Hitchcocks Forum

Hi Norm,
Please could you tell me what is so bad about cast iron barrelled Bullets? I bought a 'Sixty 5' a year ago although I haven't ridden it yet. I must admit the only reason (apart from a left gearchange)was I preferred the more mellow exhaust note compared to the rather tappetty sound from the alloy barrelled AVL engine I had previously.

Nothing is so bad about the Cast Irons, they are what they are, built by Indians so a bit hit and miss. They can be built into a good machine using a variety of Hitchcocks parts. As long as they are ridden gently around back lanes etc they can work well, but you start pushing them and they will fail. Sprags on the E/S ones were a problem, many fail, some don't

And the Sixty Five is probably the best of the iron barrels. The 5 speed box is much better than the Albion one.

Thank you for clarifying that. I was a bit worried. Thankfully all I intend to do on my is just potter around quiet Devon lanes- hopefully soon. Just need to inspect the oil pump for peace of mind after reading another of the Hitchcocks articles on how they can strip their teeth. Boy, am I paranoid!

Continuous production from 1949 to 2008 says something. Incredibly simply, rugged and reliable.

Having owned one myself I think you are right to be paranoid. I bought mine from Hayward's in Cambridge and they included a written warning that the bike was not suitable for use on modern, high speed roads, and that the user should consider 55mph as a realistic maximum sustained speed.



The lubrication system is probably the weakest part of the engine - at maximum rpm the oil flow is just 1.2 litres per minute, which is WAY behind any modern engine (e.g. the UCE flows 9 litres per minute). There is also a delay after starting before oil gets to the top end, and when the oil does get there it is aerated. And yes, stripping of the oil pump feed gear is not unusual. They will also overheat the exhaust valve at high speeds because of inadequate cooling in that region of the head.



HAVING SAID ALL THAT, if you really do just want to chug around the country lanes, then it's a delightful engine - a delightful motorcycle - and I got lots of pleasure from mine. Provided you use it appropriately, and service it diligently, I don't think it will give you any trouble.

1992 largely unmolested 500 Bullet 45000 miles, goes up & down UK, Europe, US East Coast on everything from gravel roads to Interstates.

I’d say that the emphasized reservations about the Bullet lubrication systems are unnecessary. Of course the oil flow is less than a modern engine. But it does not need to be equivalent to a ‘modern’ engine. There are umpteen thousand of these engines that have covered umpteen thousands of miles with no problem at all related to lubrication. The teeth on the worm drive may wear or (in very rare cases) be destroyed, but this (like the sprag clutch problem) is usually related to minor faults elsewhere – which then can have major repercussions. But in itself the lubrication system, as odd as it may be, is not a major problem, indeed it isn’t even a minor problem other than in a proportionality very small number of cases. I do agree with Thack that the performance expected from these machines does make them precarious to use in faster flowing traffic.

Hey Potboiler, just wondering how it is possible to buy a bike and not ride it for a year (unless it's in boxes). Don't stress about anticipating problems that most probably will never arise. Just ride it gently and you should have years of enjoyment.

the weakest point of a cast iron enfield(or any other enfield) is the one sitting on it.