Classic 650 can't help being a beauty

The Royal Enfield Classic 650 is meant to be beautiful.

 There are beautiful motorcycles that are works of art. Often they are artworks first, and vehicles second. These are perfect for art museums. 

In contrast, motorcycles that get bought and used by the public may look dramatically modern, look evocative of other eras, or look like tools built for abuse. They all typically sacrifice at least a bit of beauty to appear modern, retro, or adventurous. 

Royal Enfield's Classic 650 twin, due on the market in January, is an invitation for art critics to weigh in. 

Buyers are going to care about how it looks. 

After all, if they wanted it fast, there's the Continental GT 650; naked, there's the Interceptor 650; luxurious, there's the Super Meteor 650; bobbed, there's the Shotgun 650; beastly, there's the Bear 650. 

What's left to the Classic 650? Beauty. And not everyone will agree on that. 

"The Classic 650 is not just another air-cooled 650, it’s the air-cooled 650," Evan Allen of Cycle World enthused. He liked nearly everything about it, including, presumably its looks. Yet he never mentioned its appearance.

Those who do mention its looks can be critical.

Uncle Longbeard was worried about the looks of the Classic 650.

"When I saw the pictures of a new Classic 650 I thought: it's terrible, they ruined the bike with massive rear fender. Is it really that bad in reality? I went to the Motorcycle Live in Birmingham to check it out," longtime Royal Enfield owner Uncle Longbeard said on YouTube.

The rear fender looked bad to him, too massive. The front fender brackets looked too squarish, not pleasantly rounded.

But, seeing the Classic 650 in person, he ended up a convert. Sort of. The rear wheel moves backward slightly when the rider sits down, making it a better fit, he decided. A taller profile rear tire would further help; you could even fit panniers if you're really offended, he suggested. 

And you could paint those offending front fender brackets black to disappear them.

In fact, from the right perspective, the Classic 650 "looks just brilliant, and gorgeous and sexy," he concluded.

The Classic 650 is not the single-cylinder Classic 350 with the big-twin motor stuffed into it. It's based on the twin-cylinder Super Meteor 650, but it has a shorter wheelbase.

It delivers the Royal Enfield Classic 350 look you love in general appearance, but it looks bulked up to handle the bigger powerplant. Call it brawny; call it muscular.

Or, unfortunately, call it chubby looking. Over-stuffed. Bloated.

Tijo Tenson of TopSpeed refers, in a complimentary way, to the Classic 650's "chunky curved fenders."

Do these fenders make the Classic 650 look fat?

Slender it is not.

"It weighs 55.7 pounds above the latest Interceptor 650 and 4.4 pounds above the Super Meteor. This will surely add some challenges in tight maneuvers," Tenson pointed out.

In fact, "Royal Enfield Classic 650 is the heaviest motorcycle in the brand’s portfolio," wrote GaadiWaadi.

Chris Cope, of NewAtlas, thought he knew why:

"How has Royal Enfield managed to deliver a bike this attractive at such a reasonable price? Surely it's all plastic, right? But then you go around flicking everything ─ even the side covers ─ and hear the distinct 'tink-tink' of steel."

Weight is the price you pay for all that metal, Cope concluded.

"The bike is far more manageable than its 536 pound wet weight would lead you to believe. I only learned of the bike's weight after riding it and was genuinely surprised to see that it is so heavy. It really does not feel that way," he wrote.

The journalists also largely understood and appreciated that the word "classic" refers to reverence for what went before.

"The Classic 650 is still a 47-horsepower bike with tubed tires and non-adjustable suspension, but in terms of quality and enjoyability, this thing is so much better than it has any right to be...

"You see rich paint sparkling in the sun – including hand-painted pinstriping. You see gleaming chrome touches, and attention paid to seemingly every detail. You see a bike that is beautiful and well thought-out, but not pretentious, and it kind of blows your mind," Cope wrote in Motorcycle.com

But reverence for retro goes only so far.

Evan Allen, of Cycle World, delivered the bad news:

"Spirited riding will quickly find the Classic 650′s limited cornering clearance at an apex. The steel chassis provides plenty of stability, but the suspension components are oversprung—even for riders who significantly outweigh my 120 pounds frame. The fork is supportive, bordering on too stiff, but the dual shocks generate discomfort as you are kicked out of the seat on road imperfections and potholes.

"The brake system includes a single 320mm rotor matched to a dual-piston caliper upfront and a 300mm rotor with a dual-piston caliper at the rear. Both units provide adequate stopping power in the city and at a leisurely pace, but braking hard into a corner quickly triggers the dual-channel ABS system well before the tires run out of traction.

"Ergonomics are neutral and comfortable for my 5-foot-7 stature, but the solo seat limits the rider’s ability to expand the rider triangle and stretch out on longer rides. Wind protection is limited as would be expected from a classically styled retro. Riders looking for additional touring comfort should consider the Super Meteor 650."

More than one moto-journalist noted that the Classic 650s's press introduction ride was led by an experienced racer.

So, while most in the press pack complimented the Classic 650's mild manners at city speeds, they ended up showing it a hard time on the road, which showcased the bike's vibration, stiff suspension, over-anxious ABS and rev limiter, low-hanging rub points, and complete wind exposure.

Cycle World caption pointed out you can see the center stand.

One Royal Enfield photo shows a rider tipping the Classic 650 so far over into a turn that the caption points out that the bike comes with a (completely visible) center stand.

Alan Dowds, of MCN, experienced the Classic 650 at its worst:

"It’s obviously much less comfortable on faster British roads: you’re able to keep ahead of most traffic with a bit of effort, but there’s little performance in reserve. It’s a similar story with the handling, which is capable enough, but limited by the restricted ground clearance and the indifferent front brake. The pegs deck out quickly, and you need a strong grip to stop the 243kg Enfield in a hurry (though the back brake is powerful enough)."

Yes, but look, you wouldn't buy the Classic 650 to go canyon carving, would you? Obviously, the appeal of the Classic 650 is first about how it looks. How long it takes to get from Point A to B doesn't matter so much if you are having fun getting there.

Clearly, the Royal Enfield Classic 650 is meant to be beautiful and there's one last down side to that:

"The drawback of having a bike this pretty is that you will feel compelled to clean it far more often and more meticulously than you would, say, a Suzuki V-Strom 650. So, the Classic 650 loses just a little of its price tag charm when you factor in the additional cost of cleaning products," Cope summarized, in NewAtlas.

Indeed. Here is what reviewer Manaal Mahatme wrote in Motoring World about life with the similarly lovely Classic 350:

"Slowing down at the sight of the smallest puddle, and avoiding any dusty and under-construction roads became normal. I was becoming a clean freak around the Classic, and the not-so-shiny finish of the engine was bothering me every day. The engine polish is now on its way and the next time you see this Classic will be with more bling!"