying a Royal Enfield are not buying them for their power. BHP is not everything, in fact that's the 'pleasure' ;)

[andrewsmith]

the people buying a Royal Enfield are not buying them for their power. BHP is not everything, in fact that's the 'pleasure' ;)This

Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk

[SV650rules]

I've been following this bike's development for a while and it has now been announced at the EICMA show. The leaked reports said it would be a 700cc twin but it is actually a 650cc.

http://www.visordown.com/motorcycle-news-new-bikes/royal-enfield-reveals-two-new-650-twins-eicma

I like retro styling generally and these bikes look good to my eyes but I don't understand how you can start with a clean sheet of paper and produce a modern OHC 650cc engine that only produces 47 hp and 38 ft/lb of torque and then make a bike that weighs 200 kg. Maybe it's a durability/longevity concept with the home (Indian) market in mind?

Triumph sell their T100 Bonneville and street cup 900cc twins with only 54 ponies. They weigh in at around 220KG

[Sir Trev]

Triumph sell their T100 Bonneville and street cup 900cc twins with only 54 ponies. They weigh in at around 220KG

As a 2017 T100 owner I can vouch that it feels lighter and has plenty enough mid-range torque for every day riding. 50 odd ponies are plenty and it sounds wonderful. Bibs and Smithers are quite right that some of us are quite happy trundling around on a modern classic.

[Geodude]

I like the look of that 500 desert storm.

[Talking Heads]

I suppose my point is that a 1968 Triumph Bonneville produced 46 hp and 37 ft/lb torque and only weighed 165 kg. The engine was based on Edward Turner's Speed Twin, a 1937 design. I'm sure by modern standards the 1968 engine would be considered "dirty" but allowing for cleaning up the engine emissions I would have expected more power (and less weight from the complete bike) from a new design. Still, it's always easy being an armchair critic who has never designed a bike in his life and I don't what their design goals were.

Weight of bikes are given fully oiled and fuelled these days.
That figure for the 68 Bonnie is dry.
Add four imperial gallons of unleaded and fill it with oil.....
Oh wait a minute, it might not like ethanol blend unleaded, not as good quality or as potent as the old four star....

[R1ffR4ff]

Triumph sell their T100 Bonneville and street cup 900cc twins with only 54 ponies. They weigh in at around 220KG

My mate sold his Triumph Sprint and part-exed it for first a Yamaha V-Twin cruiser but didn't bond with it so part-exed that for a,"Street-Cup".It gets ridden more than his SV650s now :)

https://i.imgur.com/JrMwNpz.jpg?1

What a beautiful sound :cool:

[R1ffR4ff]

I like the look of that 500 desert storm.

Yeh.Definitely a,"Conversion Starter" :)

[ophic]

Being air-cooled tends to limit the overall power output.

Having said that I'm currently riding a water-cooled 750cc Honda v-twin that puts out a meagre 39bhp and weighs a ton.

[R1ffR4ff]

Being air-cooled tends to limit the overall power output.

Having said that I'm currently riding a water-cooled 750cc Honda v-twin that puts out a meagre 39bhp and weighs a ton.


You got a picture?.I like piccys :smt038

I use Imgur for hosting now,

https://imgur.com/

Also means I can re-size my piccys easy if I need to :)

[SV650rules]

A couple of weekends ago I was out with a couple of cruisers, a Yam XVS1300 and a 1900 midnight star, the 1900 has 104 foot lbs and 80 ponies, but the 104 ft/lb is at just over 2200 revs and the 80 ponies at 4500 revs. With a dry weight of 725 pounds and a four gallon tank its getting on for 800 lbs fueled and oiled. Extreme example but not my kind of bike - we parked on a sloping carpark, both cruiser guys really struggled to move them around. Surprisingly the 1300 does not like low revs, and my SV will pull lower speed in top gear - I think may be a problem with his bike ?

[R1ffR4ff]

I was out the other week and there was an Older 1800c Big Honda Goldwing parked net to me.He had no trouble getting out but then he has the honda Heavy duty Starter/Reversing system<BFG> :D

[ophic]

Surprisingly the 1300 does not like low revs, and my SV will pull lower speed in top gear - I think may be a problem with his bike ?
If it's one of the more recent carbed bikes, they were set to run very lean for US emissions laws.

My Honda Shadow does not run well until it's fully warmed up. I think the engines were mostly developed for shinyness not function.

[Talking Heads]

What a beautiful sound :cool:

That's down to the 270 crank, essentially its a fake v-twin. ;)

There's a lot of them about, this new Enfield, the Honda NC range, the MT-07 range, the old TDM, the Hinkley Triumph Bonneville Scramblers and customs and all the new Triumph twins.

The fact that Suzuki are able to keep costs down and knock out a real v-twin for less than all of them is testament to the long running success of what is undoubtedly one of the best ever motorcycle engines.

[R1ffR4ff]

That's down to the 270 crank, essentially its a fake v-twin. ;)


The fact that Suzuki are able to keep costs down and knock out a real v-twin for less than all of them is testament to the long running success of what is undoubtedly one of the best ever motorcycle engines.

Can't argue with that.I doubt I've enough time left to get this guy's mileage

http://www.svrider.com/forum/showthread.php?t=378946&highlight=milestone

:sad:


:)https://imgur.com/a/oMhZs

https://i.imgur.com/UhicqbW.jpg

[SV650rules]

That's down to the 270 crank, essentially its a fake v-twin. ;)

There's a lot of them about, this new Enfield, the Honda NC range, the MT-07 range, the old TDM, the Hinkley Triumph Bonneville Scramblers and customs and all the new Triumph twins.

The fact that Suzuki are able to keep costs down and knock out a real v-twin for less than all of them is testament to the long running success of what is undoubtedly one of the best ever motorcycle engines.

+1

Only a proper 90 degree V twin is naturally well balanced enough at all revs to not need the balance shafts and other gizmos that the others need, and then they don't fully negate the vibs throughout the rev range. A Harley D although a V twin is only 45 deg, so will shake your eyeballs out and front wheel moves back and forth at tickover LOL. Ducati knew what they were doing with their 90 deg V twins, but Suzuki lump much better value (and arguably more reliable) IMHO.

The Honda NC engine is half a 1400cc Jazz car engine - only revs to just over 6k - not a proper bike engine at all.

[andrewsmith]

+1

Only a proper 90 degree V twin is naturally well balanced enough at all revs to not need the balance shafts and other gizmos that the others need, and then they don't fully negate the vibs throughout the rev range. A Harley D although a V twin is only 45 deg, so will shake your eyeballs out and front wheel moves back and forth at tickover LOL. Ducati knew what they were doing with their 90 deg V twins, but Suzuki lump much better value (and arguably more reliable) IMHO.

The Honda NC engine is half a 1400cc Jazz car engine - only revs to just over 6k - not a proper bike engine at all.And the zzr1400 and the gtr1400 motor started life in a Mitsubishi colt

Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk