enter the community for car enthusiasts in Malaysiahttps://www.wapcar.my/forumBasic information2020 Honda
It is here to challenge the likes of Honda HR-V, Mazda CX-3, and Proton X50.This is the first time the
Ahh, the Honda Civic.
Following its global debut in Thailand late last year, India is set to be the second market to introduce Honda
recharges the high voltage hybrid (traction) battery via regenerative braking, while the second motor is a generator
Mention VTEC and images of an uncouth, loud, and high-revving Honda Civic speeding down the highway might
Singapore is set to be the first market in the ASEAN region to launch the all-new, fourth-generation Honda
Its just a cam with an open circuit. A swing of the cam completes the electrical circuit.
Malaysian Dash Cam Owners, a website dedicated to compiling and sharing DVR footages from Malaysia has
Fret not, Honda Malaysia today announced a new interior colour addition to the Honda HR-V RS –
enter the community for car enthusiasts in Malaysiahttps://www.wapcar.my/forumBasic information2019 honda
Most engines of today utilise an Overhead Cam (OHC) configuration so a belt or a chain is required to
nomenclature for the engine code follows this logic:4 - engine block versionA - engine family typeG - dual overhead
reinventing the wheel (those are still round), the boffins at the Center of Automotive Management (CAM
Cheras-Kajang Highway when someone decided to hurl the cocktail at his car just as he was passing an overhead
Nissan Almera.Q: How does the Honda City 1.5 engine compare to the Honda Jazz 1.5 (GK5) engine?
After introducing no less than five new models in 2020, including the Honda Civic facelift, all-new Honda
Dongfeng is also one of the JV partners of Honda in the Middle Kingdom and produces the Honda XR-V, a
Honda Cars India has just launched the all-new 2020 Honda City in India.
Very soon, Honda Malaysia will be hosting the world debut of the first ever Honda City RS with the latest
The model is known in Japan as the Honda Fit.
the Corolla Cross is really as big as it seems, heres how it measures against its closest rivals, the Honda
HR12DE 3-cylinder petrol engine with 79 PS and 103 Nm which doesnt drive the wheels but works as a generator
Honda has previewed the Honda City RS and made quite a fuss with its video commercial not so long ago
A couple of days ago, Kah Motor, the official distributor of Honda vehicles in Singapore, launched the
taken further steps to digitalise its aftersales by launching the Online Service Booking and Service Cam
Render by Best Car Web, purported looks of Civic HatchbackItll be a double dose of the all-new 2022 Honda
Had it been that we had no local automobile manufacturer, the Honda City / Honda Jazz would probably
The soaring asset prices and strong Japanese yen caused Japanese automakers like Nissan, Toyota and Honda
The new partnership will see the installation of Panasonic’s Nanoe X Generator in 5,500 vehicles
The engines used in Royal Enfield motorcycles are drastically different than the ones used in present day rev-hungry motorcycles like Bajaj Dominar. Even the 150cc engine used in Honda CB Unicorn is more refined and efficient. Royal Enfield motorcycles cannot be compared to other motorcycles. It’s like comparing a vintage motorcycle to a KTM Duke. Yes, you read that correctly–Vintage! Even though the 350cc and 500cc unit construction engines (UCE) (top row, middle) are fairly new, the technology used is decades old – heavy crank, pushrods to engage the valves, long stroke. I’d say Royal Enfield motorcycles are “modern day vintage motorcycles”. It’s obvious that engines featuring vintage tech won’t perform at par with latest engines with similar capacities. That said, Royal Enfield motorcycles are designed for those who want old-school looks and the (sort of) feel of a vintage motorcycle. Royal Enfield motorcycles look and feel different, don’t they? Speaking of improvement, the current-generation UCE engine (used in Bullet, Classic, Thunderbird, Continental GT) is miles ahead of the previous-generation cast iron barrel engine (top row, first) used until 2009. The engine and gearbox which used to be independent units are now housed in the same body. Improved oil pump, transmission, clutch system, ignition system, alternator, bearings, crankshaft, valve train are some of the key upgrades. The result is a smoother, more reliable, more efficient engine with better power delivery. Next comes the 411cc long-stroke engine used in the Himalayan (top row, third) featuring overhead cams and timing chain. Not to mention the upcoming 650cc parallel-twin engine (bottom, against black background) with 4 valves per cylinder, overhead cams and 6-speed transmission which will debut in the Continental GT 650 and Interceptor later this year. In addition to new engine development, Royal Enfield keeps adding minor updates to the engine, clutch system, transmission, electricals, body work, brakes, etc. for further refinement and improved performance. Being internal, many improvements aren’t visible. However, you can feel the difference when you ride an older motorcycle. For example, the latest Classic 350 will feel smoother and perform better than the 2010 model. Please stop by, read, and follow my space. Content contribution welcome!
The, Ariel Atom 500, has the highest redline of a piston-engine road car rated at 10,600. The Renesis in the Mazda RX-8 has the highest redline of a production rotary-engine road car rated at, 9000 rpm,. Then there are F1 engines which rev Beyond 17K-18K Limit. The ,Honda CIVIC Type-R, revved upto 8600 redline but turbochargers of modern era made it fall down gradually. Audi R8 V10 (First Generation) – 8700 RPM The current R8 is a delightful screamer with its 8500-rpm redline, but the first V10-powered R8 has it beat by a nose. Its 5.2-liter V10 redlined at 8700-rpm and loved to be hammered on. Interestingly, this R8 revved higher than its close relativeFerrari , the ,Lamborghini Gallardo. Porsche 911 (991) GT3 RS – 8800-rpm The new ,GT3, ,RS, doesn't rev quite as high as its non,-RS, companion, but with an 8800-rpm redline, you're not exactly missing much. Stroking the ,GT3,'s 3.8-liter flat-six to 4.0-liters shaves off a little of the top-end, but the extra 15-hp you get more than makes up for it. Ferrari F12tdf – 8900-rpm A high-revving, small displacement engine is one thing; a big 6.3-liter V12 that nearly touches nine large is a different matter. For the more hardcore, track-focused F12tdf, ,Ferrari, bumped the standard F12's horsepower from 730 to 770, and raised the redline to 8900-rpm. HONDA S2000(AP1) — 8900 rpm Ferrari 458 – 9000-rpm The 4.5-liter V8 used in the 458 is Ferrari's parting gift to the naturally aspirated V8. It made 562-hp in standard trim and nearly 600-hp in the ,458 Speciale,. Peak power arrived at a 9000-rpm redline Lexus, LFA, – 9000-rpm The V10 in the ,Lexus LFA, almost resembles an F1 engine more than something to stick in a road car. It revs so quickly to its 9000-rpm redline, Lexus deemed it necessary to install a digital tachometer. Allegedly, no analog needle could keep up. Porsche 911 (991) GT3 – 9000-rpm Porsche 918, Spyder, – 9150-rpm The obvious benefit of a hybrid system is fuel efficiency, but the 918 shows us another benefit: Torque-fill. That's actually the term McLaren uses to describe the powerplant in the P1, but it applies well to all three hybrid hypercars. It describes the marriage of a high-strung gasoline engine with the low-end torque of an electric motor. That allowed Porsche to set the redline of the 918's V8 at a crazy 9150-rpm without detriment to its daily driveability. Ferrari, LaFerrari, – 9250-rpm The LaFerrari uses a similar powertrain concept as the 918, but Ferrari decided to stretch the redline to 9250-rpm. That's a crazy number by any standard, but in a V12? It's mind-blowing. You expect numbers like that out of a tiny bike engine, not something that displaces 6.3-liters. Honda S500/S600/S800 – 9500-rpm When Honda first got into the car business in 1963, it drew heavily on its experience in motorcycle production. This is evident in the inline-fours found in Honda's first roadster, which scream to a scarcely believable 9500-rpm. These tiny power plants had four carburettors each and dual-overhead cams; impressive stuff for the era. They sound unreal too. Ariel Atom 500 – 10,500-rpm What happens when you stick ,two Hayabusa engines, joined at the crank in a tube-framed, track day special? The Ariel Atom 500. Only ,25 were built, and each revved to ,10,500-rpm,, eclipsing every other production car built. That's the advantage of using motorcycle components in a car.
GM bit off more than they could chew. While Saturn started strong, ,GM would not or could not invest enough in ongoing R&D to keep the brand viable,. In the 1980’s, GM CEO Roger Smith correctly ascertained that GM’s family cars were uncompetitive with Japenese imports, especially Honda and Toyota; this was an existential threat to GM; GM’s corporate culture was too hidebound for the existing divisions (Chevrolet, Buick-Olds-Pontiac) to respond effectively; and drastic measures were necessary. He succeeded at taking decisive action by creating the Saturn brand as a clean-sheet skunkworks project; but failed at creating buy-in within the GM power structures. Lee Iaccoca rallied Chrysler around the K-car-and-minivan turnaround plan, and Alan Mulally rallied Ford around “One Ford,” both of which involved killing some sacred cows. But Smith could not rally a critical mass of GM to behind Saturn as the future of GM small cars. GM diluted its resources among three independent and redundant small-car programs in North America in the 80s-90s: the legacy ,J-body (Cavalier etc.), and ,A-body (Celebrity etc.), platforms, each rebadged as numerous Chevrolet, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, and Buick products; joint ventures with Suzuki, Isuzu, and Toyota (NUMMI), under the umbrella of the ,ill-fated Geo brand;, and Saturn, created from scratch as a “different kind of car company” This was a weakness, as the divisions ultimately saw each other as rivals, jockeyed for resources and influence, and did not afford GM any significant economies of scale nor access to new markets. The first generation S-cars were competitive and well-received., The cars were competitive enough with the contemporary Civic and Corolla to sell on objective merits. The plastic panels made S-series attractive as a winter car (no body rust) or first car ($0 fender benders). The no-haggle policy had a following among the conflict-averse. All the “different”ness was appealing to shoppers that might otherwise buy a Volvo, Saab, or kooky VW. There was a buy-American movement in the 1980’s, and Saturn was an attractive way to buy a sensible American car that “gets it” without any of the baggage from traditional brands such as Chevrolet, Plymouth, Mercury, etc. Saturn and the first-gen S-series emulated a lot of what made Honda, Toyota, Civic, and Corolla so successful at the time: clean-sheet design, attention to customer service and total cost of ownership, more collaborative and less adversarial labor relations, and genuine attention to detail on entry-level products. The Saturn powertrain, with its all-aluminum overhead-cam engine, was years ahead of the iron pushrod engines in contemporary J-bodies and A-bodies. But, ,GM did not complete Saturn’s lineup,. The original plan was for a full line of family cars, perhaps comparable to Honda’s range, but this never materialized. Saturn desperately needed a midsize car, and ought’ve had a minivan or MPV, sports compact, and executive car too. It is difficult for a marque to retain customers, and for dealerships to close sales, when a brand has only one size of car (ask Fiat or Chrysler). Had GM focused its resources, Saturn would’ve had the R&D resources to develop its own midsize car, with Saturn touches such as plastic panels and an efficient Saturn-specific V6 within a couple years, say by 1994. Instead GM starved Saturn with only a single model until 2000, when they rebadged the aging Opel Vectra as the ,L-series,. To add insult to injury, Saturn’s sole model was neglected. ,GM failed to update the S-series at regular intervals,. Apparently they skipped over the part of the Honda/Toyota playbook that talks about redesigning a car every 5–8 years to keep it current. Again GM did not follow through on the necessary investment to keep Saturn viable. The Civic, for example, ,benefited from a major redesign in 1983, 1987, 1992, 1996, and 2001,. By comparison the S-series debuted in 1991 and got only a superficial refresh in 1996 and then 2000. The final 2002 model year was fundamentally a 20 year-old design competing against a 2-year old Civic. While the first-gen Saturn may’ve been comparable to the fourth-gen Civic in 1990, the first-gen Saturn simply could not compete with the ,seventh,-gen Civic in 2001. By 2000, Roger Smith had been succeeded by John Smith, Robert Stempel, and then Rick Wagoner, and all executive-level affection for the Saturn vision had dissipated. GM reverted to its badge-engineering habits and turned Saturn into ,Yet Another Rebadged Chevy,. The 2000s lineup included the ,Ion small car,, a crude and unattractive version of the Chevy Cobalt, which is really saying something; ,L-series, midsize sedan, related to the past-its-prime Opel Vectra, with an expensive and unreliable made-in-England V6; ,VUE crossover,, a Chevy Equinox rebadge; and ,Relay minivan,, a rebadge of the mediocre Chevy Venture minivan. The character and virtues of the original Saturns had been washed away, and consumers and the press had noticed. GM gave it one last try; in the late 2000’s, they tried to move Saturn upmarket to ,Yet Another Rebadged Opel,, occupying a Euro-premium niche similar to a VW or Volvo. The Astra, Aura, and Sky were well-regarded, but it was too little too late. The Great Recession of 2008 bankrupted GM, who killed Saturn as part of their government bailout-supported restructuring. We can only wonder, what might have happened, had GM put all its import-fighting eggs in the Saturn basket. Maybe there’s a parallel universe out there where Saturn took over all of GM’s economy car business, leaving Chevy, Pontiac, Buick, and Oldsmobile to focus on their core competencies in large cars, muscle cars, and SUVs. I wonder how that would’ve turned out?
My Dream bike… ok, lets give this my best shot… In 1949, Jawa, which had been nationalized at the end of the war, was merged with former competitor Ceská Zbrojovka (CZ) and both companies came under communist control. It is unclear why they decided to make a technically superior luxury motorcycle, when they were known for their strength in the commuter segment. Maybe, as put forth by someone, it was a snub to the dour communist regime; a slight at the claimed technological superiority of their wartime occupiers, or just to prove that in spite of their new mandate to build basic transportation for the proletariat they still could create superior designs. The Jawa 500 OHC was a four-stroke, twin-cylinder, air-cooled motorcycle developed by Jawa , produced in the years 1952 - 1958. Unlike the Jawa Perak (Plunger model) of which I own one of each - the 250cc and the 350cc, this model was more focused on sports-minded drivers. The first prototype of a frame derived from Perak was made around 1948. In 1950. They began pre-production of a motorcycle with a capacity of 500 cc. Serial production of motorcycle Jawa 500 OHC type 15/00 would start two years later in 1952. Below is an image of the Perak 350 The first version of the Jawa 500 twin, model 15/00, arrived in 1952 featuring a unit-construction 488cc engine with dry-sump lubrication and an overhead camshaft driven by a shaft and skew gears. Valves were operated by rockers, and drive to the clutch and four-speed transmission was by chain. Motorcycles of 1952 were really classic, with a relay in the battery, in 1953, the relay moved to Dynamo with the other types 01 and the 02. The first mass-produced type was 15/00 from 1952, called the Snail, followed by type 15/01 and 15/02 (with dual seat, large drums and wings with a collar.) Type 15/01 - See what I meant when I said that it closely resembled the Perak? The four-stroke, two-cylinder air-cooled engine had an overhead camshaft in the head driven worm gear. With the engine worked a single carburettor type JIKOV 2924 HZ. Jawa 500 15/00, ,Claimed power: ,26hp @ 5,500rpm (claimed) ,Top speed:, 80mph/128kmph (claimed) ,Engine:, 488cc air-cooled OHC parallel twin, 65mm x 73.6mm bore and stroke, 7.0:1 compression ratio ,Weight (dry):, 330lb (150kg) ,Fuel capacity/MPG:, 4.2gal (16ltr)/45-55mpg (est.) The gearbox featured a semi-automatic shift mechanism: applying pressure to the shift lever disengaged the 6 disc clutch working in oil bath, allowing the rider to shift gears without using the hand lever. This also meant the Jawa could be held at a stop in gear without using the clutch lever, simply by stepping on the shift lever instead. It’s essentially the system Triumph later introduced as the “,Slickshift,,” and Honda used on their Cub. Also innovative was the way the shifter and kickstart spindle were fixed concentrically — though it also meant the kickstart was on the “wrong” (left) side of the bike. The drivetrain was dropped into essentially the 250/350 frame with the plunger rear end and telescopic fork. To accommodate the taller overhead cam engine, the frame was extended with a steel bar insert. Unfortunately, the extension was right where the center stand was attached and the fragility of this arrangement was a concern to some owners. However, the 500’s ingenuity of design, quality of finish, and attention to detail was almost breathtaking, and certainly on par with BMW,. Examples include the air filter neatly encased in a cutout in the oil tank, the throttle cable running inside the handlebars, the elegant headlight nacelle (Triumph introduced theirs in 1949), the massive rear suspension plunger castings designed to prevent any “looseness” in the rear wheel, the inclusion of hydraulic dampers inside the plunger housings, and the discreet use of gold pinstriping. The factory recommended plug consisting of mags brand Lucas in the prototype was meanwhile replaced by PAL installation consisting of ignition coils, 6V 14 Ah battery and generator 6V 60 W. Firing had an automatic acceleration point in the range of 20° ~ 40°. Valve gear type OHC was powered by a royal shaft. This type of drive cam is difficult to manufacture and therefore expensive. There was also the prototype motor with a cam driven by the chain between the rollers, which proved to be unstable for mass production. An update to the 500, the model 15/01 arrived in 1954. The skew gear cam drive was dropped in favour of a more conventional bevel gear, and a dual seat replaced the cantilevered saddle of the /00. Claimed output was given as 26 horsepower. The difficult experience from camshaft driven worm gear helped Jawa decide to impose a modernized type of motorcycle in the TYPE 15/01. Type 15/01 had been constructed from scratch. The camshaft drive was via bevel gear toothing type of Gleason. Lubrication system consisted of a pump and a separate oil tank with a capacity of 4.5 litres - it was a so-called dry sump system. The motorcycle frame design was derived from the model Jawa 250 Perak, was suitably strengthened and adapted for mounting the new heavier engine. Tyre size was: 3.25 x 19 front and rear 3.50 x 19. The weight of the motorcycle was 156 kg, the maximum speed of , average fuel consumption 4litre / 100km. Jawa 500 15/01, ,Claimed power: ,26hp @ 5,500rpm (claimed) ,Top speed:, 84 mph / 135kmph (claimed) ,Engine:, 488cc air-cooled OHC parallel twin, 65mm x 73.6mm bore and stroke, 7.0:1 compression ratio ,Weight (dry):, 344lb (156kg) ,Fuel capacity/MPG:, 4.2gal (16ltr)/45-55mpg (est.) At the beginning of 1953 Jawa now introduced again a redesigned model 15/02. The motorcycle received larger hubs with a diameter of 200mm. Post 1956, they introduced the couch instead of the saddle. Engine power had been increased to 28 BHP. The maximum speed was 147km / h, the weight of the motorcycle increased to 174kg. TYPE 15/02 - Now that’s a bike worth owning The final version announced for 1957, now with substantially larger full-width aluminum hubs containing 10-inch diameter drum brakes but still with the plunger frame. Output was now up to a claimed 28 horsepower, giving the model 15/02 a top speed of between 85-90mph. Unfortunately, a luxury touring motorcycle was not what the central planning committees of the Eastern Bloc wanted. Jawa had become a major supplier of motorcycles to the USSR, and concentrated production on the 350cc model 354, often sold with a sidecar. Production of the overhead cam 500 ceased in 1958. Jawa 500 OHC 15/02, ,Claimed power: ,28hp @ 5,500rpm (claimed) ,Top speed:, 91mph/147kmph (claimed) ,Engine:, 488cc air-cooled OHC parallel twin, 65mm x 73.6mm bore and stroke, 7.0:1 compression ratio ,Weight (dry):, 384lb (174kg) ,Fuel capacity/MPG:, 4.2gal (16ltr)/45-55mpg (est.) The front suspension was with telescopic shock absorbers (oil)and the rear suspension on a hydraulic slide. The dome had headlight indicators as well as ignition indicators The fuel tank capacity of 16 litres contained the ignition switch, ammeter and the indicator for idle. The fuel tank like the saddle, structurally originated from the Jawa 250 Perak. The left side kickstarter takes some getting used to, but the other controls are easy to operate. The engine is almost free of vibration, and the assisted gearshift is light and positive. The steering feels neutral, and there’s no swaying or weaving like you experience on some plunger-suspension bikes. The brakes are adequate without being aggressive, and the overall feel is one of quality and sophistication, reflecting a Jawa tradition that even their communist overlords couldn’t suppress. A total of approximately 7,200 pieces of JAWA 500 OHC were made. Mostly type 15/02 -about 5,000 units in the years 1955-1958. Snails - 15/00 were the least. I estimate about 500 pieces survive today… I need one of those 00/01/02 - doesn't matter which one… But that’s what dreams are for… That’s me on my 1953 Perak 250 by the way… The design predecessor to the 500 OHC Type 15/00
I wasn't sure exactly what you meant by EM1 I don’t refer to them that way. But, from what I know… EM1=The SiR model. It was the Canadian equivalent to the American Si. It would've come with all the extra’s. Power sunroof, leather bucket seats, power window’s, power door locks, tilt steering, Cruise Control, because it was a sport model, a manual transmission, rear disc brakes, they also came with ABS in Canada. Other cosmetic features would've been different colours, and colour matched side mirrors, possibly colour matched door handles as well. Mud flaps may have also been installed. The suspension was usually a bit more stiff and the rear multi link would be designed for rear disc brakes. I think stiffer sway bars are used to allow harder cornering. Larger alloy wheels would've been standard for SiR. which would've come with different tires from factory, more aggressive. I think it would've had the upgraded stereo system, or at least a CD player standard, this was an option on lower models. It would've been a coupe (more sporty) The engine was the sought after B16A2 1.6L DOHC VTEC. Not gonna lie, I couldn't remember everything. I had to look some stuff up on Wikipedia. I do remember another mechanic i used to work with had a heavily modified SiR with a Turbo charger installed. Our parts manager had a 2000 Civic Si that he swapped SiR parts into to make it a “sleeper” he had swapped rear hubs with disc brakes which I think just bolt right on. He had an SiR engine as well, and at one point he had a CR-V 2.4L engine in it. I’m not sure what that mod required. This generation of civic had a lot of interchangeable parts between the base model and higher end Si, SiR. when I was in high school, and shortly there after, A lot of these cars were modified by kids who still lived at home. Which led to the car’s being abused. To find one of these in good condition, with no aftermarket modifications would be rare, and valuable. At least to a person who appreciates things being left the way they are. Before i left the dealership a customer imported a base model civic from Japan, and brought it to the dealership. I remember it was right hand drive, but it had a single overhead cam engine, with VTEC. Pretty cool. I currently Drive a 2000 Civic SE, it doesn't have a lot of these things. It has a SOHC engine, but no VTEC. I’ve searched the auto wreckers for things like mud flaps, a centre console with an arm rest, the CD player, colour matched side mirrors and door handles. a lot of parts are becoming harder to find for these cars. I wanted to buy another key FOB, they are discontinued. Mud flaps too. But they are good cars if you take care of them. Mine is 17 years old, about to turn 18. it shows it, but it still handles well, and is good on fuel.
I wouldn’t be surprised if you, when you were in school, read or heard about Royal Enfield motorcycles being used for long rides and treacherous journeys by road. True that they were go-to motorcycles for such rides back then in the 90′s and even before. Till date, it’s a perception that nothing comes close to Royal Enfield motorcycles when it comes to long rides. “Want to buy a motorcycle for long rides? Buy a Bullet”, “You need a Royal Enfield motorcycle to go to Ladakh”…and it goes on and on. I would have agreed to such statements if we were still in the early 90′s when there weren’t a slew of motorcycles from multiple brands available in showrooms. The market was ruled by 100cc motorcycles from Hero Honda, Yamaha, and Bajaj. And then there was the mighty 350cc Royal Enfield Bullet, which was one of the very few easily available motorcycles with a high-capacity engine. Also, motorcycling culture wasn’t prevalent in India back then, the way it’s today. Go to a motorcycle showroom today and you will be greeted with multiple options for different purposes - daily commute, race track, cruising, adventure. Add multiple reputable Indian and international brands such as Hero, TVS, Bajaj, Honda, Yamaha, KTM, Suzuki, Benelli, Harley Davidson, Triumph, and so on. And thanks to the Internet you can compare, read/watch reviews and make a more informed decision. Coming to your question: ,Is Royal Enfield Classic being used because it is so mainstream? Yes… the perception among masses that Royal Enfield motorcycles are great for long rides is still very strong today. I’m not saying they are bad, but there are many more options from other brands to choose from. Just because the Royal Enfield Classic/Bullet look like retro cruisers and have a loud and thumpy engine doesn’t mean mean they are good. Image Credit: Cartoq.com Is the Royal Enfield Classic really comfortable for long rides? Here are some important points to consider if you want a good motorcycle for long rides: Engine Technology, - UCE engines use outdated technology for their valve train, push rods v/s single and dual overhead cams driven by timing chain in modern motorcycles. Engine Refinement, - you don’t want a bike that rattles and sends vibrations through your body at high speeds. Higher Speeds, - a current generation 250cc 4-stroke motorcycle from any brand will outperform a 350/500cc Royal Enfield motorcycle, when it comes to speed. Reliability, - you don’t have to say your prayers when you start any other motorcycle. You believe it will start. A Royal Enfield may not start even after you’ve said your prayers. Also, Royal Enfield motorcycles are more prone to breakdowns and require more frequent maintenance. Comfort, - The Classic 350/500 has one of the worst seats I’ve come across. You and the pillion will be better off seated on a Hero Splendor. Ergonomics, - Most other motorcycles will have better ride dynamics and riding comfort. Features -, Want better suspension, meter cluster, fuel gauge, tubeless tyres, lights, aerodynamic design, brakes, and more? Look further! Thank you for the A2A and have a nice day :)
For a auto manufacturing company to do so requires a lot of engineering and very expensive hardware look at a motorcycle engine..it can achieve these lofty rpms ..but they can do this by their small size. engines that need to move a car weighing the minimum of three to four times the weight of a sport bike would need a larger displacement. When that happens valve gear and pistons con rods all increase in mass….which is enemy of high engine speeds american pushrod engines can reach these speeds in race applications but at great costs which would be totally impractical…especially in attaining any warranty longevity a formula one three liter engine is capped at I think 15–17 thousand rpm for up to a few hundred mile race and lives but not in production…..Porsche had one that would shift at 9000 ..but these are four valve overhead cam engines the four smaller valves vs two larger valves are easier to control rpm wise due to much lighter weight and have short stroke cranks which has less piston speed vs a longer stroke engine that generates more piston speed for same rpm so it’s a cost function..it can and has been done..you want lots of rpm…spend around 75 thousand plus for a exotic i believe the early Honda 2000 sport cars had a very high shift point..but were a very tuned race engine for the street
What are the fundamental differences in the engines used in sport bikes versus cruiser motorcycles? Piston and cam configurations are designed to enable each bike’s purpose. Other differences exist, but only to assist the engine to better serve its purpose. I don’t normally think of the Hayabusa or similar when considering sport bikes so mostly we’re talking about sports bikes at 1000cc or less. Cruiser engine displacement covers a wider range of sizes. Sport bike design serves to make a light weight (under 460lbs), maneuverable motorcycle that can get into its power band quickly and stay there without burning up while it navigates a track as fast as possible. So, small pistons, shorter stroke, dual overhead cam. Arguably, some of the fastest sport bikes are found in ,MotoGP,. Popular piston config in MotoGP are either in-line 4 cylinder or V4. Honda and Ducati both use V4. Ducati has the highest top speed on-track. In-line engines have their strengths and can be quicker on certain tracks. MotoGP crank config can be ,Big-Bang or Screamer, and determines the amount of time between the piston power stroke, which influences tire grip. Commercial sport bikes take design queues from the track although power will be less, and design will take production cost into consideration. Various dynojet test results can be found online, ,here’s one, showing a Ducati model generating around 199bhp and 84ft-lbs of torque at around 14.5k rpm. Cruiser bike design serves to… well, cruise. Lower RPM and enough power to move a heavier bike at normal speeds. Larger pistons with longer stroke help serve that engine’s purpose. We also should acknowledge that there is some culture and image purpose behind the cruiser design. Companies like Harley Davidson invest heavily to learn what customers like, and in the case of Harley it’s the exhaust pulse. To that end, in some designs they still use a ,single-pin crank design, to facilitate the “potato” pulse (that very satisfying, lopey cadence of the engine at idle). Of course, lower rpm means less heat, so air cooling is usually enough to cool the engine and creates a cleaner look. Regarding power, let’s consider a popular Harley engine, the ,Evolution Big Twin, (1343cc air-cooled). Single center-line cam with pushrods producing around ,102HP / 90ft-lbs torque / 5.3k rpm,. That power and torque lower in the rpm curve means a cruiser can beat a sport bike in the short run. Other cruiser engine designs exist with more modern features, but the majority tend toward v-twins with larger pistons with longer stroke.
“If you had a 5 car garage and all the money in the world, what cars would you buy?” I already have one of them with my Mini Cooper Hatchback Coupe, so I will start here. Secondly: I would like to take an ORIGINAL Mini Cooper or an Austin America 2-Door and put a Mini Cooper S drivetrain in it-with Turbo! Thirdly: I would take a 1979 Mercury Capri Turbo RS, and replace the suspension engine,, and trans with the 2.3 Ecoboost Four, the 6-Speed Manual Trans, 4-Wheel Disk Brakes and the Independent Rear Suspension from the current generation Ford Mustang, and most importantly: MAKE THAT HOOD SCOOP FUNCTIONAL. Fourthly: Build the Mechanix Illustrated Tri Magnum using a Honda Water cooled shaft drive engine. I am thinking that the Overhead Cam Twin Cylinder Engine would be ideal, if not the ST 1300 Last, but not least: Build my own roadster of my own design!
Royal Enfield motorcycles can last a lifetime and go on from one generation to the other. But that’s true with any motorcycle - provided you give all the tender loving care it needs. I’m talking about the motorcycle as a whole. Coming to the engine, ,let’s start with the cast iron-block engine, with CB point ignition. Which has existed for decades till around 2009. Engine and gearbox are separate components connected by the clutch chain in the clutch case, pushrod driven valves, point ignition driven by timing wheels. This engine design gives the Royal Enfield Bullet its characteristic thump. However, it required frequent maintenance and tuning to keep the engine running optimally - frequent timing adjustments, point cleaning, pushrod length adjustments, etc. When perfectly tuned, it ran like butter. An old RE cast iron-block engine (will still run today. You’ll be tired of it but the engine won’t get tired. How reliable? You’ll need to say your prayers every time you kick start it or if it suddenly goes off. It’s a moody machine, you’ll feel at times – at least I do. At times it won’t start even after 10 kicks. Give it a 10 minute break and it’ll start in a single kick 😆. So, you have to bear with such niggles to enjoy the ride. But the lazy idling engine feels and sounds like none other - hands down! ,Reliability: 5/10 Then comes the cast Iron Electra, which I still own. The same old cast iron-block engine but without CB point ignition. It uses CDI ignition like most carburetted commuter motorcycles. So, no timing issues, which is a big blessing. The biggest advantage - it doesn’t need a battery to run. It’s this motorcycle that gave birth to the Royal Enfield Electra and the rest of the league. How reliable? Quite reliable. I’d say more reliable than UCE engines, if perfectly set. Simple, old tech, but definitely more reliable. It even feels better and accelerates like a rocket! You’ve got to ride this one to see for yourself. Maintenance required - adjusting pushrod length, adjusting clutch chain tension, whenever required. Put adjustable cam spindles and you have a big upgrade. ,Reliability: 7/10 Next comes, the cast iron-block TCI engine - Electra 4s and 5s I own an Electra 5s, too. This engine adds further refinement to the former CDI engine. It had improved stator coil & magnet, and TCI ignition - which was carried forward to UCE engines as well. Better breathing mechanism for the engine and smoother performance. One had the option to choose the self-starter and for the very first time, 5-speed gearbox with the shifter on the left. This motorcycle is the foundation for all Royal Enfield engines until UCE. How reliable? Much better than CDI. I’ve done quite a few rides on this motorcycle and it never let me down (thankfully). The only drawback of TCI is that it needs a charged battery. Remove the battery and the engine won’t start. ,Reliability: 8.5/10 AVL, Lean-Burn Engine Same as the Electra cast iron-block engine, but with improved oil pump design and a redesigned top. This had an aluminum block and a much better valve train. In India, 350cc lean-burn engines were available in Machismo and Thunderbird. And 500cc LB engine in Machismo 500, which I also own. How reliable? I’d take this to Ladakh! ,Reliability: 8.5/10 Unit Construction Engine (UCE) This engine was Eicher’s biggest move. It literally pulled out Royal Enfield from becoming dead. It’s this engine because of which Royal Enfield is where it’s today. Launched in 2009 and existing till date, this engine powers the current-generation Bullet, Classic, Thunderbird. Key feature - unified design that combined the engine and gearbox, unlike earlier. In addition, improved clutch and gearset, modern-type oil pump, hydraulic lifters for pushrods. Ultimate result - refined performance. Reliability? Ask the owners! I own one. I’ve seen multiple instances of sprag clutch (one-way starter bearing) going bust because of which the self starter failed. Hydraulic tappets can go kaput anytime. Connecting rod jobs coming up randomly in less than 40K kms. ,Reliability: 8/10 - Yes, I find my Machismo and cast iron Bullet Electra more reliable. Himalayan, 650cc Twin, Meteor These engines are major upgrade from UCE engines. With the absence of pushrod-driven valve train it relies on a timing chain and an overhead cam like modern motorcycles. It’s much refined than UCE engines, especially the J-platform engine seen in the newly-launch Meteor 350. Like they always do, in a few years Royal Enfield will certainly come out with a version 1.1 of the engine with further refinements and issues ironed out. ,Reliability: 9/10 (as of today, Feb 2021) So, you see, till date I’m not confident that an RE engine is as reliable as let’s say a Honda / Suzuki / Yamaha engine. Why can’t RE get things right the first time and everytime? 🧐 Hope this changes with time. So, which engine is a 10/10 in reliability for me?, Many! The first that comes to my mind is this modest little 100cc workhorse! I never had to say my prayers with the Hero HF Deluxe 🤣 And yet, why do I own Royal Enfield motorcycles?, Because despite the niggles, they feel like no other, compare to no other. It wouldn’t be a fair comparison. However, RE Meteor 350 v/s Honda Highness CB 350 is a fair comparison because they use similar engine designs. Honda Reliability? You say! Please stop by, read, and follow my space. Content contribution welcome!