Interesting replies, and kinda glad some others are just as confused as me in terms of the amount sold versus the investment. If they sold it with an RSV4 engine in it, I think they would have a real shot a producing a superbike that could be sold in some sort of volume, the best way forwards seems to be buying established engines from another manufacturer. I am sure @Christopher Lang would still buy one with an Aprilila V4 in it as I'm sure he is after the design and hand built in England element of it as well as the rarity, rather than purely for the engine (especially if the Aprilia engine is actually better). we will see what happens, I don't think we are more than 6-8 weeks away from some sort of news regarding their fate, whether that's the winding up order or buyers publishing emails and fraudulent dealings.
Well as stated I think they've bitten off more than they can chew. I'm no business expert but I know that developing engines is just incredibly expensive. From a supply chain perspective to a testing perspective through to actually gaining Homologations to sell them in different markets (as let's face it the UK isn't a big enough market to sustain a £40k superbike alone).. If I was 'designated survivor style' ported in to try and develop a brand like this I would be searching hard for an OEM deal with a good engine provider like BMW or Aprilia or even Ducati (like Bimota) and try to build individuality around that solid base.
https://news.sky.com/story/norton-motorbike-boss-brexit-has-kicked-us-up-the-backside-11662637 I'm watching with interest, according to your sources, when will it be clear whether or not there is a problem with Norton? I don't want to lose £2K or wait for something that might not happen....if that's the case I'll head down to Ducati Aylesbury and save myself a summer of waiting
Yeah,they should have gone with an outside supplier for the engines,at least while starting out.Maybe a 765 triple?Triton anyone?
They did go with an outside engine - the Aprilia (granted not for the production models). Personally I don't see the issue with development of their own engine(s), they have gone to a proven engine designer. Yes it costs money and time, but I don't think that has much impact on their cottage-industry style of building them. And producing the twin from the V4 is imo a logical step, although I wish they had got the V4s out the door first
For me the issues lie with just how much real-world road testing is being done, and how quickly they are actually churning them out. The technology is the same (or at least very similar) as the Aprilia engine so not a major issue. Granted that designing an engine that can last a TT race then have its oil changed and everything checked is a lot different to what a punter who has a service every ~7k miles needs. the bigger problem might be getting any replacement parts out of them if the need arises. And from what I understand from some Aprilia owning mates trying to get spares out of them is not exactly quick or easy, so that might not have been a good option anyway... I want to see a bunch of bikes delivered and being ridden so we stand a chance of knowing just what we might be getting into. With my rose tinted specs on I hope the new factory sees them churning out the bikes significantly quicker than they currently are, and the owners love and rave about them. Lets face it if the new owners think / say they are a pile of poo and the press gets hold of this (wont be MCN as they seem to love them) it won't do much for future sales or residuals, so chances are they will keep quiet about issues anyway (unless using publicity to push the process along / get out of the sale). A mate summed it up nicely at the weekend: If you want a small volume bike to own and look at for a bunch of years, not too worried how it might ride, and can live with it being out of action at times, its a good choice. If you want something that is likely to be reliable, has good parts backup, and reasonable/timely customer service, probably best to go elsewhere. I hope they hurry up with them, as this fence is starting to get a bit uncomfortable
Hmm duke, what can you say. If I owned the company I would be embarrassed to see that. missing an accounts filing date by a day or even a week is acceptable (still get you a fine though), but now over 3 months late. This does ring alarm bells, because why would a company not file accounts during the 6 months from year end unless they were essentially insolvent and didnt want to document it
