[man_of_steel]

Something else caught my eye..

[Steeroid]

Originally Posted by bblost

Attachment 1411930

It looks like the additional metalwork around the fork and headlamps is an attempt to hide the design and aesthetic flaws around that area.

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by Steeroid

It looks like the additional metalwork around the fork and headlamps is an attempt to hide the design and aesthetic flaws around that area.

Whatever it is, its really ugly.

A headlight, like a tank, is a big part of the beauty of a bike.

This is an eyesore. Even without the LML inspired perspex.

[Shivanshu]

Originally Posted by man_of_steel

Something else caught my eye..

Attachment 1412111

I thought they are coming with FI, but this seems to indicate that carburetor is present in this machine, and since its in the Factory Line of Production, hence I think this will come with carburetor

[KhalDrogo]

Originally Posted by ebonho

Whatever it is, its really ugly.

A headlight, like a tank, is a big part of the beauty of a bike.

This is an eyesore. Even without the LML inspired perspex.

Isn't that a very basic crash bar?

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by KhalDrogo

Isn't that a very basic crash bar?

It is. Also used for attaching over-tank soft panniers.

But that's not what I find ugly about this production ready version. They were there in the earlier prototype spy shots as well (discussed on this very thread) and actually look "adventure" chique.

Its the headlight dome and instrument pod miles in front of the handle and tank I am talking about. That's the new uglification I am referring to.

[Viju]

Originally Posted by ebonho

Its the headlight dome and instrument pod miles in front of the handle and tank I am talking about. That's the new uglification I am referring to.

Totally agree with you Doc. It makes the side profile look very ugly. Like the neck of a goose if you may.

I think they designed that raised front mudguard and then realized that it is in the way of the headlight beam. I cannot think of any other reason why they would extend the headlight so far ahead.

[ringoism]

Originally Posted by Urban_Nomad

it's just common sense that a bike that can be straddled by a 5 footer, 6 footers should not have an issue either. Thus opening up the market to many more buyers; But it is the design and dynamics that dictate saddle height. Even Adventure type motorcycles have a high saddle on account of their suspension travel and the need for ample ground clearance; it's not without reason that seat heights are whatever they are

I think the Himalayan is looking pretty good and pretty balanced / practical. Kind of retro, classic styling, while more dirt-track capable than any other Enfield to date, with a smooth modern engine and a price lower than I expected. Sounds like a potential winner.

Re: this issue of seat height: I had some serious offroading fun in Honduras on a Yamaha DT175MX enduro (later model mono-shock).



Fully street-legal, with VERY GENEROUS SUSPENSION TRAVEL, LOTS OF GROUND CLEARANCE, AND LOW SADDLE HEIGHT. Being a two-stroke, the engine is shorter, of course - but it had loads of empty space above the cylinder head, so could accommodate a 4-stroke.

Took this quote off the net: " If ever there was a case of the right bike at the right time it was the Yamaha DT175MX. In 1978, everyone had a baby Yam in their garage because they were dirt cheap and the greatest biking bargain ever. They were also idiot proof and maintenance consisted of adding petrol and oil. Best of all, the DT was all things to all men. Learners passed their test on them. Road riders commuted on DTs, and enduro riders thrashed them like thoroughbred race bikes."

Sounds PERFECT.

I'm 6'2", but after that experience kept wondering (thinking of the Indian market) why a decent, Indian-height-appropriate dual-sport can't be designed/marketed here. On the worst spots of roads/trails astride my Impulse, even my long legs occasionally have found themselves unable to reach something solid on one side or the other. Lower saddles do a lot for my confidence even as a taller rider.

The one benefit of a high saddle that I've experienced is that it does make long rides easier on the knees, as they're less bent for a given footpeg height/ground clearance (I know that from comparing my Impulse with the old (lower seat, identical ground-clearance) KB-RTZ offroad specials (see my thread elsewhere).

Also, I have to note that the average male height in Honduras is probably equal to and probably even less than in India, AND YET high-saddle 200cc dual-sports from China/Taiwan absolutely dominate the market, here pictured a "Yumbo" (that's a 21" front wheel) and a more Motard-ish "KMF":




Moreover, there are a lot of females in the U.S. (who average around the same 5'6" figure there) who are riding DR/KLR/XT/XL's/etc, and not having trouble, even if on their tiptoes.

Which makes me think it has more to do with market perception/style considerations/etc. than actual rideability / practicality (and so instead of a big-cc Impulse, Hero gives us the ridiculous Passion Pro TR, and instead of a KTM 390 Adventure, we get the pointless Pulsar AS!!!). Point being, the old DT - even if 4-stroked and economical and the most practical of seating and everything else - would never sell in the modern market - it just looks too, eh, dated (read: practical) the Ducati Scrambler notwithstanding). A modern dual-sport is expected to have a certain kind of look, whether it's of any practical benefit or not. And then again, there are an awful lot of people wanting to feel adventurous, with no intention of actually being so. Which explains the TR/AS marketeers and their purchasing crowd.

I hope Enfield does well with the Himalayan. If I had the same money available to me now that I had when I bought my Impulse, I'd be going for this new RE.

-Eric

[Visaster]

The bike looks cool and the purpose it is developed for says a lot more on the attitude of the bike and of the to-be owner. Anyone would love to have this as an add-on bike or a regular ride too. I still have a lot of reliability issues with the bullets. No doubt it has good torque but the damn thing rides as though the engine is going to die on you any minute. Ridding like that on the highway on these vibrators sure is a mans job not for faint heart.
I don't like the part when the engines cries on the highway.

[man_of_steel]

Originally Posted by ebonho

But that's not what I find ugly about this production ready version. They were there in the earlier prototype spy shots as well (discussed on this very thread) and actually look "adventure" chique.

If you notice, there is actually no place to put the RE logo on the tank which makes me think that there might be a fender coming over the headlamp stay on either side of the fuel tank.

Originally Posted by Shivanshu

I thought they are coming with FI, but this seems to indicate that carburetor is present in this machine, and since its in the Factory Line of Production, hence I think this will come with carburetor

Same here. I was also expecting a FI. Many of the hardcore tourers I know Has swapped the FI unit for a carb, put on a dual purpose tire, stripped off the panels and slapped on a borrowed windscreen on their TB500-s and C500-s all in the name of practicality. I think RE might have taken inspiration from that.

[sasi@8689]

sorry if i am asking something which was already mentioned on this thread, but a bit confused as the assembly line pics above look a bit different from those shared sometime back by bblost (post #179). Are there going to be two versions of this bike - one for hardcore offroading or touring and a second one which is a bit toned down for regular use? Comparing both the pics, parts like seat, exhaust, front mudguard, tank and engine block are same but the head light assembly is different and overall stance of the bike also looks different

[ku69rd]

Originally Posted by man_of_steel

Same here. I was also expecting a FI. Many of the hardcore tourers I know Has swapped the FI unit for a carb, put on a dual purpose tire,

+1 to that thought proicess, As long as the carb requires less fiddling it should do the job. The Great KLR650 still comes with Carb so there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Except that in higher altitudes you would have to drop the needle. FI would have done it by itself automatically.

[himanshugoswami]

while a lot of people are going gaga over this new RE, i for one am distinctly underwhelmed. This design looks half baked and incomplete. If you want to have an exposed frame, at least make it pretty, a la a trellis frame. else slap on some basic bodywork.

if this is the final product, then it certainly looks WIP. Also given its tourer positioning, dare I hope that RE will equip it with tubeless tyres?

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by Viju

I think they designed that raised front mudguard and then realized that it is in the way of the headlight beam.

EXACTLY! Bang on Viju.

Very common with Bulleteers who fit fly mudguards - the shadow within the beam spread.

[bikertillidie]

Originally Posted by himanshugoswami

while a lot of people are going gaga over this new RE, i for one am distinctly underwhelmed. This design looks half baked and incomplete. If you want to have an exposed frame, at least make it pretty, a la a trellis frame. else slap on some basic bodywork.

if this is the final product, then it certainly looks WIP. Also given its tourer positioning, dare I hope that RE will equip it with tubeless tyres?

Agreed.

The KMF & Yumbo pics a couple of posts above seem much better in terms of overall packaging/execution, albeit plasticky