Surely the joys of the earlier Himalayan were….

[Wapping]

From its first appearance bods on this forum (myself included) were singing the praises of the Royal Enfield Himalayan. Why?

Because it was everything people wanted and addressed the ills that so many people apparently found wrong with modern motorcycles. It was, as a start, basic and cheap. It was simple to work on, light and fully capable of on-road and modest off-road riding. It was frugal in the fuel department. It was and is, comfortable and can cruise all day at around 65 to 70.

Now, suddenly, everyone seems to have forgotten just what the bike offered, as the new version has more power, engine modes, a trick TFT screen and the option of cast wheels, whilst gaining the arguably complexity of water cooling. Royal Enfield certainly pulled a nifty advertising stunt by getting the Dutch bird to endorse it, setting the middle aged men’s hormones into overdrive.

What next? A 750 version, with five power modes and a thirty five litre tank….. ready for a Tesco car park near you.

 

[richie]

Ha ha, spot on

 

[timeandtide]

I rather agree with you but, it is I’m afraid, the way of the world!

 

[Posh Pete]

My only issue with the original was the seat and pillion design. For those of shorter leg length, it must have been comfortable. I was just too long in the leg so I found myself pushed back but unable to do so because of the pillion step up. I tried my own mods to the rider seat but was never totally satisfied. I'll look at the new one and test it when available. It has more power but seems to have kept the basic philosophy of the original - it's about torque not power.

I think RE are simply responding to the market re all the gizmos. If they can provide them and still sell at a competitive price then why not?

Sent from my moto e30 using Tapatalk

 

[Fluffmeister]

I'm with Mr Wapping on this one, IMHO Royal Enfield maybe missed a trick by not just performing some tweaks to the existing Himmie, and launching the new model as a "whole" new model for those who wanted the extra gadgets and gizmos, call it something different. They must have some unused historical names left in the books

The Kamet 450 Adventure or something like that.

 

[malcopopolo]

From its first appearance bods on this forum (myself included) were singing the praises of the Royal Enfield Himalayan. Why?

Because it was everything people wanted and addressed the ills that so many people apparently found wrong with modern motorcycles. It was, as a start, basic and cheap. It was simple to work on, light and fully capable of on-road and modest off-road riding. It was frugal in the fuel department. It was and is, comfortable and can cruise all day at around 65 to 70.

Now, suddenly, everyone seems to have forgotten just what the bike offered, as the new version has more power, engine modes, a trick TFT screen and the option of cast wheels, whilst gaining the arguably complexity of water cooling. Royal Enfield certainly pulled a nifty advertising stunt by getting the Dutch bird to endorse it, setting the middle aged men’s hormones into overdrive.

What next? A 750 version, with five power modes and a thirty five litre tank….. ready for a Tesco car park near you.

Cruise of 65 to 70.....
Maybe indicated and not for a long time.
The newer version is spot on. There is a reason why a 411 owner sells within a year.

 

[Arsey]

It’s quite nice though

 

[EVskij]

They all gone BMW with the running, stopper and indicator light combo

 

[AndyB_11]

The main thing I like about Royal Enfields is their simplicity whether thats on the older Classic, the Himalayan or the 650 twins. They’re still a bike that you look at and think there’s so little on them that’s complex there’s not much to go wrong so why worry about going anywhere on them

I’m not sure that the newer Himalayan follows the some ethos but while for me it’s a departure for others it’s an arrival and they’ll almost certainly sell more of the new version than the old one.

 

[Wapping]

…….and they’ll almost certainly sell more of the new version than the old one.

That’s their aim, I’m sure.

 

[The Other PaulG]

Arsey - one of the areas that's more 'budget' on bikes like the Scram, is the tank finish. On the Scram (and I think the early Himmys too) what looks like paint is actually a decal over a single base paint colour.

In the new Himmy, do they use paint or are those yellow graphics simply decals over the black?

Cheers,

Paul

 

[AndyB_11]

That’s their aim, I’m sure.

There’s no other reason to manufacture bikes apart from to sell them and though I never really wanted a Himalayan it’s a shame to see them moving away from the original bike.

 

[ChasF]

It’s inevitable that RE would evolve the Himi just a shame they’ve gone for more electronics and TFT rather than sticking to the original design brief (analogue simplicity)

I feel that they missed a trick with the original Himi given that the competition were all up around the 30 bhp. I’m sure that even an air cooled 400cc engine could be persuaded to give a bit more power and still comply with the Euro emissions regulations.

 

[Wapping]

I feel that they missed a trick with the original Himi given that the competition were all up around the 30 bhp…..

What is magical about the 6 bhp gain, other than it’s a bigger number?

One of the joys of the ‘old’ Himalayan, was its ‘underpowered’ 24 bhp engine and gearing.

 

[malcopopolo]

Its about real world use. Yes u can travel slower but at times if you want to go some distance yiu want reasonable acceleration and to cruise at a genuine 75mph.

30bhp may do this and 40bhp certainly will

 

[ChasF]

What is magical about the 6 bhp gain, other than it’s a bigger number?

One of the joys of the ‘old’ Himalayan, was its ‘underpowered’ 24 bhp engine and gearing.

It’s all about appealing to as many potent buyers a possible. The CRF300 is a grand more expensive and only clams 3hp more but I wonder how many went for he Honda based on the paper specs which will make little difference in reality.

For me though, all the reasons that I would have bought a Himalayan have been wiped out in the new version. Marketeers working in this sector have a virtually impossible task trying to determine what will sell the most bikes.

 

[Wapping]

Its about real world use. Yes u can travel slower but at times if you want to go some distance yiu want reasonable acceleration and to cruise at a genuine 75mph.

30bhp may do this and 40bhp certainly will

I’ll find out, when I have ridden it nearly 8,000 miles around Germany, in a real world usesge.

I plan to use my Himalayan to ride the four quadrants of the German Motorcycle Route. I probably won’t have time to ride all four back to back, unfortunately. The alternative would be to blast around all four on my 1600.

 

[Wapping]

It’s all about appealing to as many potent buyers a possible. The CRF300 is a grand more expensive and only clams 3hp more but I wonder how many went for he Honda based on the paper specs which will make little difference in reality.

For me though, all the reasons that I would have bought a Himalayan have been wiped out in the new version. Marketeers working in this sector have a virtually impossible task trying to determine what will sell the most bikes.

A Honda, just by branding alone, is many bods’ safe bet. Before I bought my Himalayan, I rode the small BMW thing, which was truly horrible. I also rode the Scram, which I didn’t like either.

Once it gets into the 40 bhp bracket, the new Himalayan enters a whole world of competitors. It’ll be interesting to see how it fares. Had it of been built in China, bods here would have written it off long ago, without even sitting on it.

 

[Arsey]

Arsey - one of the areas that's more 'budget' on bikes like the Scram, is the tank finish. On the Scram (and I think the early Himmys too) what looks like paint is actually a decal over a single base paint colour.

In the new Himmy, do they use paint or are those yellow graphics simply decals over the black?

Cheers,

Paul

Sorry , no idea


Sent from my Nokia 3310 using Thetwatcantalk

 

[AndyB_11]

I certainly wouldn’t have purchased either of my Royal Enfields if they were made in China. While I accept the fact that day to day purchases will inevitably include ones made in China I won’t go out and buy more expensive items even if they’re good and the equivalent is a couple of grand more.

Build quality and plagiarism don’t bother me, China continuing to annex Tibet does so they can fuck off

Rant over. I was happy with my first Enfield and I’m even happier with the current one and long may that continue.