HPRE

Menu

Members Rides

Sloughside Hooligans


in
Members Rides

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 20, 2014, 10:14:15 PM

Login with username, password and session length

 

Author Topic: 'Real World' AVL vs. Iron Bore Comparison?  (Read 2163 times)

64falcon

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: 0
'Real World' AVL vs. Iron Bore Comparison?
« on: April 27, 2008, 01:20:54 AM »
Greetings and salutations!  This is my first post here on the board, so I'll toss out a brief intro before getting into my questions. I live in the Kansas City, MO, USA area, and recently was told about Royal Enfield bikes after looking some at vintage BSA and Triumph models. I was specifically looking for a 500cc bike, and the ability to get a modern bike that size with some real style is great. I'm wanting something to be a more fuel efficient alternative to my daily driver currently, a 1964 Ford Falcon station wagon. OK, here's the questions:  How performancewise does the AVlL compare to the old iron bore engine in real life riding? By the specs sheet it would appear that it has a bit more power on the top end, but both specs show a 75mph top speed, with a 5mpg bonus to the AVL on fuel use. Secondly, I do travel a fair amout on 70mph speed limit highways- is running at that speed once the bike is properly broken in a fair cruising range or 'flogging' it pretty hard? If i was buying new, I'd definitely go with the AVL, however, if I found a used model I just want to know if an iron bore would still be almost as good for my needs if the price was right.

Leonard

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 1278
  • Karma: 0
  • I love this bike!!
Re: 'Real World' AVL vs. Iron Bore Comparison?
« Reply #1 on: April 27, 2008, 12:58:47 PM »
  Welcome to the forum.  I own the classic engine so will let someone else speak to the suitability of the AVL.  For the riding you have described the iron bore engine wouldn't hold up.
  OTOH if you could get by at slower speeds you would be OK.  I've ridden in the KC area and not had a problem but never ventured onto any of the Interstates.  I think the disc brake on the AVL is probably better than a properly adjusted twin leading shoe. A maladjusted front brake on the classic would be dangerous in city riding conditions.
  Let us know what you decide.
2009 Triumph Bonneville T100
2004 Royal Enfield Sixty-5 (RIP)
2001 Kawasaki W650 (going, going...gone)
http://www.romeoriders.com

64falcon

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: 0
Re: 'Real World' AVL vs. Iron Bore Comparison?
« Reply #2 on: April 27, 2008, 04:38:03 PM »
I've been plotting how to get around without the major highways, which would be necessary for a break-in on a new engine anyway. It would just take some thinking to get around without the usual stretches of highway, but should be doable for the sake of a nice bike.

luoma

  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 779
  • Karma: 0
Re: 'Real World' AVL vs. Iron Bore Comparison?
« Reply #3 on: April 27, 2008, 06:37:19 PM »
Performance-wise, the difference in hp is slight, but the difference in torque is significant. No matter which bike you get, you'll love it. As for interstate travel, stick to secondary roads, you may have to travel a bit more miles, but you'll soon learn that. not only don't you mind a slightly longer commute, but you'll wish it was longer.

There are a lot of horror stories about REs blowing up and such, but you hear just as many stories about them running far and fast. Just break it in right, and maintain it well.

Thumper

  • Psalm 23
  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 1065
  • Karma: 1
  • Classic Wannabe
Re: 'Real World' AVL vs. Iron Bore Comparison?
« Reply #4 on: April 27, 2008, 09:59:59 PM »
IMO, the AVL-based bikes are good for 65mph interstate runs of short duration (20 miles or so). Also depends on your weight. If you're a 200 pounder that's probably pushing it. Also by comparison, I can be cruising 45-50mph in 4th while my friend on the Classic is in 5th.

Matt

64falcon

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Karma: 0
Re: 'Real World' AVL vs. Iron Bore Comparison?
« Reply #5 on: April 28, 2008, 02:26:32 AM »
Thanks for the replies all! I've been checking Mapquest using the 'avoid highways' option, and it shows some pretty reasonable back-road routes everywhere I need to go. I don't really mind the old 'proven' iron bore, since I grew up around Ford Model T's, Model A's and flathead V8's. I guess it's down to finances and what decent used models may be out  there...

Kevin Mahoney

  • Administrator
  • Grand Gearhead
  • *****
  • Posts: 2582
  • Karma: 0
Re: 'Real World' AVL vs. Iron Bore Comparison?
« Reply #6 on: April 29, 2008, 02:44:16 PM »
Nothing but very good advice given below

PaulF

  • Grease Monkey
  • ****
  • Posts: 477
  • Karma: 0
Re: 'Real World' AVL vs. Iron Bore Comparison?
« Reply #7 on: May 07, 2008, 12:04:54 PM »
I've never owned either one, (until now). My dealer had a Classic with the iron lung and a Deluxe AVL side-by-side. I chose the AVL mainly because of the improved bottom end, hi-flo oil pump and electronic ignition, (I'm getting too old to like points ignition), a little less tinkering and a little less restrictive break-in, higher compression.

The AVL motor however, is not, in my opinion, nearly as pretty as the iron motor. Truth be told, I'd love to have one of each - and will if I get the chance.


fredgold52

  • Grease Monkey
  • ****
  • Posts: 352
  • Karma: 0
  • Macomb, IL Flatlands Rule
Re: 'Real World' AVL vs. Iron Bore Comparison?
« Reply #8 on: May 08, 2008, 03:14:33 AM »
I did just the opposite.  My dealer had a 65 and an Electra.  After an appropriate time spent feeling, looking, drooling, etc., I opted for the 65.  I liked the engine better and the almost complete lack of any modern technology.  I was aware of the technical advantages the Electra possessed, but I chose the more primitive route.

There are no interstates around here, so that's not a problem.  My 65 will hold indicated 60 + with no strain for long periods, although 40+ is more enjoyable.  For my purposes, I don't feel I am missing anything not having the AVL equipped bike.

If you'd like to tinker less, go with the AVL.  OTOH, if you enjoy putzing with mechanical things, the iron lung is most enjoyable. 
2006 '65' and a 200cc Stella, Indian all the way