Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   Motorbikes (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/motorbikes/)

-   -   The Royal Enfield 500 Classic thread! (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/motorbikes/73998-royal-enfield-500-classic-thread-206.html)

p.s. and just to add, from a 500 meter standing start. :)

Within similar mods the EFIs will go faster.

Because you say so, or you have proof such as I have posted?

I personally don’t care for top speed, and don’t want to argue with CI “bullet” owners from that standpoint. In terms of reliability, amount of maintenance required, running cost, and fuel efficiency, the EFI UCE bullets are way superior than the older engines. I don’t think anyone would be able to disagree with that. But then again, there are always the “real” “die-heard” “original” bulleteers who think “old is gold.” To each his own I say.

slightly disagree with the above from my little experience of owning a 2008 machismo 350 and a 2010 classic 500. the AVL demanded much less maintenance, cost of running was much lower, and fuel efficiency was good as well, but cant be compared to the 500 as the cubes differ.

My point is the older bulls are 50+ years old designs, when manufacturing technology available was almost zilch compared to date. And they must be credited for still giving good competition to a 2010 all new UCE engine. In other words, UCE is inferior compared to what it could have actually been.
to add to that, poor quality of adulterated materials, cheap parts makes ownership experience even miserable. For example, a few days back, my horn clamp (made out of metal) broke for the 3rd time in 3 years. This time, i did not buy a RE spare, i got a clamp made at a local metal workshop and i am fully confident it will last long.

Where as, if you open a 60's engine and examine the quality of materials, be it the internals, casing etc, there is a stark visible positive difference. Just buff a 60s engine case nicely, and it will shine more then a new one from 2013, thanks to the quality aluminium.


its not feasible to duplicate all the possibility of mods on a carburetor engine to a EFI engine. Even with after market ecu/maps, the possibilities and its effects are limited on an EFI, and much more on carbs. and the much higher cost of mods is another factor against the efi's.

Sorry guys, those were the wrong videos.

Check these out -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtiDgRTw_qo

Same run, other side on the gun

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7TMe9CKdY8

The bike is a tuned and lightly modded Lightning 535 with a very light rider.

OT: Please speedgun the Safari and pm me on the top end. Interested to know.

That aside, the TB500 'cruises' at an indicated 120-130kmph. She can do that all day. Can the modified carb bullets do the same doc?

Not just TB 500, all the UCE 500 variants are INDICATED to cruise at 120-130 kmph all day. Infact TB 500 being the heaviest of all, in dry and wet both, the P:W ratio goes against it slightly. coming back to cruising at higher speeds, the UCE 500 vibrates a lot beyond 100kmpl, making it extremely difficult to sustain high speeds. Secondly our road conditions (road + other vehicles+ people+animals) does not allow us to maintain 120kmph for even 10-15 mins, forget doing it the whole day. Thirdly, the bulls being heavy, generates huge momentum at higher speeds, and the brakes do not inspire confidence. Another aspect is very few UCE 500 actually does true 130kmpl. RE parts are not meant to be precise and so is the speedo.

As for UCE Vs Carb at higher speeds, i guess the carb gives better flexibility as we can use larger main jets for proper feeding, coupled with better intake and fast exhaust. On a UCE even if u install a free flow filter, the missing O2 sensor will not be able to read lean condition and give feedback to the ECU to compensate the mixture. So with free flow filter and exhaust, we may end up running lean. Its the pre-programmed maps that control the combustion, where as in a carb, we have maximum control. Another important factor is the rev limiter with the EFI. with carb conversion, there is no rev-limiter, and we can get some extra RMPs aiding to the top speed.
I ran my C5 with EFI for 30K kms, and have been running it on carb for about 8k kms. My personal take is- i feel better with the carb.

Bro, do you know what a true 140 kmph on a callibrated Bushnell speedgun equates to on the famed Bullet speedometers? :D

P.S. Both bikes in the video, my 500 and the L535, at the time were our everyday all-purpose bikes - including touring. In the earlier videos you can even see the Studds dabba fitted to my 500s grabrail (not very aerodynamic or weight friendly now is it....) and both bikes are in full stock trim with boxes, mudguards, everthing!

P.P.S. Also to be noted, my 500 was running short geared with 18 inch wheels front and rear at the time (tuned for better acceleration than outright top end running). You can see the Zapper Qs in the video.

Obviously if you hold 140 true for any length of time, the piston will come out through the fueltank, but these bikes have comfortably held 120 TRUE (not indicated - that would be in the region of 140-145 thereabouts - the L535's twin pods being better callibrated than the 500's single dial) for long sections of GQ stretches without issue.

A well run in standard with good oil flow (up rated pumps) is no less reliable or long legged than the newer Bullets.

P.S. Karizmas are still better in terms of reliability, amount of maintenance required, running cost, and fuel efficiency, if those are what you want from your bike. And bone stock they are quicker and faster too. Just saying. :)

P.P.S. Beastie just gone in for first service. Wouldn't have the cojones to gun her man. Not unless I am on the Utah Salt Flats or something - with no one in front of me for the next 8 miles.

Thanks for the detailed info. I have a question. Does the EFI have a rev limiter? I have seen my TB pull 6k rpm from 1st to 4th gear, which is well into the red line, didnt feel the presence of a rev limiter cutting in.

Is your TB the TB500?
Personally, i have never experienced the REV Limiter while i was on EFI, but this thread starter Randhawa use to experience them often, so they do have one.

I have no doubt that ebonho"s modified 535 iron barrel will be as fast as he says it is.

One must note the words "modified 535".

Ace, who provides some of the finest modifications available for the Royal Enfield in America is the first to say that running a stock iron barrel 500 at speeds over long distances over 96kmph is asking for a first class piston freeze up or detonation of the engines lower end.
The stock iron barrel machines with their poor heat transfer inherent in a iron cylinder, questionable piston quality, aluminum alloy connecting rod, floating sleeve bearing on the rods big end, low performance oil pumps and marginal valve materials were not designed to do that.
To obtain a high horsepower long life engine like ebonho is championing, all of these things must be changed.

The new Royal Enfield UCE's on the other hand is proving to have corrected these faults and although it is limited to about 130 kmph (82 mph), it will run at a constant speed (where practical) of 112 kmph (70 mph) for hours on end without overheating or overstressing its engine parts.

This "overstressing" is an important aspect to consider.
A engine that is designed to produce a maximum speed of 115 kmph will quickly wear out if it is consistently operated at a speed of 100 kmph.
A engine that is designed to produce a maximum speed of 130 kmph will last for years if it is consistently operated at a speed of 100 kmph.

As for carburetor vs fuel injection, yes, the carburetor is easier to modify to achieve good performance. This "easier" isn't easy though.
A typical carburetor has several fuel control jets in it and each of these has several different sizes to choose from. The fuel metering rod also comes in several different sizes. All of this adds up to a number of combinations that may work very poorly (or not at all) to the ideal combination that gives the performance the builder is after.

Even after finding the best combination, it is usually only suitable for the elevation it was tested at. As most of you know, changing elevation by 1200 meters will cause the carburetor to need to be readjusted.

The Royal Enfields fuel injection on the other hand cannot be adjusted without spending large sums of money and even then the final result may not provide much (if any) real improvement over the stock ECU settings.
With the sensors in the new UCE fuel injected engine a change of altitude will be automatically compensated for.

There was a time that the "hot rod" builders in America used carburetors on their modified engines. The main reason was due to cost.
The really fast guys paid the money and used fuel injection (and still do).

Anyway, back to the debate. :)

120-130 all day on a EFI 500 be it CL5 or TB5

Seriously?

100-105 is the max they can handle comfortably.
At 120-130,engine and chassis are at their extreme limits.
anything more for a good distance,the RE and the rider may dis integratelol:



PS:-I have ridden TB5 for a good distance on a long open highway and own a CL5.

No comments on your experience mate, I speak from my experience. Infact the bike rides smoother at higher speeds. Its boringly painful to potter along at 80kmph. Not sure of CI bullets, but have seen them cruise 100 up comfortably

Its all experience my friend.
I had a CI-350 earlier,at 100km/hr it used to be on its limit.
There is no way you can call the engine note comfortable as CI 350's are usually screaming for mercy at 3 digit speeds,but they can still go on.
I love my engine's and know their comfort Zone for Cruising.

CI 350-it was 75-85
UCE 350-not ridden it for a long distance but it should be-80-90
UCE 500-95-105