Hitchcocks Forum

I was once again comparing the look of the original pre 1955 bullets to the Indian versions. I'm always baffled as to why the original version looks different and in my opinion quite a bit nicer. The main difference (Not the only difference) is the rear suspension: The original Bullet has a much more forward slope to the rear shocks. By careful comparison, it looks as if it's either due to the shocks being shorter....OR the swing arm is longer.....OR the top frame fixing is in a different place............Any opinions as to why the angle is different?...Photos can be seen on the "PHOTO GALLERY" here and "Original Sales brochures"....The 1954 and 1955 Bullet images show the difference well when one compares them to any picture of the Indian Bullet.

The dimensions of the frames are about the same. The swinging arm is quite a bit slimmer on the pre-55 bikes which could give an impression of a different shock absorber angle.
I have a Pre-55 Bullet with fitted with an Indian swinging arm and lots of other Indian bits. The only difference dimensionally in the swinging arm area is that the shock absorber mounts are 6mm wider each side on the Indian components.
The Indian engine is also a lot bulkier on the clutch side which can influence the appearance of the bike.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/24439520@N03/4167730324/

Les,
They seem to sit lower as well for some reason. I've measured the forks and shocks some years back and they are about the same. Not sure what it is

290mm Brit, 300mm Indian (I think). So 10mm shorter shock on early bike...correct or corroborate please!

There is the bloody great big bolt through the frame behind the engine too which the early model doesn't have. The front tube on the Brit ones is tapered and not on the Indian ones. The shocks are definitely longer but apart from that they are pretty similar. My bitsa has early 50's Reddich front forks attached to an Indian frame and whilst I had to make a new axle the old narrow hub back wheel fitted in fine. Handles well too!

I'm writing an article on the rebuild of a 1955 350cc Bullet (the "early" model,) for Paul Grace's new online Royal Enfield magazine, Vintage Adventurer. Find it at greenlane.biz As this will have to be a complete rebuild you'll be able to see all the gruesome rusty details of the frame and swinging arm in the next installment!
REgards, Mark

Thanks for your replies chaps, all very interesting and nice to know it's not just my imagination. Although Norm has measured and compared them some time back I reckon it has to be simply the shock length with almost certainly softer springs fitted too. Peter says they are at least 10mm shorter and doing some careful measuring on the images they could be as much as 25mm shorter. I guess the front springs are softer too on the original. Extra ground clearance makes a lot of sense when Indian bikes are used on rough Indian roads. The reason I mentioned it is that I want to get an Indian bike much more like the original. You can see the clearance above the rear tyre is so much less on the original even allowing for the fact the profile of the guard is a touch deeper. As long as there is tyre clearance at full spring compression then I’m going to fit shorter length shocks. To check all one has to do is to fit only one shock with the spring removed and pull the wheel fully up until the damper is fully compressed and check that top of tyre is not rubbing underneath the mud guard.........................................Oh yes, I’ve mentioned it before but I wish that original style shorter flatter deeper dual seat was available... that makes a massive difference to the look too. Single saddles look very nice but twin single saddles look ugly to me, so as I often ride two-up I’d prefer that original looking dual seat. Thanks again..... PS couldn’t find the “Vintage Adventurer” web site Mark…did quite a bit of searching.

Les, I guess this is what you mean by wheel clearance... my 1958 Redditch bike, just restored and had to use new Indian rear shocks !!

http://i1234.photobucket.com/albums/ff4 ... 093318.jpg

Hemant

Les, go to greenlane.biz then click on Royal Enfield Magazine on the top line. I just checked it and it should open fine. It's Paul Grace's (aka Anarchy,) site and has a fair bit of other stuff about Enfields. He heard I'd bought this 55 Bullet off ebay and asked me to write it up for the amusement of you all!
REgards, Mark

That's a beautiful bike Hemant. Well done. Not sure exactly what you mean about having to use the Indian shocks but if fitting shorter ones caused the tyre to touch the mudguard you could have easily shortened the movement by slipping on some split rubber washers onto the damper tube, they will limit the travel and act as bumpstops too. Ones that come to mind are the type that are often used for petrol tank mountings which come in different lengths (Eg AMC type...you will have to cut the split yourself and superglue back together) Maybe the earlier shocks had a shorter movement compared to later Girling type?
............Thanks Mark. I have found the site and a very good & interesting mag it is too. Some good stories to read, (Not read 'em all yet) I look forward to reading the future editions when they come out..ATB...Les.