Unofficial Royal Enfield Community Forum

Royal Enfield Motorcycles => 535 Continental GT => Topic started by: Richard230 on December 01, 2018, 10:48:10 pm

Title: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: Richard230 on December 01, 2018, 10:48:10 pm
I went through my motorcycle test inventory looking for a test of a Continental GT. No luck. But I did find this 1964 Cycle World magazine test of the Royal Enfield Crusader, which (according to the article) is the basis of the GT which was to be a hopped-up version of the Crusader and was supposed to hit the market the following year.  So I guess it is the next best thing. I submit it for your reading entertainment of how it used to be a couple of years after I first started riding.   ;)
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: Richard230 on December 01, 2018, 10:48:58 pm
Here are pages 3 and 4 of the article.
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: Arschloch on December 02, 2018, 10:08:48 pm
Page 2:  "There is nothing in this engines basic specification to excite anyone". ;D

...sounds good.
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: KC1961 on December 03, 2018, 12:31:32 pm
I bought this last week, I'm really enjoying it.
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: Richard230 on December 03, 2018, 02:13:59 pm
That "Turbo Twin" sounds exciting.   ;D
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: Boxerman on December 03, 2018, 04:33:38 pm
Don't get too exited  :)  the name comes from 'turbine smooth' it's a Villiers two stroke twin motor.

Frank
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: Adrian II on December 03, 2018, 08:43:52 pm
There a turbo Twin on ebay over here at the moment, item # 123517860559. More pictures in the listing.

(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/0MgAAOSwbP1ajI5M/s-l1600.jpg)

(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/xHUAAOSwjytajI6L/s-l1600.jpg)

A.

Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: Richard230 on December 03, 2018, 10:27:39 pm
Boy, does that bike's engine remind me of my first motorcycle, a 1963 250cc Yamaha YD3.  It also was a single-carb twin with a very smooth engine, unfortunately it topped out at 70 mph and fouled spark plugs every 30 miles or so.   :(  I replaced it with a 1964 Honda Super Hawk - which was a major improvement in all performance and reliability categories.  :)
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: GlennF on December 05, 2018, 04:13:32 am
(http://www.realclassic.co.uk/bikepix/continental05081901.jpg)
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: Richard230 on December 05, 2018, 02:00:36 pm
So how fast was the old GT?  Faster than the new GT?
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: Arschloch on December 05, 2018, 02:10:16 pm
So how fast was the old GT?  Faster than the new GT?

https://www.motorcycleclassics.com/classic-british-motorcycles/classic-royal-enfield-motorcycles/1963-royal-enfield-continental-zmtz17mazhur

If this source can be trusted it did 80mph. Almost as fast a new stock 535 GT, but keep in mind that the horse requirement grows exponentially with speed, it takes only maybe 5 to 6 horses to reach 60 mph.
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: Richard230 on December 05, 2018, 05:02:52 pm
https://www.motorcycleclassics.com/classic-british-motorcycles/classic-royal-enfield-motorcycles/1963-royal-enfield-continental-zmtz17mazhur

If this source can be trusted it did 80mph. Almost as fast a new stock 535 GT, but keep in mind that the horse requirement grows exponentially with speed, it takes only maybe 5 to 6 horses to reach 60 mph.

Well, the 1959 Bullet 350 that the British press tested got up to 88 mph, with a "mean" top speed of 81, according to the road test that I posted yesterday in the Vintage section.  So what do you think of that?   ???  Could we have had a "ringer" there.   ;)
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: Arschloch on December 05, 2018, 05:13:49 pm
Not saying that 88mph on a 1959 stock Bullet 350 is impossible,  but in real life you would likely need to get close to a tornado and keep riding around it - in the correct direction of course.  ;)

Back than it was a competition for every horse even if imaginary. ;D 

My motorcycle magazine says anything above 120hp is of not much use on any public road in no country, I think that could be about correct.
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: Richard230 on December 05, 2018, 10:30:47 pm
Not saying that 88mph on a 1959 stock Bullet 350 is impossible,  but in real life you would likely need to get close to a tornado and keep riding around it - in the correct direction of course.  ;)

Back than it was a competition for every horse even if imaginary. ;D 

My motorcycle magazine says anything above 120hp is of not much use on any public road in no country, I think that could be about correct.

So you are saying that England was having a tornado during April 1959?  ::) Who knew?   ;D

The way I ride, my 60 hp Triumph works just as well as my 125 hp BMW. It is not how fast you go, but how fast you tell others you go.   ;)
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: Arschloch on December 06, 2018, 09:19:07 pm
So you are saying that England was having a tornado during April 1959?  ::) Who knew?   ;D

The way I ride, my 60 hp Triumph works just as well as my 125 hp BMW. It is not how fast you go, but how fast you tell others you go.   ;)

Lot of things could have happened during April 1959. About 10 years ago I used to do regularly 60mph on a bicycle and an tornado was not involved.... ;)

If wasn't even 1st of April.
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: GlennF on December 06, 2018, 10:23:00 pm
Lot of things could have happened during April 1959. About 10 years ago I used to do regularly 60mph on a bicycle and an tornado was not involved.... ;)

If wasn't even 1st of April.

Yep. All sorts of minor factors come into play.

I read an article once that claimed the biggest advantage the allies had in the air war against Germany was higher octane fuel.
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: Arschloch on December 10, 2018, 03:41:39 pm
Yep. All sorts of minor factors come into play.

I read an article once that claimed the biggest advantage the allies had in the air war against Germany was higher octane fuel.

Higher octane fuel? Probably one of the minor factors though...
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: ace.cafe on December 10, 2018, 04:46:03 pm
Well, the 1959 Bullet 350 that the British press tested got up to 88 mph, with a "mean" top speed of 81, according to the road test that I posted yesterday in the Vintage section.  So what do you think of that?   ???  Could we have had a "ringer" there.   ;)
Speedo inaccuracy, and/or tailwind.

The best advantage that they had back then was a decent flowing exhaust system and proper jetting. That is a good advantage, but it doesn't bridge the gap between a 250cc and a 500cc from the same maker.
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: KC1961 on May 19, 2019, 07:42:21 pm
I saw this today, really clean bike and it sounded fine too.
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: Bullet Whisperer on May 22, 2019, 09:27:29 am
Speedo inaccuracy, and/or tailwind.

The best advantage that they had back then was a decent flowing exhaust system and proper jetting. That is a good advantage, but it doesn't bridge the gap between a 250cc and a 500cc from the same maker.
The British RE machines performed much better than their lethargic, Indian counterparts. Bob Currie, who was no slip of a lad, got 88 mph from a 500 Redditch Bullet and suggested it might do more with the air filter removed and jetted up. Road tests back then were done with timing equipment over a measured distance, indeed, speedometer inaccuracies would also be given in the specs with such road tests. I don't know about 88 mph for a 350, though, but I have seen tests where the high seventies were recorded.
 B.W.
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: Richard230 on May 22, 2019, 02:04:44 pm
The British RE machines performed much better than their lethargic, Indian counterparts. Bob Currie, who was no slip of a lad, got 88 mph from a 500 Redditch Bullet and suggested it might do more with the air filter removed and jetted up. Road tests back then were done with timing equipment over a measured distance, indeed, speedometer inaccuracies would also be given in the specs with such road tests. I don't know about 88 mph for a 350, though, but I have seen tests where the high seventies were recorded.
 B.W.

I have a British road test by the "Blue 'Un" (whatever that is) from their April 1959 issue where they tested a 350 Bullet and obtained a one-way top speed of 88 mph. The subtitle of the test said: "An Exciting, High-performance Mount with Strong Appeal to the Discriminating Sporting Rider". However that bike might have been a "ringer".   ;) The top speed average was 81 mph and the quarter mile was covered in 19 seconds at 68 mph. The conditions were stated as: "light following wind; rider wearing two-piece riding suit and overboots".  ::)

(I posted a photo of the road test in the vintage forum a couple of years ago, if I recall correctly.)
Title: Re: 1964 Royal Enfield Crusader test
Post by: jez on December 21, 2019, 12:34:16 am
I had a '54 Bullet. It revved to an indicated 65mph in third. My AJS ran out of puff at 55. My '65 Crusader was supposed to be the sports version, but I have my doubts. Gander and Gray cocked up the rebuild and I got a local engineer to retro sort it. It did an indicated 70 flat out. Handled beautifully, though I didn't appreciate that till I built the AJS......