[navin_v8]

Originally Posted by ku69rd

Mate,

Where did you get this information? Can you please share the source?

ku69rd Mate if you select the Standard 350 model from the motorcycles dropdown list you will get a dedicated page for Standard 350. Click the special features label and move your mouse over on the Engine icon and you will see this (see screenshot image below)



Besides this as tharian mate as aptly put one of the unique features of the Standard Bullet is its "Heavy Crank" which to many is a make or break decision especially in Kerala and Punjab. People used to buy Standard then(when we had Electra, Machismo, etc.) and people are buying Standard now(when we have the Electra, Classic, etc.). Apart from heavy crank one of the many other reasons is the regal look with that golden pinstripe livery and jet black color coupled with those age old timeless mudguards. When I bought my first Standard CI (1996 model) it was a light crank model. I researched day and night on the web, chat with veterans and mechanics about changing it to heavy crank. But I decided against it as I started liking the light crank. RE faced a backlash from many Standard lovers when they switched to light crank and they changed back from light crank to the standard Heavy Crank in the mid 2000's. As BOV mate mentioned the crank weight of the Standard Bullet is a murky area and the opinions are divided with regards to the exact weight.

From what I have heard and experienced so far my Standard Bullet 350cc 1996 model is definitely a light crank, my Standard Bullet 350cc 1969 model with B1 engine is a heavy crank and my Standard Bullet G2 350cc 1961 model is a heavy crank as well. The crank weights differs from 10Kg to 12.5 kg to 14Kg as per the experts and mechanics. "Heavy Crank" demands a heavier premium over light crank models.

[ku69rd]

Originally Posted by navin_v8

(see screenshot image below)
.

Thanks Mate, it was an eye opener for me.

[navin_v8]

Originally Posted by ku69rd

Thanks Mate, it was an eye opener for me.

You're most welcome mate. Infact in spite of owning and riding 5 RE's I'm still learning new things about these classic ingenious British motorcycles especially the older Pre-70's and 60's ones. It's a joy and sometimes a surprise to learn new things.

[adrian]

Since time immemorial Team Bhp-ians have weighed the cranks of their Bullets, which may drag the information on the crank weight of the UCEs, out of the murkiness

Read post #927 by Randhawa
http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/motorb...thread-62.html

[Stanher]

Originally Posted by VW2010

@Stanher

There is definitely a huge difference between the drum and disk in these bikes. We have been riding the CL for close to 10 years now and can see the upgrade to disc is here to stay and it makes a huge difference.

If you can get the bike out retrofitted with the disc its worth the additional money. In fact if you can convince them to fit the GT Continental brakes you would get the best out of bike. The brakes in GT Continental (front) is unbelievably effective.

Oh, ok. I'll try and check that out with them.

You wont go wrong with either of the 350. The difference in weight is actually not a factor after few rides. Your test rides are one time, but once you start riding these torquey bikes you will realize that weight is not an issue but a nice blessing in disguise.

Just riding few weeks the bike grows smaller and lighter for anyone. So consider that factor as well.

That's what a lot of people have mentioned, as I said - but somehow- I didn't see myself likely to adjust or get accustomed to it even within the time period you mention! In fact I might add twas this very weight issue of the Bullet (then the CI) that kept me away from buying one 10 years ago, which was when I'd first shown interest in buying one!
But the moment I got on to the Standard 350cc (UCE) I found it reassuring!
Besides, as I mentioned, cost is another factor here.

You would be surprised with the answer. Which is a big YES. I ride the bull in 4th gear, at less than 20kmph. price and speed are not relational when it comes to these bikes. The ownership is more than speed.

Then in that case I might as well be content with a 350!

(I am sure someone would have suggested, but let me say, try the KTM 390 - We bullet riders started enjoying what the 390 offers as a package - Lightest and yet much better for long rides and city rides for some)

My answer to this would always be NO, sorry!
Let me make a revelation here- I'm not much of a bike guy. But I always had this thought in my mind- were I to buy anything worth being called a bike, it had to be the good ol' BULL! Anything else is just 'bull' (if you know what I mean! ) 'far as I'm concerned. Apologies if I hurt anyone.

[ArizonaJim]

Although it is a guess on my part, I think this "light crank" vs "heavy crank" issue is not relevant for the new UCE powered Royal Enfields.

It makes no sense for Royal Enfield to make two different crankshafts, one or two for the 350 and another one for the 500.
Where it is possible, commonality of hardware is the economic way to build things.

Looking at the engine specifications, all of the 350's and the 500's share the same 90mm stroke.
This leads me to believe they all share the same common crankshaft, all housed in the same engine cases. The only difference between the 350 and the 500 seems to be the bore size, the cylinder and of course the cylinder head.

As for the difference in weights notice that all of the kickstart 350's weigh about the same and the heavier 350's are all kick/electric start.
That seems to indicate the weight difference is due to the addition of the electric starter motor, the sprag clutch and gear train which connects the electric starter to the sprag clutch.

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by ArizonaJim

Although it is a guess on my part, I think this "light crank" vs "heavy crank" issue is not relevant for the new UCE powered Royal Enfields.

It makes no sense for Royal Enfield to make two different crankshafts, one or two for the 350 and another one for the 500.
Where it is possible, commonality of hardware is the economic way to build things.

Looking at the engine specifications, all of the 350's and the 500's share the same 90mm stroke.
This leads me to believe they all share the same common crankshaft, all housed in the same engine cases. The only difference between the 350 and the 500 seems to be the bore size, the cylinder and of course the cylinder head.

As for the difference in weights notice that all of the kickstart 350's weigh about the same and the heavier 350's are all kick/electric start.
That seems to indicate the weight difference is due to the addition of the electric starter motor, the sprag clutch and gear train which connects the electric starter to the sprag clutch.

Jim that is not correct.

The flywheels of the 350 and the 500 have always been different.

Its the 350s where the flywheel weights have waxed and waned over the years.

[navin_v8]

Originally Posted by Stanher

That's what a lot of people have mentioned, as I said - but somehow- I didn't see myself likely to adjust or get accustomed to it even within the time period you mention! In fact I might add twas this very weight issue of the Bullet (then the CI) that kept me away from buying one 10 years ago, which was when I'd first shown interest in buying one!
But the moment I got on to the Standard 350cc (UCE) I found it reassuring!

Stanher Mate the Bullet Standard 350 Cast Iron weighed 172 kgs(Kerb Weight) and the new Bullet Standard 350 UCE weighs 180 kgs(Kerb Weight). You can confirm by checking the specs online. Or better here's a screen shot of the factory service manual of CI Standard and specs of UCE Standard from RE's site.

Originally Posted by ArizonaJim

It makes no sense for Royal Enfield to make two different crankshafts, one or two for the 350 and another one for the 500. Where it is possible, commonality of hardware is the economic way to build things.

Jim mate here in India the Heavy Crank vs Light Crank discussion has been going on since time immemorial. And as Ebonho rightly put, this is just limited to the Bullet Standard CI 350 models only the 500cc CI engines never had this light crank and heavy crank difference.

Although the crankshaft technical specification of both the 500cc and 350cc CI engines is almost identical (see image below which is a screenshot of RE Service Manual for 350cc and 500cc CI engine). I have personally seen people retrofitting a 500cc crankshaft in a 350cc engine for the added weight advantage of the 500cc crankshaft. Some people add metal to the surface of their light cranks to add weight and make it heavy. Some people buy G2 and B1 engine heavy cranks from the scrap market and retrofit it on their light crank Standard CI 350. I have also personally seen and lifted the crankshaft of both the 500cc and a 350cc. The crankshaft of the 500cc is bigger and heavier than a 350cc crankshaft. This is for CI 350cc and 500cc models only.

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by navin_v8

Stanher Mate the Bullet Standard 350 Cast Iron weighed 172 kgs(Kerb Weight) and the new Bullet Standard 350 UCE weighs 180 kgs(Kerb Weight).

172 kgs is actually the max payload.

Per the workshop manual, the dry weight of the CI 350 is 163 kgs and that of the CI 500 is 168 kgs.

Most of those extra 5 kgs are the the crank (max), the piston, the CI barrel, the larger valves, the longer push rods, and the bigger head with larger cooling fins. And a lot of smaller things like springs, plates, studs, bolts, etc.

As far as I can recall the CI 500 crank is 11.5 kgs or thereabouts.

Either way, the wet weight (with all fluids) of a CI Bullet is around 180 kgs, with the 500 weighing 5 kgs more. This is with 14.5 liters of fuel, 2.25 liters of engine oil, 420 ml of clutch oil, and 150 ml x 2 of fork leg oil, plus the weight of the oil/grease in the gearbox.

[navin_v8]

Originally Posted by ebonho

172 kgs is actually the max payload.

Yep its the max payload missed that information.

As far as I can recall the CI 500 crank is 11.5 kgs or thereabouts.

11.5 kgs might be close as I have come across many light crank to heavy crank modifiers using the CI 500 crank. The heavy crank model CI 350 model that came from RE was around 10.5 kgs or so. For the heavy crank modifiers the heavier the merrier.

[ArizonaJim]

Originally Posted by ebonho

Jim that is not correct.

The flywheels of the 350 and the 500 have always been different.

Its the 350s where the flywheel weights have waxed and waned over the years.

Yes. I am in agreement. There is/was a difference in the weights of the cast iron engine Royal Enfields.

This is why I prefaced my remarks,

"Although it is a guess on my part, I think this "light crank" vs "heavy crank" issue is not relevant for the new UCE powered Royal Enfields.

None of what I was saying applies to the Cast Iron or the AVL powered motorcycles.

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by ArizonaJim

Yes. I am in agreement. There is/was a difference in the weights of the cast iron engine Royal Enfields.

This is why I prefaced my remarks,

"Although it is a guess on my part, I think this "light crank" vs "heavy crank" issue is not relevant for the new UCE powered Royal Enfields.

None of what I was saying applies to the Cast Iron or the AVL powered motorcycles.

I think that too would bear some effort at confirmation.

Long stroke low rpm motors are very sensitive to the balance of crank mass and inertia forces. The classic "flywheel effect" that all Bulleteers love, though admittedly no UCE can ever be made to turn over as slowly and effortlessly metronomically as a CI Bullet can.

Even so, the UCE engines as well have a significantly larger and heavier piston and a lot more swept volume per stroke for the 500s vis a vis the 350s.

Again, like you, this is just gut guesswork on my side. Cause I never really scratched the surface (if at all) on the UCEs.

[adrian]

Originally Posted by ebonho

though admittedly no UCE can ever be made to turn over as slowly and effortlessly metronomically as a CI Bullet can.

What Doc said is true. That is because the UCEs are equipped with an automatic de-compressor attached to the exhaust cam, which kicks in when the rpm drops some what below 650 (in real life scenario).



In order to decrease the idling rpm in the Standard 350 UCEs some people just throw out the fly weight mechanism, thereby deactivating the auto decompressor. While the engine idles just like the old CIs, there is the negative effect of the kick start becoming difficult and also with the increased risk of decreased oil pressure to various engine components due to the decreased idle rpm.

[amrisharm]

Excellent thread. To be honest exactly what I was looking for. Maybe you can give me some advice on Bullets. I currently own a Pulsar 220 Fi model and now am looking at getting myself another 2 wheeler. At first I thought I would buy a new Classic 350. I test drove it and did not come out of the test drive impressed. Then One day I got a chance to ride pillion on a 1995 350 Bullet, 4 speed. And Wow the thump and beat and the experience really impressed me.

Now I have 90% made up my mind to go for an old Bullet and not a new one. So the question is which model year should I get? I see Bullets from the 70's all the way to the early 2000's. So Navin sir how are the 70's models when it comes to getting parts? Also what about the 80's models when it comes to sourcing parts? I would love to own a 80's model bullet. But am worried about parts availability.

Any advice from you would be of great help. I will be using the bike primarily for weekend rides. Thank you.

[navin_v8]

Originally Posted by amrisharm

Excellent thread. So Navin sir the 70's models when it comes to getting parts? Also what about the 80's models when it comes to sourcing parts? I would love to own a 80's model bullet. But am worried about parts availability.

Any advice from you would be of great help. I will be using the bike primarily for weekend rides. Thank you.

amrisharm mate glad you liked the thread. It would be great if you can post your query on a dedicated thread for Royal Enfield called "Royal Enfield Queries". I will be more than happy to reply to your post on that thread. This thread topic is different. Kindly share your experience and riding style with regards to your existing motorcycle Bajaj Pulsar 220 FI

Don't call me sir mate.

P.S. Mods can you shift the query part of the post to the correct thread. Thanks.