Unofficial Royal Enfield Community Forum
General Discussion => Campfire Talk => Topic started by: boggy on November 28, 2012, 04:11:46 pm
-
What a cool looking bike. Side car looks mean. Lots of great pics here:
http://www.visordown.com/motorcycle-news-new-bikes/ural-yamal-paddle-included/21884.html
-
over on advrider they posted the warning that comes with the bike.
http://advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=838273&page=2
14k is alot of money.
-
Quite cool, even though I am not a sidecar fan...
Bare
-
I think their including an oar with the rig is a neat idea.
That way, when it leaves you stranded alongside a little stream you won't find yourself "Up the Creek without a Paddle." ;D ;D ;D
-
Funny how I get the urge to look at the Urals..Was just at their website the other night..I thought their "solo" for 8-9k was a fine looking machine..Think it was 750 cc in displacement..It look like it be fun to ride..Like Royal Enfield, their distributors are a bit on the sparse side..
Famous for their sidecar combo/s...No longer selling the machine gun placement feature.
-
Just my opinion but from what I've read their solo version handles like the truck it is.
It was built heavy for handling a side car and that weight is still there even without the hack attached.
IMO, about the only thing it has in common with the Royal Enfield is its old fashioned design.
-
Of course instead of a paddle they could supply a camel ...
(http://dybiz.com/sites_randomblog/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Aral_sea_shipwreck_camels.jpg)
-
I think a Ural would be fun for exploring some open spaces with my daughter in the hack. But if I go that way, I'll buy the cheapest one I can with 2wd and keep it out of the deep water...
14k? I guess it's an exclusive market for amphibian motorcycles. You wanna play, you gotta pay [Ivan].
-
If I WERE to spend 14K on a Ural, I'd go with Hammarhead Industries Solo X. Like all their other bikes (including the Enfield Woodsman) it's a great build.
http://www.hammarhead.com/solo-x.html
P.S.
James from HH is a forum member here.
-
boggy: that is so cool..can't think of a word to describe it...spartan, primitive, futuristic mechanical....I like it...GM
-
Yup. That's their thing. Slim, light, and usable machines. Check out the EFI Woodsman gone airborne and the slim looking AVL Woodsman. Museum quality, trail proven.
-
I love the Woodsman EFI. Looks like he moved the fuel pump forward in an Iron Barrel tank. I like the seat, too. I didn't see them in the for sale section.
That airborne picture doesn't look right to me...photoshopped, maybe?
Bare
-
I don't think so. Lots of pics on their blog of them riding the sh#t out of their machines.
Here is their bikes page with all they have. The Jack Pine is the crown jewel of their shop, imo. The low, Zard exhaust and low pro dash make it seem super tidy.
http://hammarhead.com/motorcycles.html
Cycle World did a great write up (Peter Egan) and web-movie on the Jack Pine. It shows that bike being ridden pretty aggressively. Looks like a ridiculous amount of fun on two wheels. Performance seems to be the priority.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unaRkye1OBk
-
That was an interesting clip. I used to ride up in that area a lot when my feet would reach the ground on a dirt bike. There were a lot of Hare and Hound races and enduros up there.
On the other hand, I wasn't that impressed with the Triumph since I owned a stock one. It was an OK bike, but way to big for me to even consider any offroad stuff. Maybe 30 years ago when I was running TT500s and such up there. Or 50 years ago when I was running BSA Spitfire Scramblers and Gold Stars in the Wyoming prairies and mountains or the Florida and Alabama woods. But any of those were a lot smaller and lighter than that Triumph.
Bare
I like the Enfield a lot better.
-
they are nice....but pricy.
i was wondering if yu could do that yourself for about 5k less.
i don't see $13,000 there.
i guess i'm just cheap!
-
I agree, but some the parts could get fairly expensive. There is a fair amount of grunt labor in doing it with a lot of cutting and grinding involved
Depends on what kind of tooling you have to do a lot of the work. A tank and seat would need to be highly modified. The rest of it can be done fairly easily.
I would like to change the wheels to 18" and 21". I could have Buchanan's cut spokes and I could do the lacing, for instance. Or I could buy the spoke rollers and do it all myself. So you makes your choice and pays your money!
Bare
-
I don't think so. Lots of pics on their blog of them riding the sh#t out of their machines.
The picture where he's airborne over the slope is all wrong. He's too far back to have launched off that slope and there's nothing behind him that resembles and launch ramp. Frankly, I doubt highly that an Enfield jumped that high would survive the landing!
Bare
-
Just my opinion but from what I've read their solo version handles like the truck it is.
It was built heavy for handling a side car and that weight is still there even without the hack attached.
IMO, about the only thing it has in common with the Royal Enfield is its old fashioned design.
You are thinking of the original solo. The Ural sT solo is priced at $7799, hand built, weighs only 30 lbs more than the Enfield and handles pretty well. Think eighties BMW boxer, add cdi and dual discs, a 2 year unlimited transferrable warranty
Halfway down the page are comparison specs with several bikes.
http://www.totalmotorcycle.com/photos/2011models/2011-Ural-sT-SoloComparison.gif
-
Hey BRW. Hope you've been well. You been riding?
I couldn't help but notice all those bikes (Urals and Triumphs) listed the gas as 91 octane.
-
Haven't been riding the Enfield at all since the skidmasters bit me.
The Ural specs 91 octane to pass EPA emissions to import into the USA. They run fine off 87.
Hey BRW. Hope you've been well. You been riding?
I couldn't help but notice all those bikes (Urals and Triumphs) listed the gas as 91 octane.