[nigelogston@gmail.com]

As I have pointed out on previous posts, it is a historical and cultural  anomaly that brings us the the Bullet in its current incarnation as the UCE, rather like a wrinkle in the space time continuum.  We have a basic concept all but forgotten and neglected by virtually every other manufacturer -the once popular "Big Single" long stroke motorbike , flashed forward 5 decades into the 21st century , but , (nostalgia for the iron Barrel aside) in better trim than our predecessors could have ever dreamed of ,  with EFI, Electronic Ignition  unit construction , 5 speed gearbox etc etc.  Preserved however, are a tried and true frame geometry and suspension, and , with decades of experience behind it, though it has it's flaws like any machine , these at least are well known. 
What is truly striking about the Bullet is the repeated reaction from owners and reviewers regarding its predictable and excellent roadhandling characteristics. 
From a recent posting :
  " A BMW is so much different from a Bullet The Indian longrunner is fleet-footed and tame, creating even in average riders like me a feeling of confidence in your skills."

And from a review published on the G 5 by Jeremy Korezienewski :
  " Though there's a rather large contingent of Royal Enfield enthusiasts who surely died a little inside with the introduction of the new fuel-injected powerplant, the rest of us get to enjoy the beauty of reliability wrapped up in a package that is nothing if not distinctive. And it attracts oodles of attention out on the road.



So, what's it like to ride the 2010 Royal Enfield G5?

Put simply, it's rather uneventful. And we mean that in the best way possible. Though the previous Bullet had made great strides in quality over the past decade, there was still a constant fear that you were pushing the machine just a bit too far past its inherent limitations while doing nothing more than trying to keep up with the frenetic pace of today's traffic. Now, with the new powerplant, you can wring the little neck of the single, overworked cylinder without fear of an impending seizure. Which is a good thing, 'cause it's a darn near necessity to push the Enfield harder than almost any other motorcycle in America if you truly desire to ride at the current stride of life.

We'll put it this way: The terminal velocity of the 2010 Royal Enfield G5 Classic, with our 200 pounds of mass riding atop, of course, is 81 miles per hour. The needle may have swung just a tad bit further to the right with the occasional downhill grade or a swift kick of the wind at our backs, but you certainly shouldn't count on that. The good news, though, is that we found the Enfield surprisingly at peace with that top speed limitation. Sure, the steering is a tad twitchy and overly light, but the engine didn't seem to sweat such merciless pounding in the slightest bit, and the front disc and rear drum brakes weren't fazed when tasked with bringing the speeding Bullet to a halt from its maximum velocity. That said, if you plan on riding for long distances on the freeway with the throttle planted firmly on the stop, you're missing the point entirely. Slow. Down. Or choose another bike."  Quoted from review

So is this a unique feature of the Bullet?  I think not.  But we are very lucky to have the Bullet in its improved form so that we can enjoy what the riding public knew before progress and economic tidal shifts  took the Big Singles away. 
An article I read in this months edition of "The Classic Motorcycle" brings home this point.   In a feature article comparing two  restored vintage Vincent s--a 500 cc Comet
and a Vincent Rapide--the highly esteemed 1000 cc V  twin which shared with it's smaller "sibling" the same frame geometry, rake, suspension and basic engine architecture (other than having two cylinders ) but differing in weight  (390 lb vs 480 lbs) and power (not specified in the article ) the reviewer rode both machines back to back.   He concluded the larger machine compared favorably with modern bikes  on the open highway  and was especially strong on hills maintaining speed with little or no throttle input, but that it's added weight was evident all all but the highest speed.  The single, by contrast, he found more nimble and easier to ride on twisting roads, and that it held its line on going through a long curve much more easily and predictably Than the larger bike. which tended to veer from the chosen line due to it's increased weight. It was also much easier to manoeuvre the single at low speeds and , obviously , to manhandle it around in the garage.
 Add to this the remarkable fuel efficiency of the big single (especially OUR big single ) and I think it is possible to say that  with capability of any legal speed, at least for the solo rider  a bike like the RE UCE 500 Bullet may be the perfect and ultimate development of the motorcycle.  All that great handling with stunning looks  and a terrific vibe and sound too!
I am further reminded (for the performance oriented among you) of ACE's mention that the Fireballed Iron Barrel Bullet UCE held its own in straight line performance with n Interceptor of higher power , due to it's weight advantage.  So the weight advantage adds to both the potential for power to weight ratio in performance enhancement situations, and also makes the machine inherently better handling than larger machines with even the same geometry.  I guess the reason the Bullet is still around after all these decades is that they got it right the first time So now we have the best of both world.  A return to rational sized machines may be the best thing that happened since, well the introduction of the Bullet in the first place.  Nigel

[nigelogston@gmail.com]

Correction ACE's  bike was not a "Fireballed Iron Barrel UCE " as there is no such thing.   I meant Fireballed Iron Barrel.   Nigel.

[ace.cafe]

Nice write-up, Nigel.
I enjoyed reading it.

I sometimes refer to this kind of thing as "fishing on light tackle", where you get all the enjoyment of skillful angling, but with smaller fish.

Most modern bikes, especially the sportbikes, have capabilities far beyond what most sane people could use on the road. I see very little advantage in having a 180mph top speed in a 75mph world.
So, with many of the modern bikes, you pay for capability that you probably will never use, and you don't really get to use the bike in its full range, because it's too fast. And the result is that you are continually riding at low rpms in lower gears, and it always feels slow because you are under-using the bike. And hence, there is always the temptation to exceed speed limits and get tickets, and ride dangerously, just so you can feel some of the bike's abilities.

With the Bullet, we get to use the full capability of the motorcycle at just a bit over legal speeds, with perhaps just enough excess to allow some fast riding above the speed limit if we want to "scratch that itch" without doing 180mph.
We can feel the full rev-range of the engine. We can "wind it up" and feel it, and hear it, and experience that enjoyment of taking the bike up to its limits, and being fairly safe doing it.
We can run it up thru all the gears nicely, and briskly, any time we want.
We can get the feel of being on the power curve, and carving around a corner with the engine revving, and feeling like Hailwood doing it. Or whatever.

The point is that we get to use the full measure of what we've purchased, while many other riders with very fast bikes don't often get to do that. It's quite a world of difference, which give us a huge riding pleasure that big bikes often will not give, unless you really live dangerously.

So, I consider the Bullet to be a great value for money in that regard, and it's something that is not often even considered in most motorcycle purchases today. Everybody seems to want a 200mph bike, regardless of the fact that they can probably never use much of that ability, and they will always be stuck riding at a small portion of the capability they have purchased.

Of course, I recognize that there should be at least a "little extra" speed available for maneuvering, and for the occasional fast cruising purposes. I generally consider a good rule-of-thumb to have a cruising speed about 75%-80% of max speed, or lower.
That allows cruising at engine speeds that aren't too brutal for wear.
This might put the UCE at a good cruising range of about 60-65mph, which also coincidentally seems to be the speeds that most owners like to ride them.
So, it's giving what is intended.

According to the Pomeroy Dictum, which specifies a certain piston speed limitation for best reliability in a street vehicle, our Bullets will reach that limit at about 4300rpm. This "coincidentally" meets the 60-65mph speed range with normal gearing in the  UCE.
So, the bike meets Pomeroy limits about where it's normally ridden, and this gives good expectation for longevity.

So, all in all, I agree about the Bullet being possibly the best value for money, and also a great value for fun on the road, and that could be termed as the "ultimate development of the motorcycle" in terms such as that. Not everyone would agree with that assessment, but that is an angle which could be presented as a good argument.

And add in the classic "thump" of a big single, and that torquey feel in the power delivery, and it really makes a nice overall bike experience. And the classic appearance is very nice too.

So, the Bullet is a much misunderstood creature, and only a select few really learn to appreciate what it is. It's truly a great motorcycle in the old tradition, and it gives a rider what he paid for, in a very nice way.

Regarding the Fireball, we just give a little more, so that the limitations are higher, and still within reach, with quite a bit more "pep" all throughout. There are riders who want that bit of "extra punch", and at can be obtained with some added expenditures.
But that's only on the Iron Barrel, for now.

Thanks for a nice read on a Monday morning, Nigel!

[olhogrider]

Ace nailed it. Most people don't want what the RE offers even though it is what most people would use and enjoy the most. They just don't know what's best for them. Motorcycles are fantasy rides. I grew up with "Then Came Bronson" an "Easy Rider". Probably explains my 20 year affair with H-D. I have put together a "street tracker" based on my watching Grand National flat track racing. There is my cafe project in the garage. The Ducatis were probably because of my love of road racing (fan not rider). The KLR is set up to ride around the world.

My point? I am not Michael Parks, Scotty Parker, Mat Mladin, Valentino Rossi, Ewan MacGregor or Ted Simon. For a time on the road I can pretend. More Walter Mitty.

Yesterday the RE left me stranded again. With less than 2000 miles on a 2011 bike my wife is wondering if there is a "lemon law" and why I still like this bike. This bike started as another fantasy but the REality turns out to be just what I needed and I'm willing to fix the few flaws that it left India with. So far.

Nigel, did you get one yet?

[nigelogston@gmail.com]

Sorry     For a minute there  I  thought my name was Walter and didn't knOw you were addressing me.   No , Didn't get it  yet,  The financial stars (and wife) have to be in the right allignment but it will happen, and closer now.  Too bad for me that we did the Harley thing several years back (which she did not especially enjoy as a pillion passenger) and came out of it at a loss.   Pressures of work then were such that the amount of time to ride (even though I enjoyed it a lot) was not enough to warrant the ongoing high cost.  It would have been much easier to launch this project now if it hadn't been for that.   But I,ve got three things on my side now:  A resonable commute every day in the temperate months, (which makes the high fuel economy a compelling argument), the substantially lower cost of the RE, and an overall much better time/money picture than was the case when I went out on a limb with the Harley.  In reality though I expect the bike I get will be the bike for life, and am approaching it that.way.  And RE fits my bill, 9and Walter's) .   

  Sorry to hear about your stranding.  From all that I hear, the issues with this bike are minor ones, not major, an I remain convinced that it is the right bike for most people for most purposes.  I too will probably never visit Tierra De Fuego on two wheels, and in fact mostly what I will do is have a little fun communting and tootle around on the weekend on smaller roads.  But you never know.  Still , that is enough, and this bike is more than enough for my pruposes.  And I may add a sidecar for the benefit of my (gulp) granchildren.  (Where did that fleeting youth go.  And all those unfulfilled fantasies,-the Himalayas, South America, trans Siberia  --this earning a living stuff really gets the way ! )   Hopefully getting yours running reliably is just a matter of debugging it, but at least it is fully backed by a comprehensive warranty.  Nigel Mitty

[Fox]

People want what they want, and it depends entirely how you approach riding which bike is best for you. I would never recommend a RE for anyone who wants to do extended freeway riding, unless we're talking 2-lane at 55-65mph.

There are more practical, cheaper, and more reliable bikes out there. They don't have the same charm, and you probably won't enjoy them as much, but "right" is one of those words - I just bought the G5, and I had a giggling fit throwing it around horse farm one-lane, and flogging the dirt roads near me (yes, I know I'm an animal, but you don't know joy until you get one of these onto the dirt), but it won't replace my KLR for the commute.

I was called out before for underestimating the bike's abilities in this respect. And you know what? I still haven't changed my tune. The KLR is, hands down, a better city commuter. It can handle rougher pavement, sits high enough to see over even SUVs, and there's no worry about overheating when stuck in traffic. It's ugly enough to not worry about dropping. My point is, every bike has a reason for existing. Granted, the people who buy 'busas and never take them to the track are maybe missing the point. Or maybe not. Ride what makes you happy. The right bike is the one you're sitting on. Just my .02.

[nigelogston@gmail.com]

You are absolutely right on several counts Fox.  The KLR is a magnificent  (if esthetically challenged) all round performer with long distance capability and real multipurpose potential  .  In fact , if I were doing serious adventure touring it would be my choice over BMW or any other adventure touring rig.  You simply cannot beat it's combination of all terrain capability, range, durability, wind protection ,  and , of course economy, both to purchase, run and farkle.   Hands down a winner in that department  and one of the most undersung machines around. 
My comments about the Bullet 500 being the ultimate expression of the motorbike, (remember I actually said  a machine "like the UCE 500" being the ultimate expression of the solo bike apply equally to the KLR 650:  both mid sized singles with all the virtues of that format, both lowish weight.  Both good allround handling characteristics, Strikingly different in the style department .  And, of course the KLR is a little more sophisticated technically in some respects (counterbalanced , chain drive cams, water cooled, beefier suspension) , , though interestingly still carbueretted.  But the main message is that bigger is not necessarily better, and each machine explores a different aspect of the midsize single niche.  The only other machines really  in this league are the Suzuki S 40 (another dependable icon but with a cruiser twist) and the older BMW 650 single like the KLR but more expensive to buy and fix.  I suppose now we would have to include the new Honda 250 single in the equation and for the money it will definitely be the right bike for some.  Each one has it's attractions.
I actually go through phases where each is the favorite, though I still tend to revolve around the Bullet, I think because aesthetic consideration outweigh pure practicality. I'd really like one of each, and a Ural sidecar too, but I will only end up with one machine. Being more likely to commute on 60 mph highways, without stoplights, on fairly good roads the bullet would likely meet my needs and provide a fun ride n the process.
Different stokes for different folks, (though my bias is to longer) .  The real point of my post is that the bullet in it's UCE configuration is a" gem " from another era which has amazingly broad application today.  And while everything you say about the Kr is the plain truth, , after decades of being an excellent allrounder it still has a quite limited very limited  (almost cultish actually) following : Probably its towering height deters a lot of riders and it is hard to imagine anyone getting their licence on it since , at least here, you are required to have both feet flat on the ground to take your test. (Good thing I got my licence when I was 16  I have 32 inch inseams, but I would need awfully thick soles to get my feet flat at the lights on a KLR :  Plus, I am not sure how I would swing my leg over it with a top box:  I think I would have to kind of sneak my leg over and squirm on--no style points for that kind of mount)    Cheers, Nigel .

[Fox]

Heh, well you gotta go for the running jump mount My KLR has a stiffer spring in the back and doesn't sink a bit when I swing my wiry frame over it. I can get the tips of both toes down... if I'm on level pavement  

Although I took my test on a state-owned TU250. Pretty, agreeable little bike.

What fails on the KLR is 'expression' part, and I think that is the key to your point. The only thing that the KLR expresses about the rider is that he's a cheap bastard that doesn't care what his bike looks like. At least that applies to Gen 1.

Which is pretty much the reason why I bought the Enfield - it does more or less most of what the KLR does from a practicality standpoint, and looks amazing at the same time. I never had anyone say 'nice bike' about the KLR, but it's a compliment I've received numerous times in the 200 or so miles I've ridden the G5.

[prof_stack]

...  Yesterday the RE left me stranded again. With less than 2000 miles on a 2011 bike my wife is wondering if there is a "lemon law" and why I still like this bike. This bike started as another fantasy but the REality turns out to be just what I needed and I'm willing to fix the few flaws that it left India with. So far. ...

With the glitches my C5 has had, my wife, too, has asked me why I bought the Enfield after previous bikes (Guzzi, Buell, Harley) had very few problems.

Yes, the engine is thoroughly modern.  But the things that go around the engine (wiring, brake calipers, rear fender, fuel sensor, muffler gasket seals, unraveling bolts/nuts, welding finishing, incorrectly placed knee pads, paint imperfections, etc) are not quite so modern and reveal how far India has to go to catch up to the rest of the motorcycling world.  But it will happen.