Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   Motorbikes (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/motorbikes/)

-   -   Has Royal Enfield overused their J-Series engine platform a bit too much across products? (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/motorbikes/270994-has-royal-enfield-overused-their-j-series-engine-platform-bit-too-much-across-products.html)

The sales numbers might paint a different story but I feel RE has used it's J Series & twin cylinder engine a bit too much in their products without much differentiation.

For instance,

When the J series engine came out on Meteor it was praised for its refinement and tractability. It was an improvement of leaps and bounds when compared to the old UCE Engine platform.

Once the new platform was given a thumbs up by the buyers they adapted the same engine on the new-gen classic albeit with minor differences in gearing and ECU maps.

For me, the engine of any motorcycle is like a soul. It has to match with the aesthetics of the vehicle i.e. the soul and body should be in sync. The engine character has to match the personality of the vehicle.

They could have tweaked the motor on Meteor to eke out a few more horses. But they didn't.

The Biggest bummer for me was when they used the J series engine in the same tune on the Hunter. The product as an idea is excellent, it might be a great product in isolation but it would have stood out if it came with a performance of say 24 ps and 30nm of torque. People would have still purchased it if it was 3-4k more expensive than the classic. It is positioned as a sharp city bike and not for long tours.


They tried to capitalize through pricing. In the process, they have created competition among their own stable mates( Meteor, Classic, Hunter & now the Bullet). Hunter over the last 6 months has started to cannibalize classic sales. Even the new classic and Bullet are virtually identical
Now that competition from Triumph and Harley is heating up RE might start feeling the heat.

Even for their 650 cc engine platform, they could have launched Interceptor with a relaxed state of tune & continental GT with a sportier state of tune. That would have been a good differentiator.

Though the Super Meteor is the best world-class motorcycle to come out of any Indian manufacturer by far in terms of design, quality, and aesthetics, they repeated the same mistake ie using the engine with the same state of tune as of the earlier 650cc models. Only the Airbox had become bigger.
I know they didn't do it to match A2 License norms.

But, do motorcyclists buy motorcycles looking at A2 license norms and other Jargon? Probably not, For Him/ Her it's an emotional purchase.

I have been observing this trend from RE for far too long. The products are excellent in their own right, just that their soul has to be matched with the nature of the motorcycle.

They have been dragging their engines across products like a rubber band.

Would love to know your thoughts on the same. Should companies do things that are right for a product from it's positioning perspective( How it must actually be if developed from scratch) and not from a cost perspective like engine sharing etc?

Just felt like penning down my thoughts on the same.

Warm Regards
Pranav

Just FYI
Kawasaki: Uses the same 649cc parallel twin on Z650, Versys 650, Ninja 650 & Vulcan S
Honda: Uses the same 286cc single cylinder on CB300R, CBR300R, CRF300L, CRF300 Rally
Ducati: Uses their 937cc engine on SuperSport, Hypermotard 950, Multistrada 950 & Monster 937
Yamaha: Uses their 847cc engine on MT-09, Tracer 900 & XSR900
Suzuki: Uses their 645cc engine on SV650 & V-Strom 650

Point is: RE is just copycat, they're not alone

All manufactures reuse their engine platforms for different formats. It’s logical to do so. Reengineering a unique engine for every motorcycle in their stable would be cost prohibitive.

Yet, I do see @pranavshet point. It’s not just the reuse of the platform, but the lack of substantial differentiation between too many of their offerings. Taking their 650 series as an example, personally I don’t see enough of a difference between the Interceptor 650, the upcoming Shotgun 650 and the Scram 650. Similarly, Bullet 650 and Classic 650. For contrast, look at how massively different Kawasaki's range of 650s are, despite having the same heart.

Whereas the other manufacturers have a very wide range of formats, ranging from sportsbikes to nakeds to ADVs/sport-tourers to cruisers to off-roaders etc., RE’s focus is completely on retro bikes, and there isn’t much of a difference between so many of them. They have no sportsbikes, no nakeds, no ADVs/sport-tourers. Their output is retro motorcycle with feet-forward controls or retro motorcycle with center-set controls, with the engine tune also feeling very much the same. Himalayan is the only real break from this pattern.

I wish they would start expanding into other formats. I don't expect them to make sportsbikes, doesn't go with their image, but the rest can carry the air of "sophistication" that RE wants to cultivate.

I think we are seeing certain signs of this. The Himalayan, especially with the upcoming liquid-cooled 450, is one. And there is the rumored ADV 650 that will be focused on sports-touring rather than off-roading.

Better to have cannibalization within the company than going to competitors. The bottom line always matters. There could be a niche segment who would like more diverse engine differentiation across their product range . Unfortunately they are a minority and won’t bring in the moolah. RE is catering to multiple segments with same engines and slightly differenly tuned, and that has worked for them

If I could add, the same 184cc single cylinder on Hornet 2.0, CB200X. XRE 190, XR190L, CRF190L, CB190R. CB190 SS, CB190X

Although I must add, they all in different state of tune

Has Royal Enfield overused their J Series engine platform?

I dont think so!

Honda uses same engine with different vehicles.

125cc and 110cc

• activa
• dio
• grazia 125 (discontinued)
• navi 110 (discontinued)
• cliq 110 (discontinued)
• aviator 110 (discontinued)

200cc

• cb200x
• hornet

160cc

• sp160
• unicorn

125cc

• sp125
• shine 125

Same with Bajaj 100cc/125cc, Hero 100cc, TVS, and all other bike manufacturer :D

How about Car/Truck/Plane/Ship companies?
Maruti/Tata/Fiat-1.3 DDIS, Mahindra-mHawk, Honda-1.5 Idtec, Tata-2.2VTT ! list is endless:coldsweat

I think the @pranavshet was clear, he does not mention about engine sharing, that is common among all manufacturers.

Rather the mechanics, dynamics and state of tune are not that different between the J series siblings Meteor, Classic Reborn (Meteor with a different handlebar and seat), now Bullet (a classic with different seat and paint), Hunter(Classic with cheaper plastic parts and 17inch wheels). They all feel more or less the same and fall into one category - Retro motorcycles. Only Meteor at least edges as a cruiser, though some would disagree.

pranavshet, I feel that there are far too many sweeping generalizations and assumptions being made in your opening post. Without getting into the weeds, I can only suggest that you also consider the research, engineering, time and cost impacts of some of the points that you have raised, with a manufactures hat on, and see if it makes financial sense to do so. That shift in mindset will directly answer many of the points that you have raised.

While I havent ridden all of Royal Enfield's J series based motorbikes, I do know veteran riders who have ridden them back to back. The unanimous feedback that I have received is that Royal Enfield has done fabulous well in differentiating the feel of each bike, to suit the character and positioning of that particular product.

Based on that, I can confidently say that Royal Enfield has done a more than outstanding job with altering their J series engine to meet the expectations of various segments of the market.

It is not financially viable for any manufacturer to build a series of different engines based on the model. The advent of modern Electronic Fuel Injection system has sort of negated the need for that too. You can tune up a bike to give it a different feel based on what the purpose of the bike is going to be. Change a couple of cogs or ratios inside the gearbox and it will feel totally different.

Royal Enfield or any manufacturer for that matter would have thought of what the J Series is going to be used for right when they were designing it. It has to suit a range of different models.

The fact that the engine isn't going to change from model to model isn't going to deter sales either. There isn't much cross hopping between a brand. Someone who finds a Hunter appealing is not going to consider a Classic 350. Technically they may not be too different. They are poles apart when it comes to looks and the target audience. Same goes for the Super Meteor and smaller 650 Twins. If you're looking at a Cruiser, it can only be the Super Meteor. The smaller 650's are more like big brat bikes.

Do we even remember a certain engine made by Fiat & sized about 1.3 L?

Engine development is hard, and costly. So using a common engine is actually a global age old strategy. Maruti/Mahindra does it effectively while creating differentiation in the products.

In so far as buyers are concerned, every Royal Enfield running the J-Series motor looks/feels different to ride, and that's what really counts.

For instance, the Hunter feels very flickable for an Enfield while the Classic feels much more planted/stable at highway speeds. Both motorcycles look very different, too. Thee Meteor is much more relaxed. The Bullet has that retro vibe and appeals to nostalgia. There's adequate differentiation!

Cheers,

Jay

Although the motor is same, the bikes themselves are different. Accept that the ride and suspension is the only thing the changes majorly between them. They dont seem to be taking risks on engine front.

They need to be a little less lazy and tune the same and even bore it to little different volume to match the characteristics including gearing.

I guess I screwed up while framing my opinion big time, rl:

For instance, the Fiat multijet engine was produced in 2 states of tune i.e. 75 HP & 90 HP. Similarly, RE should have developed the J series platform & 650 twin platform in 2-3 states of tune. This thing should have ideally been incorporated in the design stage itself.

Say for example
20 HP for classic with a thump and calm demeanor
24-25HP for Hunter which may be again altered for Meteor.

Don't get me wrong, RE products in isolation are excellent but " Ye dil mange more"

The products should be positioned sharply ie Each product has its own purpose and audience.

When one goes to the showroom the prospective customer must not get confused as to what to get.

One thing the RE has managed brilliantly is getting the ergonomics and design of each of its products bang on to differentiate it.

Let's see if the R&D guys give us the J series in a different state of tune in the coming years.

Till then, Ride safe guys.

even with the same engine and the overall same numbers, you can have a vast variety of differences in the overall powertrain ratio.

For example, the final drive ratios of a Scoprio & a Thar are different. So even with the overall same numbers for the two vehicles, the final torque delivery and drive experience is very different.

I am sure for the Meteor & the Interceptor, you would have different ratios. If not anything the change in tire size would make it a different experience. On the other hand, if you are getting the same drive experience despite the changes in the power train, then it is hats off to the engine tuning guys who would have tuned the engine to manage the changes in the weight, aero, etc. to deliver the same experience.

Regarding using the engine as a differentiator, we are well beyond the phase where we made choices solely on engine power/torque. Upping the power has its own development cycle and also a constraint from the emissions etc. Detuned engines don't attract the same junta especially when you are launching flagship products

Regarding using the engine as a differentiator, we are well beyond the phase where we made choices solely on engine power/torque. Upping the power has its own development cycle and also a constraint from the emissions etc. Detuned engines don't attract the same junta especially when you are launching flagship products.

Very well articulated Sir, You gave a very deep analogy. If they are able to create such good products using the same platform then the upcoming classic 650 might create a lot of problems for many high-end single-cylinder motorcycles.

It is reported that RE is working on a 750 cc parallel twin. We are still not clear as to whether the higher displacement twin would use a 750 cc LC parallel twin or the existing 650 cc air-cooled parallel twin.

RE has a lot of geographies that they can cater to with existing & future product pipeline.

So far RE the motto is: We do only a few things but we do it exceedingly well.

The way they function is way different from how other Indian & Other Japanese brands operate.

They have been market disruptors in recent times & I want them to continue doing the same. I don't want them to get complacent. They have put India on the Global map & I want them to sustain it in the long run.

My original post was to gauge interest as to how the members of the forum are perceiving the recent strategies of RE.

I had written similar post on Heromotocorp & I intend to write on strategies of Bajaj & TVS in the near future.

Feel free to give your suggestions/ recommendations for the scope of improvements in write up.

Warm Regards
Pranav