Hitchcocks Forum

Like a lot of old-timers on this Forum I've been riding motorcycles since the year dot – in this case the year dot being 1965. I bought one of the new Continental GTs is from MotoGB in Rochdale (who are good guys by the way) in September 2013 and it's done about 1500 miles – so is run in. I thought I'd post some of my experiences of the bike with a view to seeding a rational discussion, this is partly because a) some of the media reviews have been somewhat odd; with journalists being moved to criticise the bike for not being something it was never designed to be and b) because one of the posts on the bike seemed to degenerate into a polarised debate sprinkled with words in capital letters to add emphasis.... If you compare the bike to the two top singles of the classic era the Velocette Thruxton and the BSA Gold Star, the GT is not in their league in terms of engine performance. But it certainly handles and brakes as well as those two bikes and is on a par with a Featherbed. The most thoughtful review of the bike was written by Alan Cathcart who'd spoken to Steve Harris about the frame. Harris said that he aimed for a classic geometry and if you look at the numbers you'll see that it's pretty close in dimensions and angles to those classic era frames. The steering feels sharper than a Featherbed, though - the steering head angle is steeper I think. And since it is basically a fast A road bike it stands well by this comparison. In styling and fit and finish terms I think it's good. All of the plaudits which have been heaped on the styling are deserved and people who've said that the finish is as bad as the Indian Enfields of the 1970s are wrong – the standards are much higher than they used to be. The gear change has been criticised by some but I've found that clutchless changes are perfect from third gear onwards and it's much better than the 2009 EFI Bullet that I had last. There are quality compromises – the silver paint on the exhaust system is a bit naff and the silencer, looked at from certain angles, has tiny ripples in the surface. Also the wiring around the battery area is a mess. Having said that, it's basically a great little bike for Sunday afternoons, blasting round A and B roads. I've yet to ride it over a longer distance but it feels quite comfortable and I'm 6' 1". But really the chassis is better than the engine - In the lower gears its fine but it needs better performance in fourth and fifth. In A road traffic moving at 60 to 65 mph it really doesn't have the fifth gear performance that it needs to get past quickly and safely and dropping into fourth gear produces more revs but not really any more power. But it certainly doesn't need gearing down - it needs more bhp / torque. So I'm going to embark on a little light tuning; an iridium plug, Power Commander, new silencer and a freer flowing air filter. Plus some attention to the ports, valves and seats, which from my experience of other Enfields will not be particularly good. With these mods in place it ought to pull a larger gearbox sprocket. And if this is too high geared in certain situations – that's what a five-speed box is for… So, we shall see…

Thanks Stephen for a balanced and informative review - more helpful than any magazine article I have read and not a mention of the cafe racer scene. I look forward to these bikes drifting onto the second hand market with a few mods and low mileage from the one previous owner.

Thanks also Stephen, its good to know it handles well and if the EU strangled motor can be freed to breath and release some more horses, so much the better..

Bye the bye our american cousins are looking for info on the GT.. Perhaps you could send them a copy of your experiences...

Have a look here......... http://www.enfieldmotorcycles.com/forum ... 930.0.html

Hi guys-------- I'll also second those remarks...This is the neutral style of reporting that we need rather than the "I frashed it up the moterway mate and it's crap !" sort of thing.......By the way, what Insurance group are they now being quoted at ??

Alan: I was talking to somebody who frashed one and he said it was far from crap. That's not neutral reporting or my own experience... just the gist of what he said..

Thanks guys. Having read some of the earlier posts about the bike, I really do think there is a need for balanced views that generate more light than heat. One of the posts suggested for example that the original 250 cc bike was much faster than the current Indian bike. If memory serves me correctly the original bike produced about 18-20 brake horsepower? I.e. a bit more than a C15? The new bike probably is not producing 29 bhp and it weighs about 70lb more but although although the original was the fastest 250 single of its day I can't recall it ever going faster than about 80 miles an hour. And though I never owned one I did ride one in 1967 – I must say it didn't seem that fast! Also, it seems quite reasonable to improve a bike, with the understanding that it's never going to be a very fast single – in the current day if you want a quick single you buy a KTM and you accept a short stroke high revving motor. The Rotax derived BMW singles are also of that sort. But they are a completely different riding experience to the Enfield which is always going to be a long stroke hydraulic tappet, pushrod engine. Unless of course there is a radical rethink at Royal Enfield in which case I think they should revert to the classic 86 x 86 square bore and stroke that graces the Manx Norton and Velocette. Chain driven single OHC and then double up for the V twin. Simple. Insurance? When I insured the bike with Carole Nash it wasn't on the database and I think it's insured as standard Bullet.

Anyway, my plan is to get the bike in completely standard trim dyno checked and then to add some tuning parts. And no, it probably won't be that much faster but I will have a lot of fun "improving" it.

I concur with the thanks as this is a sensible and rider oriented review and assessment. I have an efi woodsman which has the free flowing exhaust and my local highly regarded mechanic said that they can do a few tweaks with or without a power commander on these bikes to beef it up. I say that because I tested a GT last Sept and was underwhelmed with the treacly performance in fourth and fifth. whereas on the wooders 4th and 5th is great because you are upright. Having had a 40bhp velo venom I think the Gt needs the extra oomph that takes it up to near that level to make it an effective café racer. If not it would benefit from higher bars thus delivering a throaty M bars or low touring bars good looking bike, which is fine if that is what you want. I have just put avon roadriders on the Woodsman and very happy with it.

Great review on the GT, plus...

I second Sofiaspin on the subject of the woodsman. Mine also goes like spanked lightning and has good torque and pull through all gears!

Ah yes the Velocette. I rode a Venom in Clubman tune for a number of years and I've ridden them in various states of tune. As you say it's basically the top gear performance that's the decider. The Venom will pull and 18 tooth sprocket, the Clubman a 19 tooth and only the Thruxton a 20 tooth. Mine ran happily with a 19 tooth and would cruise at 70 - 75 if required but it needed a 9:1 piston, cleaned up ports and a bigger Concentric to achieve that. I always reckoned on a 4 speed box it was how well a single would pull 4th that mattered and when everything was working on my Velo it pulled the 19 tooth easily and had a very nice 'long' 3rd gear. All I would say is that compared with the old time singles the new GT is not at all bad - it just doesn't go quite as well as it looks. As I said I am confident that can be remedied. I'll be at the Classic TT with it BTW - by which time the changes ought too have been made.