Hitchcocks Forum

Hi guys - I wrote a review of the new GT - so I thought I'd post it here:

Good Friday saw a 200+ mile ride on the GT - Cheshire - Derbyshire - Yorkshire - Cheshire. I went a bit further than I intended but it was a beautiful day, the bike was comfortable and I was enjoying roads like the A523 and the A515 in Cheshire and Derbyshire. So, this is a bit of a paean of praise to the bike following that ride.

I think I Eicher have a hit on their hands. But I ought to start by saying that although the bike is great, the title 'cafe racer' gives a bit of a false impression, in the case of the GT it's two thirds right. The original cafe racers were styled after the racing bikes of the 50s like the Nortons of Joe Craig, with the big Isle of Man tank, clip-ons, rear sets, racing seat, sweptback exhaust and fly screen. People wanted bikes that went well, handled well and looked great and they copied the look of the iconic Bracebridge Street 30M. But the cafe racers were what we'd call today 'aftermarket'; the definitive example of course being the Triton, which got all three things: looks, handling and power (plus vibes). Of the British manufacturers it was really only Royal Enfield that copied the trend on the street, producing the original 250; mainly a styling exercise around a puny and unreliable single. The real opposition wasn't other British companies but Honda in the shape of the OHC CB 72 Honda. There was no contest; true the RE looked better but that was about it.

The new GT gets two parts of the cafe racer equation right; it looks great and it handles well. It is definitely the best of the Indian Enfields, light-years ahead of the first Indian Enfield I came across, a 350 in 1978 and much better than the Sixty-5 and the 2009 EFI I owned recently. If you look past the styling what you have is a modern version of what was previously called a 'sporting single'. Just as the Velocette Venom Clubman was the faster version of the MSS and the Gold Star a much faster version of the B33. Look at the basic dynamics of the bike; its height, weight, wheelbase and handling and you have all the ingredients of a classic British post war machine. Steve Harris said he wanted to give the bike a classic feel and I'd say he has absolutely succeeded. With a shorter wheelbase and steeper steering angle, it feels slightly sharper than say a Featherbed, Velocette or Gold Star but it's essentially the same kind of bike. Except it comes equipped with better lights, electrics, brakes, forks and suspension than those originals.

So what about the engine? I like singles, I've owned (or had long term loans of) three pushrod Nortons, one Velocette, various BSAs including a Gold Star, two Enfields and a BMW 650 GS. These span the various generations of the species from the long stoke Norton at 70 x 100 through the square Velo at 86 x 86 and the nearly square Gold Star 85 x 88, to the under square BMW 650 GS at 100 x 83. There's no doubt that the square engine is in the sweet spot for a single; between the lumbering long strokers and the buzzing short strokes. The square measurements give the classic engine a great combination of torque, revs and usable power. And if well setup such an engine will vibrate in a way that lets you know exactly what it is doing without making bits of the bike (or you) fall off. A square engine with some flywheel will give you trundling low end power and to a degree, revs. The short stroke singles like the KTM or BMW produce more power but not relaxation. One of the definitive A or B road experiences on a classic single is pottering through a village or built up area in 4th, seeing the de-restriction sign dropping into 2nd or 3rd and then winding on the throttle, only changing back into 4th at illegal speeds. Square engines have a dual slow/fast character and do that very well.

At 87 x 90 the 535 is close to square and I guess as standard it's somewhere between the basic RE EFI engine, which is still a plodder in the Norton ES2, AJS Model 18 mould and a Velocette Venom. It will burble along at 2,000 in 4th or 5th and it will rev out to 5,000 but it feels a bit strangled in standard trim, even with the 'sports' silencer. But actually there's no real point in taking it beyond 4,500. It's been criticised for being too slow but I don't actually agree with that. Once run in, over 1500 miles, it's fast enough over A and B roads. On a dual carriageway or motorway it will cruise at 4,000 or 70 mph but I have to ask why you might be doing that? Except for very short sections linking together a mostly A or B road cross country ride I can't see any good reason to ride it on the motorway. I'd say it's acceptable on secondary roads but it's below modern standards on the motorway. But better to have a 'faster' chassis than the engine, on the whole. And better to just avoid motorways altogether.

But it could do better. The wiring is untidy, the silver paint on the exhaust system, is a bit naff, on mine the little pad at the back of the seat fell off - no nyloc nuts or shake proof washers. Some of the design is kind of odd; 3 drain plugs for a unit engine? Twin horns in such a prominent position - why? And whoever designed the oil filter housing needs to be sentenced to change them at least a hundred times. But these are minor details and make no difference to the pleasure of riding the bike. Improvements? I don't think the compression ratio needs to go up but it does need to be allowed to breathe more easily with some basic work to the head plus Mr. H's various extras. The 4th and 5th gear performance needs improving and it needs to be able rev out easily to 5,250 and maybe a bit beyond. That would make Good Fridays and sunny Sundays more enjoyable. But not a lot.

Thanks Stephen, that adds a proper Rider's view to what we already know, all the better for your comparisons to other "Classic" Brit singles. (Although I'm a little offended at the remarks about the original GT, I'll have to go and reassure mine that it won't be up for sale as a result of your glowing praise of it's new cousin!) REgards, Mark

Oh yes - sorry about the original - I actually haven't ridden one since 1968! I'm sure it's fine with the application of TLC. But in reality a valiant effort from a failing industry. It was interesting to hear yesterday about the lack of investment by business over the last 30 years, because that was at the root of the British demise - not just RE - all of them. The industry could have survived and prospered but companies like BSA needed to put the money back in and take the long view. Eicher's reengineered classic, easy to look after and adapt is in some ways based a Harley Davidson strategy - a basic bike which can be altered / tuned / customised to suit the owner but at a lower price point. Which is of course also the Hitchcock's business strategy. Eicher also need to sponsor a GT series to run in the Lansdowne Classic series, assuming the bottom end can take more power.

Hello STEPHEN R ( a fellow Rs man !! LoL )------- Now that's what I call a Review ie}--- Owner/rider on the road experiences with some sensible Tech.details and comparisons thrown in........ and that " mainly a styling exercise around a puny and unreliable single" sentence is how I've also perceived the 535 up to now ( Based purely on other peoples generalisations I hasten to add ).....And I'm still hovering as to why I should invest £5,000 plus on this bike compared to others of the same value ( For example}----Original Hinkley 900 Tridents, an "Emerging Classic in their own right nowadays, are available in the region of £1,100 and at over 20 years old can still beat the 535 on Quality and reliability)..Remember I'm comparing CASH COSTS ONLY here and not bike-for-bike types........So, what Insurance Group have they settled into now ??? and what is the Insurers stance on fitting any mods. such as the Hitchcocks Power Commander ???..................I agree entirely re}---The Harris formula and the "Look" of the bike overall but still the poor quality overall lets Eicher down, and with them at the helm this should NOT be happening now.....I'm hoping that an engine conversion kit might be available soon to allow such items as the Triumph 500 twin or the Enfield 500 twin to be retro-fitted.....Proper clip-ons, rear-sets, twin high-level exhausts with short reverse meggas'( all in matt black) plus the obligatory Chequered Tape and we're away !!!! YES, I'D BUY THAT VERSION !!

Hi Alan, firstly, the quality of the GT is actually pretty good. There's a new paint plant at the new factory and the paintwork as a result is fine. The rims hubs brakes shock absorbers instruments headlamp shell, clipons are all pretty good too. The engine castings are okay but actually need more polishing at the factory; not a difficult thing to do. And the bike isn't puny in terms of performance, it's quite capable of overtaking safely and quickly on A roads and leaving the majority of traffic behind. But, as I said, you need to ride it as it's intended to be ridden – isn't a really a plodder. Some reviews have complained it's snatchy below 2,000 in fifth - OK well change into 4th - it has less flywheel effect than the standard EFI engine. Also, a lot of the reviews and owner comments are based on bikes which have done under a 1000 miles, sometimes under 500 – as I said they really do get better with age. As for the Hinckley Triumphs – they obviously are a better £ for £ buy in performance terms but as you say that's true of many other bikes. It would be difficult to find an equivalent re-engineered classic like the GT - although Yamaha are making a 400 single again I believe. Quality on the Hinckley Triumphs? I'm not so sure. I rode the first series Sprint as my main mode of transport for three years, clocking up 75,000 miles in the process. The engine was fantastic but it also needed a new starter sprag clutch, the seat split, the rear wheel adjusters, the eccentrics, needed very careful looking after or they would seize, it went through front fork oil seals every 12,000 miles and changing the gearbox sprocket was a complete pain. And it ate headlamp bulbs. But it was brilliant and all the faults are fixable. The 1st series Speed Triple is beginning to attract attention in the market - for good reason. What I predict is that the second hand market will be slow to develop for the GT. The reason I say this is that if you look at the Enfield 2nd hand market you see lots and lots of bikes with very low mileages for sale, meaning that people buy them as a Sunday afternoon plaything (nothing wrong with that) and then don't use them very much. What I expect to happen is that people will buy GTs and then hang on to them. I'm sure you could buy a different bike for £5000 or even £1000 but unless you bought a very well sorted Velocette, at a bargain price, you'd find it hard to buy a comparative single.

Stephen, you make good points about the original GT being under engineered for it's 17 year old market but the same was true of most other Brit 250s sadly. Enfield were different in their approach to development though, there were prototype OHC singles for the juniors and a very advanced step-thru lightweight in the pipeline when the Company was taken over in 1964 by an Industrial conglomerate (E & HP Smith Group) who were more interested in the development potential of the Factory site in the new town of Redditch and rapidly ran the company down and sold off the property. It took them just 2 years to break it all up and the rest is history! REgards, Mark