120mph on a bike with flexing forks wallowing suspension and drum brakes, leaking oil and slowly shaking it's self to bits isn't all it is cracked up to be. The new modern classics have the looks, feel and style without the worry. Speed and power isn't always the be all, feeling the wind on your face and enjoying the open road is where the magic happens and knowing you don't have to stop every hour or less to spanner everything up. As I have gotten older top speed is meaning less, and not having to lay on a wet road trying to tighten rounded nuts is the appeal of the new T100 for me. Great video bart.

I'm 72 years old and recently bought a Triumph Street Twin. My first bike when I was 18 years old was a used 1962 Triumph Bonneville that I bought from my brother-in-law. Comparing the two, I much prefer the new Street Twin. It's reliable, sounds much better, is far more comfortable, and if I start it up in the garage I won't die from poisonous exhaust fumes. Regarding the weight, my 1962 Bonneville had kick start, air cooling, no catalytic converter and no battery. The new bike has liquid cooling, electric start and emissions system which adds weight but the weight is negligible because it's very low. It also has lots of electronics that give me all sorts of information to enhance my ride. My first bike required lots of labor to keep it running. The electric components were especially unreliable. The riding experience wasn't really that great because the sounds coming from the engine were mostly mechanical that drowned out the exhaust. The new Street Twin with it's 270 crank sounds wonderful and other engine noises are suppressed (probably by the liquid cooling). My new Street Twin satisfies this old man's desire to enjoy riding a motorcycle only for the joy of riding. In addition, it looks and sounds wonderful! At my age I don't care to spend hours trouble shooting and fixing problems, I want to ride and enjoy the experience of moving through nature on a wonderful and beautiful motorcycle.

Hi. This is very interesting, but speaking as an "old geezer" (aged 69) who does not look at the world through rose-coloured spectacles, a key point is missing. British bikes of that period were hideously unreliable. They blew up all the time, their electrics were always failing and they vibrated so much that they would fall apart under you. They had not advanced in terms of fundamental design since the pre war Triumph Speed Twin. I had BSAs, Nortons and Matchlesses and, frankly, they were all shit. The British motorcycle companies were exhausted, undercapitalised and lazy. As soon as bikes like the Honda CB350 turned up it was game over, and thank God for that. I went Japanese as soon as I could, migrating to the wonderful Suzuki T500 Titan. It was transformational - it always worked and it went like stink - I loved that bike. The problem for bike designers now, including modern Triumph, is that consumers nowadays expect motorbikes to be reliable, which is why the retro bikes are heavy and underpowered, as the video points out. Nobody nowadays would tolerate the rubbish the British were serving up. And we should feel no sympathy for the British motorcycle companies of that period. If you look at the Italian motorcycle industry, as they crawled out of the ruins of world war two they started with little bikes for Italian commuters, but immediately they started innovating with interesting, modern engines. Likewise the Japanese and the Germans. By contrast, the US bike industry in that period seemed to match the British for being lazy and inbred. So it goes - culture matters.

I like living in a world of technological progress where we still retain the option to buy classic designs. Plenty of room for us all it seems...

Coolness in motorcycles is often derived from the absence of accessibility. Most normal riders would kill themselves on the MV Agusta Superveloce - IF they could ever afford one. The same was true of Bonnevilles in the 60s. "Only for the expert rider". So if Triumph made the modern Bonneville what you are asking for, you probably would end up thinking it was cool, but not buying it - and that is a bad business model. My two cent's: At the end of the day, a cool motorcycle is the one you ride, that puts a smile on your face.

Confusing. You want more power, lighter, more unusual models. But then Superveloce is good but it could do with a bigger engine? I think one sentence in there sums it all up. "I would never buy one." These companies don't create bikes for people that would never buy them. Or else history would repeat itself and they would all go out of business. You cant sell bikes like they were made in the 60s, it wasn't feasible then, and its way way way less feasible now. You are basically asking bike manufactures to go back to the decade they all went bankrupt and go through the process of going bankrupt again!

This comparing power, torque all the time is the saddest thing in the whole motorcycle industry. There's a lot that goes into motorcycle characteristic, the frame, the stroke length, the crank diameter, the gearing arrangement, how the air fuel mixture is tuned, the clearances and how everything works as you reach the redline. These can't all be taken into account when talking factually about a motorcycle, that's why the "feel" matters. If it's well designed and well tuned it is gonna feel well at whatever usable rpms and speeds you drive it at, but everyone is concerned about that X hp that is achieved at N rpm like they are going to drive it at that rpm all the time. I can tell you what makes most power, petrol buring in an open dumpster fire ! Delivery matters. So yeah the older bikes might post better figure in terms of power and rpm because the design of engines haven't changed very much and the modern bikes have to work with the disadvantages of having to be more reliable, safe and adhering to emissions. The modern bikes are more safer, from chassis design to all parts within the engine are all mostly simulated and tested for better reliability and to be more environmentally friendly. And they would still do better speeds than their older counterparts with more stability and safety, probably.

“If only Triumph made motorcycles like the Trident and the Speed Twin…” huh? I have a Thruxton, I love it. Best bike I’ve ridden. I’ve gotten her up to 100 at only 5000rpms and it seemed like it was tempting me to push it more. The power is there. In a sea of plastic fairing Japanese bikes and oversized, over priced Harley’s - I’ll choose a Triumph Bonneville every time.

I remember walking past the local bike store in the early 70's and the brand new Triumph Thruxton in the window had a drip pan under it to catch the leaking oil. A master piece of engineering? No!

I'm anything but a hipster, and I love my 2018 Bonnie. To me there's not enough retro bikes on the market.

The w800 and interceptor could probably do a lot more horses, but they were made with A2 licenses in mind, which is limited to 47hp Also power really isn’t anything, your not buying these bikes to be one of those people who loves to break the speed limit at every possible moment, your riding them to just enjoy them because you like the look of them

Firstly, really enjoyed your video. I'm a 57 year old British motorcyclist and own quite a few machines. It's interesting to hear your views and understand your frustrations. I passed my motorcycle test back in 1984 and rode relatively small capacity bikes for around 5 years, as my sole means of transport. I serviced my own bikes but remember three or four occasions when an unexpected breakdown ruined a planned day out. Fast forward nearly 40 years and, amongst others, I've got a water cooled T120, Street Scrambler and a Speed Twin in the garage. All modern retros, all doing something slightly different reliably and efficiently. In over 30000 miles of combined ownership I've not wasted a moment wondering if a bike was going to let me down. In the last twelve months, the only day I've had hands covered in fuel was when my 2 year okd Honda powered lawn mower let me down. I suppose that's the appeal. Modern retros clearly don't have genuine history but, for a rider that loves motorcycling, rather than just loves motorcycles, they provide a great way to get out there and, probably, get back home again without suffering mechanical failure. When I think more deeply about the bikes, of course I'd love to be able to strip down, adjust, improve every aspect of a modern motorcycle, but, in reality, I pay my money, accept that the manufacturer has locked the ECU, but still love riding the bike. I've test ridden so many modern bikes, including the Speed Triple R, and they have the best of everything that manufacturing can now produce but, after a few hours' riding most of that seems to becomes less relevant. What remains crucial is adequate power, predictable handling, comfort and excellent braking.

Thank you for an outstanding incomprehensible and silly waffling. To compare the few good qualities from 50-60 years ago with the few shortcomings from the present. I have ridden many motorcycles from different times. Also Norton, AJS, Triumph and Matchless from the 60's. It can definitely be an experience to drive these .... but the shortcomings in reliability, comfort, safety and most other things are endless. Having owned motorcycles from different eras and continents than it is really enjoyable to drive a modern Bonneville T120 that has fantastic engine character and is reliable. It has also not been a problem to increase the effect a bit and reduce the weight by 20 kg. It would be nice to have an original from the 60's in the garage as long as you did not have to drive long distances or have to rely on it.

i am into retro for two reasons, build quality and simplicity to maintenance. if something breaks you can fix it without to connect a freakin computer with propietary software just to put off the oil light

I don’t think it is all about the retro look, it is the ergonomics, comfortable upright seating position, the handlebar of older motorcycle that makes them more popular for older riders who are not interested in sporty ergonomics, lean forward seating position. One example is Kawasaki z900rs, same engine as z900 but much better ergonomics, and it is nothing like 60s bike .

I luv it when regular folks tell OEMs what they "should" do without knowing about manufacturing, marketing, laws, oh, to hell with it....

I came to gently take you to task, and see that I am in good company. Mostly I feel a bit sad for you. You see trees, but no forest. You have *your* wants/needs/desires, but ignore *not-you* wants and needs. Motorcycles have a broad market. One of them is the need for speed (w00t!). One of them is making desirable bikes that n00bs can ride. An A2 license needs to be under 48 HP, so the RE Interceptor makes 47 *by design*, with a $5799 price that is 30% below it's direct competition...and they're flying out dealer's doors. (Standard with EFI and ABS too.) The Superveloce is $21k. It's only market is the same people buying the Panigale V4 ($22k). I've been riding for 40 years. At 59, I don't want OR need either of those, and I can afford them. I'd rather ride a slow bike fast than a fast bike slow.

You say "retro," I say "standard." Riding position has meant more to me since my mid-40s than scraping knees or pegs. I don't have many years left to ride but I sure as hell aren't going to suffer with lower back pain after 45 minutes of saddle time. There are bold riders, and old riders, but there are very few old & bold riders.

I absolutely love my air cooled Triumph 865 SE. It feels just like a 45 year old bike without the negatives of a 45 year old bike. I have owned bikes by every major manufacturer except Ducati and Indian. This is my 4th Triumph and my first retro bike and I could not be happier..

I am glad this is only an opinion! They do not build retro bikes to be "copycats" as you implied. They build them because there is a desire, a demand, and a very healthy market for them. Also the bikes are not built bigger because of emissions, the engines are! Many of which put out much more usable horsepower than the original did. The Z900RS is a prime example of this. The market now seems to be resisting the insect looking bikes a bit as it embraces the retro looking bikes. More comfortable to ride and and covers multi tasking better than the insect bike as well.

i've owned over 60 bikes, from 170 hp supernakeds to stage iv harley big blocks. y'know what i ride most of the time nowadays? a guzzi v7iii. 50-ish hp. the connection between throttle, engine, and the road is profound. speed is a novelty; feeling the road in a purer form lives beyond the adrenaline peaks.

I understand where you’re coming from, but for me I don’t give a damn about the lack of tech and lack of speed. They look cool and appealing to me. I mean the speed limit is 100k in NZ. So why would I want 200 bhp. Anyway I am upgrading to the 2022 Triumph Bonneville T120 Matt Black / Graphite. Shall pick the bike up in February. Tnx for your perspective. NZ. Regards John.

the best bike is always the one you have in your garage. that sums up all said above =)

Good thing you like the Speed Twin, I test rode one about 2 months ago and my goodness it was the smoothest bike ever that felt like a rocket when twisting the throttle. Everything about it was just so polished. The whole reason why people (myself included) love modern retros is this: it’s like owning a resto-modded classic car. There’s no worry about it not starting, drum brakes, crap tires, etc. it gives me the same feeling as the old bikes but without any of the worry of being stranded on my weekend rides.

100% agree. Calling things "hipster" is a lazy take, but yeah. There is ABSOLUTELY a big hole in the market for a true evolution of classic style. Not everyone wants to ride a sharp, angular sport bike that looks straight out of an anime, but people do like the performance. Every new bike I immediately feel like I need to mod just to make it cleaner and less alien-looking.

You said it yourself Emissions! It's pretty amazing that brands like triumph are offering what they do. Everything is a compromise nowadays, just to survive. On the plus side, bikes are way more reliable and stop better today.

This is why I like Harley-davidson, they never stopped making the same bikes they just evolved, no fakery, no retro, simple old school engineering. Works

What is so good about retro's is that they have feeling, compassion for the ride. They were basic and direct in application. They were fun. Bikes of today are way beyond what is needed for good motorcycle ride and touring today. Fast is not the only reason for owning a motorcycle. The retro's are the kind that you take to the beach, country touring, and out with your girlfriend or boyfriend. Speed or power is such a narrow focus on the enjoyment of riding. It basically says a person does not understand the passion for riding, if they are focused on power. So many of the bikes today have too much plastic on them, and too many shrouds. At point, Why do you think Harley has such a big following. They are true owners of compassion for riding and nostalgia and the calmness of yesterday.

Gentlemen, to each their own, let's enjoy all types of motorcycles as long as they exist, once electric vehicles take over.. it's all over.

Enjoying my Katana--I'm stuck in the 80s (with 150 hp)

For me, modern classic bikes tell me that companies are willing to listen to the demand of the market. How many people have said "I love the old boxy style trucks" or "I miss wide body cars". People love that older aesthetic and clamor for it in cars and the car manufacturers seem to be like screw you here's another weird, round, bulbous take on a car we've been selling for 50 years. MC bikes are giving people what they want, classic looks but with modern features.

I have a Bonny, I bought one of the first fuel injected ones because I wanted to spend the time riding, not messing with a mixture adjustment and timing. It looks like I expect a motorcycle to look and it isn’t trying to kill me. Triumph could do a stripped version with more power, sure, but they are a business and they know their market. They have other bikes for the organ donors to ride.

I have a 2019 Street Twin. I didn’t want something that pretended to be a track bike and I didn’t want a cruiser. For me the Street Twin balanced off so many factors: it’s approachable, low seat, strong in every gear, good looking and well-made. I’ve had sport bikes before, but the Street Twin is how I want to ride now. It gives me enough speed, looks great and is easy to own.

I really like the idea of older retros from the 20s through 40s... I have a Royal Enfield Classic 500, and Continental GT 650, and love them both. I'm happy that neither of them are plagued with mechanical and maintenance issues. Which is a common theme amongst old motos of the 50s and 60s. I also have an Indian Scout 60 Bobber. Totally different moto than the other two, but also reliable and beautiful. High performance isn't a key concern of mine... Why? Because I'm not a racer. Nobody pays me to risk my life and go fast. I simply ride, and I enjoy it. That's what these motos are made for, and they do exactly that. Now, that being said, I did buy the BIG Bore Kits to give both Royal Enfields a higher cruising speed and passing power.

One of the best bikes I've owned was my Norton 750 Commando. I have no doubt that it would kick the arse of a modern retro performance wise. However, handling, brakes, emissions and reliability would be no contest whatsoever.

Thanks for your thoughtful review that somehow hits the nail. But you've gotten it completely wrong to include Royal Enfield in your assessment because it is the only english brand who was never discontinued and therefore is still to be considered as probably the only genuine and original company which has always kept an eye on building simple, service friendly and easy to use motorcycle's thanks to the perseverance of the factory based in India. This is quite ironic because an independent Commonwealth State has preserved a british masterpiece over more than a century and therefore shouldn't in any way be mistaken as a so called "modern classic". It is still and simply to be valued as a ongoing original.

pretty narrow viewpoint, all I heard was "fast, quick, performance" sometimes it's just how the bike makes you feel.

I'm OLD so you'll have to excuse me. I grew up riding motorcycles in the 60's so retro motorcycles represent the motorcycles I knew way back then. They were simple machines, usually a side by side twin cylinder of small engine size. Honda's largest back then was a 300cc Dream or a 305cc scrambler. The fuel was fed by gravity, not electric fuel pumps and EFI wasn't even thought of back them for motorcycles. No ABS or driving modes, they were very crude to say the least, but it was fun transportation. I think most of the manufactures today are just targeting old riders like me. I don't think somebody twenty years younger who grew up with sport bikes would be the least interested in a retro bike. Retro to them would be the earlier sport bikes. Retro does sell, that's why HD and Indian are there. But the Japanese bike makers have already rode that ride and are returning to more modern bikes with all the bells and whistles and some of them are wonderful motorcycles, but old people like me hardy ever give them a second look. I may be different, I love all motorcycles, the Honda 300 single cylinder is a neat bike. I do like the Royal Enfields, the 650 twins, Himalayan and the Meteor. And I really like the Kawasaki W 800. I've owned many motorcycles since I started riding in 1964 but I had to go to trike a couple of years ago due to my wife's health issues. (she always rides with me) I checked out different three wheeled machines but I found the Harley Davidsons handles much better than the others so now I own a HD Tri-GLide. Please don't hate me for that. I have a friend who owns 47 motorcycles, mostly old Triumphs and BSA's some completely restored and they are beautiful motorcycles.

My first vehicle ever, at 16 yrs old , in 73, was a 71 RD350. Drum brakes front and rear. Top speed, 110 mph. Felt sketchy. Loved that bike. Still have it.

I was somewhat frustrated with the beginning of the video but when you hit the Ducati analogy you totally made your point. Great video, and I agree 100%!

It’s the style that draws people to them. Enjoy what you enjoy is bottom line. There is merit in aesthetics for both styles, different strokes for different folks.

Correction, the Kawasaki W1, 2 and 3 were specifically sourced from a BSA design that they had acquired a licence to produce through a takeover, not an attempt to build a Bonneville knockoff.

i love my T140ES. the sounds, the vibrations...I cant stop smiling while riding my 750. the norton 850 is also sooooo funnn. why go retro, when you can go classic/vintage. I havent had issues with either, and i do keep up with maintenance more than I do with my KLR or victory kingpin. that way Im always riding.

After not riding for the last 36 years or so, at the age of 78 I have bought an Interceptor 650 on the 1st of November and have just finished running in at 2,000 km. My last bike was a Suzuki 1100 gsx e which before they brought out the katanas. The Interceptor has plenty of get-ups and goes when you twist the throttle. The biggest surprise was how heavy it is, 2017kg. My Suzuki was 253 kg and I don't remember it feeling heavy, might be age though. I had a 650 triumph trophy tr6 in the early 70s and it was about 173kg in comparison to the Interceptor. I bought a 900cc honda new when the came out and traded it back straight away for the new Suzuki, I like a bike to have the old-fashioned sit-up style and hated the clip-on bars. The 1100 GSX E was the best bike, easy to handle, no powerband so to speak, you could be in top gear sitting on the 60km speed limit and turn it on and it would accelerate hard all the way to 190 km an hour before wind resistance started to make its presence felt. I never had to drop back gear with a pillion on to pass a car ever. The Royal Enfield 650 Interceptor is a great bike, what's not to like! Low price, abs brakes, eft ignition, disk brakes, 3-year warranty, 3-year roadside assist, and 12 months rego. As for why riders like them it's because a lot of riders don't want to be perched and crouched over like a racer especially in the cities.

i spent some time considering this question over the last two years or so, and i get what you are saying. i like the look of the old bikes, but ultimately i went with a modern design for safety, performance and re-sale value.

It's the style and the lines! I've got two classic Hondas. 72 CB450K and a 75 CB550 Four. Love them, but they're not the best for daily use. For that i've owned several "modern" bikes i turned into retro bikes, but now i'm getting a Speed Twin. I was waiting for this recent update. This is what it should have been from the start! My current runaround is an XJR 1300

I'm 56 have owned a bunch of vintage motorcycles and ended up picking a 2017 BMW R9T its just the right amount of retro that when I go to vintage motorcycle meets my bike doesn't get mixed up with a vintage bike.

It is an Interesting take, I have a vintage honda and love it. It feels so different than a modern bike and I like working on things. So the work and maintenance I have to do is part of having an old bike. I look at current triumphs and the Royal Enfields and people call them retro bikes. But I feel they should just be called standard bikes. They are a class of there own and keep the look similar to the beginning is no different than ford, chevy and other brands bring new takes on their sport cars but trying to keep them looking the same as they once did. Think of a triumph they have the specific look.

There are several reasons the weight has gone up over time: Emissions certainly but also the addition of starter motors, starter motor drive mechanisms and larger batteries to power the starter motors. Balancer shafts and their drive mechanisms. Also the engines are far more robust now. Those old classics couldn't sustain freeway speeds in excess of 70mph without tearing themselves apart, but the modern retro can because the engine components are beefier in design. The sad part is the lack of use of modern materials in the modern retro. Frames and cycle parts could be made far lighter using composites or even aluminium alloys.

Nothing says uncool like shorts and flip flops

This has been said thousands of times, there are as many different reasons to ride a motorcycle as there are people who ride them. I'm 63 years old. I still like the music from the '70s and '80s better than anything popular today. My love for motorcycling began with '70s dirt bikes, before the Jap 4 even made purpose built motocross bikes. You had to take a DT and strip it down to bare frame and motor. Make it loud, fiddle with the carb, knobby tires. And my connection to motorcycles is much the same today. I like em minimalist, noisy, and fierce. I've ridden "retro" motorcycles ever since I turned to street riding - Yamaha XJ650 Seca, then a BMW R100, now a Moto Guzzi 1200 Sport - because they were highest in the character that appeals to me, that maxmizes my motorcycling experience. They aren't copies of anything, they just look like motorcycles - beautiful. With a minimum of suspension and fuel mods, they've all been fast, stable, and reliable. Anyone who has not read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance may not get it. Just ask anyone riding a Harley, or a bobber of any make. Why are manufacturers building retro models? Because people like them and people are buying them. It all comes down to soul.

12:29 I am half and half with your viewpoint in this video. When it comes to my Car Enthusiasm, I used to be all "sPEcs, DaTA, NuMBeRs, aND StAtiStiCS" as I churned 0-60 figures out of my mouth, pouring like Barf. However, when I got into the world of Motorcycling, I actually came with the mind of "Commuting" and not using it as a luxury item or "toy". Fast bikes are fine, I'm not gonna be some Nanny telling you there isn't a reason to push technological limits, but IMO the main appeal of Retro Bikes aren't so much that they're "Retro" or "Not real bikes" it's that they're the reason people fall in love with riding to begin with. It's crazy that as bikes get faster and faster, we're telling young new folk to kill themselves on more dangerous and dangerous vehicles. That's what riding is about to me. The Feel. The Romance. The Journeys. Not the speed. Not the Technology, specs, data, statistics, or Numbers on paper.

A very thoughtful video. You have recognised (many do not) that the bikes being emulated were performance machines in the day, not retro cruisers.... They were also very modern. This was before Honda invented the UJM and suddenly made them look old. I am in the "cynical about retro" camp, but I see their place in the current market. To my mind, it was Italy that kept the British bike tradition going after Triumph Meridan became a sad Victorian backstreet workshop and even Norton kept churning out the 850 Commando as if nothing had changed. Moto Guzzi was almost British on character, as was Laverda. Even Ducati had something British going on, if you could afford one. I do believe the current retro trend is more about seeing oneself reflected in a shop window while popping out for a latte. But that isn't a crime. None of these retro bikes will offer half the visceral thrill of a 1980s Guzzi or Laverda. That is the true retro buzz. Good video.

Well, I guess if you like the British bikes in the 60's. It Works for you. I myself started on Hondas or Yamaha's. The bike that started the death of the British bike was the CB750 in 1969. If you were after speed, the inline is the way to go

Love your Tiger 500 ! My first two motorcycles were Daytona 500's, the twin carb version of yours, and I bought the first one new, in 1972. Wish I still had it.

I do like and ride modern bikes and have done for many years as they have progressed. I started riding in 1967 and loved Triumph bikes the most. I still have a 1966 model Triumph Tiger 100 (T100SS) which I have owned for many years. It is a beautiful bike and I love the fact that it creates interest wherever it is parked. On the reliability side you are right they were not good when thrashed but if maintained well and regularly and ridden sensibly they do give good service.

Completely agree. My favourite bike is a Norton Commando MkIII 850. It is light, fast, handles brilliantly, has decent lights and even stops quite well. It looks gorgeous, as slim as a hungry whippet. To be honest if I wasn't so ancient with weak legs and dodgy knees I would have an earlier kickstart one with drum brakes. But at my age compromises have to be made. Foolishly I bought a nearly new Triumph T120 Black a year ago. Great lardy behemoth with loads of silly useless tech. Kept it about 3 months and sold at a huge loss.

I Just love the look of retro scramblers and cafe's and I cant be assed to deal with the unreliable poor handling and slow junk that most actual retros are so a retro's in reality are so a retro style bike with modern handling and reliability is a win/win for me. That said I would die a happy man if I could ride a Brough superior.

Well with old bikes one aspect that really bothers me now is the safety. Abs is something I would wish if it can be incorporated in those old bikes, it increases your confidence in your ride a lot.

Wow, watching this makes me appreciate my 2017 Honda CB1100EX even more than I did. With a 1140cc air and oil cooled transverse inline-four making 88.5hp / 68.5lb-ft in a 544lb wet package, it really does hold its head up high as Honda's premier retro/heritage bike.

I completely agree with your assessment. But but but…..in music, are variations on a theme, copycats? Are rock reworkings of country, or bluegrass classics copycats? I don’t think anyone thinks so. Is imitation not the highest form of flattery? That triumph/Kawasaki etc sell retro bikes that, let’s face it, are not sold for performance or features, but because of looks says something about the state of today’s motorcycle design. I personally would rather get an interceptor or a triumph speed twin way over anything Honda produces. I look at the cb500 and admire the engineering, and hate the design. For me, the motorcycle is something that I like to look at, and I don’t like looking at the ninja. Modern motorcycle design leaves me completely indifferent. Am I a hipster? Sure, whatever. If I am going to invest in a luxury item, I wants beauty and the retro designs to me were much more beautiful.

I'm pretty happy with my 2020 z900rs! 👍😀

I concur with your views, which is why I own both a 1968 Triumph Bonneville T120R and a 2019 Triumph Speed Twin.

This whole topic could be dismissed immediately if we all just bought (or restored) whatever bike we like, and forgot about what the next guy liked. If you need more zip than Steve McQueen, you can have it; if you're good with less, there're plenty of choices for you. There are old-looking bikes, new-looking bikes, beginners bikes, alien-insect-transformer bikes, WW I thumper bikes, Isle-of-Man-death-wish bikes, - just ride whatever you like. The more you worry about seeming cool to other bikers, the less cool you actually are; cuz what's _really_ cool in life is confidently making your own autonomous choices.

Royal Enfield are the oldest motorcycle company in continuous production, so they aren't emulating anyone; they just are being consistent. I own a RE GT650 and my previous bike was a a 1970 T120 Bonnie so I know the category well. Both are 100mph+ bikes, but the GT650 handles better, stops better and is far more reliable. With a bit of dieting it now only weighs 8kg more than the '70 T120. What's not to like? Not everyone wants a pointless 200hp bike... how fast can you go on a naked bike on a public road before you become just another Yammie-Noob-style hood ornament.

The modern classics are objectively better in every way. They are stiffer, handle better, ride better, more comfortable, safer, cleaner and more reliable. If you prefer an original, that is fine but unless your a collector or ride very little, your much better off with a modern classic. Some of us ride 10,000 miles or more per year and like to actually ride out of town and travel on a motorcycle.

this is why I love Harley Davidson. no competition.no bhp. only torque which they are still producing,

Great video! When we look at modern classics I’m always surprised that people don’t talk more about Harley Davidson? These bikes genuinely park in back to their routes whether it be bikes from the 1940s or even through the 1980s especially now with the Lowrider ST. Well they do harken back to those bikes they put out mountains of torque and have great possibilities with horsepower and upgrades. Not to mention they handle far better than their early counterparts

I really like the view you have on modern classic motorcycles and I agree with most of your thoughts. Hopefully your wishes will come true one day. I would like that too :)

A couple comments on the RE Interceptor: first the power output is limited on purpose to 47 so it can be sold World Wide on an 'L' plate or bottom rung of a graduated licensing program. This makes them hugely popular within reach of many more riders...good marketing decision. Can you easily make more power...of course! They're actually fairly easy to get into the mid to high 50's which makes for a pretty sprightly ride while still being simple and reliable...for a modern machine. The frame was designed by Harris and is very well done...great handling stock and again...easily improved as you progress as a rider. The weight is part of the desire to make them affordable so steel is used for durability and cost. It's not hard to get them down to about 415lbs just with exhaust cans (the stockers flow well but are very heavy) and anyone complaining about a mid 50 HP Interceptor being slow...the bike isn't...it's YOU. All of this..."I want 200 HP" is BS. You do realize that the bikes that offer this amount of power never really give it to you...yes? They all have traction control, wheelie and stability control and electronic throttles which won't come close to fully opening especially in the lower gears. If you doubt this...look back at the development of the KTM Super Duke 1290. The test rider asked the engineers to program the bike so he had a true 1:1 throttle with no aids....they didn't want to do it because they said "you'll not be able to ride it". But he insisted and they reprogrammed one and he took it for a ride on the test track....and didn't make even a full lap. Came back and said "you were right...I can't ride it". Anything much over 125 actual HP is a REAL handful that will bite you unless you're very skilled. The RE Interceptor is a willing and friendly bike that can be thrashed on a back road where it isn't the limiting factor about how fast you are going...YOU are. Affordable, simple, strong and easily modified...what's not to like? There are 750 and 865 kits available if you want more but most people find a mildly modified 650 does the job just fine. The only place it's lacking is in big numbers you can brag about to your buddies. If you can ride...they'll have trouble catching you on a winding road where the union of bike and rider is much more important than how much raw power it makes.

I’ve been riding for fifty years. After I got off my buddy’s new Thruxton the first thought that came to mind was, “Wow. This is what the ‘73 Norton Commando 850 wanted to be when it grew up.” Still . . . in my muddled opinion, anything Suzuki uses its magical K5 lump in is as retro as I need.

How fast are you looking to go? I had a Bonneville t100 that I put a 2 in 1 exhaust on and a fly screen and I would get that bike up to 115 with not so much effort. Currently have a r ninet (modern classic) and it's more power than I need and it gets more attention than the r1200r I had before it.

I just bought a 2021 speed twin and I have to say I have never ridden a bike that is this much fun. Pure pleasure. I can honestly sat that my relationship is suffering a bit because I am truly in love with this bike. It is a blast! Get one!

I own a 2000 W650, a great looking retro 20 years ahead of its time. You can ride modern retro's thousands of miles with no breakdowns, oil leaks or bits falling off due to the vibrations. I also own a 1960 BSA 650, another great bike but with 60 year old bike limitations.

I love modern and classic bikes. I have a Triumph T120 because I no longer have the time to tinker with cars or bikes. I just want it to work - which it does. Lovely bike.

Nice video. For me an old man who was so inspired by the Triumphs of the 60s and 70s, and someone who owns all of the bonnevilles from the pre-units to the modern T100 fuel injected air cooled I can relate. While my favorite by far are the 68-70, the best bonnevilles they built were the 73-79. My 2014 T100 is what I take on vacation. I'm too old to ride long distances on a fun fun motorcycle, and besides why would I want to drive a 2 wheel car just to be able to ride 500 miles in a day. I think my 2014 T100 may be the perfect bike, it can do everything a motorcycle should do, it can commute, it can carve up mountain roads at all altitudes, it has the feel of a sport bike, however it is not a rocket ship. Thanks for the video very well done.

I agree with you. If in future you want to get a modern classic, try the air cooled Bonnies (pre 2016). The new water cooled ones are good but very different to the air cooled ones. You can get good examples on used market. I prefer the engine in those then the new ones. I got a T214 have done 30000 kms, no issues so far and so much fun. I ride it daily all through the year.

Well at least you've got people-talking ! I ride a W650 the same as 'pams' (mighty-garage) . I've owned 54 bikes over many years (just bought another !) I would have been happy with any of the modern-retro-classics really, but this deal came-along . I push-it hard and it hasn't broken-yet . Only '1' of my old-brits didn't 'lunch-itself' spectacularly, but I still loved-them all. I live too-far out-of-town to risk owning one these-days plus I'm too-old to push it far . I would love-one in my lounge (partner wouldn't !) ..or maybe a real-old single-banger so I could do 'the-old-guy-on-the-old-bike thing '.... on occasion. .. for laughs . Look all-stooped, break-out the grey-hair ...then do a back-flip (we all have dreams ). Dave NZ

I’m 29 and bought a speed twin two years ago. Didn’t buy it as a reminiscent to old days, because I wasn’t even born then. But I can identify with the idea of simplicity and lightheartedness and that’s how I feel the bike. And I think a lot of people like this idea, too, because nowadays society seems to have lost it.

As someone who owns a Moto Guzzi V7iii, your argument is ON POINT. There is literally no reason why old school design can’t evolve. Granted, I’m in love with this bike, it is amazing, but after some time, the torquey, low power engine just feels slow. I am going to eventually move to their Griso 8v or their new Mandello V100 for that reason. They are making attempts to build on their heritage while still reminding everyone that said heritage WAS RACING AND INNOVATION.

For me, my 78 Bonneville T140V does everything I want - it's quick enough for me, easy and comfortable to ride (as long as you don't want to go too far , too fast) simple to maintain and will never go down in value. The added bonus in the UK is that it is exempt from annual road tax and MOT test (vehicle inspection), and has lower insurance rates, as a classic. I'm also a retired mechanic with time on my hands, which helps.

The reasons retros have become so popular is that over that last 20 years we have pushed performance to the level of insanity. I'm 52, raced 3/4 liter bikes in the late 90's. 105-115 hp doing 140 miles an hour on the few tracks in the south east that had those straights. The liter bikes were even faster (on the straights). That is power so beyond normal road conditions it's scary and useless.The fun just got lost to the larger market. To find the market again we're going back to bikes that won't kill a new rider but still are sexy and quick. Pretty simple really. I've ridden some of the retros and like them. But if your gonna make a retro, hmm, 75-95 hp please ;-).

For me at age 64 trading my Yamaha FJR for a Bonneville Speedmaster was not trading down but sideways. As time passed on me it was no longer about going further faster but having fun and getting a Speedmaster is definitely a fun move. I also want to keep the reliability that I relied on with my Japanese bikes so a new Triumph was my best answer. One doesn't really need to overthink it.

My favorite modern retro is the Kawasaki Z900RS, I think it's the perfect compromise between retro and modern sensibilities. It looks visibly retro inspired, while also looking modern and fresh, and packs over a hundred HP, which I think is more than enough to have a lot of fun. If only I had the money to grab one of these, damn things are expensive as hell in my country.

The W1 Kawasaki was an A10 BSA. Kawasaki bought the tooling from BSA when they stopped the A10 series in favor of the A65. Kawasaki replaced the BSC threads with metric and put a Battery coil ignition in place of the Lucas mag.

My first bike was 1968 Bridgestone 350 GTR. Not a very popular bike but for six years was my transportation! It was ahead of its time with rotary disc valves to control the the air flow to the engine! The bike had 19 inch wheels which aided its stability at high speed speed. It was a two stroke with oil automatic injection. It was a true sleeper from a tire company. I understand only 9,000 we’re ever imported to the US. Oh! it was only $695.00 at Montgomery Ward. Lastly it had a six speed transmission. Except for spark plug fouling very reliable. Had 57,000 miles on the odometer when I went for a car.

Well young man, you will understand in 40 years why we dont need the the speed anymore.... anyway i still love to go fast on my 21 year old yamaha yzf 1000 thunderace, but my next bike will be the kawazaki 900

I have a Kawasaki W800 and I feel that it the only modern retro that really does look retro. At 66 years old I'm not looking for high speed or outrageous performance but something that looks good and works. Admittedly I have had to do some work to the suspension (mine is a 2014 model and the post 2019 have better front forks) but I love it's low down torque and the power is enough for my needs around townand country roads.

Are the old bikes really quicker? They had less power, a lot less torque, less gears…yeah I get less weight. I have a Street Twin which has more power, superior brakes, great suspension, sound, and looks great..25 lbs lighter than a T100. When you get tired of the bad brakes, suspension, and carbs of your original, check out the Street Twin. When you get tired of a bike falling off in power at 70+, get a Speed Twin. They are expensive…but they have such nicer components. These Modern Classics from Triumph are their best sellers. May not be the right bike for you, but more of us disagree and ride the new ones.

Hi bart! i understand your problem, The Speed Triple 1200 RR looks really great, but i think power and speed is important but not the edge. I am in love with my RE Interceptor and my old Triumph Tiger. Two bikes: 142 HP ;-)) THX for the video!

Keep it simple Keep it sleek and pretty Keep it comfy and not 100% cutting edge Watch it take off in sales!

I ride 1992Honda CB750 Nighthawk dead reliable, retro original, ugly and every time I want to sell it to get something new she protests that she didn't do anything wrong why dump her.Love the new retro bikes specially BMWR9T which video didn't mention best in my opinion.Ton of HP looks modern and retro same time.

I really enjoy your videos. You articulate the feeling I have towards the modern retro, aka aesthetic copies, motorcycles. I live with and rebuild classic British motorcycles everyday of my life and have done so for decades. I can't warm up to imitation triumphs of the day but I am in love with the unique authenticity that the Kawasaki w800 exudes. I have read comments here that perpetuate the myth that the British motorcycles of the 60"s must still be olil leaking unreliable crap that looks cool in 2022. This inspite of the fact that people learn and problems have redress. Calling upon the knowledge accumulated over the past 70 years we address the failings without destroying the aesthetis. Reliability in a triumph, BSA, or Norton isn't illusive it is readily attainable if you have the knowledge and skills to impose your will on the classic beauties. To accomplish what I'm stating seek out those that aren't making the same mistakes in addressing the same problems they have been fighting unsuccessfully since the 60's.

Your T100 looks like the one Ted Simon rode around the world. I had a TR7E back in the day. Great bike, when it wasn't leaking oil or making funny noises again, or bits falling off.

If classic and modern is what you want and couldn’t care less for things like Power to weight ratio (though Here I think it was talked about as a comparison between old and new models) just buy a Guzzi. Had a Griso, rode a 1200 sport, V7 II/III and the new 850. Lovely and reliable machines.

It’s a long winding road working out what motorcycle you need. I had affairs with modern T120s and a Speed Twin and was a bit hooked on that retro look, but it’s been great getting outside that box and going for a 900 cc BMW bike that is sleek, nimble, good luggage, good pillion, with lots of other safety features and is also good looking in a different sort of way. A 900 with dynamic mode can really shift, but in road mode it’s twin engine is equally happy tootling along British Countryside lanes. Another factor is age, the bikes we like when younger differ from middle age and finally older age (if lucky). Cheers for a thoughtful video.

Moto Guzzi V7 is a modern bike with heritage.

Waiting for Honda to come out with a new CL scrambler, like I had years ago. Great all around bike. Basically a CB with a few mods. I like the 2 high pipes on one side. Triumph was close with their scrambler, but the 900 and now the 1200 are heavy and a bit ridiculous. With today's technology, a 600 would be fine, and much lighter.

Triumph will up their game on the Bonnevilles, they have to, its their bread and butter. I own a 2022 T100 and love it and I have thought the same as you about what Triumph could do to make it better because it could be a GREAT bike! Hope you enjoy the one you have.

I’ve got a T140 Bonneville. It’s still a fun ride and nimble like it’s going out of style. Also got a 2016 T120 which is not going to break any speed records, but is just a superb smooth ride. They did a pretty good job of recreating a classic feel. They’re not allowed to build them like they used to with the modern emission control and safety requirements. Rode a Hinkley Bonneville yesterday while the T120 was getting serviced and can say it felt close to the older Triumphs. Just fun and joyous noise! They made a Brough Superior a few years ago and it cost as much as a small country…. Same with the Nortons. Slow is a relative term too…. I comfortably travel at speeds on my T120 that would have been insane on the old Bonnies, even with its modest 80hp.