EFI engine (UK)

[caspice]

PDF I found online detailing a few of the differences between the old and new engines. Enjoy!

[old attachment deleted by admin]

[fredgold52]

That's a very informative piece.  Thanks for posting it.

The UCE seems to be a good blend of new and traditional technology.  It should be a fun bike to own.  I have also read on here someplace about the possibilities of higher performance from the UCE.  Sounds promising.

[scoTTy]

great pictures thanX

[cyrusb]

It has a "Check Engine Light". Can the end of all things be on the horizon?

[Thumper]

Caspice,

Thanks for posting. Great information.

My stint as top-dog superior AVL LB engine-based RE is apparently at an end. My AVL LB engine is now as obsolete as the Classic was (when mine was introduced). Great...just great. I wonder why the AVL LB engine was even produced for those few short years. Why not just go from the Classic to the new UCE engine?

As for item number 9, "Cam Gear - Inlet":
Cam gear gets
assembled in eccentric
sleeve with spindle
assy. It is to adjust the
centre distance and
hence backlash gets
adjusted.

I still have yet to hear from a single dealer (let alone owner) who has ever adjusted these - or even knows how (try transliterating the manuals verbage...)!

Well, at least RE and I seem to be coming to the same conclusion: The AVL LB engine models are only an interim scratch to a particular itch.

Matt

[LJRead]

In the hot rod era, solid lifters was a bragging point, and I'm not sure why.  Does anyone know?

Oil amount and flow are better in the new engine, thus no doubt helping engine cooling.

The AVL lean burn has had a ten year run, or will have had, which isn't exactly stop-gap in this changing world, and many of the parts of the new engine are the same so that may help out. 

My feeling is that the AVL is still a good compromise in that it still has some of the appearance of the iron engine.  I don't have the same good feeling about the new one.  Plus there are still certain advantages in having the old transmission system and the old oil system, so we will have to wait and see.  It may turn out that the AVLs are prized more than ever.

[Thumper]

In the hot rod era, solid lifters was a bragging point, and I'm not sure why.  Does anyone know?

Oil amount and flow are better in the new engine, thus no doubt helping engine cooling.

The AVL lean burn has had a ten year run, or will have had, which isn't exactly stop-gap in this changing world, and many of the parts of the new engine are the same so that may help out. 

My feeling is that the AVL is still a good compromise in that it still has some of the appearance of the iron engine.  I don't have the same good feeling about the new one.  Plus there are still certain advantages in having the old transmission system and the old oil system, so we will have to wait and see.  It may turn out that the AVLs are prized more than ever.

Uh, apparently you're a glass-half-full kindofaguy! 

We didn't see the AVL LB engine here in the states for 10 years, but it's good to know that it does have that much history.

RE: my previous entry about the timing gears: I've requested my dealer (whom I have the greatest respect for) to go ahead and check the backlash while they have it in the shop. Keeping my fingers crossed that all goes well! My understanding is that they rarely, if ever, need adjustment of the eccentric cam to set the backlash back to specs.

It is kind of nice to see a modern thumper going into the Classic motif. Who knows, maybe I'll put one in my frame once I've blown mine up!  I remeber back in the early 90's a rumor of a Yamaha-based 900cc thumper (probably in a cruiser platform). That would be thumpthing to own!  BOOM    BOOM    BOOM   BOOM.

Matt

[LJRead]

The AVL first appeared in India in 1999.  My understanding is that for the first few years they were highly cursed as having some basic problems.  I started a topic under 'Tech tips' hoping that someone could give more details of what the early problems were, partly because I will be having two AVLs that came about three years after introduction.   One problem, I think, was the push rods (or possibly the tappets), which may have been made out of an inferior metal, but I sort of garnered this from the India R E site and no details were given. 

I suppose, therefore, that there will also be a question as to whether there also will be teething problems with the new UCE.  I suppose it will be thoroughly tested so this won't be the case, but supposedly the AVL would have been thoroughly tested.   Also there seems nothing really radical that might give trouble.   But there is nothing like real driving conditions with a variety of owners with different styles of riding, maintenance etc. to give a final test.

[LotusSevenMan]

The AVL lean burn has had a ten year run, or will have had, which isn't exactly stop-gap in this changing world, and many of the parts of the new engine are the same so that may help out. 

In Royal Enfield Iron engine production terms this is just a blink of an eye (Okay, Okay with a bit of grit in it so it blinks a bit longer then!!!!)

[hutch]

In the hot rod era, solid lifters was a bragging point, and I'm not sure why.  Does anyone know?

I will try to help you out on that one, and hope I don't get bashed for it. Being a old hot rod, drag strip freak, I can tell you that you get better performance out of  solid lifters and cams. They don't vary in valve lift as much as hydraulic lifters that depend on the oil to keep them the correct length. More precise valve lift is what you get from the solid lifters and cam. The hydraulic lifters do not have to be adjusted as much, because they adjust longer to make up for any wear on the lifter and cam, but they do have a squish factor that does not keep them as precise as a properly adjusted solid cam setup. We used  to say hydraulic cams are for people that want to play drag racer and don't want to get their hands dirty, or don't know how to speed shift and are worried about blowing there car up from missing a gear. Hydraulic lifters will float(collapse) if the motor is over reved, thus dropping the rpms before the motor blows. Solids will not collapse and you will blow a motor. I  still will take a solid cam over a hydraulic anytime. Harleys have went to hydraulic cams, for all the people that don't work on there own bikes. They make big money too. You used to be able to pull 4 little covers and adjust the solids on the bottom of the pushrods, just like the RE. Now you have to tear half of the bike apart to adjust the hydraulic lifters. Big money for the Harley dealer, and a pain for the do it your selfer. As I said before, the companies are trying to broaden there customer base($$$$$) and making it harder for backyard mechanics. People that don't work on their own bikes pay the money, and backyard mechanics get frustrated with all the hassle. Backyard mechanics are being slowly being phased out. Look what a mess we have under the hood of our cars. It wasn't like that a few years back. I know I'm old, but  I aint kidding either.  In summary the solid cam and lifters are for performance, but need to be adjusted more often. The hydraulic cam needs less ajusting, but doesn't perform as well.  Hutch

[clamp]

To put it more simple , the solid lifer does not compress --at all ,--therefore your cam geometry is what you get to the valve. Timing, duration and lift is controlled.

       The roller lifter is so that the lifter rolls up the very short ramp /cam that you get on High performance cams.