The New BSA Gold Star is everything wrong with Retro Motorcycles today
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 июл 2024
- As a student of motorcycle history I can't help but find the new BSA Gold Star project somewhat offensive
📚Check out my Children's Motorcycle Book!
rb.gy/bdh14b
Support the channel!
☕ www.buymeacoffee.com/bartcycle
Subscribe for more Motorcycle content! ➔ tinyurl.com/ybuffutr
📷 INSTAGRAM ➔ / bart.cycle
Disclaimer
Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing."
I do NOT own some or all of the video materials used in this video. In the case of copyright issues, please contact me at bartcyclebusiness@gmail.com for any further action. 
Авто/Мото
![Here's why the BSA GOLD STAR is a MASSIVE FAIL [SoapBox#1]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3nyDUrNzz94/mqdefault.jpg)
I think that it's great that there are companies out there building retro motorcycles. Modern sport bikes don't appeal to a lot of cyclists. The new retros provide an option. I think they're all beautiful. I don't mind liquid cooling and disk brakes. I had a Triumph 750 when I was a young guy. It was exhilarating, but not reliable. I traded it in on a Honda CX500. Nowadays being able to get reliability out of a Triumph or a BSA or a Norton or a Royal Enfield is a most excellent prospect. Sure--you can criticize their lineage, but they sure are nice!
Whilst I agree that Triumphs of the 1960’s and 70’s had their reliability issues, in my personal experience, all of those issues could be recitified by an owner with a Factory workshop manual and some older friends who had learned how to correct these flaws that were largely due to production line compromises. My first ever motorcycle was a 1969 Triumph Trident, which was an icredibly fast and powerful bike, yet very ‘forgiving’ in terms of handling. This was followed by a 1973 650 Bonneville, which was no slouch either, but again handled like no Japanese bike did until well into the 90’s (if then). I rode the Trident for two years and the Bonnie for the next two and during that time I DIDN’T OWN A CAR, so I had to iron out all the reliability issues, which when you get right down to it, turn out to be not big problems anyway. By the time I bought my Bonneville, I had learned many things and that bike DID NOT leak oil, always started within the first two kicks, and never, ever, broke down on the side of the road.
I rode a mate's Honda 750 once and the appalling lack of willingness to obey the rider’s desire to go around corners, along with the alarming wallowing if you hit any kind of unevenness in the middle of a corner, was frightening enough for me to never get on another one! People used to crap on about the 5 speed gearbox, disc brakes and electric start, etc, etc, but if a bike will not obey the input of the rider, it can have a built-in coffee machine for all I care. I don’t like bikes that disobey their rider’s commands. They’re more dangerous that anything else on the road.
The modern Japanese bikes are much better at staying on the road than those early ones, but I don’t like the dynamics of their handling much either. I’ve heard and read the phrase; ‘It just falls into the corners’ often enough, but I don’t want a bike that FALLS anywhere. I want a bike that goes where I point it, when I point it and when it’s not being pointed, it tracks straight down the road. I know that riders who’ve grown up with these new bikes don’t understand what I’m on about, but I have had a lot of fun showing them that all they’ve read or heard about how Harleys don't handle is largley a matter of not knowing how to ride a bike that doesn’t FALL intol the corners. My Sporty will out handle a Fireblade any day, without any substantial mods.
The sad thing about the Triumphs after 1975, is that for many reasons, they failed to produce anything worth owning, as they tried to please everybody and ended up doing the opposite. They should have just concentrated on getting rid of the production flaws and improving on issues that riders complained most about. Unfortunately, the company had become top heavy, with people who really couldn’t care less about the actual motorcycles they made, than they did about the bottom line. In the end they lost that too.
@@BigAl53750 Thank you for that. When I had my Triumph I lived in a residence hotel and had no shop and no tools. It was being spiffed for $1,895 and I couldn't pass it up. It cornered very nicely and did a wheelie when I speed-shifted it into 3rd gear. Wonderful motorcycle. If I had been more mechanically savvy at that time I could probably have sorted its issues.
@Alan Heron One of the best motorcycle related comments I've read. Ever.
my dad has a 1982 honda cbx550 I wish he got a cx500 of the same age the last reiteration of the cx500 with the newer bodywork com star wheels and the little headlight Cowell looked cool. definitely a classic now.
@@BigAl53750 My 66 bonnie was a cracking bike, handled like a dream and no issue's at all. I was only 17 at the time and didn't really appreciate what I had. Next a new 74 650 Bonnie, again very reliable, by this time the rot had set in, literly, the exhaust's fell off in a year. Talking to people now about their experiance's with Japanese stuff then, they say the same, to big, heavy and did not buy the same again. Turned full circle as the twins are back in popularity, even Yamaha have copied the Triumph triples. It's a pity we did not have the likes of John Bloor earlier, may have been a different story in those difficuilt times.
The thing is the BSA isn't a BSA. It's a Mahindra. It has absolutely no connection to the original firm apart from the name that they bought to give their product some otherwise missing western credibility. At least the Enfield has a direct historical connection.
Well you could say the same about 90% of the brands
Mahindra itself is a car company, they tried making motorcycles but they failed miserably, but recently after acquiring brands like Jawa, Yezdi and BSA, really did make some pretty good retro bikes here in India tho, they're making bikes under the JAWA branding and they're launching pretty good bikes which are competing with Royal Enfield here in India, but the thing is with the New Jawa bikes all of em are on the same platform as one of they're older failed bikes called "mojo" but they've just tuned the engine differently for each bike, but with this BSA, this is the first time they're making a new platform since mojo.
That's true of every retro British brand apart from Enfield, triumph is a different company that just bought the name triumph and the Norton brand has been owned by lots of different companies over the years
@@ilovecake50 Exactly
Yeah, exactly my thought aswell. Brits are way too incompetent....😂
I really appreciate the rare sight of retro bikes (at least where I live) in between all the new compressed , Transformers-like looking bikes on the streets. Having owned several lovely bikes from the 70's, I am very happy about ABS, traction control, water cooling etc. on my Street Twin. When it comes to criticism about engine power performance or weight/power ratio I have to say I don't really want or need more. For me it's more than enough to have a lot of fun without constantly being triggered to go double the speed limit in second gear. Better ride a ''slow'' bike fast than a fast bike slow is a good motto in my opinion. So I'd like to thank all motorcycle hipsters for their choices :D.
The Street Twin, is a Harley Davidson, is that right? I really like the look of those and the fact that they come in a 750cc is nice. What I really like is that they aren't trying to look like a Sportster. They are their own and will create their own history, good or bad. They are their own motorcycle.
Hi @@maxfield9873 the Street Twin (since this year called Speed Twin 900) is a Triumph Bonneville, it has a liquid-cooled parallel 2 cyl, 900cc. In my opinion it has not really much in common with the HD Street 750. And btw I am a big fan of the old Sportster (up to 2020). I think people who like classic or retro bikes (should) hold the Sportster in high esteem.
I'm an old bugger. Someone like me doesn't listen to advertising. We don't buy something because the manufacturer makes claims or the general public think its cool. We buy bikes which are called retro because we like them. I don't want a fairing. I don't want to do 180 miles an hour I don't want digital rubbish.
I just want a bike that reminds me of the bikes I couldn't afford as a kid. Only now I can have one that doesn't leak oil and stops well. I use a 1938 leica film camera for exactly the same reason.
I've riden super bikes they were great when a was younger. Age has its advantages. We know what we like and we buy these things because we want to.
I am old enough to recall what it was like to own and run a BSA back in the 70’s. I can tell you, from a couple of years of real world experience, that the original BSA motorbikes were the biggest heap of crap you can imagine. If they resurrected the brand and gave it plenty of “original BSA spirit” you would spend more timing fixing the damn thing than riding it. This new one is made by Mahindra, but has a Rotax engine (Austrian) which means it will start and go well, and be ultra reliable. The brakes are class (brembo), it has decent electronics and modern tyres, unlike the old ones back in the day made from cardboard. This bike will be for misty-eyed romantics but bares no resemblance to any BSA from the so called ‘good old days’. This looks quite good!
I work in a motorcycle museum and the british bikes are the ones with drip-trays underneath, plus the Harleys :)
Well said!, thank you for your comment!
Spot on. My brothers 1965 BSA lightning was a horrible bike to ride and repair. It looked cool for the time but I’ll take my Royal Enfield 350 Classic over the Older BSA as far as riding pleasure. Bart, the idea of retro bikes is to reproduce the looks but not carry over all the old tech that really didn’t work that well. I like the looks of the new BSA and hope they make a go of it.
I was thinking along these lines when I saw your comment. If you're going to ride the damn thing you want it to be reliable, keep up with traffic and stop with contemporary braking.
I think this Mahindra 650cc single looks pukka enough to me, and to fair the Indian guys that make them are passionate about bikes. It would doubtlessly be a much better road bike than the Enfield 500cc single, which when I rode one, it was really only happy tootling about at around 65km/hr, any faster than that and it's just too vibey in an unpleasant way. However i also agree the Enfield 650 twin has authentic lineage and is a good machine.
Rewmember when we said that BSA stood for Bastard Stopped Again?
The problem is, you can't copy the looks, and also go for the performance angle. You have to pick one. The h2 chose to go performance, the goldstar is going for looks.
Flopped on the looks, then.
You might not be able to match the performance of modern sporty bikes while copying the looks. But, you can hit reasonably modern performance and still hit the looks. That requires a lot of money and special parts though. So, often then get somewhat close with as many off the shelf parts you can.
Much of it boils down to the fact that the people that would buy a bike like this today likely haven’t ridden the original bikes. So, if you really nail the old performance and looks then people will be disappointed as it won’t fit modern expectations of performance.
@@leehaelters6182 Not really
@@thatguy1060, each their own, fair 'nuff. All the best!
I think there is a happy medium. For example I think the 70s Yamaha XS650 XS750 and XS1100 and the modern XSR700 and XSR900 are good examples. Do they look identical, no but you can see the influence. They even kept the twin and triple delineation.
I own a 2007 Triumph Bonneville. And, while you've made some excellent points, consider this: I was fascinated by motorcycles, especially Triumphs, from a very young age, but both of my parents were *DEATH* on the subject. I couldn't go near them, couldn't ride a friend's motorbike, couldn't even BE friends with anyone possessing a motorized vehicle with less than four wheels.
I didn't learn to ride a motorcycle until I was 43, having taken the basic motorcycle safety course twice - the second time with a perfect score.
I love the look of the old motorcycles - but I know NOTHING about keeping them running. My '07 Bonnie didn't come with a six-volt electrical system that requires a kick-start to turn over, it didn't come with electronics made by Lucas(!!!), it didn't come with oil-in-frame, it didn't come with weird British Imperial fasteners, and I don't have to keep a sheet pan under the engine when it's parked. What it DID come with: a twelve-volt system with electric start, modern electronics, mechanical reliability (12k miles and NO issues) metric fasteners, and about as many oil drips as you would find accumulated under my Nissan pickup truck. It's still carbureted, all of the instruments are analog, not digital, the 360-degree firing interval purrs, and I paid extra for some upgrades, such as the "eyebrow" tank badges. My 2007 Triumph Bonneville is not only about as close to owning an original as I'll ever get, it's about as close as I *want* to get.
Your story sounds almost identical to mine ! Parents not wanting me to ride a motorcycle in the 1980s . I was about 50 when I finally passed my test a few years ago. I've ended up with a modern Triumph Speed Twin 1200. I thought about owning a classic Triumph, but all the things you say, well I completely agree !
AND it's air-cooled. I think these are classics in their own right.
@@boodog4023 Unsurprisingly, I have no problem with this.
I just posted your same comment a little earlier! Check it out.
Ill post it again hear so you don't have to search for it.
In your opening, you basically say that the Triumph T-100 is so retro modern that it has little in common with its roots (original model). In general, I agree with you. However, some retros are closer than others. For example, the latest Bonnie T-100, with its water cooled, computer-controlled fuel injection, ABS, breaking, ride modes, LED lights, etc. is nothing like my 2015 Bonneville T-100. My Bonnie has No dual ABS disk brakes, water cooling radiator, hazard flashers, double tubed exhaust silencers, to hide the bluing discoloration, and even a fule gage. Yes, yes, I know my bike has fake carbs, an LCD odometer, and other modern little extras (oil-cooler for example). But truth be told, I had the choice to buy the new updated 2016 model I described earlier, or get the air-cooled T-100 that the dealer wanted to get rid of and gave me a great deal on it! So back to my question to you, were you comparing the original T-100 to the current T-100 or the 8 year old air cooled T-100. Because one has nothing to do with the other. BTW, going with my T-100 was 100% the right call.
If the original BSA company was still in business, who’s to say the BSA Goldstar wouldn’t be like the one Mahindra is making.
Hats off to them for putting BSA back on the map
Nonesense. That comment shows no understanding of automotive product development. The Gold Star was BSA's top bike, its superbike of the time, if you like. If BSA had never gone out of business, the Gold Star would now look something like the Triumph Daytona, or an Aprilia RS650.
@@dave6467 Agreed, the whole reason BSA, Triumph etc. failed was because they stopped developing their machines and lost the performance mantra that was what had made them so popular. The original Goldstar went out of production because it was superseded by the twin cylinder models which had better performance and refinement.
The Goldstar went out of production before BSA went out of business, so had already been replaced in the lineup by the twin cylinder models, so there is zero chance that if they'd survived they'd be making any thing like the Mahindra Goldstar, unless the success of the multicylinder products they'd be making allowed some nostalgic retro model to be slipped into the line up.
It's not BSA.
You had 2 options, if riding a British motorcycle back in the day. You could use it for daily commuting and work on it during the weekend, or you could ride it for pleasure in the weekend, and work on it every evening the rest of the week. But yes they sure had a personality that cannot be replicated :)
I have a 1963 BSA Super Rocket custom. I don't have to work on it every day or every weekend. Does it take some time learning the quirks and keeping it in tune and in shape? Kind of. That's the fun part though. If it's running right and you ride it often, you'll have no problems really.
For the money, I prefer my machines to NOT have ‘quirks’ to begin with. Thanks but no thanks. Lucas electronics can die and go to hell!
@@vincedibona4687 really? That's why I also own a newer bike. My BSA is a 1963 custom built. All original engine and electronics (Lucas), always starts and runs. Say that about any new bike with modern electronics. ruclips.net/user/shortsByIim2dERPQ?feature=share
Sounds like my M.G.B
Yes,but very much a mixed bag!
My first "big bike" was a 1960s Triumph Bonny 650cc. Weighed 165KG before i trimmed it down to 158. Now they weigh 220kg or so.
My personal preference is not so much for retro bikes but I do like simple standard style bikes, that's why I love my 2022 Moto Guzzi V7 850 Stone as it's not trying to be retro with it's LED lights and LCD clocks but it still has that brilliant riding position and simple design.
Gotta love a Guzzi. Real heritage and not a completely fake pastiche of something resembling a 60's bike. Personally, I own a LeMans Mk2 and wouldn't be seen dead on things like the Royal Enfield, or BSA things, being turned out. But then I don't think I'm the target audience. I prefer authenticty over fakeness.
The fact that they're still made in Mandello I think is also appealing, none of the heritage is lost. I love my V7, it's been mistaken for one from the 60's though it's a 2021. All Guzzi really did was modernize (fuel injection, disc brakes, etc.) but still nails the look of the original.
And yet as with RE it does have the true lineage, albeit both grandfather's axe.
I'm very happy with my 2015 RE 500, and my V7ii (not sure I'd like the extra 30 kilos of the 850 though)
@@dave6467 perhaps weirdly a 500 Bullet compliments a Guzzi in the shed, similar torque orientated motors. The RE better suited to small lanes and town traffic, very easy to ride. RE India was founded and co-owned by RE until NVT went bust, no badge engineering fakeness there. I have RE and MG.
@@LieutenantLysol Moto Guzzi were one of the first with disc brakes. Brembo only a few kilometres away, they got them around the same time Ferrari did.
Personally I like all these new retros. At 71 I lived through the times of many of these bikes. I have owned a 2018 triumph Speedmaster- wonderful bike but it on resembles the old Bonnie’s. But I loved the new technology. Water cooling made for more horsepower and abs and rider modes - great
So I hope to ride the new bsa. With limited dealerships I doubt if I could own one. But I actually love what they are doing.
If you want the old put down the money and find one. But for me I love the look balanced with the modern technology.
Just my opinion.
I would consider a new BSA just because I love large singles. It really doesn't need to be anymore or less than what it is. I just love the ride!
I totally agree Terry,,I ,m the same,,,, I like big singles ,low revving,easy to ride, and bags of torque.. the name on the tank hardly matters (thou I do like it tobe in English)
Man, I love your videos but, being too purist at anything is the best way to miss many great things in life.
I remember, at 17 years old, drooling over the Gold Star Clubmans in the window of an Oxford dealer. An artifact of sublime and enduring beauty. But when a couple of years later I could afford to buy one, a wise salesman with a developed conscience dissuaded me from buying it. Totally unsuitable for urban traffic, he said. Equipped with the RRT2 gearbox it was designed to do 85 mph in first gear. It belonged with the AJS 7R, the Matchless G50 and the Egli Vincents running on Castrol R at Silverstone. So I made do with a Kawasaki H2 750. And apart from the unprovoked tank-slappers she was thrilling in a good way.
This so-called retro is cruel vengeance for the British Raj.
I drool over Goldies even now, and go weak at the knees when I hear one.
I have two Kawasaki H2s. One is the original 1972 H2 the other one is a 1974 H2b.
I went out for a run with friends and used 4 gallons of petrol to cover 74 miles 😱.
So as you can imagine, I am not on Greta Thunbergs Christmas card list.
@@martinhambleton5076 Yes! The jaw-dropping petrol consumption of the 1972 H2. I remember going 64 miles on a brim full tank down the M4 at dawn, when the last drop was swallowed up. Until I had the H2 I had never realised how many hairpin bends there are on British motorways.
@@m2menuiserie540 🤣😂 My friends asked me to overtake them on the A38, and open it up.
The H2b is not a standard bike, and Denco tuned. Non standard barrels, pistons, carburetors, with Denco race expansion chambers, so it's extremely noisy.
I went past them at a vast rate of knots, and looked in my vibrating mirrors to see that they had disappeared in a blue fog. When we stopped, they had got spats of oil on their visors and bikes.
She doesn't like pottering about slowly and gets a bit sooty if you do and can oil plugs up in a heartbeat.
I’m 70 years old and have been riding since 1967. I loved the 60s British bikes. I’ve owned a 2009 Bonneville for 7 years now and I think that I wouldn’t be as happy owning a late 60s Bonneville. The 1968 Bonneville owned by a classmate in 1968 was and is still a stunning bike, but my 2009 Bonneville has been very reliable and that is very important to me. I can ride the 2009 bike everyday without a worry. I don’t care how pretty she is, if she eats crackers in bed…shes gotta go.
I'm 77. I lived through that era it was wonderful. Motorcycles these days are just terrific but they're not the same. I've got a couple of harleys but they're not like the new ones. I think the main thing is to enjoy what you have. If you like old bikes find one and be prepared to wrench on it. It's a great hobby.
I’m in my 20s. Own a 20 year old Subaru, a 40 year old Merkur, a 20 year yz400, and a 40 year old Yamaha venture. If you can work on stuff, 80s bike are absolutely wonderful. I love my venture! I’m ~2500$ into it, if I wanted a new tourer that was similar, I’d be into it 10-30k. And I think especially with bikes, if you’re going to ride, you should know how they work and be able to maintain them yourself.
I didn't know that there was a retro bike craze. I'm nearly 70 yrs old and I just wanted a motorcycle that looked LIKE a motorcycle. You know, something like when I was a wee pup. Flatter seat, simple design, you can appreciate the form and function of most of the mechanicals. So, I bought an Interceptor straightaway when I saw it a few months back. Love it. It has none of the transformers look to it of modern bikes; that's why I like it. I've been racing motocross for 54 years now, and the newer bikes, even though they've evolved greatly, have not suffered the same weight gain and busy-ness of street bikes - they still look purpose-built even though they are sleek and water-cooled. I wanted a street bike that was at least trying to keep the pounds off and the function beautiful.
"I just wanted a motorcycle that looked LIKE a motorcycle" I'm with you there. A lot of these modern motorcycles just don't look like motorcycles to me. I suppose that's because when I was in my teens (the '70s) what I lusted after were the Tirumph Bonneville 750 and the Norton Commando 850 -- so that's what motorcycles look like in my head.
I did manage to own a '71 Moto Guzzi V750 Ambassador for a little over a year around 1980. Gorgeous machine that looked and sounded like a motorcycle should, But, the reliability was wanting and the clutch was designed with an Olympic weightlifter in mind (ouch!).
I agree with you the early bikes were so simple and naturally attractive it didn't take much but a few pieces of curved sheet metal to compliment the look of the engineering. Conversely modern bikes are so busy & industrial in their efficiency that takes more effort to make them look attractive. The result looks kind of forced.
Same here Mitch, I just wanted a bike that looked like a classic, didn't cost a fortune and was a pleasure to ride. I can't recommend the Interceptor highly enough (but get so Hagons shocks ok)
The Interceptor was a fine choice, and real value for your money. I'm also on that yonder side of 60 and still nursing along one of their original preunit Iron Cylinder Engine Bullet 500s. I enjoy fettling it, but for someone who just wanted something of comparable "relaxed" performance without the endless needed tinkering, and who just wanted to dodge the butterflies on two-laners now and then, I'd advise them to have a good look at Enfield's newish line of J-Engine 350s, particularly their "Classic" model. It looks like a "real bike" too to these aging peepers, but without all the necessary wrenching to keep real British Iron running properly.
@@Username-2 the weight gain is between vintage and retro. Vintage Triumphs and Royal Enfields weigh significantly less than the retro versions.
I do agree with some of your points, but you can't have everything..
you have three options..
1. performance
2. reliability
3. classic look
you can only pick two of these at any given time to make a modern retro bike.
Surly you can have all 3....My Bonnie has all 3.
I'm up to 83hp on my Bonnie I think that's good enough to call it "performance". With my wife the back at 70 mph the other day we had to pass and i barely cracked the throttle and was instantly doing 90 and passed the vehicle. It's fast enough for me!
I think they should have used a different old BSA name (like the Royal Star) for this bike. Then used the Gold Star name for a high-performance retro sport bike (kinda like triumphs new Speed Tripple RR), would have looked nothing like the original, but would have been much closer to the original Gold Star in spirit.
Yes, a few people said similar 🤷🏻♂️
Why not have a new 'race series' based around these 'retro 650's, or are they just 'chicken dressed as Glam' on track? : )
Don’t blaspheme , I have owned my 1970 Royal star 500 for 40 years this year & I don’t want it connected to a vindaloo machine!
@@buxvan Oh Dear.
@@buxvan what does it have to do with an indian dish 🤦♂
Something no-one ever really talks about is riding position. Hear me out, I have an Interceptor partially because of the looks but also a lot because of the riding position. I've ridden various modern naked or adventure bikes that I could have bought instead, and they either have the footpegs swept back in a way that i find hurts my knees after an hour or they are really tall and I have quite short legs. One thing I really like about retro "roadster" style bikes is the mid position footpegs and low seat. No other segment provides that position and for that reason alone I think there is a place for them
True, you need to feel comfortable, but that doesn't mean you have to get a fake classic bike. There're plenty of bikes out there with accessable ergonomics. The Japanese all make them, or you've got the Guzzi V7, or even something like a Ducati Monster for a bit more performance and passion. Why go down the boringly predictable Royal Enfield route?
@@dave6467 the Guzzi V7 is retro, by dint of being the real thing. For that matter so are RE. Both are the oldest continuous companies, in Europe, in the world. The Bullet (ended) was still using the first swinging arm frame from 1948. With the V7 we can draw a development line back to their first 1967 V-twin.
@@jeffslade1892 Yep you made a good point. That said, I actually don't look at the Guzzi V7 as a retro. It's a 'roadster'. As you say, you can trace the lineage back 50 years, but it's not a retro copy, in the way the Triumph Bonneville is, or the Enfield Interceptor. At least that's just my opinion. 😁
In my teens I was a "ton up" boy of the UK in the late 60s . I never had a Goldie, although I lusted after having one, but they were out of my price range. I've rode motorbikes since then and for the last 22 years have ridden a 1200 Suzuki Bandit. Now 71 I'm not using my Bandit to it's full potential and have been thinking about buying an Enfield 650 to finish my riding career on. Having read all the biking press waxing on about this wonderous re-birth Goldie. (I feel some of them may be getting a drink out of it?) I thought I would like to see it in the flesh, and book a test ride. A dealer about 30 miles away had got one in so I took a ride out to see it. Well what could I say, the radiator looks like something off a 1960s Ford Anglia. The frame welding looks like something I'd done, (I'm not a welder). However the crowning glory had to be the BSA logos on the clutch case and timing chest and the 3 guns on the fake pushrod tube were plastic stickers? They are going to stand up well to a British winter (Not). I didn't bother booking a test ride.
My dad once told me a BSA was the prettiest bike you'll ever see parked next to the highway. That was in in 1970. I currently own a Royal Enfield Interceptor, model year 2021. I was in love with Brit bikes as a kid, but I never owned one (my first bike was a Yamaha GX650) and, I hate to say, I'm glad I never owned one. My dream bike was an 850 Commando. They were bankrupt when I was old enough to drive. A Bonneville was the next choice, but Triumph was on life support in 1975 and a new Bonnie was 1) hard to find where I lived, and 2) too expensive brand new and no place to get it serviced. It was Japanese or nothing, as Harley was now owned by AMF and had a rap as bad as the dead British industry. Dire times. I'd been without a motorcycle for 35 years when RE came out with the 650 twins. The look and price point was all I needed to get back on two wheels. I didn't care about "history" or anything else. It was simply a bike I loved the look of and could afford it. It wasn't plastic, it didn't have traction control, the only thing heated was the exhaust pipes. It looked like a motorcycle, and looked like the motorcycles I grew up with. That it was reliable, not carbureted , had disk brakes and fuel injection and was gorgeous is all I cared about. I could afford it, and that I would be spending a lot more time riding that I would wrenching filled all of my requirements for a motorcycle. If Mahindra "stole the name", well, that's on Mahindra. All that should matter is what it means to the person who buys it. Any time spent on two wheels is precious-- to me, anyway-- and what brand or name is on those two wheels is only the concern of who's on top of them.
You just described my youth. I loved British bikes. My dad and my older brothers and every adult in my life who knew anything about motorcycles told me the same thing, "you would never want to own one." I have spent my life owning Japanese and BMW. Both my sanity and my bank account are much better off for it.
There are many Interceptor 650 owners that are very disappointed in that bike's fit-finish and reliability. Not to say lack of dealers in the U.S. and dealer support. Congratulations on getting a good one..
@@doylegaines1319 Never had a problem with mine.
@@doylegaines1319 My INT650 has been flawless in every way.
@@doughoffman9463 Obviously, you consider an overweight and under-powered 650 as a perfect motorcycle. Good for you.
The Interceptor 650 is a wonderful first bike. It's as you say, it's not a performance motorcycle like the originals. that said, it's a well priced approachable platform for beginner riders like myself. The vibe of the bike is more relaxed than a ninja or something more aggressive, and it's lighter than a Harley cruiser. The lack of features has given me a good understanding of riding without feeling like I'm inside a cockpit. It gave me roots for my ride.
There will be others for me down the line, but as it stands I love my interceptor, and will continue learning and growing with it. The BSA has an uphill battle ahead, but those who get it as their first for the same reasons I did mine are only going to be better off from it.
I’ve had more than 50 motorcycles in my life. I have road raced and dirt raced. It makes me laugh that people call the Interceptor a “Beginner Bike”. I absolutely love mine and it has the sweetest gear box I believe I have ever experienced. That being said, I have also gotten rid of my big “power ranger” ADV bikes and now ride a KTM 390 Adventure for that purpose. The KTM is also labeled a “Beginner Bike”. For many riders, the joy of motorcycling is not always about size and power specifications.
@@jons78733 That's fair, technically it's my second. my first was an 89' Honda trail 110, I rode it for years. This is the first bike that's capable on the highway. Hard to say how it would be without that experience riding mountain roads. I looked at the KTM, I've heard it's a great bike. there's not a lot of dealer support out where I'm at so I went the RE route.
I've own and ridden a lot of motorcycles. The Enfield 650 is just a great bike and a great deal. Peachy motor too...full of character. It's the real deal. That's why they sell like hot cakes.
I’m glad they are building BSA bikes again.I really hope they make a big success of it.
Bet you wouldnt want to buy one though....
@@newtonmetres I definitely will if it comes to USA.
@@newtonmetresI would have bought one if it was out when I was in the market for a new bike.It’s getting good reviews from demo rides.
I don't have a problem with modern representations of classic kit. I wouldn't want an original Gold Star for it's peaky cam, high gearing and cripping clip ons. It's also going to cost a lot. The new Gold Star represents a choice and I like that.
I bought a 1975 Honda CB 750F in 1978 after she killed my best friend. I still have her today and she has 489k miles on her now. Still riding with my best friend!!!! Lets go riding brother!!!
I think the Gold Star looks beautiful. It is not a pure knock off of the original, but the theme is there. But then you would have to be of my generation to understand the appeal of the Gold Star. Considering I am 73 years young, the motorcycle is pure adventure for me. I almost bought an original when I was 20 years old, but as with many of these bikes the seat height was to tall for me with a 28 inch inseam. If the motorcycle industry would every learn to make their seats adjustable on height, they would increase sales about 15 - 20 %. I spent some time in sales and marketing in my career, and studied in college. What I noticed at a number of annual new model motorcycle shows, was that shorter people (me) would sit on some of the motorcycles they were interested in and as soon as they noticed they could not plant their feet on the ground, they would get this frustrated frown on their face and walk away. That holds true for me also. I always loved the British motorcycles and wanted a BSA or Triumph first choice, until I tried the sea height. I ended up going Metric motorcycle for the next 9 motorcycles I bought over 50 years. All because of seat heights. I am 100% more secure when I can plant both my feet on the ground. Take note that I sent both Triumph and Harley letters years ago about seat heights. Harley seemed to have responed within 1 - 2 years with their "Low" model line of motorcycles. They picked up significant market with women. Triumph never did.
A bike that captures the spirit and look of the old classics without looking like them at all is the Husqvarna svartpillon and vitpillon.
👋🏻 my bike! Love my Svart
Ugliest bikes ever made. Like someone tried to make a gas bike look like some horrible EV abomination
This video is a good example of the "tyranny of small differences". The new BSA is close enough to the original to be satisfying. I am thrilled that retro standards are back in quantities, and I don't really care that they aren't a perfect match. It's WAY better than the late 80's through 90's when many brands were building horrible, ugly cruisers that were worse machines in every way than the standard motorcycles that came before them.
I grew up in the 1960’s, living very close to the A40, the road with the Ace Cafe on it. My friends had motorcycles and scooters, but we did not mix with the “ton-up boys” that hung around the coffee stalls in the road lay-by’s and of course the Ace Cafe. They would gather on friday evenings after work, you would often see 20 or more bikes lined up in each layby, with the owners chatting and checking out the bikes. Later in the evening it would get serious, with two or three bikers in a group (nickname = “rockers”) going for a race to the next “roundabout” (an island in the road where there was a cross-roads that you drove around and got back on the road you came along). Sometimes there were accidents, but in those days bikers did not drink and drive, they drank tea and ate bacon sandwiches instead.
I was a partner in a motorcycle courier company, our stock work bike was the Honda GB 400TT, my personal bike was a GB 500TT it had Yokohama F3 track tyres and used to out corner almost everything. At the same time I had a Triumph T100 Daytona, it was considerably faster than Honda.
These days I have a late 30s BMW R75 and a BSA WM20 (500cc side valve).
I love retro bikes, but I am more interested in the actual vintage vehicles. Luckly I have the technical skill to keep vintage vehicles going and in the fortunate position to not worry about the cost associated with their ownership.
I recently did an advanced skills course on the BSA. I could corner as fast, stop as quickly and with only one exception quite adequately do any task asked of me. The only thing I couldn't do was keep up with the group on the open road. The BSA only has 13 hp! I did however find the limit of the front drum brake or front drum brake cables strength to be more specific.
I love retro bikes, I dont feel the need to put any rider down because of their choice of ride.
I think it's great, that there is a wealth of retro motorbikes on the market. The modern versions, on the whole look the part, but don't have all the drawbacks of the originals. I had a street twin tor 3yrs, really enjoyed it. Something for everyone. 👍
I think working on and knowing your bike in that personal way is so lost on folks today. I don't mind turning a wrench. I know the maintenance is done because I did it. If a computer chip goes out on a new bike, you are screwed!
@@maxfield9873 Amen. I’d be embarrassed if I couldn’t at least do BASIC maintenance on my bike. I learned the hard way on a XS500 I bought for $50 out of a barn in high school. Rebuilt it with my brother and rode from NY to CA and back one summer in college.
@@gtemnykh that's awesome!! That's a magic feeling on the road like that going such a long distance. Especially on a bike.I road from Portland Oregon to Yuma Arizona and back on a 2001 Yamaha V Star, 650.
To my eye, the Kawasaki W800 nails the retro look better than everyone else and particularly in its Japan-only Meguro K3 incarnation and everything about it is completely legit. That said the Z900RS is also up there. I like the new BSA because I really like big thumpers, but find the KTM Duke looks like an ugly transformer, but . Anyhow it's pretty moot because it doesn't look like the BSA is headed for Canada.
What about Husqvarna? They have KTM's engine and look a lot better
The W650 looks much nicer than the W800.
Meguro K original incarnation built under licence BSA A7
The W800 is nice looking but a bit of a slouch. Built down to Euro A2 class 35kW but its torque is way up in the air (instead of low down) giving it lack-lustre performance. And relatively heavy. A2 should have no need to be over 200kg wet and be able to see off a hot hatchback. That said the Triumph Tigger 800 with its narrow power band is a bit rum too, ask it to go and it's in the wrong gear.
I ride a W800 almost daily and constantly asked how did I get a new registration for an old bike.
Yes it’s an A7/A10 with a 360 engine, and yes some vibes but still closer to the 70’s bonnies I used to ride than what “Triumph” produce today. Yes it’s not fast and not very torquey but it has the looks, sounds and reliability to bring me back to my original bike days, and that’s what retro bikes are for at the end of the day, in my opinion!
@@AubMar The W800 is not at all an A7 or A10. Versions of those engines were used in the original W1 and W2, but the W650 and current W800 were clean-sheet designs.
I rode another 500 back in the 60's, a Velocette Venom Clubman. It made 40 bhp and weighed 420lb. I loved it and thought about getting one when I retired 19 years ago, but then I remembered it was a bit of a pig to start, the handling was only so so and the brakes required a death grip to slow the thing. I've got used to modern bikes and I reasoned I might get into trouble on a classic. Gold Stars were out of my price range back then, but talking to owners at the cafe, they had a close ratio gearbox with a very tall first gear which made them a total nightmare round town with much clutch slip needed.
These days, I an much happier with the riding position of an adventure bike and will stick to my 1290SAS. If I have one regret - I haven't got a single photo of the four bikes I owned in the '60s.
Bart, keep on being honest about your learned opinions of the motorcycles you try out.
In this day and age, people just don't disagree with you, they get all "butt hurt" about it.
Like Colin Ashdown said, the "new BSA isn't a real BSA, it's a Mahindra". They reproduced an old badge and slapped it on their new bike.
Good for you, for being honest. You have my respect.
There is little to nothing "learned" about his opinions. He does not live in the U.K. He was not there during that era and he does not have or has not ridden most of the bikes that he opines about. It is pure, mostly unfounded, speculative opinion !.
I own a 2019 interceptor and back in 1969 to 1972 I had a 1965 interceptor, they share a name that’s about it, had fun with the old one but as was the case locktite and wrenching were the order of the day. At my age now it’s partly nostalgia and partly what is good for me to ride and what looks good to my eye and the Enfield suits my purpose. It’s not a vibrating twin from that era. As to the BSA, you are right in that it’s not even close to the original other than the badge. I suspect few will buy it for any other reason than it has BSA on it and it’s different looking, this one does not attract me to it in a retro looking sense. I’m sure though that it will sell a few. Good review, but for many older riders age does change perspective at times when buying a motorcycle. 🍺😎🇨🇦
While I agree with a lot of what you say, I think the Kawasaki W800 is a lovely bike. It's less of a copy and more of an homage. It works for me!
The W800 was a copy of the Bonneville back in the day... and Kawasaki did it very well... The current W800 looks more like the original Bonneville than the current Bonneville, in my humble opinion. It is a beautiful bike and the fit and finish is really nice.
What?? yeah no@@bikernate8902
I grew up an Air Force brat living on base. My dad was a fighter pilot and I used to drool over all the motorcycles in the parking lots in the early 60s and late 70s. My dad had an old Harley with no brakes in Vietnam and later got Hondas and Norten commando 750 and 850. The other pilots had Rockets 3s, Triumphs and all the cool dirt bikes of the day, Maico, Bultaco, Ossa and all the Japanese bikes. The squadron flight surgeon had a 1970 Yamaha 360 enduro black w/ red pin strip. He had done some performance stuff done and it burned a special sweet smelling 2-stroke oil. Man I loved that bike and one day he said let's switch! I had a Yamaha 100 enduro. I will never forget that day! He made me keep riding around the track and Arizona desert until I could hit the throttle wide open out of the turns!
Sorry I got carried away.
We also used to go out and watch the Barstow to Vegas open desert races. Then one day "On Any Sunday" came out at the base theater. I saw it 3 times that weekend.
These aren't "retro". They are modern bikes with classic styling elements. A good thing. I only wish they were as light as the original classics.
So I passed my UK bike test only a few years back as a middle aged old git.
I was too scared to take it in my youth of the 1980s to early 90s.
(my Dad had said "Bikes are dangerous, don't ride them !")
As a child of the 1970s, I'd listenned to my Dad's stories of his biking in the 1950s to early 60s. Featuring Ariel Red Hunter, Norton Model 18, Manx Norton 350 and probably his favourite, a Triumph Tiger 110. He did like the 1939 Manx Norton 350, very "flickable" ! , but as a daily rider, it sounded like the Tiger 110 was much better, things like proper lights, and a kick start. The Manx had to be run and bump started.
So come buying my first big bike, I was a sucker, and I got a modern Triumph Speed Twin 1200 as my first big bike in 2019. I love it. It does pretty much all I want. (apart from not being a Triple !)
I often wonder what it'd be like to ride, and own, the bikes of my Dad's era, and so far this has only been a trip of the imagination.
The gear shift would be on the "wrong" side for me. Cable operated drum brakes, whilst they might look pretty, the thought of having to use them sounds something between challenging to very scary. Also no ABS.
Kick starting, whilst better for my father, well I now have an electric start. Tyres are now much better, and on performance my father's Tiger 110 knocked out about 44 BHP on a quite a bit lighter bike , but I've got way more than I need with 96 BHP. Top speed on my father's Triumph , well 110 MPH as the name suggested. My one, well I've never done more than 70 ish, so a theoretical top speed of about 130 MPH that speed cameras mean I'll never see, this side of going on a track day.
I have the feeling if and when I ever get a ride on an original 1950s Tiger 110 or the very closely related Bonnevilles of the 1960s, I'd probably be very disappointed.
Then on owning a real classic there's the maintenance. I just want to ride when I want, and not to have to be tinkering around keeping the thing running.
But I'd love to have a go on a Tiger 110, if not own one.
As for the new BSA Goldstar, I think it looks "okay", I'd probably be disappointed riding that after riding my Speed Twin. I think it will appeal to some, but really it is too expensive when compared to the RE Interceptor. They need to drop the price by about £1000 GBP , or $1100 USD.
I'd choose the Interceptor over the Goldstar at the current prices.
The new Norton Commando, that looks lovely, I would quite like one. However in the UK it's going to be about £16,000 GBP, and my Speed Twin (that can be got for about £11,500 GBP) has a good 20 BHP more, and reasonable dealer network in the UK. Norton doesn't really have a dealer network right now. I can't see Norton selling many of them. I do wish them luck though.
For £16,000 GBP in the UK, a rider can get a very fast Triumph Speed Triple 1200 RS . Yes not a retro, but if I had a spare £16K, I'd have that instead of a Commando. I don't mind modern bikes, and I love triple engines. I think they're better than twins.
I did have a Speed Triple 1050RS, and that was very impressive, but my wife wouldn't get on it, so it didn't get ridden much.
What I'm hoping Triumph will do is make a Speed Twin look a like, but with a 1050 to 1200 cc Triple, knocking out around 130 BHP, that my wife would sit on. I'd have one of those tomorrow .
A very interesting read may I say.
You put yourself down as a child of the Seventies, yet you are following your Dad’s ideas not that of your peer group?
So I’m 63 and had my “Fizzy” in ‘75 aged 16. I went on through a Kawasaki KH250, then onto a Suzuki GS750 and (after I got knocked off that on a roundabout after two years of ownership) then a Suzuki SP370. In the middle of all this I bought a Triumph Daytona (TBP 150F) because I felt I should try one as the narrator states was a fast bike of its day - at ten years old it was sh1te with a capital S.
So in a roundabout way you should really try the Japanese bikes of your youth. That’s where your age driven roots are.
To end on a comment about our narrator I would suggest that he’s looking backwards with rose tinted glasses. I’ve owned classics since and the concept of tinkering passes me by. I just want to ride and enjoy it. I don’t need to be very good at it, I just need to enjoy it. Hence I ride a R1250GS now and it’s as good as they all say.
Buy what you like, ride what you like. I won’t be listening to this annoying American commentator anymore. He has a view that I don’t subscribe to.
Enjoy your bikes and if you can encourage your wife to get on the bike and do a summer European tour you will have a convert for life. For that - you need a BMW, ask my wife….
@@PhilbyFavourites I do enjoy my Speed Twin . I did also have a Street Triple , got traded in for a Speed Triple. I did like them both, but my wife didn't want to get on either, and I just ended up riding the Speed Twin more .
I'd like to try all bikes, but there are only so many I can own , this side of having a bucket load of cash and being like Jay Leno !
Your dad was right.
@@thatguy1060 On bikes are dangerous ? ( well "yeah !", or his 1954 Tiger 110 was the best bike that he had as a daily rider ?
I'm guessing he was correct on both points ! 🤣
I think the one really well-done attempt at a retro bike was the Ducati Sport Classic line which was introduced in the early 2000s, around the same time as the retro Triumph Bonneville. Most of the Sport Classic models captured the look of their 1970s forebears well and their high spec brakes and suspension made them a lot of fun to ride.
But the sport classics had plastic gas tanks that were ruined by ethanol gas and Ducati never corrected the problem.
The Ducati Sport Classics were to me the most desirable bikes of the modern era. So weird that it didn't become a long term thing when retro bikes in general are good business.
@@varmastiko2908 I think they decided on the Scrambler series as their retro line.
There’s definitely something ironic and yet admirable about a former colony revering, paying homage to and successfully manufacturing its ex-colonizer’s iconic designs.
My Indian and Pakistani friends tell me their countries are full of well-maintained old British motorbikes, cars and other machines.
I have a 73 CB750, a 77 KZ1000 and a 2018 Z900RS Cafe. I shared your opinion when Triumph came back, but I don't now. I run a monthly meet for Vintage Bikes. I love vintage bikes... But as my buddy riding his 29 Indian would always tell me, it's the same wind.
Maintenance on a vintage bike is crazy. Honda recommended checking all bolts prior to riding. It's rare for me to ride one of my old bikes without incidents. The handling, the power the brakes are awful compared to modern equipment.
Anyone can ride a new bike. That's what we say when we're riding our old ones... But the best rides are when you make it home safely.
I just experienced wheel wobble at 70 on a busy freeway on my KZ, it was NOT fun... I had to replace my wheel bearings. Most shops won't work on bikes over 10 years old. The constant question I got is who's a mechanic.
Real vintage bikes are probably as expensive as these modern versions. Modern bikes are reliable maintainable and easy to start, keep running and ride.
There's plenty of room on the road for all of us. I like them all. I don't think you're giving the new BSA enough credit for the risk they've endured to produce their products.
As you mentioned it would be impossible to recreate the original with today's requirements.
Also we as humans are much larger than people from the 1950s on average.
Interesting video thanks for making it, just my opinions after 60 years of life and 22 years of motorcycling.
" It's the same wind" That's a great slogan your buddy has 👍
I wanted something old-schoolish while it's still possible to use petrol-driven motorcycles, so I got myself a Daelim Daystar 125 carby edition (Honda engine). It's by far not a powerhouse, but it's really comfy driving through the countryside on it.
Do the carbed ones come with a kick starter?
@@ioioioioio6026 yes
The 500cc Daytona twin rule Daytona for 30 years. It earned its name to be called the Daytona. I have one and it is one of the few bikes that I take on an interstate highway because being a 500 is much smoother than a 650 and it is made to rev with the twin carbs. It is also a great towel trailing bike because I would Chase my German Shepherd who would get out and I would be on the trails with the 500 Daytona and even though it is a street bike is handled the dirt Trail very well. They used to say it's easy on a Triumph and it is.
I was a BSA guy but always had a weakness for that Daytona 500 with the blue and white tank. I'm tickled for you.
I didn't quite make it to the end of your video. But I can tell a couple things. I was born in 1952. These were the bikes of my teenage years! My first road bike in high school was a Norton 750 P11 scrambler, that was a great bike! Then I had a brain fart, I sold it and bought a brand new BSA 441 Victor Special, at the same time my buddy did! It was basically a smaller bore Gold Star with a high pipe. So I put a straight pipe and megaphone on it, and clip-on's. Every year we had a 'rally race' around lake Ontario. I won it the first year on the Norton. I couldn't wait to get off the BSA! And the kick start lever tore a hole in my leg that took 40 stitches! I have many more stories about it. But I sold it after a year and bought a 1966 Bonneville. That year I won the Lake Ontario rally again!! I had that bike till 1996, along with others, and another brain fart happened and I sold it! Trust me, you would not want a Gold Star or Victor 441! They were a "Royal pain in the ass" so to speak, pun intended. LOL I've ridden BMW's since. Still have a 1978 R100-RS Police Special with 500,000 miles on it parked in the garage!! Happy motoring!! JMHO's 8) --gary
A broken ankle or leg, the hidden surprise of owning a Goldie. Even starting those things is a reasonably dangerous and unforgiving process.
Part of the appeal for me with the new Sportster S is that they did not try to make it a retro bike. They made it a fast and modern street bike because that is what the original Sportster was. I think the direction and marketing on the Sportster S was spot on because they aimed at a mid end market but still on the young (it was never intended to get the 70'ish old man off his thumper). The retro bikes kind of play outside of that middle market. They are cheap enough to appeal to the new rider and classic looking enough to get Old Man Joe to get a second bike for nostalgia. I also think the Norton Commando is a bad bike for being the opposite the Sportster S. It lacks the modernisation and is priced the same as a Ducati as a retro bike. It won't appeal to existing riders and new riders can't afford it. At least the BSA has a market in the young.
Better yet GET A Z900 RS and HOLD ON.
"it was never intended to get the 70'ish old man off his thumper",I remember those 60's bikes well.Starting in 63 was my first Triumph and had 3 more after that and then went to Harley"s and because of those bikes,i'm riding a ZX-14r.I like reliability and i'm 73 years old.The lesson here is "Don't judge a book by it's cover".
@@Demonbfg Well done old boy. Well, 1963 would have had you 13 years old and riding a Triumph. Possible in the day I guess but my thought is that it might be a 63 Triumph that was your first bike??? That Nightster is not aimed at you if you are riding a ZX14R. You would not get that bike either. I did not group all older riders into the HD market (hell I am 52). My point sir is that it does not have an existing market from older riders and you absolutely prove that. You are either on something that goes like a shower of shit or something that is an easy tourer. This bike does not appeal to your generation or mine.
@@MrEiniweini Yes you are correct.I learn how to ride a 2 wheeler on a 63 Vespa 125 scooter and then within that year went to a Triumph T-20 Tiger Cub (200 CC).My dad lived his life through me.He lost his leg in the war.He graduated me very fast when he saw what i could do on a motorcycle.From the Triumph Cub to a 64 Honda CB-77 SuperHawk(305 cc),from there to a 65 Triumph TR-6 (650 cc),which i raced and have a couple of trophy's with that bike.Then i went on a touring kick and sold the Triumph and bought a 65 H-D Electra Glide.I could go on there were 42 motorcycles between 63 and the present,believe it or not...and more trophy's.I could go on but it would be a book.My last two sport bikes were a 88 and 90 Yamaha's FZR-1000.The ZX-14r,will be my last motorcycle as i couldn't ask for for a better bike for me and i will be too old,lol.
@@Demonbfg Interesting history and good for you old man. I do say "old man" with respect. There is respectability in being an old man, I am getting there faster than I would like. My post was never meant to apply to the fringes of the riding community like yourself. It was meant to apply to the generalised and mainstream. Your history sounds golden.
I get what you say about the BSA but to criticise Enfield is a bit ingenious as it's the only retro that can trace its lineage back to 1901 as Enfield has not hijacked the name and their bikes have been in production continuously in Redditch and India.
I feel the retro bike market is great, especially in how all other bikes are now at extreme styling and generally not as fun. Retro bikes are welcome in the market, this BSA is just another, and a big single will make for a fun bike. I hope it does well and the aftermarket addresses it's weaknesses just as it has with the Interceptor. Yeah it's not the real thing, and after working on many vintage bikes I'm glad. Some of them are like owning a helicopter, for every hour of riding come hours of maintenance!
By extreme styling... do you mean, modern? Like the BSA Gold Star was in the 50's compared with, say, a Norton made in 1909?
@@dave6467 By extreme styling I mean pure sportbikes, cruisers that are impractical and dirt bikes that are too much for people to start on. This is what was losing a large segment of the bike market and how BMW, Triumph and Harley were able to grow so much, they made bikes people could ride and use easily. Now finally in the last few years the japanese makers have been bringing in bikes under 600cc which are also easier to ride, good to learn on and aren't totalled if they fall over.
I took one of these for a test ride yesterday, it was a lot better than I thought it would be!, before I set off the mechanic that wheeled the bike out said he’d just come back from a training course and was impressed with the engine internals, no flash on the castings etc, he said it feels more like 60bhp than 45 when ridden, “sure it will 🙄” I thought , but it actually did!, it’s a little breathless off the line but above 30mph really pulls well , “stompy” I would say, it handles nicely on twisty back lanes until you really push hard then it wallow’s, that’s because the rear suspension is way too soft, but that’s only a problem if you really push, I did so on purpose to find its limits, with normal and even somewhat spirited riding it fine, the brakes weren’t the best, initial bite isn’t there, no doubt they’ve fitted organic pads and swapping to HH rated pads would probably help, it was actually really fun to ride and definitely left me smiling, then I got back on my Fireblade and my smile got even broader 😄
Has the person doing the voice over actually ridden one of these?, if not I’d recommend he did before forming an opinion.
Exactly! Ride one then slag it off if you must!
The more I hear of complaints about some motorcycle brands, the more I also hear the commentator say, "They should have done it like Royal Enfield."
I agree totally with what you say.I've owned a Rocket Gold Star and pre-unit T120 Bonnie and loved them both and in my opinion , the 2 most handsome British bikes of all time.I own a ' modern ' T100 ' and its ' okay ' but just that .Incidentally , the ' 62 Goldie R00 735 at 8.10 is still very much alive and licenced to next year !.
Spot on! Having had Triumphs and Vincents in the sixties here in UK, form following function and all the elements beautifully proportioned made them iconic. As a teenager, I once rode a friend's DB 34 in clubmans trim and found it a " bit of a pig", but then I didn't have the skills needed to appreciate it. Thanks for your excellent videos.
I am old enough to remember as a kid an old guy in my area that every spring he bought a brand new 650 BSA every spring from 1959 all the way up to 1970 that I think the 70 was a 3 cylinder. Out of all of them he only keep 2 of his BSAs, the 65 & the 66 as they were the best looking ones. He always drove them very VERY hard ! with no mercy as he had the money and he knew he would trade them in the next spring. Then in 69 Honda came out with the 750 X4 and Kawasaki came out with that wild 750 H-2 that was under 1/3 the weight of the BSAs and both were so much faster it was hard for the BSAs to come anywhere near them. The guy that bought a new BSA every year stopped buying new ones after 1970. and just rode his 65 & 66 until he passed away in the 80s. By then, everybody was riding Jap bikes and very few rode Harleys
There was something straightforward and beautiful about the air cooled engines and simple open frame. You could see how everything worked. Form followed function. With the new BSA however, form follows marketing and therein lies the problem.
I think the triumph Scrambler XE comes close to a retro styled bike that has it's own thing and is at the top of it's field in performance. They took a retro aesthetic and made something really quite original, not trying to copy the old TT but something that can punch thousands of miles and do 'off-road' as well if not better than any of the big modern adv bikes. Did a trip not long ago with BMW bikes and a T7 and it easily held its own on and off road and has specs exceeding both in important areas.
Personally, I don't really care about the badge on a bike.
If it's a dependable product at a decent price point, I'm all for giving it a chance.
A couple of things that appeal to me about this one are, I love thumpers, and the gas cap location. If I ever get the chance to see/ride one here in the Pacific NW I'll give serious consideration to adding one to my garage 🙂
I couldn't believe I saw an SR500 yesterday, and I thought, you never see a big single anymore.
Perhaps the single consistently honest YT channel on the subject of MC's,
MUCH appreciated!!
Hey thanks! Too bad none of them are inviting me to a bike launch anytime soon 😂
I agree 100%
Easy to get misty eyed about the old days,forgetting about the bits vibrating off and the oil leaks
I started riding English motorcycles in 1969 with a Greeves 250 Challenger. Quickly thereafter I purchased a BSA Victor Special, which was my only transportation my senior year in college. This was in Bozeman, Montana, yet. Since then I've owned several more English bikes including my favorite, the 1970 Triumph TR6-C. I agree 100 percent with your observations about the new retro bikes, ESPECIALLY the abomination called the new Goldstar. I do like the Kawasaki 800W a lot, and that or the Speed Twin would be my choice if I were to buy a new motorcycle. But, damn it, there are too many cars out there, so I guess I've hung it up. Keep up the good work.
If you reliably started a Victor during your Montana winter and commuted ❄❄ you sir are a motorcycle man! What a nice sounding bike. A couple friends had them to care for.
BSA Victor,,, Have you recovered the feeling in your fingers yet ?
The victor does vibrate, that's for sure. I still have one, and need to blow the dust off it and charge up the battery. @@lipsee100
@@robertodebeers2551 "The victor does vibrate, that's for sure" Not only vibrates,it shakes ,rattles and vibrates !
And I love it!! Nothing like a big single that's 50 years old. @@lipsee100
I road my BSA Gold Star all the way through high school and then years after. Went through many other bikes but just all ways went back and dusted off the old favorite B.S.A. Then it got wrecked beyond repair and have been sad ever since. I wouldn't ride one of those new fakes if it were free! As far as the reliability issues, that was all part of the experience. "If I can't work on it myself, I don't want it." If a single doesn't thump so hard you have to put a piece of wood under the kickstand to keep it from driving the stand into the hot pavement and falling over, "IT'S NOT A THUMPER!"
I used to ride and own a Gold Star and road many 1950-60s BSAs. There's a website in the UK "How many left" and BSA shows 1000's of 60-70 year old motorcycles in daily use. They were built to a very high quality. But, the Gold Star was a racing motorcycle - the standard exhaust actually has on it "not for road use" and its a no compromise bike. Would I want one now? No it was a pig, impossible to start, fouled plugs, burned out clutches (70mph in 1st due to the 4sp close ratio box). Would I consider this retro Goldie? Yes its much easier to live with, stops when you want it too and won't vibrate the lenses out your eye glasses, and yes that did happen on a real Goldie. A BSA - I had in 1971, a 1954 Golden Flash and sold in 1972 is still in daily use so don't knock BSA quality, but remember that most BSA's were built to last not go fast.
Still ride my 1960 BSA Super Rocket on sunny days. Great bike, puts a bigger smile on my face than any of my more modern bikes.
I had thought the same about much of what you say. The modern Triumph/BSA/Norton brands are just that - a brand, a copyright name that otherwise bears absolutely no connection with the previous owners of that brand. Enfield India has at least some continuity with the English company. But naming these modern, relatively pedestrian machines after cutting edge performance bikes of 60 years ago just smacks of marketing a myth. Performance-wise, the new BSA should have been named the Starfire, and the Interceptor as the Crusader (there's a name that's unlikely to be resurrected!).
Sorry Sir, this is all too emotional. I remember being in the BSA factory in the early 60s; as a 19 year old, I remember being in awe of the lines and lines of export bikes - waiting to be shipped to the USA. The company BSA was in it for the money - they were a business - if they had been as passionate as you imagine they were, they would not have gone out of business. Yes, their bike became icons of their era but, I regret to say, your commentary is the romance of a bygone era - I would love to own the new Gold Star but if I came off one, my bones would break like a China cup. STILL WATCH ALL OF YOUR VIDEOS THOUGH.
The last 650 single I rode was a Phelon & Moore Panther 120S sloper, back in 1968. Designed primarily as a sidecar machine, I had to ride mine as a solo for several weeks while I waited for a new front upper linkage to the sidecar. Despite using the offset trail (allowed by the fork-ends) it was still a handful at cornering until I remembered the old adage "in slow, out fast: in fast, out last"! Speed-wise, the Panther went up to 78 mph exactly as according to the manual and would do the same no matter the loading - such as three hairy bikers and a BSA A10 engine and gearbox, bound for Huddersfield. I loved my Panther outfit and I rode it daily and I would be really pissed if some firm had bought the name and produced a new-age Panther.
The best modern retro has to be the Kawasaki W650, it was short lived in the United States but that’s because it was a little ahead of the movement to get back to retro, which is why it got away with being so retro, carbs, kick start, air cooled etc. I owned a w800 and it captured the look but not the feel, or character I should say.
I'm guessing a lot of BSA Goldstar buyers will be happy with just having that badge on the tank--oh that red and gold starburst 🌟--as long as it's reliable and generally fun to ride. Like most bikes are despite performance. They might even be thinking, in contrast to your preferences, that some of the asthetics are an improvement. For instance, I've never been a fan of white piping outlining oversized seats. I think that new Kawi W9 stuck with the white piping. It draws your eyes to a feature not represented or tied in anywhere else on the bike. The upholstery people just had to make a statement of their own! Or perhaps buyers like the wider tank and packed in components of the bike, giving it a sort of robust or sturdy look. Some people like those big boned gals after all. 🙂 Just playing Devil's advocate here. In general I agree with your sentiments. One thing I was thinking while listening is that it's nearly impossible to reproduce the Goldstar's original performance appeal because, well, those times are gone. The new bike would HAVE to incorporate some sort of new, proprietary tech and do 180mph to obtain a comparitive level of "cool" today. Not going to happen in a big single with a retro frame and suspension setup. So all you're left to work with is a visible single cylinder engine with the appearance of vintage metalwork and castings, hopefully some comfort and reliability, and a good paint job, etc. Basics... with a retro badge.
Yup, people should ignore the "spirit of the BSA Goldstar" marketing language and buy the bike because: A, they want to see the BSA name on dealership signs and in magazines again; or B, they genuinely like the bike (looks, ride, etc.) and the price is right.
Cheers 🍻 to the longest comment of the day! Biker Nate almost had me there.
I have a late model BSA A65 Lightning and love it. I can get any spares I need for it and it just keeps running. Its foibles are part of its character and although it is not sophisticated iit is the real thing and goes well whilst making a glorious sound. I am not sure what the new Gold Star brings except the name and ease of ownership. That may be enough for some but you are right that it is Triumph, Norton and Royal Enfield that are more directly linked to their heritage and in a more convincing manner.
Wow, I thought that the BSA Lighting was IMO the best looking bike at that time. Enjoy your ride!
Hey , Great Video and regarding the BSA Goldstar featured you are 100 % right and I agree with you. I am now 71 years old, I was a British bike fan and especially BSA. As a kid I dreamed about having my own bike, I used to be so envious of the older guys , with their BSA's, Bonnies and Nortons ... Anyway the day came and I bought my own BSA 250 which I rebuilt from completely stripped down state, I was the happiest guy on the block. (I did ride bikes or mopeds as a teenager ) ...but this was my dream come true ,,, I used to ride with my mates who all owned Jap bike ie CB 750 etc >>> I then decided I needed a bigger bike and got my hands on a 500cc AJS which again I redid and had the coolest cafe racer.. this bike I had for years and was daily commuter.
Fast forward to 60 years old and I had been watching the TV series and Cafe Racer , and this just brought back so many memories, and I just had to have a bike... So, Triumph Thruxton 900 twin was the bike I bought...
Wasn't long and I had to get a Thruxton R, upgraded to Fairing , exhausts, Clip ons, the whole trip...
Now Im an old guy 71 yrs and the Thruxton was a bit heavy on the wrists.. so it was time ....
I now own a Speed Twin and I am happy as Larry with this bike, Still British, Still performs, and I feel like a kid every time I get on the bike... Like they say "getting old is obligatory, growing up is my choice" thanks for a great vid, I am following your channel as im interested in all bikes, actually thinking about getting a midrange adventure bike... :-) cheers
When I was 10 I learned what a BSA was. My dad's buddy had one and it never ran, he bought a cb750 first year they came out and never worried about his BSA after that. I love my interceptor and what I like is it's ease of use. Reliability is paramount.
Who wants a retro bike with drum brakes and Lucas electrics? The retros are different (and better) because it is now, not 1950.
I would buy the new Goldstar in a minute.
You really just can't go wrong with the Royal Enfield offerings.
I think this is as least as good as RE 350 classic.
@mebeasensei I don`t think so. By staying with a smaller motor RE avoided having to use a radiator. Maybe if the BSA had stayed with 500cc they may have been able to dispense with. Going for 650 still does not make it a high performance bike.
You have a point. That radiator is ugly and so is the header pipe for some reason. maybe it is the colour of the steel. the BSA looks dull and not quite right. The Classic has the sparkly bits right but also has some terribly tacky parts that really damage the aesthetic. The old tool box area is black curved plastic, the speedo is a shocker with the boxy LCD display. But overall it is very sweet. But more than 110kmh is needed. I have a w650 Kawasaki and cruising on the highway is totally feasible. It's a slow bike on the low roads but winds out OK. The RE can't do that. So no touring, because there are times you just need to get on the highway, even if is a small portion of the trip @@futch2121
I had a chance to ride a gold star in 1982. I was used to riding Japanese bikes. The gold star scared the crap out of me. The brakes were weak and the bike shifted and braked in the wrong places. I was just happy to have not wrapped it around a tree! It was gorgeous however!
Yeah and all these commenters are upset because the new improved one isn't really a Gold Star (fortunately). Anyway the new one has a cool-looking tank badge which I'd be proud to display.
Will Hawkins' comment down below just cracked me up. Ditto. I bought a 1970 BSA Royal Star (500cc twin, single carb) in London and rode it through Europe. It wasn't a great ride. Amongst other things the clutch cable was constantly breaking. I finally bought a half dozen cables and just routed them across the gas tank. The lock froze up so I had to hack saw it in half. It leaked oil of course. It was useless on any autobahn-type highway. I don't know if there are speed limits on those roads today but in those days there were not and that bike didn't stand a chance. All of which isn't to say I didn't have fun. Flipping through the twisties in the Alps and on country roads it was perfect. It was a good looking bike too which attracted some cute friends.
Which leads me to the new BSA. Excepting that stupid radiator I think it looks great and I love that it is a big thumper. I haven't ridden one--I haven't even seen one--so I can't make any judgements other than how it looks. And, probably because I'm getting on, I like retro bikes, especially retro English style bikes. I think most modern bikes look ridiculous: a gaping 12 inches between the rear tire and the bottom of the seat; plastic farings here, there, and everywhere; frames that look like raw scaffolding on a half-built parking ramp, digital dashboards that can't be read unless it's nightime; wheels that look like they came off low-riders; riding positions so extreme your head is bouncing off the gas tank (try riding like that on a cross-country trek!). I don't get why RE gets a pass with respect to "heritage" but the BSA doesn't. I really like the Interceptor but come on. They are made in India just like the BSA and they're 650's, not 750's. And I'm not dissing India either. From everything I've read REs are really good bikes. So why can't India build a good BSA? And why does Triumph also get a pass? Some are made in England but they're also made in Brazil and Thailand. They're also apparently not as reliable as their price might suggest they should be.
And lastly, Bart, I really like your site. I think you do a great job. Thank you.
I completely agree with everything you've said here!
I actually think it's a really nice looking bike, but I'd respect it a whole lot more if the company wasn't called BSA!
I'd even respect it if they were a company blatantly ripping off the Gold Star look....... even down to the badge looking similar (It would be cheeky and fun)
But to call it BSA just seems like a marketing ploy (which in itself is quite nifty)
I just really struggle to love this product
But maybe I'm just grumpy haha :) !!
My 56 Goldstar was 10 years old when I got it. It was an absolute blast to ride, on city streets, highways, even off road. I rode it for 3 years, then sold it because my son was on his way. It was one of my 3 favorite bikes. I've owned at least a dozen over the last 65 years or so.
In 1972 I rode a 1971 Honda CB450. While I loved that bike it really does not compare favorably to my 2023 RE 650. The RE has EFI, Electronic Ignition, ABS, slipper assist clutch, an o-ring final drive chain, spin-on oil filter, no choke for cold starts, no petcock needing to be manually turned on/off. The CB450 gave me 34-38 mpg, the RE 63-67 mpg. A tune up on the CB450 consisted of setting valve tappet clearance, points gap, setting the timing with a timing light, and setting the overhead cam chain tensioner. A "tune up" on the RE 650 needs none of that (except tappet clearance every 10K). I bought the RE650 because the riding experience is very similar to the CB450 (though the RE650 is torquier as one would expect with the extra displacement) and the RE650 is not nearly as touchy to throttle response. The RE shifter mechanism is much smoother than the CB450 and also has 6 gears instead of 5. The improvements in the ownership experience are almost too many to mention. I would not want to go back to a 12" black and white screen for watching television either.
Bart, well said. Needed to be said too. Frankly only Royal Enfield and now again Norton, at least with the 961, retain the authentic air-cooled bikes. Actually, having ridden both old and new, a modern Interceptor would hang with the original. That said nothing sounds or feels like one of the genuine original British bikes.
Agreed...the new Interceptor is about as close to the originals...performance wise... as you can get approved for sale today. Stock they're grunty but for sure not what we'd think of as 'fast', but with pipes, cam and tune they run pretty well and are about as snorty as the 'British Roadster' design can and should be. Mine is set up this way and it's a very fun bike to ride...smooth and will go as fast as you care to ride it with some prodding. It's about as quick as a big Harley and will pull them on the top end...but naked Roadsters aren't about maximum speed...it's character, feel, handling all combined to make it's 'performance' and not all about 1/4 mile times and dyno numbers.
@@recoilrob324 With you totally, I don't own one (I am a dual sport guy now) but have ridden a couple and the cam makes the most difference along with a complete pipe system because the stock headers are super restricted, and cause more power loss than the cans. But that 650 engine so super smooth, (smoother than most multis) amazing job on that engine! But I am with you there is no point in taking tuning too far, cannot understand why people do the 860 conversion etc. They are missing the point and screwing up a beautiful well balanced package. Just replace those brake pads with real ones that actually work and thats it! Emotion over mostly unused extra superfluous performance. Thats why we ride bikes man! Good choice, respect!
It is important to note that the RE 650's and the BSA Gold Star are aimed at the international market and the A2 class in particular. That means a max of 35KW or 46.9hp. Believe it or not, the market would be much smaller if the motors made even 30% more power. Back in India, these 650's are considered to be very large and powerful since the max speed limit for motorcycles is only 80kph (50mph) and a lot of the time, 50kph (31mph).
@@recoilrob324 that is exactly what drew me to purchase my Interceptor... after a set of S&S pipes, cleaning up the look by replacing the tail light, turn indicators and some easy touches... she is about as authentic as one can get unless you choose to buy an old bike... and an old bike comes with a whole host of challenges to keep it running. Bart is clearly biased towards vintage Triumphs and I understand his draw. But, after riding several decades, I simply wanted new, reliable and as close to the original concept as possible... that also drew me to add a 2022 Classic 350 to my garage. I think RE nailed it with these two bikes and they are unique in their approach. No other British brand or British designed bike comes close. If Triumph made a 650-750 air-cooled Bonneville, I would gladly pay a premium to buy one. But... they don't.
@@jfess1911 And anybody who has traveled in India knows that they all stick to those limits diligently. LOL!
Honda cb350 highness is a sweet retro machine
Indeed. It's a well made British classic by the Japanese legend. Also the CB350 H'ness and CB350 rs have the surveillant of Bonneville and Speed twin. In fact CB350 rs looks more like single cylinder version of Speed twin than Speed 400
I'll tell you something you don't want to hear. Jay Leno said that the 2 motorcycles he hated the most are a BSA 441 and a 77 Sportster Cafe racer model.
As Royal Enfield has become a decent company after 10 years or so, I believe Indian companies are capable of reviving these cool, old British companies. I rode a new Royal Enfield Interceptor and I'd buy that before a Triumph. It's a decent bike for a great price. Only a country like India can pull that off. I'm glad that we're going to have Royal Enfield, BSA, and Norton bikes again. And the icing on the cake is that Triumph still builds premium bikes in Britain.
No offence but im pretty sure some people can favor the retro more than the original classic
You are right ! The new Triumph's are faster and more reliable.
bart, I could hardly agree more with your take on the new Gold Star and the whole retro bike thing. I'm well into my 7th decade now and currently own a Royal Enfield 650 twin. Such a pretty bike, more power than I need and no oil leaks. A mate of mine had a Gold Star back in the sixties, fantastic bike but you would have to be a masochist to want to own one as your daily ride in London as he did. I have no wish to re-live many of the obvious failings of British bikes like oil leaks, vibration and awful 6V electrics when I can have electric start, fuel injection and particularly ABS brakes but more effort put into reducing weight would be very welcome.
Agree 100%
I agree, I had a demo ride on the RE 650, really enjoyed it. That bike is a lot of fun!
Moto Guzzi are the guys who do it in an authentic way. They’ve been in production since 1921 and the current V7 is their latest development of their basic naked bikes going back to the 60’s. They haven’t bought a brand name, designed a brand new bike to look like a previous model and tried to market it as some historic model. It’s non of those things, it’s the real deal.
I don't mind the simple fact it's water cooled, what annoys me about this bike is the old BMW Funduro derived Rotax engine, Mahindra just grabbed an off-the-shelf engine, dressed it up a bit with fins and covers then threw it in the bike, the least effort choice, It keeps development costs and selling price lower I know, but is that what BSA means for them? At marketing exercise at best? At least the Royal Enfield twins have a new engine and chassis and are a part of that brand's major renaissance.
If the Rotax engine is a good engine, what's the problem?
you summed that up pretty good, I feel the same way about the New BSA.
My first motorcycle was a BSA 441 Victor back in 1981 while in college. I loved it. It just about broke my right ankle a couple of times when I didn't use the compression release properly but I still loved it.
Well I'm from India and right now I'm not old enough to ride motorcycles legally (I have never even ridden a bicycle on the road), but recently since last year I've been really interested in vintage and retro bikes, I personally didn't have a thing for motorcycles apart from that I'll probably own one someday (as here in my country motorcycles are used the same way as cars are used around the world, commuting, getting groceries and usually everyone gets one after graduating),my enthusiasm towards motorcycle started after watching an anime where the main character rides a Kawasaki Z2 and does crazy shit with that, that was really cool and soon after that I saw a Royal Enfield interceptor and I thought damn it kind of looks like the bike from the anime (well that time the round headlight and dual exhaust made me think that, I know the interceptor looks nothing like Z2) and that's how my interest in motorcycles started, soon after I grow old enough I'll learn to ride on my dad's motorcycle and get graduated, maybe then I'll probably test ride the goldstar and get a continental GT instead :-)
I really wanted the new BSA to be good, because it’s such a great historical brand, but it just seems like a bit of a chunky basic bike, not special. You mentioned Norton, and it’s interesting that I have been watching videos about the new bike after the launch, one thing stuck out was that they see themselves as custodians of the legendary Norton brand. They know we know they’re not the same company, but they are carrying the torch into the next generation.
I would rather buy a 60's Triumph Bonneville than any bikes you mentioned. These motorcycle companies are literally riding on the coattails of past glory days. Water cooled with fake fins is just not for me. These new retro motorcycles have no soul or character. Just my opinion. Ride safe all you riders!
Like the old school bikes own 6 triumphs nothing past 73 probably the best bike they ever built just due to disc brakes and 5 speed tranny and I love 71 , 72 tall frames lot of people hated them but at 6'1 they ride great for me keep up the good work and the faith
I understand what you are saying but don't agree with it. The old bikes were a legend if you could afford them, but reliability, scary handling, lack of brakes, and the Lucas prince of darkness electrics, made them hard to live with, if you managed to stay out of hospital. Oil changes were not necessary with the "constant loss" oil system, if there was a clean area under the bike it meant you were out of oil. Forget to retard the ignition when kicking it over, and you could be treated to an out of body experience, looking down with a temporary birds eye view of the shed and surroundings. I can still remember changing oiled up spark plugs and replacing the things that fell off after a ride and the bike suddenly dying when crossing a busy main road. So God bless India for bikes you can ride and be boringly reliable.
I loved my cb750 with electric start in the 70s... My Norton whilst it handled really well was a pig to start, stalled while ticking over, meaning find neutral, then kick and kick and kick while stuck in traffic. The Honda was a revelation. The amount of times I pushed my British bikes home led me to the conclusion the engines were like new because I'd pushed them most of the time🤣...
One thing I think exemplifies what you said about the retro bike craze coming to a close is pricing. Although in America it seems a different story here in the UK the royal enfields have just gone up and up in price, now even costing more than the BSA.
So although I'd love to have a modern bike that feels like a classic, it's actually more economically viable for us in the UK now to literally buy one of the classics they're trying to mimic!
Not sure I see how, literally just today I was up at Tadcaster, Eddy's Moto and they had an original BSA goldstar with sold on the head light, this bike was over eight grand! And harks back to early 60s. true original vintage bikes are generally bloody expensive and let's be honest not perticularly reliable on a day to day basis, at current prices the most expensive RE is the continental GT twin chrome at £6899 the basic Intercepter is £6199 so I'm sure how any royal enfield is more than a BSA which is between £6500 to just over £7000 🤷🏻♂️
@@kevindarkstar Fair enough for the specific original bikes like the BSA goldstar, but for bikes like original Bonny's they're going for 5-6k and the old Japanese stuff is still going for even less. And yeah my bad for the re stuff, I seemed to remember them being 7k. Still up from their original price unfortunately though, I still remember when they were £5.5k new
@@generic7916 "Up from their original price" (which bore no comparison with the factory gate price in India), sure, but factor in general annual inflation and the abyssmal value of the Pound over decades and you have your explanation.
As for buying a classic for cheap money !! yes maybe you can ,but what are you getting ,you are getting an old bike !!! These days RE are selling used for cheap money,,look again used 650s and Himalayans in plentyfull supply used...and cheap
As a kid I loved the look of the Goldstar single but after watching a few of my friends that owned one trying to start it on a cold British winter morning while in a hurry to get to work ,in the days when a family car was a rare thing . And another friend who owned a Velocette Thruxton single was in the same boat as the Goldie owners ,a good right leg was invaluable ?. I bought a Rocket Gold Star after owning a few reliable B.S.A. A10s & A7s, off a young lad who had just passed his bike test at 17 but Mommy & Daddy would not let him ride it and locked it away in their garage ,he bought it from money left by a Grandma without them knowing . Anyway it was a bargain of the century and I owned it till I blew a hole in one of the pistons .
I swapped it for a 1958 Speedtwin which I regretted at the time ,but couldn"t be bothered with repairing it . Would love another Brit. classic but my right knee says - NO ! . My electric start Harley will have to do for now . Keep safe & happy riding .
The original Gold Star was carbureted, the new one is fuel injected and has a catalyst converter, ofcourse it's not going to sound like the original.
Spot on Vinay!
I think it’s an opinion.. finally the market will decide.. My opinion : I guess it’s design is driven by price point, which matters more than performance in non-western markets
The closest a modern manufacturer came to building a close copy of the original was the Kawasaki W650, but as regulations tightened it had to use fuel injection on the later original drum rear brake W800 and then ABS on the rear disc W800. They left most of the essential features such as a long stroke 360 degree crankshaft and the nearly exact proportions of the original Bonneville, and only upgraded what had to be changed to satisfy modern regulations.
Two things, the W650/800 isn't a cheap bike by any means and most would buy a Triumph instead (well I would). And the other thing is that drive shaft for the ohc, thats not a good look.
@@bsimpson6204 The W650/800 isn't cheap for a reason, it's built up to a standard and not down to a price. You could buy a Triumph just for the badge but you are getting a bike built in Thailand with only a passing resemblance to a Meriden Triumph, but if you want a bike that's very much like a Meriden Triumph without the dramas of keeping one on the road and without too many modern gadgets the W650/800 fits the bill perfectly. The bevel drive for the OHC eliminates the need for a chain or belt and the look is very classic al la Manx Norton and Ducati bevel head. If you really like classic Triumph twins take a ride on a W800 and you'll be pleasantly surprised like most people who can see past a badge.
The W650 is a much nicer looking bike.
The W650 was based on the BSA 500 (A7) design, do a search for the history of the Megura W1 which was the original version and a very close copy of the BSA A7 produced under license with redesigned crankcase which was far better. The W800 can trace it's roots all the way back to BSA and is actually much more closely related to BSA than Triumph is to the old Meriden factory !
@@ianc4901 the only thing a W1 and a W650/800 have in common is they were both Kawasaki products. As you say the W1 was based on a BSA A7 but the W650 was a completely new design that was styled on a late 60's T120 Bonneville, right down to the bore and stroke, though Kawasaki did add a millimetre to each for some reason.