British manufacturer Royal Enfield showed this flat-track inspired bike called the Fury at Motorcycle Live 2010.

It is based on the classic familiar chassis of the fuel-injected Electra with a 500 cc engine, single cylinder, twin silencers, air cooled, but it has a brand new original seat American-style, wide handles to “Western”-style exhaust system 2×1, a number of devices in a digital form, and boasts a sporty white and orange coloring.

According to Britain's MCN, the Fury will retail for about £5,800 in the U.K. No telling if the Canadian importer will bring it over. 

Engine	Single Cylinder, 4 Stroke, OHV, SI Engine, Air cooled, and Fuel Injection
Displacement	499 CC
Bore x Stroke	84 mm x 90 mm
Maximum Power	27.2 bhp @ 5250 rpm
Maximum Torque	41.3 Nm @ 4000 rpm
Transmission	5 Speed (left foot gear shift)
Ignition	Electronic Ignition
Dimensions
Ground Clearance	140 mm
Width	800 mm
Wheel Base	1370 mm
Length	2130 mm
Height	1050 mm
Seat Height/ Saddle Height	800 mm
Tyres
Front	90/90 - 18
Rear	110/90 - 18
Electricals
Electrical System	12 Volts - DC
Head lamp	60 W / 55 W, HALOGEN
Battery	14 AH
Tail Lamp	21/5 W
E-Start Starter Motor	0.9 KW, DENSO
Brakes
Front	Hydraulic Disc Brake (Disc dia 280mm)
Rear	Foot Operated 153 mm Single Lead Internal Expanding
Maximum Speed
Speed	130 Kmph
Suspension
Front	Telescopic, Hydraulic Damping, Stroke 130 mm
Rear	Swing Arm With Gas Shock Absorbers, Stroke 80 mm
Vehicle
Fuel Tank Capacity	13.5 ltr
Compression Ratio	8.5 : 1
Air Cleaner	Paper Element
Engine Oil Grade / Qty	15W 50 API, SL Grade JASO MA
Weight(Kerb)	187 Kg (with 90% fuel & oil)

The UCE was amongst the most standard engine designs post World War-II era, where the unit construction integrates the casting assembly of the engine, gearbox and clutch. This technology reduces the friction between the tightly-knit movable parts and hence lowers the transmission losses. 

Unit construction is a term used to describe motorcycle design where both the engine and gearbox are an integrated unit within the same casing. Engine and transmission may or may not share a common oil supply. Prior to unit construction, the engine and gearbox had their own separate casings and oil reservoirs and were connected with additional components, usually a chain drive, either exposed or in an oil bath primary chaincase. Early engine design had been of Pre-unit construction where engine and gearbox were in separate casings. The primary chaincase was usually made of pressed metal, but some were cast.
The advantages of unit construction are:

• fewer external oil lines to leak/fracture
• no external drive connecting engine and transmission, thus simplifying maintenance
• mounting in the frame is simpler - no need to align engine and transmission within frame
• the combined casting may be stronger or lighter - hence more easily used as a stressed member of the frame.

The chief disadvantage is that the engine and transmission have different lubrication requirements. In a design where the engine and transmission use a common oil supply, the oil used must take the requirements of both into account. (eg 1972 Ducati 750) Also the gearbox cannot be changed to that of another manufacturer. If different gears are required, they have to fit in the existing unit construction casting.

The chief advantage of separate construction is the ease of removing gearbox or engine separately for maintenance, or for complete gearbox replacement, with stronger gears, or more gears, or better spaced gears.

As the day of war dawned, we thumped to the holy battleground of Mutha to find out who had thicker metal of the two. To begin my evaluation I had the two contenders stand face to face. When the two metallic hunks stand firm together, they have this masculine aura that surrounds them. But both these bikes have their own reasons of marking their presence.  

The LB 500 with its shining chrome and 19” wheels, stands tall with pride. The Classic on the other hand, dyed from head to toe in the green (or blue?) colour, with its long sweeping fenders and 18” rims stands like an innocent looking wild cat ready to pounce on its prey. But the analogies apart, I personally feel that the LB 500 sports the old school macho look that you expect from a Bullet, while the Classic C5 looks ‘classic’ no doubt, but comes across as a rustic old bike restored by a new age mechanic with 21st centaury tech and paint.

Nevertheless I still love the round taillight on the Classic and the option to make the C5 a single seater in a jiffy – which unfortunately the LB 500 doesn’t allow. Moreover my entire team thinks that the Classic is a much better looker than the conventionally styled LB 500 and that I should dump my head in a gutter if I thought otherwise. That pretty much settled the design debate in the C5’s favor, forcing me to come to the engine.

With a victory each under their belts, the Bullets now had to prove their agility around the corners. Knowing Mutha like the back of my hand, I set off on the C5 first. It would be stupid to say that the Classic did not handle like my Karizma, but nevertheless the bike was well planted in the corners. Can’t say the same about the seat though – the bugger kept shaking as if it were imitating Dev Anand’s ‘neck boogies’.

The LB 500 undoubtedly gives you the best value for money. So if you already have one, the money involved in upgrading to the Classic is not justified. On the other hand,the LB 500 excels over the C5 in outright acceleration and top speed, but then again, touring on a Bullet is not only about riding on straight roads – it includes a lot more, from twisties and high altitude slopes to off road patches and river crossings. And this is exactly where the Classic’s facets come into play – fuel injection, tubeless tyres, better handling characteristics, sprung seat etc. For a buyer looking for a brand new Bullet, RE has left very little choice when it comes to choosing the ultimate performance Bullet. So for now, C5 is the way to go!

source : motoroids.com