Talk:Royal Enfield (England)

---

Bad Joke

Where does the Queen keep her chickens?
In the Royal Enfield!

• This one was especially bad, I did not understand it :-) Manik Raina 14:59, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
  • 'Enfield' is a pun on 'Hen Field'. Some English regional accents drop the 'h' before an 'e'. Conch Shell 11:38, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Considering the Enfield-Indians (for America) and the Indian Enfield, should India's Royal Enfield make a cruiser, and sell it in America as an Indian? Unlikely I know.Seasalt 04:57, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

"Enfield spanning three centuries"

No reference are provided for this in the article. Neither is there any mention of it in the early part of the article in say the Origins of the company.

--User:Unitedroad

Royal Enfield was founded in 1898, ie, the 19th century. It's now the 21st century so Royal Enfield production has spanned three centuries. Conch Shell 10:54, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Enfield of India bought the rights to the "Royal Enfield" name sometime after the British company's collapse, but considering the first motor-bicycle was not made until 1901(?), "motorcycle production" could not be said to "span three centuries", tho' the company itself could be said to "span three centuries".(1898 - 2006) That's the pedant/nitpicker view, unless there's an earlier motor(bi)cycle. Triumph could make the same claim, begun in 1883, first motorcycle 1902, and still produced today. Seasalt 12:29, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I think the catchcry is actually "A company spanning three centuries with 100 years of continuous motorcycle production" or very similar.Seasalt 09:33, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

114.72.251.13 (talk) 23:41, 17 December 2010 (UTC) Enfield / Royal Enfield were building and selling quadricycles and tricycles before 1900, these were not cars but the forerunners of motorcycles. Some details of these would be interesting, as they are rarely seen or mentioned. Real Pioneer Motoring stuff.... User:R 23:38, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

POV Advert

Having read through the article, the following looks like an advert in encyclopedic form - have removed to here rather than just dumping as the person who added much to the article also wrote this stuff - the bottom two pieces are just adverts, added by 71.215.167.227 on 31 August. There is something there, but not this much POV/hype -Trident13 09:23, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Egli Super Bullets

The Swiss importer of Enfield, and renowned bike tuning specialist, Fritz Egli designed performance improvements for Royal Enfield. He designed a 535 cc version which produces 26 bhp with a top speed of 125 km/h. Egli's work resulted in multiple efficient improvements for the Enfield including improved ignition performance, aluminium cylinder, Big Bore piston, long stroke crankshafts and many other major and minor modifications. He also offers components for the individual customization of the Royal Enfield such as wheels with aluminium high shoulder rims, "Classic" and "Clubman" saddles.

Royal Enfield Customs

The longtime USA importer of the Royal Enfield, Kevin Mahoney and his firm and Classic Motorworks <ref>[http://www.royalenfieldusa.com] RoyalEnfieldUSA (Retrieved 22 October 2006)</ref> have a huge catalogue of both styling and performance enhancements for the Royal Enfield Bullet. With their parts the initial modest power of the 500 cc Bullet (22 hp) can be raised to 40 hhopy. Bullets using these modifications have been very successful on American race tracks beating their normally faster contemporaries such as Manx Nortons. The company also produces kits and parts to replicate the look of 1950s and 60s Cafe Racers, trials bikes and other styles.

Royal Enfields and Sidecars

An increasingly popular addition to a Royal Enfield is a sidecar. Many sidecars will attach to the Royal Enfield but the "Cozy" model seems to be most popular. The Cozy which is also manufactured in India is specifically made to bolt onto a Royal Enfield with no modifications. These sidecars have become particularily popular in America and are sold by the US importer of the Royal Enfield, Classic Motorworks in Faribault, MN

Suggestion

Egli is notable in motorcycling terms. I did not write the original above, but think Egli rates a mention. How about;

Egli and Enfield

Fritz Egli, famous for designing frames and building motorcycles using existing engines, has the Enfield of India distributorship for Switzerland and Austria. While he has not designed a new frame for the Bullet, he produces performance parts for them. This lead to Egli working as a consultant to the Madras factory, and Royal Enfield incorporating some of his engine improvements into production models.

Sources

Is that acceptable?Seasalt 12:53, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

This article presently that "The 1938 Model K sidevalve V-twin had grown to 1140 cc and was then called KX." This is not quite correct and is a common misconception. Towards the end of the V-twin development, RE broke with their nomenclature slightly. There were actually two versions of the 1140 V-twin, the K and the KX. The later had interchangable wheels and a few other 'luxury' apoointments. The basic version was still called the K, just as the 976cc version had been. I have no documentary evidence to hand to confirm this but my father owns an 1938 1140cc K and it cleary states in the documents he has that it is a K and not a KX. Furthermore, I have seen 1140 K and KXs side by side and there are a few cosmetic differences. I am aware that this breaks all prior RE practice, since they had previously always assigned different letter(s) to models of different capacities, but I am absolutely certain that, in this instance, there are both 976cc and 1140cc Ks. There are also 1140cc KXs, but not all 1140s are KXs. Some are Ks.

On a seperate point, the 1140 engine was introduced in 1937, not 1938. A 1937 V-twin might be either 976 or 1140 but the engine was definately introduced at some point in '37, not '38.

I am not able to provide any documentary evidence to back this up without considerable inconvenience, but does anyone mind if I change this? Jack

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Okay this is from my memory so I can stand being corrected.

Enfield Madras bought the tools and rights to produce the old frame and the bullet engine some time after Royal Enfield produced the "new" bullet frame in 1957 (I think). Enfield India were producing bullet 350s before Royal Enfield finally folded in approx 1971 (date vague as the company had re-formed and moved to Wiltshire, then Indian and lastly Rickman produced the last Interceptors). Enfield India did not start using the Royal Enfield name until the 1980s.

jon

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.4.64 (talk) 11:40, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Electra X

Very little mention is made of the 500cc Electra X and its significance to Royal Enfield in Europe. The classic version can no longer be imported as it doe not meet EU emissions regs so the Electra X with its 'lean burn' engine was the answer to this problem. I was one of the first in the country to have one and it was met with derision by the 'purists' who did not consider it to be a true Royal Enfield. In truth it was a wonderful handling machine which pulled back 80 - 90 mpg and would cruise all day at between 70 - 80 mph (indicated). Now a couple of years down the line what do people think now? Mspice2215 82.34.55.108 (talk) 19:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Diesel?

According to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_motorcycle
"Royal Enfield in India was the only manufacturer that has built a diesel motorcycle in mass production."

The word "diesel" does not appear on this page or this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Enfield_Motors

There is no mention of what fuel the models of motorcycle listed on this page use. Do I assume that like nearly all other motorcycles they use gasoline (petrol), or do I assume that all of them are diesel powered?

Kevin Trumbull (talk) 17:16, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

   You may assume all of them are petrol (gasoline) powered.  They all are.  The diesel model was short-lived, although there are some die-hards who swear by it. 203.145.134.205 (talk) 16:17, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

• Imagine kick starting it, with a diesel's compressionSeasalt (talk) 09:02, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Egli super bullet

Does this section belong in the article at all? Is it even about a Royal Enfield bike? If not, perhaps it should be removed:

EGLI Royal Enfield Super Bullet

Swiss motorcycle tuner Fritz W. Egli, a distributor of Royal Enfield motorcycle, was approached by a customer to create the Egli Super Bullet. The basis for this bike is Egli’s use of a central tube frame constructed from nickel-plated chromium-molybdenum steel. The engine is equipped with an aluminium cylinder, US-sourced piston, larger valves in a redesigned cylinder head, longer stroke crankshaft (105mm), special main bearings, dry clutch, timing belt primary drive and 36mm Keihin flat-slide carburettors. The output is 40PS from a 624cc engine fed via an electric pump from a classic-looking aluminium tank.[12] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.240.129.53 (talk) 23:51, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Suggested merge

• Not supported - this is one of the oldest British motorcycle manufacturers we need to improve the article not export it to India Thruxton (talk) 07:59, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

• Not supported - Having motorcycle articles assigned to the name of their current manufacturer does not seem good practice to me, and could contribute to a steady loss of history. It is a tricky business, naming conventions. I would hope both the page on Britain's Royal Enfield and the page on India's Royal Enfield Motors could remain.Seasalt (talk) 08:55, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

• Not supported - per Thruxton and Seasalt. MalcolmMcDonald (talk) 15:17, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Today, in era globalization , geography has become irrelevent. Royal Enfield of India by acquiring the rights of Royal Enfield brand, has by default acuired the 'History' and 'Heritage' of the said marque and the company has continued and strentghen the heritage and lagacy of Royal Enfield.Even Jurge Pullin's online Royal Enfield Museum , treat the both company same.. Thus it is retrogressive to have separate wikis. Thus Both the wikis should be merged.Rajesh Kumar69 (talk) 08:44, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Absolutely not. They are two different companies. --Biker Biker (talk) 09:16, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Millers Classic M/cycles

I have added some historical details picked up from "Millers's Classic Motorcycles Price Guide 1995 Volume II, p.78. Consultants Judith and Martin Miller, general Editor Valerie Lewis". They disagree slightly with this article on the exact start-point of motorcycle manufacturing (and there is a miniscule grammatical error in there if you can find it!).

ROYAL ENFIELD (British 1901-70, Indian 1950s)

Royal Enfield experimented with motorcycle engines in 1901, but it was not until 1911 that they offered their first motorcycle for sale, a 425cc MAG V-twin. From 1912 to 1920 they produced a variety of bikes but not until 1920 did they produced their own engines. By the late 1920s only RE engines were used in all their designs.

RE specialised in a collection of bikes that were initially manufactured for export, such as the luxurious 1140cc side valve V-twin and the 125cc copy of the DKW 2 stroke, and much later (1967) the Interceptor twin was made for export to the US. During the 1940s and 1950s RE produced their most popular bikes the Bullet series, the 700cc Meteor twin and Crusader.

In 1963 the company was sold to E. & H. P. Smith engineering group but shortly thereafter a rapid decline in British sales led to cut backs of the range and the company was again sold to NVT at Bradford-on-Avon. Although the Royal Enfield marque ceased production in the UK in 1970, Enfield India Ltd., a branch of Royal Enfield, established in Madras in the 1950s to concentrate on 173cc production and other small machines, continues to manufacture and export the 346cc and 499cc Bullet models.

These are their exact words, I've not added everything they say. MalcolmMcDonald (talk) 15:17, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Multiple external links to offical site

WP:ELOFFICIAL is pretty clear. Links to more than one of the subject's web sites are to be avoided. And en.wikipedia.org is not USA.wikipedia.org; there is no reason to give special attention to the US website of an international company. As far as using the USA site as a source, that's highly questionable. If you are using it for the article, cite it inline. But then again, it's not an independent source, so how much good is it?

The other link, www.royalenfieldmotorcycles.blogspot.com, clearly violates WP:ELNO. --Dbratland (talk) 15:47, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Not the longest production run...

I don't know where they got their information, but the record for the longest production run of any motorcycle is actually the Russian IMZ-Ural m72, which came from the 1938 BMW R71. This predates the bullet by some 16 years (Enfield of India's 1956 vs Ural's 1940). ▫Bad▫harlick♠ 12:28, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

<Reply>The 1935 Royal Enfield catalog shows both the "Bullet" 250cc and 500cc versions.

Page 14 from the 1935 Royal Enfield catalog

Link follows. http://reocarchive.byethost31.com/Catalogues/1935Catalogue.pdf

Royal Enfield back in London

This article describes Royal Enfield as defunct but I read a newspaper article recently that they are opening a new shop in London. VenomousConcept (talk) 17:09, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

This particular Royal Enfield article refers to the business up to 1971, as stated in the intro and infobox. The later business is stated (in the hatnote before the lede section) as Royal Enfield (India) or Royal Enfield Motors which produces motorcycles currently (also included in the lead section).--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 21:00, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Time for a new article at Royal Enfield (India)?

We need better coverage of the Indian Royal Enfields, the UK re-imported Enfields and the UK re-imported Royal Enfields. However this doesn't remove the past history of the original company.

We might even convert Royal Enfield to a disambiguation page and rename this article as Royal Enfield (UK). Andy Dingley (talk) 12:33, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

OK, it looks as if we did have such an article, but it was renamed to Royal Enfield (Closed). I'll try and get it recovered. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:38, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

We need to discuss this whole structure and reach consensus on how to handle it. I must admit that I am not keen on the new article name Royal Enfield (Closed) and would have preferred some discussion. Cheers DBaK (talk) 12:41, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

If we not changed the name then people will get confused every time they see the name.

We had the two pages - UK Enfield and India Enfield - co-existing quite nicely until now. The differences are/were accommodated by the hatnotes on both articles. The changes to other articles from this new editor may need scrutiny.--13:19, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

hatnotes could help only when the article is opened so we need a change so that difference can be understood by name only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saurabh2y (talk • contribs) 05:50, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

We need to add something in the article name of Royal Enfield like Royal Enfield Closed or Defunct or Royal Enfield UK etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saurabh2y (talk • contribs) 05:54, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

• I see that everything has been moved (undiscussed) yet again. Can we please have some discussion and agreement on where is best to go before anyone starts on sorting out this mess again. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:44, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • YES! Please, no moves without discussion. Don;t just go ahead and do it, please please please. DBaK (talk) 10:53, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

• OK, I suggest:

• Royal Enfield disambig
• Royal Enfield (UK)
• Royal Enfield (India)

Also restore the deleted content [24] Andy Dingley (talk) 10:58, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Agree - looks like an eminently suitable plan! Robevans123 (talk) 11:17, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Yup DBaK (talk) 21:46, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

    Ok then suggestion for 

• Royal Enfield (UK)
• Royal Enfield (India)

    is ok as it clearly differentiate two entities.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saurabh2y (talk • contribs) 04:43, 30 March 2015 (UTC) 

• Yet more undiscussed moves from Saurabh2y, contrary to what has been discussed here. Getting tired of this now. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:33, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Claim of weapons manufacture legacy

The article claims that the logo refers to a legacy of weapons manufacture, but there is no mention of that in the history section. I rather suspect that the logo was piggybacking on RSAF Enfield, who created some of the most famous small arms in British history, including the Lee–Enfield (standard rifle of British and Commonwealth troops in both World Wars) and the SA80 (current standard rifle of the British Army).-84.170.92.183 (talk) 00:13, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

This dates the name and slogan "Made like a gun" to 1893 and says it was because the motorcycle company also make rifle parts for Royal Small Arms Factory. Same here. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 02:58, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Could you please add this bit of information to the history section?-84.170.92.183 (talk) 10:43, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

The Enfield Cycle Company of Redditch, Worcestershire did not have any part in the manufacture of the Lee-Enfield rifle by the Royal Small Arms Factory at Enfield, London. The Enfield Cycle Company were however also an engineering firm and did produce defence components (not guns) which probably earned them the 'Royal' prefix. More research on Enfield Cycle Company history needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.242.162 (talk) 15:34, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

<reply> Shortly after WWII, Royal Enfield produced a book titled "A Proud war record" which lists and shows equipment manufactured for the war effort. Link follows. http://reocarchive.byethost31.com/misc/proud.pdf

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Royal Enfield (England)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

==Assessment== Needs a infobox. Needs more pictures. Some information could go into a tables. Too techy...need to reduce the numbers in many sections. Can add a graphic timeline. Needs a copyedit. Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 05:56, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Last edited at 05:56, 29 October 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 20:13, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Disputed section tagging

Changes by Vintagent introduced errors in March 2016. I found them soon after. Despite being notified together with historic evidence emailed directly, this editor still has not corrected the prose. I have to assume the emailed 1996(?) article was received but purposely unactioned. Worse than that, the errors presently implicate another author's published work which, as I don't have his book, I have to assume is correct.

See User talk:Vintagent#Your edits to Royal Enfield dated 21 May 2016. {{copyvio link}} is not applicable. I've sat on this for a year, and expect I'll have to do the correction; it's largely buried so I've monitored it but allowed it to run.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 00:24, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Royal Enfield. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131015030043/http://bootiebike.com/Royal_Enfield_Revelation/Royal_Enfield_Revelation.htm to http://bootiebike.com/royal_enfield_revelation/royal_enfield_revelation.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070704104051/http://www.cycletownusa.com/post1953.html to http://www.cycletownusa.com/post1953.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:57, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Royal Enfield Motorcycle-Logo-274x300.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:06, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

'Indian' Enfield photo

The Enfield Indians section is about bikes made in the UK and the US in the 1950s and 60s. It is currently illustrated with a photo captioned 'Royal Enfield Bullet 350 in front with license plate from Delhi, India' showing a modern Enfield manufactured in India, which I am going to remove. Robert P Connolly (talk) 08:59, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 25 March 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

---

• Royal Enfield → Royal Enfield (defunct)
• Royal Enfield (India) → Royal Enfield

– As the former is defunct since 1971, and the latter is still functional and selling products (perhaps in international market). This move will help readers not get confused. Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 06:57, 25 March 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. There appears to be consensus that the Indian company is the primary topic, but the discussion needs to settle on the preferred new title for the English one. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:19, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

• Support but move to Royal Enfield (England) instead. I was expecting to oppose based on WP:RECENTISM, but the Indian company has been consistently more popular despite being disambiguated so it does seem like the primary topic. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:48, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
• Move to Enfield Cycle Company per WP:NATURAL. The present-day Indian company has indeed assumed the history and lineage of Royal Enfield.[25]. 162 etc. (talk) 16:19, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
• Support the Indian one has 29,782 views compared with only 15,110[[26]] for the English one but I'd consider having the base name as a DAB instead and moving the English one to Royal Enfield (England) or The Enfield Cycle Company Limited. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

  Just an observation, if the more active and relevant by general commonsense is the (India) one, however, given the current link for RE to the (defunct) article. It can be said that a few % of views in RE (defeunct) is just people who wanted to see RE (India) and soon navigated to RE (India). Thanks, Please feel free to ping/mention -- User4edits (T) 04:30, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

• Support but move to the alternative title suggested by Pppery. The Indian Company is cleary the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Arnav Bhate (talk) 14:13, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.