BSA A65 machines - some of their desirable features discussed following a 52 mile two up ride.
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 фев 2025
- I have no footage of our 52 mile ride, due to the possibility of the camera being in the way with a passenger holding on, but all went well - so well in fact that I decided to discuss some of my machine's good points which made themselves noticed during and after today's outing. A very versatile and managable machine among the British classics.
Note - those oil spots beneath the machine were there on the concrete already and were not from this BSA!
Everything you state is spot-on ! Much more practical & EASY to live with, than a Gold Star...especially in a metropolitan environment.
Approximately $ 10 US price in fuel. Your BSA is now a dream machine. Cheers
Lovely handling flickable bikes the A65's.
Made for our mix of A, B and smaller roads. Super to ride including the Slumberglade Hall ones.
I'm biased about BSA bikes. My first one was a Starfire (still got it) and had a few of them. My favourite was my 62 Super Rocket, biggest regret was selling it. Love the A65 too. Nice bike you have there sir!
Thank you!
Now you are showing off 52 mile in one go you'll wear it out LOL😂. Brilliant, I might be BSA biased A65's great bikes 👍
Sounds like a really good all rounder.
Hi Paul you have a very good theme to do more vid content as many riders late 50s 60s and over need good advice and guidance when choosing a bike to suit them. Great stuff mate...
Thanks 👍
I love the A65 and A50.
I really want a 1969 A50 Royal Star, '69 for the TLS front brake, which is a life saver.
I agree. Thanks!
You are so right. The A65 is a joy and I love mine. I love it so much that after a good ride I will pai it on the tank like it was a horse,
laugh, and then say good job old boy!
Glad to see you are enjoying your lovely Thunderbolt. My Golden Flash was a great bike and on the runs to and from work (mainly country roads) it regularly returned 70-80mpg while giving great performance and being great fun around the twisties.
I just purchased a '67 Thunderbolt here in the U.S., it will be delivered sometime around new years.
Perfect,looks good,runs well,My bike for those getting on a bit is the early Honda sohc fours, the 400 and 500 are similar size to the BSA,but with the advantage of the electric leg,
Speed and consumption about the same
Keep up the good work
Stick it in a large box and send it over here, sounds like the bike I need at 60 years old this year.
I too really enjoyed my 69 A65 especially after riding an A75 for a while! I know exactly what you’re saying about the triples!(love them too)👍
Beautiful
What a bonny bike. Thanks for sharing.
Thank you!
Hello Paul, I watch and enjoy your films from time to time. There is a lot of useful info whatever British bike you own. I have a wee '59 C15 though I doubt any part left is from '59. Even the frame is '61 but you could do that back then! I don't even have matching engine casing numbers!
Good video had a good jaunt on my a10 yesterday still bit nippy though had to warm my hands on timing case couple times but these bikes are great to ride nice steady 50 to 60 like you say good stuff 👍ps I know yours is a unit
New favourite film.
Yours is certainly a good advert for the BSA A65. A pity they aren't still being made, along with many other types that definitely are also not crap bikes.
In 1968, I had to choose between a Thunderbolt and a Honda CB450K1, both priced about $975, for my first bike. I chose the Honda, mostly to avoid Lucas, but I always wished I could have traded with the BSA dealer, the great Milne Bros. shop in Pasadena, CA. The Honda handled like crap and was replaced in a year or so by a Norton Commando, so I got acquainted with the Prince of Darkness after all.
Enfield Albion gearboxes were, shall we say something never forgot when ridden
I seem to recall consistently getting 55 to 60 mpg on an A65 even when ridden hard.
A small digression, but did the Enfield Constellation have a non-standard centre stand fitted, as i recall seeing the 'spur' coming out from the left-hand side, presumably to make getting the machine on the stand a bit easier?
Yes, it has an Indian centre stand, which is much easier to use than the original, but on the downside it fouls the side stand, making that awkward to use.
Hi Paul I'm assuming that you have never had the engine apart and that your A65 is still running the original timing side bush, what are your thoughts as to the necessity or otherwise of changing this for a needle roller set-up? Is the bush system as awful as legend says, or are the issues exaggerated?
My engine has definitely been rebuilt at some time in the recent past and still has a timing side bush. They are not as bad as some make out!
@paulhenshaw4514 Thanks for your reply Paul, my A50 is also still running the original bush, and to listen to the hoards of doom mongers out there it'll definitely destroy itself on a short ride to the local Co-op
I trust your opinion over the armchair experts so that's reassured me
I fancy a big old 500 single like a matchless after a fire blade which is a bit to much now I’m a grandad .
OMG…7-8 pounds for fuel?!!! At an exchange rate of 1.24 dollars a gallon of fuel would be $8.68 U.S. per gallon!!!…and I thought I was paying out the arse yesterday when I filled my ‘95 Honda Shadow…it was $3.28 per gallon and she took a little over 1 gallon….and I felt as if I was taking it in a very uncomfortable area!…..I guess I have nothing to complain about as far as fuel cost is concerned….now our govt. is another matter!…
US/UK gallons are not the same
80% of what we pay is tax. It would be nice if the oil companies sold us what we need before putting it on the global market
Your US gallon is only 3.785 litres, whereas a UK gallon is 4.54 litres so you'd have paid $3.93 for our gallon
Still rather less than what we pay here though!
US gallon approx 3.8 litres. UK gallon approx 4.5 litres. Is it the only thing that is smaller in the USA..?
G'day Paul, sorry to say this but a Gallon of fuel in Australia is better than half the cost of your fuel and that's not E10 price, that a bute machine might look out for on, l am getting a bit sick of those bikes that are hard to manage as I'm in my late sixties, time too swap l think, cheers mate, Neil 🤠.
Should have bought a Thunderbolt instead of a Daytona in 67. T100R was not well made , lots of manufacturing problems. I saw some that were ok but mine was poor
A65 is a much better bike than the A10 IMHO - lighter and better designed!
Sorry to disagree but I have owned both, and my A7 is a lovely reliable bike. Paul does not seem to get many PU twins in ! Each to their own I guess.
It’s a nice bike ,but would have to fit it with a set of indicators ,as the only bikes I ever needed to use hand signals whilst riding were push bikes .
Wow all British bikes are crap 😂😂 52 miles with no problems and good on fuel. Love my old Atlas now owned by my son usable everyday if you want trouble free keep British bikes alive love the classic bike would my best wishes to you from the Philippines ❤️💪👍😀😉😁🏁🏍️🛺🐑🇵🇭🏴
Their biggest feature is not a oil frame and no comical brakes.
Actually, the oil in frame ones are not as bad as some people make out and neither are their conical hub brakes, if set up correctly, although those models are a pig to put on their centre stand. They seem to command less money to buy than their oil tanked predecessors, too.
52 miles on a crappy British bike!
Amazing, but true!
In 1973 I rode my C15 more than 100 miles in a day on quite a few occasions. And in my opinion it wasn't as well designed as the big Apple series twins
I too really enjoyed my 69 A65 especially after riding an A75 for a while! I know exactly what you’re saying about the triples!(love them too)👍
I fancy a big old 500 single like a matchless after a fire blade which is a bit to much now I’m a grandad .
I too really enjoyed my 69 A65 especially after riding an A75 for a while! I know exactly what you’re saying about the triples!(love them too)👍