The Royal Enfield story is a very cheering for the classic bike world, and no matter what Harley might tell you, they’re the longest extant make in the world. Steven Myatt takes a look at REs, some old, but mostly new.

The story of Royal Enfield is truly a remarkable one, and is quite unique. They started production the year before Harley-Davidson (so yaa-boo-sucks to you) and have been in constant production ever since, and are still offering affordable and practical bikes to enthusiasts today.

This is the friendly face of motorcycle manufacture; the Japanese factories don’t do it like this.

If you are a classic bike purist and think that the development of the swinging arm was the work of the devil, and that the advent of telescopic forks was largely responsible for a complete breakdown in law and order, the rise of the drug culture, and Celebrity Fit Club, then please stop reading now – but I think that the availability of new ‘retro’ bikes is nothing but a good thing.
I have an interest in anything with two wheels – or three, or four, or caterpillar tracks – but the modern, ‘it can do 200mph, but I’m not safe over about 75’, Japanese bike interests me least. I feel a far greater empathy with Harleys, modern Triumphs and the like, and certainly don’t mind combining more traditional looks and ‘feel’ with modern suspension and brakes.
Classic bikes can be used as everyday transport, of course – the sexton in our village can be seen out and about in all weathers on his ancient BMW combo, with his tools, trays of plants and bags of rubbish in the sidecar – but it is true to say, is it not, that most of us would rather have a late-50s Thunderbird for sunny weekends and use a Hinckley-made Thunderbird Sport for wet dashes down the M6?
So what could be better than an RE? You can see what’s going on, you can connect with the metal as you certainly can’t with a plastic-bodied Jap, and you’ve got adequate power to keep up with today’s traffic – but not so much that you feel your manhood is in doubt if you don’t drag away from every set of lights at something approaching the speed of light. You can work on the bike yourself if you wish, and you can add and subtract accessories with no more than a set of spanners.
I know that they’re equitable in terms of style, but not really in terms of size, power and speed, but even getting towards the top of the RE range, a 500 is two-thirds the price of an entry-level Triumph Bonneville, and getting on for half the price of an 883 Sportster. Sounds great to me… but maybe I’m preaching to the converted.

Mike Williams-Raahauge and Peter Rivers Fletcher.

The Enfield story starts in the 1870s, when a gentleman by the name of George Townshend was persuaded by his stepson to build a bicycle at his engineering works. He did it rather well, and soon patented a spring saddle. Towards the end of the century, two folk by the name of RW Smith and Albert Eadie took over the company, and started using the Enfield name in 1892. A year later they aggrandised their brand to make it Royal Enfield. So far we as know Queen Victoria never actually owned or rode one. They also started using the slogan ‘Built like a gun’, which was of course meant complimentarily.
Like every other bike manufacturer in the known world they were soon adding internal combustion engines. At first they weren’t sure quite what configuration to use, and tried making trikes (with De Dion motors) and then a quadricycle – a trike with a fourth wheel. So far as two-wheelers went they initially just bolted on the motor below the top rail. They didn’t make their own engines, but used an imported Minerva unit. Drive was direct to the rear wheel by leather belt.
Almost immediately they realised that they need to design a frame especially to suit the power, and an all-new model appeared for 1902. This motorcycle also had non-push bike brakes, though in a novel move you operated the rear brake by pedalling backwards.

END OF ONLINE SAMPLE | BACK TO FEATURE INDEX