[LJRead]

Don't mean to be mysterious, and what I have to say may be old hat to some, but to me there has be a revelation.  Most of us have read or posted in threads having to do with Classic Iron engined bikes,CI, versus the AVL.  Matt (thumper) and others have come up with lists of advantages of each type, and, the thing is, most of what they mention has to do with external features.  For example appearance, reliability, gas mileage, even sound, all have to do with what occurs in use.

However, one big factor is either not mentioned or only alluded to.  This has to do with rebuild ability.  Hutch has mentioned the advantage of points in the older bikes as being fixable at the side of the road.  Internally, there are other, even more significant issues.  The bottom end of the AVL isn't rebuildable, you simply replace the crankcase and con rod as a unit. It is called a "crankcase assembly" and you have to buy the whole thing.  In the CI you can buy the constituent parts a new con rod, big end bushing etc.   Also, once a AVL cylinder has worn out, you have to replace it, there being no other option.  So that once the engine is worn out, it is modularized to the extent that one is replacing modules instead of the parts making up the modules.  Is it more expensive?  If you do the work yourself perhaps so, because modules will tend to be more expensive if you only need a few of the constituent parts.  A new cylinder probably costs a lot more than boring out the old one, and oversized rings will often suffice.  With the AVL, as I've said, you need a new piston and cylinder, nothing less is available.

It is a little like the old Fords I used to work on.  Things simply unbolted and could be replaced, often with remanufactured, good as new, parts.  In modern cars, it just isn't simple anymore, and I believe that is the trend with the movement to the AVL.

Now, a final thought, what about the new UCE unitized engine.  It may well turn out that the trend will continue and that they will be even more modularized.  More reliable, probably, but if you have to get into the guts of the thing, you may find yourself replacing modules instead of parts.

For most of us this trend makes little difference because we are unlikely to put enough miles on our bikes to make a difference.  Most small, locally used bikes don't get more than 20,000 miles of use, the big tour bikes do.  But the unmentioned fact is there, the old technology allowed for backyard or home grown mechanics, more and more the new bikes don't.  Oh, there are always the maintenance things that will keep us busy, but should we have to get into the heart of the beast, the traditional is the more workable.

In India they are well aware of this fact and most Indians will say they prefer, by far, the CI.  In our more disposable society, maybe we don't think that a big issue.  To some of us it is.   

[deejay]

You should post this in the AVL section too. I tried to follow the thread on the yahoo group a bit. Is the final consensus that the AVL was manufactured this way to save money? The AVL apparently has a solid bottom end, but its kind of a bummer you can't swap out bits if needed. Need to replace the whole assembly, and now with it out of production (or close to it) who knows how long parts will be around.

[LJRead]

Yes deejay, it could go into either category, but I put it in the Classics section because I think it favors the idea of owning a Classic (Cast iron).  I read previous threads and wondered why would someone prefer an iron when they could have a more reliable, more modern engine.  Then I started to look at parts compatibility, wondering how much substitution form one type to the other could be made.  It was posted on the other forum something about the bottom end of the AVL not being rebuildable, so I started to probe.  Another poster chimed in with the cylinder replacement issue.  The oil pump on the AVL is said to be more functional and the aluminum fins better able to dissipate heat, The ring tolerances are closer in the AVL and the fuel mileage better, as is the top speed.  But again there is the Ford analogy, and I think rebuild ability is a very important issue that hasn't come up much.

I mentioned the integration of the UCE in another thread, asking the question of what the advantages are.  FoggyAuggie, I think it was, said "follow the money", so there may be some of this with the AVL, and, indeed, it seems it was more economic to manufacture the crank assembly as a module, but I think the AVL (lean burn) was to meet emission standards overseas.

You, deejay, if I may say so, may be a good example of the interaction that occurs when we try to repair our bikes.  I have read of your problems and your victories, and I would suggest that you have come out a winner through all the agonizing you have done.Question is, and a very real one, is such interaction being siphoned away from us as R E modernizes?

Knowing what I now know, I think I would go for an iron R E rather than the two AVLs I have - but since I am unlikely to put more than a hundred miles a month on the two of them, it really makes little difference.  We are all attracted by the primitiveness of Enfields.  It would be nice if the primitive nature of these beasts could have remained unchanged.  Something those who are struggling to choose a type might consider.

[deejay]

You, deejay, if I may say so, may be a good example of the interaction that occurs when we try to repair our bikes.  I have read of your problems and your victories, and I would suggest that you have come out a winner through all the agonizing you have done.Question is, and a very real one, is such interaction being siphoned away from us as R E modernizes?

Knowing what I now know, I think I would go for an iron R E rather than the two AVLs I have - but since I am unlikely to put more than a hundred miles a month on the two of them, it really makes little difference.  We are all attracted by the primitiveness of Enfields.  It would be nice if the primitive nature of these beasts could have remained unchanged.  Something those who are struggling to choose a type might consider.

Well, for the record, most of my problems and (minor) victories are a direct result of me fixing already existing problems. The bike came with a serious leak from the head and primary, a rattle in the exhaust which turned out to be the cat converter welded in crooked, and the ES removal was for looks but it did make a few weird noises during its life on the bike. These are all fairly minor issues in comparison to what I've heard others have dealt with, and they would also be covered by the warranty if I trusted anyone with my bike. The fact is, I like working on it and obsessing about how I can make it better.

The cast iron seems to be a tinkerers dream, and the AVL may be a result of the disposable lifestyle that so many around the world seem to have adopted. And how many people actually split the cases these days anyways? I do credit RE though, they seem to have a solid bottom end in the AVL, so no real issues should arise, especially for people like you living on island time.

[Jon]

If it can be taken apart it can be rebuilt.Might not be cheap,might not be easy but
there are companies out there who can do it. I wouldn't mind betting that Alpha
Bearings could split an AVL crank and fit a new big end even if the factory won't
play ball.

[LJRead]

Not quite the point, Jon.  Yes, one can fix about anything if you want to throw money at it.  Enfields are very much like the old Fords we worked on as kids.  They had parts that we, as semi-skilled mechanics, could unbolt and rebolt, doing about anything we cared to do in the way of restoring function.  New cars are fast, smoother, quieter, last long and pollute less, but new cars are still new cars and they are modularized to the extent that it takes a trained mechanic with expensive equipment to work on them.  But they are modularized to an extent, which may be good when one is paying from forty to a hundred per hour to have work done.

Many of us buy Enfields because we want the equivalent of an older technology bike.  Some don't care, they are satisfied with an old looking bike with a newer generation engine, and possibly with the UCE it will reach a point where Enfield has been totally transformed to something that isn't an Enfield at all.  The AVL is probably a transition between old and new generation technology.

Yes, some have repaired AVL bottom ends, but for the average bloke, the old irons can't be beat in the area of replace ability

Just depends on what you are satisfied with.

[LJRead]

We are getting some feedback from India on the Yahoo site to say that the AVL  bottom end can be rebuilt and that conrods and big end bearings are available in India.  Wonder what the story really is - and are separate parts available in the U.S. and if not, why not.  Think CMW could clarify this issue if they were so inclined.  Kevin?  Jim? Anybody?

[Kevin Mahoney]

There is nothing that prevents the bottom end being rebuilt in the same manner as a Cast Iron engine. We feel pretty sure that the factory will badger their supplier into offering the correct replacement parts in something less than an assembly. the call for it in the US and the UK has been non-existent which does not exactly light the fire under the factory.
 I hear a lot of talk from Australia, but the bottom end issue just plain doesn't exist here.

As with all things mechanical it is possible to find someone somewhere to rebuild anything. I would be very cautious however. For example a 350 AVL bottom end will fit into a 500 but although it will fit it is not the same. It is much lighter and would require a rebalancing and you could expect more vibration. Issues like this are not that material in India because the bikes are used in a very different manner than in the West.

[LJRead]

There is nothing that prevents the bottom end being rebuilt in the same manner as a Cast Iron engine. We feel pretty sure that the factory will badger their supplier into offering the correct replacement parts in something less than an assembly. the call for it in the US and the UK has been non-existent which does not exactly light the fire under the factory.
 I hear a lot of talk from Australia, but the bottom end issue just plain doesn't exist here.

As with all things mechanical it is possible to find someone somewhere to rebuild anything. I would be very cautious however. For example a 350 AVL bottom end will fit into a 500 but although it will fit it is not the same. It is much lighter and would require a rebalancing and you could expect more vibration. Issues like this are not that material in India because the bikes are used in a very different manner than in the West.

Thanks Kevin,

Bottom end rebuild ability has come up as an issue against the AVL and for the Iron.  As you say, the bottom end is rebuildable, but the parts aren't available, so, in essence, it really isn't currently rebuildable and this is a strike against AVL.  So, I would take issue with your statement that "There is nothing that prevents the bottom end being rebuilt in the same manner as a Cast Iron engine".  Lack of available parts is something that makes it essentially unrebuildable, as you have said. There is also the issue of the AVL cylinder having to be replaced (at considerable expense, I should think) if it wears out.  It apparently can't be rebored and oversize pistons aren't available.

So the original poster (Ace) in the Yahoo forum is quite right in his assessment - yes, it is possible to rebuild the bottom end of the AVL (Ace mentioned tht if there should be problems in this respect, and entire bottom end and casing, in other words, a short block bottom end would be required), but no it really isn't possible because the factory has chosen not to provide the individual parts.  And, it should be further noted, that although the problem isn't wide spread, there have been instances when a bottom end rebuild is necessary, but it seems, only in India, have they found an after market and outside-of-factory-authorized-service way to do this

The AVL has only been in wide use for about five or six years.  By their nature of not being open road type touring bikes, in this length of time there hasn't been a need for such things as bottom end replacement parts, but as these many AVLs age and have more miles put on them through gradual acquisition, it may well become a problem, something those interested in R E should be made aware of. I should think the expense of exchanging the old cylinder and piston with a new one might be more of an issue, and it has been suggested that the Enfield factory may make provision for this. Is there any truth in this?

From your response Kevin, and from what others have said, it seems that the factory is choosing to ignore something which just doesn't seem right. Either a bike is sold as being easily repairable, which is the R E image and tradition, or it should be made known that, really, without great expense, AVL is not very rebuildable.

LJ

[Kevin Mahoney]

Larry,
You may want to re-read my post
"We feel pretty sure that the factory will badger their supplier into offering the correct replacement parts in something less than an assembly."

The factory is aware of the problem and recognizes it as such. These are not stupid or ignorant people. At this point (as of today) we are worried about a problem that does not yet exist, why borrow trouble?

For what it is worth there will be oversized pistons and rings available, probably before the end of the year.

[LJRead]

Kevin,

Why borrow trouble?  Wow, if there is a problem (as you now acknowledge) it is trouble demanding to be borrowed.  A problem that does not now (as of today) exist?  Of course it exists, has existed, and will likely become more of a problem, if not resolved, in the future. There is a problem, a potentially very serious problem, with the AVL.

I have not even by implication suggested that the factory is run by stupid or ignorant people, so would suggest that you don't even imply that I have.  What I have done is to raise, along with others, a very legitimate problem.  You say that you are badgering the factory to make these parts available.  That doesn't say that they are willing to or are going to, you only feel "pretty sure" that they will.  You have now also acknowledged that the factory is "aware there is a problem" (so the problem that isn't  problem is a problem - strange wording).  Before, you implied it had never been a problem so the factory was unwilling to be bothered, if I read you correctly.

:ook Kevin, I shouldn't have to point out that you, yourself, are a major player in R E's success.  You shouldn't have to badger them.  If they know the problem, tell them to get into gear and fix it - simple as that! They already make the damned parts, all they need to do is make the damned parts available!  A very simple fix.

But it is even worse than this - the parts of the crank assembly aren't available, and the crank assembly can't even be purchased as a unit.  It simply isn't available for purchase. Without clarification, the rumor is, based apparently on what the factory has stated,  that the factory chose not to make the assembly available because of concern that proper reassembly wouldn't be made by those doing the repairs in the field..Instead, one is forced to buy an entire "short block" bottom end.   And, from what Pete Snidal has said, yes it is tricky to make sure everything is assembled right.  But, on the other hand, there is the same problem with the Cast Iron engine, they use the same bearing system at the end of the crank, so I fail to see that this is a legitimate concern.  It seems that, according to rumor at least, RE has chosen to make proper reassembly into a concern for what reason, if true, I can't fathom.

Look, I'm not whining about this, I am not distorting facts, I have qualified everything I have reported with facts as I have found them to be, and you, Kevin, now confirm just about what I have been saying.  This wishy-washiness by the factory isn't a good thing.  It would be very easy for them to state what their policy is and will be regarding this problem which they themselves perceive, and let us get on with choosing which type is better suited for our needs based partially on these stated policies.

With the situation as it is now, I wouldn't buy an AVL at the present time were I living in the United States.  To me, it doesn't make sense to buy into what is touted as being an ultimately simple and repairable bike, by tradition, when obviously this currently isn't the case for the modern versions.

LJ

[Kevin Mahoney]

Larry,
Please re-read my quote from a previous post

"We feel pretty sure that the factory will badger their supplier into offering the correct replacement parts in something less than an assembly."

I have had to badger no one. The factory sees the need and is badgering their supplier. In other words, they get it, have gotten it and will get this done. At least I am quite certain that it will get done. I will be meeting the powers to be including the CEO here in the US in a week and this is one subject of conversation. I have been tasked with sourcing oversized pistons and they have sent me the drawings. The reason that they have asked me to do it  is that the current demand is extremely low and their current manufacturer will only accept orders in the hundreds which would sit on their shelves for a long time. It will be easy for me to have one of several US manufacturers make oversized ones using the REM drawings in smaller quantities. Also doesn't hurt that the dollar sucks right now. Also bear in mind that it would not be unheard of for a parts supplier to split up an assembly. We do it for certain items like push rods.

[LJRead]

Sorry about that, yes I see that you aren't badgering them.

With regard to the pistons, are the ones you will be enlarging better than those that have, in the past, been provided for the Cast Iron?  I understand that it is a serious issue with them.  I suppose the pistons of the AVL are somehow better?

Ok, what about the problem that the AVL crank assemblies (nor their constituent parts) are not available?  Can this be true?  You mention not using the 350 crank assemblies in the 500, but apparently one can't buy a 500 crank assembly at any price currently.

Anyway, good to know that it is quite possible that the AVL will be made into a rebuildable machine!

Regards,

LJ

[LJRead]

As confirmation, all of the lower end parts are available in India for the 350 cc AVL, including separate crank, con rod, and a new cylinder and piston,which, supplied as a unit (piston and cylinder that is), is so reasonable, it is cheap enough to just replace.  Under this circumstance, there really isn't a need for a larger piston in India, although the cost of the cylinder unit (about $70 U.S.) may well be significant for an Indian owner.  That is, it is probably cheaper there to rebore and Iron, than replace an AVL cylinder assembly.

.So it looks as though the crank assembly supplier, who has to be badgered to produce individual parts for the American market, is keeping the Indian market, which is virtually only 350s, supplied.

All of my correspondents from India remark that the AVL isn't popular there, partly because of tradition.  Also, since mechanics are readily available and labor reasonable, they tend not to work on their own bikes as Americans do, so they aren't as concerned over which of the types is more reliable. 

Ashish Nayyar, of  Royal Motorcycle Company, comments that, as one might expect, bikes there are not for hobby or pleasure, but are simply transportation for most.  They are looked at in a different way than we would.  He also complimented CMW for bringing up the standards: at first, I guess, standards were a bit lax, CMW played a role in improving the quality that the R E Company offer.

And now, it seems, CMW may play a role in doing away with "the unmentioned factor" that I and others have raised.  We owe Kevin and CMW our moral support in this.

Thank you Kevin,

LJ

[Old and In the Way]

New member here - been lurking since the beginning. My only comment on this is why is this thread in the "Bullet Classic Model" forum?? Apart from a mention as to rebuildability being a plus and/or minus between a CI Bullet  or AVL, shouldn't the perceived lack of REI response to a nonexistent US problem be in either the "Bullet Electra & AVL Models" forum or better yet the "Campfire" forum.