In the Western world, when people plan expeditions on motorcycles, there are a few brands that are favored. BMW stands out as a tough, dependable motorcycle that can be "hardened" for exepeditionary use. Sadly, the Royal Enfield motorcycle is considered an outdated, old-fashioned bike, armed with 1950's electrics and engine design. (I should add that since 2003, Royal Enfield has completely revamped its motorcycles and the quality and design has made a quantum leap; but many of us see the passing of the old 1950's based deisgns with some sadness.)

But if you ride in the Himalayas, some of the toughest, harshest roads on Earth... you will see Royal Enfields of all ages. Lots of them.

In India and Pakistan, they are by far the most common brand, and people ride them "to the top of the world".

It's partly a question of cost; a Western or Japanese bike in India costs a lot more than an RE. And it's partly perception: the old technology of the RE is viewed in the West as a negative.

So there is no good answer to this question: is a modern, efficient, well-engineered bike (which cannot be repaired by the user, but most go to a dealer for diagnostics) like a BMW better in the long haul than an older, more primitive bike with known issues - but which can be repaired by any layman with simple tools?

Which do you choose for an expedition, a computerized marvel with hardened electronics that won't need an oil change in 100,000 miles - which if it breaks, you have to fly in a new one - . or a leaky old bike with antique electrics, but which you can carry everything you need to fix in your panniers?

I guess it comes down to personal preference.

As a born tinkerer, I was drawn immediately to the Royal Enfield as something I could work on. So the choice for me was a personal one.

That being said, taking a Royal Enfield on an expedition requires a little preparation!

Antique Electrics

The 2000 year Royal Enfield military Bullet was designed some times in the 1950's, and has been manufactured with very few changes, ever since.

It's electrics were modernized to move from a magneto to a distributor and coil system; and "daylight" headlamps and emissions regulations being law in the United States, modifications were made to meet these standards.

However, the wiring throughout the 2000 Bullet is based on 1950's and 60's design, and is considered one of the weakest points on a bullet.

So this had to be fixed.

Over many months, a majority of the wiring on the bike has been replaced with new wire. Wherever possible, waterproof sealed soldered connections have replaced old plugs and connectors.

No more fuses

Fuses have been centralized in one fuse box, and converted to circuit breakers, requiring no replacement. A tangle of wires is stil a tangle; but ends in orderly terminal strips that are easily checked and diagnosed

Nuts and bolts

Royal Enfield fasteners vary widely in quality. To confuse things further, a changeover to metrics began in the late 1990's and was completed over several years, so a 2000 RE contains both metric and British Whitworth fasteners. Add in the fact that many new fasteners added to this bike (including the water injection system, meter holders etc) are SAE, we now need to carry three different ranges of tools!

Wherever possible, old fasteners have been replaced with new. Nylon locknuts have been used extensively.

And a little Loctite never hurt anyone!

The front axle clamps - the pieces of metal that bolt on each side of the axle to hold your front wheel in place at the bottom of your forks- comes OEM made from light, weak aluminum. Aftermarket steel bearings are vast improvements, and have been mounted.

Solo seat

No hitchikers allowed. The water injection system required mounting a tank, and the logical solution was to convert from a "dual seat" (with regrets, it would have been more comfortable!) to a solo seat. Additionally, there is a small weight savings.

LH to RH

The diesel conversion required converting the bike back from a left hand shift (required for import to the US) back to right hand shift. The chaincase needed for the diesel conversion was considerably wider than the original chaincase, and the LH shift could not easily be modified to fit around it. A better solution - convert back

The bushings, rods and levers that transferred the shift to the left foot were all removed. These have long been troubling to American riders, as they introduced more "slippage" into the shifting process.

Converting back to a RH shift meant better, easier shifting, as well as improved braking. And fewer rods and levers means less maintenance and a tougher bike.

Wheels

Both wheels were removed from the bike. Spokes were adjusted and tightened to bring both wheels into true, before putting on new tires and tubes. The brakes were cleaned, checked and adjusted.

A never ending job...

There's a lot more that could be done. The drum brakes could be exchanged for discs (at least, the front brake could be converted to disc). But this diesel bike is already much tougher than it once was.

Tools for the road ...

So what tools do you take on a 1700 mile trip?

As many as you dare.