Quote:
Originally Posted by mithunvvijayan Doc, I am not saying that 390 is the ideal bike for me. But there isn't any which fits my requirements. |
Because I believe that at heart you are still a Bulleteer.
BUT you just bought the wrong Bullet. Because it wasn't a Bullet to begin with.
And then you proceeded to correct that mistake by selling that Bullet. And buying a 390!
When actually you should have instead have been buying the right Bullet.
A real Bullet.
Quote:
Why do we have to go that far. When they introduced the new UCE engines, RE managed to increase the power out put by almost 50%. This is done without increasing the torque or changing the bore/stroke.
If they can increase the max rpm to around 8000-9000 rpm, power above 40 bhp is quite possible. Liquid cooling, lowering the frictional loses, changes in head, piston, crank etc might be the way to go.
|
Please buddy. I am weeping tears of frustration here. And I cannot decide which is stinging more, my palms or my face.
PLEASE for Bullet Baba's sake get rid of the numbers!
What does that super duper new age cutting edge Bullet DO ON THE ROAD what my and VW's decade old cast iron thumpers always did and still do?
Quote:
I am actually enjoying the 390. If we putter around below 5000 rpm, the engine sound is quite audible akin to yezdi. It may not the ideal bike for me but there isn't any other choice either.
|
See what I am saying? You sold a Bullet. Or what sells as a Bullet today.
Then you bought a 390.
Now you ride the 390 like a Bullet.
You need a Bullet. A real Bullet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VW2010 The only ideal thing i did in my life was to sell a bike and buy the 500 and i paid a little over 60K. And now its an investment |
Ditto! But in 2004 it was 72,000 on road here in Pune bro.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mithunvvijayan If they produce such a bike even if for say 2.5-3L I think it's worth it. Didn't say exactly, but some resemblance? At lower speeds? |
The British made such bikes in the 1950s. We Indians took their designs but still 60 years later with all our modern technology and umpteen contracts to tuning gurus and engine and gearbox manufacturers, we still have not made a bike that can beat what they made then.
Quote:
I want to have my cake and eat it too. Imagine a thumper at 140kmph.
|
Want a thumper that can do a true ton? Buy a BSA Goldstar. No Indian Bullet still comes even close.
Quote:
But many of the 390 owners here are bulleteers or have been. So why do they own both the chalk and the cheese?
|
Because most of them recognize that both bikes are chalk and cheese. And are comfortable in that knowledge and choice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverflash every single bike in their stable has a variant of the same 2 engines. |
Try
7-8. Quote:
What you are asking is for them to strike out in a completely new direction with a bike that would be a radical departure from the one basic design that has been the bedrock of their success.
|
They already did that with the UCEs. Even the LB AVLs still had the basic structure of the original British motor.
Quote:
I would love to see it, as may others, but RE has to evaluate whether enough of us will to justify the effort and risk.
|
I am done with RE, as are many others from my Bullet generation.
We already have the one Bullet we need. And will keep them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mithunvvijayan They struck out on a totally different path with their cafe racer. If someone said 15 years back, that he wished, had RE introduced fuel injection and ABS, people would have laughed at him. |
Yet the Cafe Racer space ship cannot lose from its rear view mirrors a mildly modded 12 year old cast iron bullock cart. Something somewhere is very wrong. Or we are all in the thrall of a mass PC Sarcar-ish hypnotic spell where we are conditioned to believe that things are really changing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by adrian The problem with Royal Enfield is that even with change in engine platforms, which took a whole 50 years, the top speed remains constant. A well tuned CI bullet hits the same speed that the continental GT does and difference in cost between the two is a bomb. |
Exactly. What I said before. Tried and tested. ON THE ROAD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverflash The point is that fuel injection or ABS do not change the fundamental character of a Royal Enfield engine, which is a single cylinder push rod long stroke thumper. |
But it did! The moment the company shifted to FI, the entire character and beat of the bike simply changed. Less generous guys than me have likened the new UCEs to big Karizmas that only look like Bullets. Even the CV carb on the AVLs changed the character of the VM slide carbed cast iron thumpers. But that was easier (and very frequently) remedied.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mithunvvijayan I am still hopeful, especially because there have been serious changes in the past 7 years in the RE line up. And from what I hear, there are larger capacity bikes in the offing. |
Do wake me up when an Indian Bullet does a true ton stock from the factory. Till then, me and my other Bullet brothers will join the company in their ongoing communal slumber.
Quote:
I have heard from one of my friends who had been working with Royal Enfield, that RE is working with larger capacity engines. He told me about it 3 years ago, while he was still at RE. As you said drastic changes to the mechanicals are always welcomed skeptically, people will eventually accept it, like what happened with the gear shifter which was shifted to the "wrong" side.
|
I look forward to the day when twin cylindered 700-1000 cc Royal Enfields costing 5 lac rupees and giving 16-18 kms to the liter will thunder down our roads at 160 kmph.
At least I can say I lived to see an Indian Bullet do that.
So what if it needed an extra engine.