aboard

Author Topic: What would you like to see as accessories on the new twins?  (Read 6024 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Happy Hopper

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Karma: 0
I would like to see Tank Kneepads, Fork rubber covers (Gaiters), Rear Carrier (Luggage Rack), Stainless Parts, and Braided Brake lines. What would you like to see as accessories on the new twins?


Narada

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,067
  • Karma: 0
  • Riding the Madrass Missile!
Reply #1 on: November 21, 2017, 09:15:19 am
Saree guard! ;D

Crash bars.

Skid plate.

Bar end mirrors.

Looks like they have center stand, could've sworn I read they didn't?  ???
Realize your Self on a Royal Enfield.

2015 Classic Chrome/Maroon, Forged Dome Piston, Ported head and H.P. Cams by SB/GHG, Power Commander-V, K&N, "Fin" intake, Dunlop K-70's, Koso TNT, Premium EFI Silencer.

2015 Triumph T-100, Orange / Black Two-Tone.
2012 Triumph Scrambler with DMC M-72D Sidecar


2014BulletC5

  • Scooter
  • **
  • Posts: 76
  • Karma: 0
Reply #2 on: November 21, 2017, 05:20:21 pm
I see luggage rack mentioned.

I'd like to see saddle bag mounts.
Royal Enfield!  3/4 Ton Up!


dginfw

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 882
  • Karma: 0
Reply #3 on: November 21, 2017, 11:07:24 pm
performance exhaust and Power Commander
Dave in TX:   '01  W650- keeper
                    '12 C5 military -sold
                    '14 Continental GT-  sold
                    '06 Iron Barrel Bullet- Ace Clubman mods


Fragman

  • Bulleteer
  • ***
  • Posts: 197
  • Karma: 0
Reply #4 on: November 22, 2017, 12:08:20 am
I would go for stainless header pipes(No fookin' cat or O2 sensors!), Norton peashooter mufflers(No baffles.) and chrome mudguards, with the front one being of a more encompassing of the wheel radius to keep goop off of the motor.

An EJK fuel controller would be on the list as well. As fer the rest, I'd just tiddle some stuff like adding flanged alloy wheels & bar end mirrors and black coat the signal housings. Oh, the fun of it. 8)
Nothing better than a nice putt on an RE.
It's a serene way to travel at an unhurried pace.

-2013 Classic Maroon-


Chuck D

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,364
  • Karma: 0
Reply #5 on: November 24, 2017, 07:06:00 am
Kickstarter ::).
Ace "Fireball"#10 (Beefy the Bullet to her friends.)
 "Featherbed" frame by Rofomoto.

2017 Triumph T120


johno

  • Grease Monkey
  • ****
  • Posts: 348
  • Karma: 0
Reply #6 on: November 24, 2017, 10:43:16 am
shaft drive.......just to be differant
No distance is to far, No Speed is to slow 2012  EFI Bullet.
 K&N, sport muffler, 18tooth fr sprocket, Avon style fairing, Givi panniers (or 1958 pattern British army haversacks)


krusty

  • Bulleteer
  • ***
  • Posts: 221
  • Karma: 0
Reply #7 on: November 24, 2017, 12:18:18 pm
A Rickman Metisse variant would be interesting, complete with chromed or nickel plated frame.
Maybe even a full fairing.
Krusty

2015 RE Continental GT - Black
2016 RE Classic 500 - Lagoon Blue
Location : SE England


Rattlebattle

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 882
  • Karma: 0
Reply #8 on: November 25, 2017, 01:07:49 pm
Early release of a full power one with bigger inlets and valves, hotter cams, Twin front discs and fully adjustable suspension front and rear ie a crack at emulating a real cafe racer. :) Seriously, a pokey motor in the small frame of the 650 would produce a great bike - never mind newbie riders, let’s have a proper rip snorter I say. :)
Sic se res habet: fractum est...


ace.cafe

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,948
  • Karma: 0
  • World leaders in performance/racing Bullets
Reply #9 on: November 25, 2017, 04:27:56 pm
Early release of a full power one with bigger inlets and valves, hotter cams, Twin front discs and fully adjustable suspension front and rear ie a crack at emulating a real cafe racer. :) Seriously, a pokey motor in the small frame of the 650 would produce a great bike - never mind newbie riders, let’s have a proper rip snorter I say. :)
Unfortunately,  RE hasn't the slightest idea how to do such a thing, and they never have.


Richard230

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,082
  • Karma: 0
Reply #10 on: November 25, 2017, 04:53:43 pm
Unfortunately,  RE hasn't the slightest idea how to do such a thing, and they never have.

I agree and if they did all that, there goes the price - right into Triumph's backyard.  ::)
2011 Royal Enfield B5 500, 2018 16.6 kWh Zero S, 2016 BMW R1200RS, 2009 BMW F650GS, 2005 Triumph Bonneville T-100, 2002 Yamaha FZ1


ace.cafe

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,948
  • Karma: 0
  • World leaders in performance/racing Bullets
Reply #11 on: November 25, 2017, 05:07:07 pm
I agree and if they did all that, there goes the price - right into Triumph's backyard.  ::)
The sad thing is that if RE had a clue, they could have made something like the Ace head, cast it in high volume, and it wouldn't have cost any more than their standard head, and it fits all the existing standard ancillaries without mods. They could have produced the Ace cam profile at no higher cost than std factory cams. They could have produced the Ace/Derottone airbox kit at no extra cost over what they put in the bike as standard, if they had made them in mass quantity.

In short, they could have produced a 43hp  535 CGT that is as fast as the upcoming 650 twin and narrower and more nimble. At no higher production cost than what they actually produced.

But, they can't make something that they don't know how to make, and that is the long and short of it. The proof is in the pudding. Just look at what they produced, if you need proof.

« Last Edit: November 25, 2017, 05:14:12 pm by ace.cafe »


Arizoni

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,010
  • Karma: 2
  • "But it's a dry heat here in Arizona
Reply #12 on: November 25, 2017, 11:18:01 pm
IMO, Royal Enfield is not interested in making fast motorcycles.

They want to build moderately powered machines that get people from point A to point B on a classic looking machine.

In a country like India, where most of their sales are, most of the people ride 50-125cc motorcycles.
The traffic is shitty and the roads are even shittier so building a super-bike is not seen as a big priority by RE.

Besides.  If RE did offer super heads, cams, rods and bearings for their singles and the new twin, Ace would be out of business. :(
Jim
2011 G5 Deluxe
1999 Miata 10th Anniversary


ace.cafe

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,948
  • Karma: 0
  • World leaders in performance/racing Bullets
Reply #13 on: November 26, 2017, 06:28:44 am
IMO, Royal Enfield is not interested in making fast motorcycles.

They want to build moderately powered machines that get people from point A to point B on a classic looking machine.

In a country like India, where most of their sales are, most of the people ride 50-125cc motorcycles.
The traffic is shitty and the roads are even shittier so building a super-bike is not seen as a big priority by RE.

Besides.  If RE did offer super heads, cams, rods and bearings for their singles and the new twin, Ace would be out of business. :(

I understand that notion about RE not "wanting" to make fast motorcycles, but I don't find it believable. I believe it's a marketing cover story for inadequacy.

After spending the kind of time inside these bikes that I have over the years,  it really becomes clear that what we have here is a company that spent 53 years assembling somebody else's design made on somebody else's tooling. The things they were compelled to add, such as the left shift and electric start were pathetic. Although, I will give them credit for getting that 5-speed box design from McGuigan. That was a good purchase, but it wasn't RE design.
AVL and others did the newer engines and chassis designs, and all RE did was try to make it as cheap as possible with very little regard for quality or reliability. They are an assembly factory, not an engineering firm.

So now, we come to the newest product, which admittedly has nice styling and the spec sheet has the buzzwords that the detractors have been deriding RE about for years.  People have cynically asked about why no multi-cylinder, why no OHC, or why no 4-valves per cylinder, or why no 6-speed gearbox, short stroke, etc. The reason is that modern bike enthusiasts equate these things with power and speed, and all the other makers have them, so "what's wrong with RE, and why are they so behind?"

So, they put all that stuff in there with this new 650 twin, and ended up with 47hp at 7100 rpm, making practically no beneficial use from those designs, and ending up with what they could have made with a 535cc pushrod long stroke 2-valve single. It's like they thought that just having that stuff in there would cover the bases, but they didn't do anything with it. All of it didn't give any more result than the old technology of the old Bullet. It's basically just a bigger displacement engine.

Who needs short stroke, OHC, and 4-valve per cylinder for 7100 rpm?  Those things are for high-revvers.
Who needs 6-speed gearbox for a wide powerband engine? That's for a peaky narrow power band performance engine.
It seems very apparent that these attributes were intended to "tick all the boxes" for marketing purposes.

Look, all I'm saying is the if they go to the extent of putting these things in the engine, it is silly to not use them, and instead produce power output that is associated with a much lower tech powerplant. It strikes me as "cosmetic design" for the purposes of marketing, but forgetting to make anything out of the parts that they put in there . They are making the heads and cams and ports and valves and all that anyway,  so what's the big reason for not getting anything out of it? That they "don't want power"?
I'm just not buying that reason. My assessment from being up to my eyeballs in RE engines for more than 10 years, and seeing how they make things, is telling me that they actually do not know, and they don't want to pay for an outsource to design it.

I have read all the same articles that everyone else has read over the last few years, with Sid Lal's statements quoted in them. And those statements were always about how much more profit RE made than anyone else, and how they wanted to take over the middle displacement market. But I never saw one statement that he wanted to build the best motorcycle.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2017, 06:36:09 am by ace.cafe »


Richard230

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,082
  • Karma: 0
Reply #14 on: November 26, 2017, 08:31:33 am
I don't know about RE, but any other motorcycle manufacturer, such as BMW (which I am familiar with), typically will come out with a lower-spec model to suck up the beta testers and gotta-have-it-now crowd and then a couple of years later entice them and any others that didn't bite the first bullet with a better performing, higher-spec, improved (and likely heavier) new model to sweep up any customers that they missed the first time. (Or in the case of BMW the new model will fix all of the deficiencies of the first version.  ::)  )
2011 Royal Enfield B5 500, 2018 16.6 kWh Zero S, 2016 BMW R1200RS, 2009 BMW F650GS, 2005 Triumph Bonneville T-100, 2002 Yamaha FZ1