It doesn’t seem that long ago that 600 cc sport bikes were extremely popular, drawing huge R&D investment by manufacturers who proceeded to install state-of-the-art engineering and components as the supersports flew out of dealerships. Times change, and supersports are gathering dust at dealers around the world.
Perhaps it is no surprise then that the extremely ambitious German brand Horex could not find a footing in the current motorcycle market with its 1218 cc six-cylinder engine. Big, expensive, and somewhat eccentric, Horex began selling its first units, but quickly fell into financial trouble. The fickle market that is catching the Japanese by surprise perhaps doomed Horex.
Passionate and capable, both in terms of design and engineering, Horex is a victim of the rapidly changing demand for motorcycles, leaving one-off models like the Horex only a sliver of a niche … ultimately not enough. We are sorry to see Horex go, because we hoped to see the fruits of their German engineering combined with Italian-like passion. After laying off all of its employees, here is the goodbye post on the Horex FaceBook page (excuse the loose Google translation):
Dear fans of Horex GmbH,
Last Friday at 10 am came the shock of the Horex team: all employees including the entire management staff were terminated on 30.11.2014, the closure of the vehicle and engine Augsburg site and the safeguarding of all assets was started on the same day.
With the removal of all employees, the company Horex, such as the Founding team has built, ceased to exist. The still negotiating bidder after (continue angestrebtem) Award build new structures and processes. At this stage, but will end all current trade and support processes.
We were convinced of the acquisition of the majority of the Horex team, because we assumed that the know-how and passion of the Horex team would be an indispensable part of any continuation.
This reach 10 years struggle for the establishment of a second German motorcycle brand to a milestone with an uncertain future. For your support on this path, we thank you very much.
“Motorcycle needs passion, it’s a crafts for engineers, who are young in your heart,” said Helmut Werner 1960 Bönsch of BMW Motorrad. A better description of the spirit of Horex team is hard to find. If we see only the spark of a chance, we will immediately grab again to still lead HOREX to success.
Until then, all we can do to thank everyone again for their cooperation.
On behalf of all HOREX’ler we wish all the best for the future.
Ah so – success has many fathers (or Fah-gerrs as one of my favorite movie characters would say), but failure is, alas, an orphan. I for one, never understood why (or exactly when) motorcycles changed from a cheap, cool, crazy fun way of getting around into incredibly complex, expensive and heavy lumps of personality-enhancing eye candy. But that’s just me, and I am crazy old.
I am all for technology, power, reliability, comfort, new ideas – as long as they don’t suffocate the original attraction. That’s what I think has happened here with the MC market. Call it the ‘Zen’ of motorcycling if you will – what’s it all about anyway? Not to pile on the metaphors, but many manufacturers have thrown out the proverbial baby with the bathwater.
But I did get a good look this weekend at the new Ducati Scramblers at the show in NYC. They are so cool and will sell like hot-cakes. Some people still get it.
It was largely a German Jesse James, or similar. Different execution, but targeting a similar part of each country’s sociographic makeup.
It may have been better “engineered” than a JJ in some abstract sense, because moneyed Germans are more comfortable justifying spending big bucks on “engineering”, than on an exquisitely hand hammered tanks and fancy paintwork; but in the end, neither one is a Honda.
Making products that are desirable simply BECAUSE they are expensive, will always be a bit of a crapshoot, since there really is no objectively “better” to strive for. It’s like a fashion designer launching a line of short skirts vs longer ones. Who the heck is to say which is best? And once fashions changes, whatever party you hit right initially, is soon over.
It’s a shame. I for one didn’t mind the looks of the Horex’s, although the tanks were a little ummmm frumpy. They did however have a look all their own which in my book is generally good, I liked the looks of the engines in particular. They have an overall stout look (bike and engines). It seemed to have caught the employees by suprise and I feel sorry for them. Probably the worst part of the bike may have been the name, but that’s only a name and probably meant something quite acceptable in other languages. I’m always sorry to hear of a motorcycle manufacturer’s demise. Hopefully, someone with the where with all to sustain operations until profitablity starts will step forward and revive.
I did not care for the Horex from the first time I looked at it. Should have been named the “Hideous”, not Horex. I wouldn’t want one for the price of a Gladious. No big loss to the biking community other than the wasted funds that could have been used to design something fun and affordable.
Ugly, hideous? No. Besides, Adv bikes already have those adjectives covered in spades and they sell. Too expensive? No. There are plenty of people financially capably of buying out the entire production run and more. Poor quality? No.
One unique boutique product without the history, or more importantly the needed financing to sustain a lengthy marketing program is not going to survive. “Big, expensive?” Yes. Eccentric? No. Variety being the spice of life, let’s hope someone will step up,(BMW), and carry some version of a 6 cylinder standard forward.
Lots of people seem to know the real reason why Horex failed. I would say that it was a big roll of the dice, and that the chances were not ever any good. The collapse of the company does not imply fault with the engine. The engine was, and is, an excellent design, and it is silly to even say that, because it is manifest that it was entirely different from every other production motorcycle engine ever offered, and obvious to me at least that it was not different just for the sake of being different. The design was driven entirely by meaningful purpose. Some people don’t get that, which is unfortunate, and some people are claiming that it failed because it cost too much to manufacture. I don’t know what it cost to manufacture the engine, and I don’t have any idea of the extent to which the per-unit cost could be expected to drop alongside an increase in volume. For all I know, once they had production up and running, they ran the accounting data through a spreadsheet and reached the conclusion that no matter what volume they eventually reached, the manufacturing cost would be prohibitive. I don’t know, but I doubt if anyone else here has any idea either, and Imdoubt that it is true or that it is that simple, because I can’t think of any reason why it would cost more to manufacture than the BMW straight six, other than the effect of volume. It seems more likely to me that they were just not making money and that they had no compelling reason to expect that the volume would ever be great enough for the cost to be low enough to be profitable. I don’t like blaming it on the cost to make the engine, for two reasons at least. First, I doubt if there is any real information by which to reach that conclusion, i.e., it is just conjecture. Second, if one of the Japanese manufacturers were to buy the rights to the design and offer this engine in a more affordable bike that would have broader appeal, this would be a good thing for motorcyclists, wouldn’t it?
It would.
I think the only production cost problems with the VR6 engine was the low volume and how it compares to engines with fewer cylinders. If you are only going to make 50 a year (or whatever their years 1 – 2 sales goal was) it is significantly more expensive than a parallel twin. If you make a couple thousand a year, the unit production costs variance between the two configurations may be the same percentage-wise, but a lot less in terms of total dollars. But you are correct: there is no reason it should cost more than a comparable engine like a straight six, though.
I’d love to see VR4s, VR6s (even VR2s?) employed in motorcycles. It is a great fit, I think. But if I had to choose one dream or the other, I’d rather see Kawasaki expand the use of / license its supercharger than start experimenting with a VR configuration. At least the supercharger dream isn’t too far fetched. But since I am dreaming, how about a supercharged, 800cc VR4?
From a cost accounting standpoint there is not a significant difference in the number of total parts and product cost between and inline 5 and an inline 4 ….especially as it relates to the total product cost of the bikes.
Volume effects the product costs for all cylinder configurations.
“Volume effects the product costs for all cylinder configurations.”
Yes, that is what I said.
But I believe a “from scratch” VR6 engine adds quite a bit more unit cost than a parallel twin would, especially the expense line that says “Amortization”.
The VR6 does make some sense. The smoothness of an inline six with the width of a triple is appealing. It is something that Honda or BMW would be much more likely to pull-off than a start-up, though. Not only do they have pockets, but they have built trust with buyers in being able to effectively engineer non-conventional solutions. The problem is Honda has the flat six well established and BMW missed their chance with the K1600GT. Also, an inline triple or the various four cylinder layouts work so well for anything smaller than the Shamu class touring bikes. It’s a big investment that requires a company to move buyers towards being willing to try something different than what is established and works.
In the car world, I have read rumors that VW’s is working on a new generation VR6, in aluminum this time. This could make people more aware of the advantages of the layout.
Changing motorcycle market? I’m not buying that for a single second.
This was a foolishly expansive motorcycle, to be sold in extremely limited numbers to the extremely wealthy. Those folks could buy thousands of these things, but they chose not to, because of marketing.
How many we’re built?
The looks of this bike is hideous. There is nothing that’s attractive. Its not anything like current day design, neither trending designs. I agree with all of those that said, its obvious why they went out of business. To those that thought it was beautiful, did you buy one? The current motorcycle market is flooded with new designs, its a tuff economy, and who really understands the next gen to get involved in motorcycles? If they cant load a phone app for it, they don’t want it. Besides, you can get hurt on motorcycles, so they tell me.
re: “Besides, you can get hurt on motorcycles, so they tell me.”
if only the 97% non-riding public saw us that tame. there is much “Fear And Loathing in Las Vegas”.
Does anyone remember that cartoon in cycle world magazine? The journalist asks a German engineer why they made an engine with 9 cylinders. “2 cylinders weren’t enough and 4 were too many, so we made it ridiculous.
It’s a shame. That was a brilliant engine design.
re: “That was a brilliant engine design.”
yes, brilliant execution…? not so much.
Not sure just what you mean, Norm, but the engine design was nothing less than brilliant.
again I mean execution. observe Gronde’s comment…
“I did not care for the Horex from the first time I looked at it. Should have been named the “Hideous”, not Horex. I wouldn’t want one for the price of a Gladious.”
now this precisely reflects what I’ve only said here many times before regarding product development…
APPEARANCE IS JOB #1.
not unlike selecting the correct lure in fishing, this thing could be powered by an antique steam engine, but if the outer packing (seen by the eye) looks good…? the masses will “consume” it.
Motorcycles are mostly a luxury item, and race replicas to a greater degree than any other genre. I would estimate the peak in race replica sales closely matches the peak in sub prime vehicle loans prior to Lehman Brothers’ bankruptcy in 2008.
Ferrari and Maserati sales skyrocket. If Motus closes its doors, maybe the entire market for high performance motorcycles is just too tiny for a small boutique company to exist.
The Motus bikes looked great at COTA this year. Too bad if they fail.
Sadly Motus is close behind for many of the same reasons.
The main reason for Motus is that quickly changing marketplace mentioned. I first saw a Motus at Barber 3 or more years ago. At the time I thought their biggest challenge was the high price and lack of abs. Fast forward to the 2015 models and electric suspension, cruise control, big hp/torque, Electric wibdshield, abs and advanced 2nd generation traction control are now MANDATORY.
Who spends $30k on a sport tourer wo ABS
Absolutely. I look at my 2008 K1200GT with ABS, cruise, elec suspension (no TC) that I picked up a couple of years ago for under 12K (32000 miles on the bike) and I wonder what on earth would drive me to drop $30K on a Motus with less functionality and support. Exclusivity has a finite value. These niche bikes remind me of esoteric stereophile loudspeakers. They only need to sell 200 a year to make their money, but a volume that low has no tolerance for demand fluctuation.
re: “a volume that low has no tolerance for demand fluctuation.
a volume that targets wealth is all but INSULATED from the market fluctuations the rest of us schmo’s have to put up with.
in 50 years i’ve never seen “Christmas Cancelled” at the Richman’s.
But because it is such an easy market to crack, there will always be too many who try. Most of whom will then, definitionally, fail.
Build ugly bikes, then go out business. Why is anyone surprised?
It was never really a household name. What’s a Horex? I might have thought it was a watch.
I pay reasonably close attention and I can say I only vaguely remember having ever heard of it. I think I thought they were in development or something. I sure haven’t seen any dealers or one on the street.
re: “It was never really a household name.”
certainly not on any Forbes list that I’ve ever read.
re: “What’s a Horex?”
well she used to be called “Wife” prior to my divorce, but that’s a discussion for another time.
Bahahaa!
Ho, Ho, Ho! (I’m assuming she had a couple of sisters)
A shame, but not unexpected. The Horex was a beautiful bike, but I’ve never seen one in real life.
Now I’m wondering if Motus will be next. The Motus I have actually seen in real life, but only in their booth at Barber – can they hold on much longer without actually selling any bikes?
One now has to look at Eric Buell and realize what are hopefully excellent strategic moves on his part to keep him solvent for the long run – turn Buell into an engineering company with multiple revenue streams, partner with a giant, Hero, yet still maintain some control; and lastly, get product to market quickly. The EBR dealer where I live in North Georgia is already stocking and selling multiple colors of both models. Real motorcycles going out the door and onto the street. While Erik may have had an advantage in the somewhat existing Rotax and immediate availability of his old frame supplier, you still have to hand it to them that they got finished product to market as quickly as they did (with the cash flow that follows). Just writing the required parts and service manuals for a new motorcycle is a daunting task, much less lining up solvent dealers and stocking a parts pipeline.
Wonder what full coverage insurance would have been on a Horex? The red Horex at the top of the page will look great in the Barber Museum…
re: “One now has to look at Eric Buell and realize what are hopefully excellent strategic moves on his part to keep him solvent for the long run”
CASH, life giving and life sustaining. he doesn’t have to “hope”, it’s as close as one gets to having a “magic wand”.
in fact, when directed intelligently toward the correct areas…? it’s INDISTINGUISHABLE from magic.
Motus needs to follow “Dodge” who recently slashed prices for the languishing Viper inventory. Sales were ignited.
They would recoup much of their invesment to build the bikes, build a little critical mass, and it would give them time to source and upgrade to an electronics package (ABS and TC) , which as has been mentioned is “derigueur” or as Norm says “Necessary Kit”.
Yes selling them at a loss is hard on the bottom line…but going belly up is all of that and more.
Go big or go home. Horex went big and now the employees are going home.
okay, that’s pretty good.
not that people losing their livelihood should be a source of humour or anything.
The market wasn’t the problem. The problem was an overly complicated engine that cost far too much to design, engineer, test, market and build. And in the end, the final product offered little more than other motorcycles, apart from a bit of uniqueness.
Entrepreneurs sometimes cannot differentiate between the market and their own egos. And speaking of Motus…..
re: “The problem was an overly complicated engine that cost far too much to design, engineer, test, market and build. And in the end, the final product offered little more than other motorcycles, apart from a bit of uniqueness.”
sounds like everything spoke about BMW’s 6-cylinder LT. the problem isn’t the market, the problem is CAPITALIZATION (or lack thereof). it’s one thing to splash cash building new kit, but if you don’t have any funding left over to tend to the ancillary functions you mention and get you across the finish line…?
it’s as if you never had the “brilliant idea” in the first place.
re: “Entrepreneurs sometimes cannot differentiate between the market and their own egos.”
and that ladies and gents is we NEVER use the word “hope” as part of any action plan.
Not sure I see the comparison with the BMW GT/GTL engine. BMW was able to bring it to market at a price range of $22,000 to $32,000, depending on model and add-ons, and they are selling readily. BMW certainly had more capital, but that capital needed to earn a return, so the money isn’t for free.
I really fall on the “it was mostly ego” argument. Have you noticed that no start-up wants to bring the world’s most awesome parallel twin to market? It’s always a weird engine or a weird chassis, or usually both. And a lack of capital (which is just a different way of saying a really bad business plan).
Michael, I think you are reducing something complex to something simplistic. When you say “overly complicated”, what do you even mean? To me, this implies that the benefits of the engine were not strong enough to justify its cost, and I do not agree with that. Do you actually have any real information on the production cost of this engine? Where did you come by that information? And when you say that it offered little more than other motorcycles, does this mean that you rode one and were not impressed? If you did, I am envious, because one of my personal areas of interest is engine design, especially in consideration of avoidance of vibration, and I would love to have gotten to ride the Horex. Where did you get to ride it, and exactly why did you decide that there wasn’t anything special about it?
Todd>>> MV augusta
MV’s first bike was 98cc, back when they were a successful company. Next?
The name HOR ex does not make one think of lofty ideals.
As a motorcyclist, I am saddened; but this is not surprising. I don’t think the “fickle” market was the problem for Horex. It was an expensive bike with very limited market appeal. That nail has seen many coffins.
Soichiro Honda started with a small bike, a moped built for his wife, and expanded from there. Within 10 years, he had developed the Super Cub, still only 50cc, but so well designed that it is still in production and has sold more than 60 million. If his first bike had been a Gold Wing, we probably would have never heard of him.
With all due respect, Soichiro’s “start” in the industry of internal combustion was building better piston rings and his family delivering them via bicycle. WW2 completely leveled his business so he started from scratch a second time.
I remenber the old 1000 six cylinders honda bike beauty but not so popular for me these bikes looks like a brick, very strong being these bike style, by the way never saw a test analysis, anyway it’s to far for my wallet but love to ride one
I thought a VR6 for a motorcycle was a brilliant idea. The song of a CBX without the girth. Hopefully the japanese will pick up this idea and make something affordable with it.
As long as I’m dreaming, how about a 100HP 800cc VR6 that weighs less than 500lbs wet with comfortable ergos that isn’t styled like an insect/transformer/bird?
er the Japanese did pickup the idea… it was called the CBX! been there, done that!!!!
re: “I’m dreaming”
as long as you copped to it, fairplay.
Starmag, you read my mind. This VR6 engine was a phenomenally good idea. It was, and is, a giant leap forward in thinking, design and production of motorcycle engines. My hope has always been that one of the Japanese manufacturers would eventually buy the rights to produce the engine and turn out a motorcycle that the average motorcyclist can afford. And I totally agree with your comment about how great it would be, scaled down to a more reasonable, rational size, and with comfortable egos. When Imthink about a fantasy motorcycle of that sort, this engine definitely belongs in it.
Would anyone really need to buy the rights to the VR6? That configuration has been out so long that I can’t imagine Horex had any patents that would materially prevent any other manufacturer from using that configuration.
Would someone please explain what the “Fickle market that is catching the Japanese by surprise” is?
I believe the Editor is referring to the relatively quick shift from performance and mega cruisers to ‘value’ models. Not that the other bikes aren’t selling, but the market for them has softened considerably. Only a couple years ago an ‘entry’ level bike was a $10K 600cc supersport – now it’s a 250cc single.
Re: “Only a couple years ago an ‘entry’ level bike was a $10K 600cc supersport – now it’s a 250cc single.”
Not really. A 600cc sport bike was never intended as an entry level bike, despite some consumer’s purchasing mistakes. Honda and Kawasaki has been selling 250cc bikes in America at a greater rate than 600ss bikes all along.
That’s true but responsible or not, most dealers in my area admit to selling what the customer wants and many (most) young newbies wanted crotch rockets. That has shifted in our area.
Yes, but those are all dead now. Dealers who sell 100+hp bikes to beginners ought to be charged with manslaughter.
M-O-N-E-Y…………..Those that have it buy a Harley, those that don’t, don’t.
Speak for yourself. I have money but I want to actually ride 10-20k miles per year so I own Yamaha and BMW, both of which Hardley does not even attempt to compete with because they can’t.
As for Horex, IMO it is ugly. The lines are “lumpy” and not flowing. I also agree with the others that they should have started with a product that had a large potential market and not a tiny niche market.
Not speaking for myself, have been twisting wrenches on Japanese bikes for 40 years and in the 70’s Honda created the motorcycle market. Before Honda, sales were of a few crappy British bikes and not many HA/DA. Honda brought me and a bunch of other folks in to motorcycling. Went on to owning Hondas, Kawasakis, Yamahas, and a couple of Bultacos. Worked at several dealerships, most of whom are gone. Now HA/DA sells 5 times as many street bikes as Honda in this country. Kawasaki and Yamaha sell almost as many bikes as Honda. Not because they are doing way better, but because Honda is doing way worse. If not for the ATV/UTV market, I think that at least 2 of the Japanese compnies would have left this market. Reality bites.
I think Horex’s competitors probably bought a BMW instead.
LOL.. that’s right. We all know there’s only two types of riders – those who ride a harley and those who wish they did.
(I’m rolling my eyes emphatically as I type this)
I had one for 3 weeks. The two happiest days in a person’s life is the day they buy a bike and the day they sell it. I tried the Kool-Aid and I didn’t like it.
I owned a HD once. Took it to settle a debt. Owned it for about a month or so. Rode it twice, it broke both times. Bizarre failures too. Sold it at a loss. The buyer thought he was getting a steal of a deal. I was happy to get it out of my garage.
The Horex looks like an interesting bike but not one that would get me to reach for my wallet or really even want to sit on it. Just not my type of bike. Looks big, lumpy and heavy, all things I don’t care for in a motorcycle.
It is a shame they shut down. Never like seeing a company fail and have to shut down.
In my naive youth, I swapped my uncle my RD for his Sportster 1000 for what was going to be a month before he came back up for the Fourth of July. After two weeks I herded the cow the 40 minutes down to where he lived and swapped back. The RD was no handling superstar, but it didn’t puke parts, and fluids. It slowed down an expected amount when you applied the brakes. It wanted to lean and turn when prompted.
The Koolaid was just yucky. Other packets might not be as much, but if all you have ever drank is Kool-Aid, how do you know?
HS….FR: I was always under the impression that Yam’s RD series was, for the time, the Shiznit when it came to handling – the Mag’s nicknamed it “The Giant Killer” for its ability to run with machines of greater displacement. I’m pretty sure the reason I never crashed mine had a whole lot more to do with the bike’s positive handling attributes than it did my own mad skills, I got myself into trouble way more than once, but was always able to keep it out of the ditch. That thing sang a pretty sweet song at 8000 rev’s, it’s the one I miss after 35 years of riding. Maybe it was just the times, or my youth, or the pillion cover at the time – but when I get that danged time machine working….that’s where I’m going.
My RD was good for its time when the pavement was smooth. The rear end hopped around a bit if there were any imperfections in the pavement. That tendency would get your attention in a curve.
re: “Would someone please explain what the “Fickle market that is catching the Japanese by surprise” is?”
no worries, first off there IS no market that catches the Japanese by surprise, they only have thick binders of sales date TELLING THEM of our fickle nature. the accountants know WHO and WHAT we are, and we can’t hide from ’em.
if it helps…? think of accountants as AGENTS IN THE MATRIX. “they are guarding all the doors, they are holding all the keys”. (Morpheus voice)
and here in the real world (yes) every single man or woman who has stood their ground, who has fought an ACCOUNTANT has “died” in the proverbial sense.
Norm, take your meds…
No, no, put the meds back in the cabinet, I like the Metaphorical Norm.
There were major flaws in this business plan. I’m impressed they got as far as they did. They tried to reconstitute a brand that is now obscure, even in Germany. Horex has been gone for over 50 years. It wasn’t a brand with great lore or race wins. They didn’t make a model that is well known or highly sought after by today’s collectors. Their only large displacement bike was the S8 of 800cc’s in the early 30’s (a few home-made bikes were made after they were shuttered under the purchased name). They weakly reconstituted after the war and did little of note during the golden days of the late 1940’s and 1950’s when Vincent and others were tearing it up. They built 350 to 500cc parallel twins during this time. What minimal cachet that was ever attached to the name is vapors. Clearly, the value of this name was over-estimated.
Maybe Horex could have been a name for small parallel twins from India or China. But they chose to build a V6, high money ride with questionable styling. They incorporated the frame so heavily into the styling that adapting to market reaction was impossible. They launched their publicity by promising superchargers and performance they couldn’t deliver. They chose and engine layout with no heritage or traction in the marketplace. They weren’t retro and they weren’t state of the art.
Well said. Most fail, Horex was doomed from the start. If they had been more than they were originally the agony may have lasted longer. The machines I’m sure were finely crafted but called to no one..
I am intrigued with the emphasis on the ancient history attached to the name Horex.
For me ancient history / past brand performance is much like the excavation of old relics – mildly interesting but largely IRRELEVANT. Horex failed because their sole product was pitched at far too high a price point, the styling was clunky / didn’t work and the resultant potential market narrowed even further in a world wide economy devoid of froth and bubble.
Tough gig currently for manufacturers of non-essential / “emotive” products such as sports motorcycles.
re: “There were major flaws in this business plan. I’m impressed they got as far as they did.”
I think the business PLAN was to ultimately “impress” another company to buy them out, as is the trend across all industry the past 1 or 2 decades.
therein, they’ll be “sitting on a beach earning 20%”. (Alan Rickman voice)
I don’t agree that the business plan was inherently flawed. Their chances of success were never particularly good, but that’s the nature of any new venture in motorcycling, especially one as ambitious as this one was. It was a great big roll of the dice. I don’t know whether it helped or hurt to buy the rights to the Horex name and use it, but to me it does not make sense to list the shortcomings of the original company’s products and somehow make that into part of the reason that this new company, with a completely new and highly original product, was not successful. You seem to be saying that a fundamental reason for the failure was the decision to use the Horex name for a bike that isn’t anything like the bikes that the original company made, and I just don’t see any reason to think that that much at all to do with it. And I especially don’t agree with your last sentence. The machine they made was BOTH retro and state-of-the-art. The styling, whether you like it or not, had a sort of funk retro look, and I happened to like it a lot. And the engine was as cutting edge as cutting edge can get. They did a lot of “thinking out of the box” with that engine, and there can be little doubt that it is one of the very best engines ever offered in a production motorcycle.
How many successful motorcycle companies can you think of that started by selling the biggest and most expensive bike they could design? Better to start small and simple, low risk.
re: “Better to start small and simple, low risk.”
I wiseman (heavily invested in CNC manufacturing for the offroad sector) once told me, there’s no such thing as low risk in the context of motorcyles…
it’s ALL RISK.
To Horex:
see Erik Buell
Rather predictable. NEXT!
Heard this a week or so ago. A shame but not unexpected. hard to make it in the motorcycle biz, especially if you only have one song to sing.