Among the long list of motorcycles introduced at EICMA, we just noticed one that slipped by at first, the brand new Brough Superior SS100. It’s quite the bike. It’s been a work in progress for a long time and we can imagine there was a lot of planning and debate within the company before launching a new model carrying the name of the most famous Brough Superior of all time.
The new SS100 exhibits the extremely high quality craftsmanship plus high end components and materials you would expect of the name and it has a certain visual connection to the legendary classics, but as a motorcycle, I’m not sure what to think of it. Is this what the Brough would have been if it had survived all of these years and continued to evolve or is this a modern recreation of sorts based on the famous name with enough visual hints to make you feel like it’s a true descendant?
The custom designed engine is an 88 degree V-Twin DOHC, 4 valves per cylinder, water and oil cooled of 997cc displacement and available in configurations from 100 to 140 horsepower. Dry weight of the SS100 is a very svelte 395 pounds. The frame is steel and titanium with an aluminum and magnesium alloy swing arm, shocks are from Ohlins and it looks like the front suspension is a Hossack derivative. Brakes are Beringer, with 4 ceramic discs.
The SS100 is designed as a very limited production model and will be followed by a whole series of Brough Superior models “which aims to become the new reference in technology, performance and distinction,” according to their website.
Based on everything we see here it will be rather unique and certainly very expensive. I think it has the look of a highly engineered and finely crafted Swiss watch and should probably be thought of in much the same way, as a high end luxury item, more so than just another motorcycle.
How well it lives up to the functional goals laid out by the company will be something to be determined over time. How well it fits into the legendary history of the marque is another matter altogether and sure to be hotly debated.
Link: Brough Superior
blackbird says
Things to like: Lowish weight.
Lack of plastic.
Looks very well made.
Premium components.
All new engine.
Cues to the original are plainly there but the styling will probably be an acquired taste. Is this what a modern Brough should look like? I don’t care. The people with the money and drive to do this are to be applauded for the effort. I’m happy to see new bikes of any kind.
Andrey says
Why 88 degrees???? There’s a strange decision, especially when you consider the lengths they went to to emulate the original models visual cues. Engine styling just doesn’t fit the rest of the bike in my opinion.
Paulinator says
I read that the classic Spitfire had several key angles set at 89 degrees because Reginald Mitchel’s T-square was out by one degree.
russell says
I can have to disagree, think the engine looks superb in the bike/frame, excellent looking engine and beautiful bike! That is the great thing about bikes, everyone has their own tastes!
Mark L. says
I used to think that you needed class leading performance to claim top of the heap. I feel this is badge engineering with a steampunkt flavor thrown in.
To me this is like the CMC, Gilroy Indian, and all the other bike that used a clone engine and called it something else.
In this case the engine is from the defunct French Voxan company, which were actually kind of neat bikes.
I remember Voxan entering some endurance races and having some spectacular engine failures doing so.
They could put blood red wheels on this and go for the full rat bike theme……
'37 Indian says
Unless Voxan had a prototype engine in the works, all Voxan motorcycles used the same engine, a 72°, 996 cc V-twin. This is different. While I’m not sure why they chose 88 degrees, the closer to 90 degrees the smoother it will run, although that makes for a tall and longish engine, especially with overhead cams. The design, execution and attention to detail on this bike is first rate in my opinion. Whether it’s what Brough would be making at this time is speculative, but it’s a beautiful piece of art. I would bet their selling price on this will be close to what they are asking for the original Brough reproductions that they produce, so I’m not a buyer. Even though I’m an air-cooled fan (that radiator looks like a brick stuck on the front of the Mona Lisa), I’d love to have this on display in my office.
Mark L. says
Voxan did indeed have a prototype in the works, 1000 to 1238cc and 140ish hp. The bike actually was pretty neat. Voxan went into some sort of bankruptcy and was absorbed by someone else. The original 72 degree engines were not well developed and had serious problems. They were actually raced a bit but as far as I’m aware, they never finished a race. They were credited with a technical finish in an endurance race in the late 90’s due to the fact that they replaced 2 engines in an endurance race and were lapping when the flag fell.
The new engine design was to correct all of that.
You could probably find out more about it on the net somewhere. This engine appears to be the 1200cc updated Voxan motor.
Mark L.
Nicolas says
Voxan’s engine was designed by Sodemo, a reputed racing cars engine, not by Voxan. Now as for this Brought brand, nothing wrong with using past developments and lessons learned from a defunct manufacturer to build your own mill, instead of reinventing the wheel, if that’s the case here.
I’ve had the chance to spend a bit of time in Voxan’s facility back when they were in production, and been lucky enough to test ride the Street Scrambler in the nearby back country roads, before it was even introduced to the press. Imho the best bike I’ve ever ridden … (disclaimer : that’s opinion, not fact, and worth what you paid for … ;-))
Nicolas says
*a reputed racing cars engine builder
Mark L. says
Hi Nicholas, I agree with you on the Voxan. I thought they were pretty neat bikes, they just lacked the development which they were in the middle of when they “went away?” or we’re absorbed.
I think the Voxan had more professional designers working on it than this Brough does.
This bike in my opinion, looks to be the work of a skilled engineer adding personal or theme touches to it rather than a professional designer. Compare a Panigale to an Ecosse Heretic. Both at the top of their respective manufacturer catalogs, yet one obviously designed professionally and one engineered.
Perhaps that is what modern manufacturing is coming down to is super compartmentalism of design.
Good luck to them all. As An engineer from the Roehr Motorcycle co. I know what a battle they face.
Mark L.
todd says
What’s the point of having a bike you wouldn’t ride everywhere?
The profile reminds me of a 1978 Kawasaki – which would be a decent all-rounder.
Though it’s obviously not to my taste, I applaud the effort.
-todd
Britman says
Tank yes.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2011/01/18/automobiles/wheels-Brough-Superior-SS101/wheels-Brough-Superior-SS101-blog480.jpg
Scotduke says
Interesting engineering and the build quality looks incredible while the engine is really impressive. But the steam punk style doesn’t do it for me I’m afraid.
I see one of TE Lawrence’s SS100s in the Imperial War Museum from time to time as it’s near where I live and I appreciate how this tries to emulate the style.
Drive The Wheels Off says
The lower stance & relatively horizontal lines to the profile, while still having some sporty dimensions are refreshing
That’s a stout looking motor but 180 mph on the dial?
Sportster Mike says
I’m not sure about the engine – rest looks good-ish
Engine is brought in from Boxer Design I think – hence the funny angle of ‘v’
STILL prefer the old ones.. especially George III, as seen on Poole Quay this summer along with other Broughs, being RIDDEN on the road..
WRXr says
Fork good.
Frame good.
Cafe Seat and engine are at odds with the rest of the bike.
Tom Lyons says
I’m somewhat conflicted about it.
I want to like it, but…..
I think that it is reminiscent of a vintage off-road trials bike. It definitely has a trials style seat. That is not a “cafe” seat. Not enough bum-stop for cafe. It looks exactly like a vintage trials seat.
The tail section reminds me of a flat tracker tail.
Not too wild about the Lester style spoked mag wheels.
I didn’t look for any other pictures of it, but I don’t see where the rest of the rear exhaust pipe is, and if it is so much shorter than the front exhaust pipe, then that’s a problem
It’s sort of like they built a modern bike around a stylized reproduction of the “Pendine tank” from the old Brough and hung on some off-road/flattracker type stuff for bodywork, and I think the appearance is incongruous.
I have no idea how well it runs or handles.
Just commenting on initial appearance impressions.
bud says
I don’t like this one at all.
Paul Crowe says
I wonder what everyone would think of this bike if it were not a Brough Superior? When you buy and then use a famous but dead name for your brand new motorcycle, the first thing everyone will do is compare it to the legendary, but now defunct, original. On the other hand, build the exact same bike with a brand new name and the bike will be evaluated for its current merits, whatever they may or may not be. A company is betting its success on the name being so positive and powerful that it will carry them forward, but it’s also very dangerous, because everyone has their own idea of what a Brough should be and you’re sure to get many who will disagree with your new design no matter what it looks like.
I find the entire process fascinating, there’s a whole field of knowledge devoted to dead brands with terms like “retromarketing” and “brand equity” among others and concerns itself with which brands can be brought back and which ones are best left alone, what people remember or think they remember about it and how to shape those opinions as your product re-emerges. I’m sure the current owners of Brough are intimately acquainted with these terms and studies and bet big on things turning out in their favor. Now that the bike is out, we get to watch and see what happens.
Willyp says
With or without the name, it’s just a goofy looking bike. It is form without function, other than to cash in on a name.
jt nesbitt says
A real understanding of the past carries with it the responsibility to innovate. Without this philosophy there would be no motorcycles of the past to emulate, we would be stuck in a retro feedback loop. Witness “Indian” and their fake flathead motor.
It is now well into the 21st century and high time for NEW ideas, New designs and NEW business models to accompany them.
That means leaving the dead in their graves and honoring their efforts by forging ahead into the scary unknown with hubris, naked in the wilderness and ready to stand or fall based on individual merit and the power of new ideas. I call it The American Way. — JT
Cowpieapex says
I immediately thought of the Confederate Motorcycles when I saw this bike.
It’s fascinating to see the iconic elements of classic motorcycles moved forward aesthetically and functionally. When it’s done boldly, the risk of straining the ties to legacy beyond their modulus of elasticity is the price of forging a new icon.
I am willing to forgive a design that has perhaps gone a bridge to far. The shock they elicit is preferable to the ennui of seeing the same bike designs cloned ad infinitum.
spectator says
I think I’m with JT on this one, shouldn’t a new Brough be something like an electric sport tourer which will definitely go more than 200 miles on one charge at highway pace and they personally check that at the factory?
Regarding the brand fit, I never understood the Brough to be any kind of attempt at a race bike. More like, gentleman’s touringbike that would torch a bunch of racers, because they’re so ***ing expensive. Something like an old-timey gentleman’s Hayabusa.
At the end of the day, this reminds me of notepad apps which show blue lines, on a yellow background and attempt to have a handwriting-like font. What once was done primarily for functional purposes gets re done for stylistic purposes after the fuctional argument is gone. Skeuomorphic design, right?
Scott123007 says
LOL jt,
The American way is exactly what your first paragraph describes when it comes to Motorcycles. The Japanese, Italian, and German way is what you WISH was the American way.
Mule says
The problem is, they DID attach an old name to a new-ish looking design exercise. If they didn’t attach the name and lost the old fire extinguisher tank design, it would be interesting all by itself. Taking a stab at a “New” Brough seems just a tad contrived. Nice bike though. Why a girder/link/tele front end with a high tech looking swingarm. Seems they had different people designing different sections of the bike. Love the handlebar clamping arrangement and speedo. Craftsmanship looks stunning. Just wrong. Sort of like a tad more sensible Wraith.
Lee Wilcox says
I like just about everything about the looks. However, IMHO if the price is near to what I read elsewhere I feel you would have to be braindead to pony up.
BTW Paul thanks for changing your security codes to something I can read and copy.
Bicho says
The side view picture,without the bodywork on,is the best one.There is so much potential in such an exquisite mechanical base.It just needs many,many,new aluminium dresses,for all the different occasions……..
B*A*M*F says
I want one, but undoubtedly cannot afford it. It’s a lovely bike, and I don’t consider it retro, or steampunk (no brass, copper, or mahogany). Aesthetically, I would be happier with a more standard style seat, and doing without the tail section as it’s not doing very much for the design as a whole.
I don’t really care about whether or not someone else made the engine. It sounds like a cool engine, it looks nice, and while it may seem heretical, there is more to a bike than its engine. I can think of no better example than Buell & Harley when they were joined at the hip. A Sportster and Ulysses may have shared the same rough engine, but were otherwise entirely different bikes.
Frank White says
Some nice parts on this but i don’t think they come together to make a coherent motorcycle.
B50 Jim says
A road-going locomotive. I think if they shoot some photos with actual lighting and not a dark background for “atmosphere” it will expose a lot of cobby bits. Still, I applaud the effort — as for the whinging about “retro” design, well, motorcycles are retro. Someone back in the late 19th century had the idea to bolt an engine into a bicycle frame and the basic design hasn’t changed since. It still has two wheels, handlebars, a place for your butt and the engine is between your feet. The rest is technology and horsepower. “Style” is purely subjective.
franz says
i think in the way it is done, the steering linkage does not connect the handle bar angular position to the wheels, so as it stands there, its not been driveable prototype.
the two vertical pipes with rod ends should not be parallel seen from the front, they should be one part looking like an A from the front, beeing connected with one rod end on the center of the intermediate bar.
what do you think?
boggy says
Still waiting for a Vincent comeback.
Re the engine, why did the makers not use the well-tried S&S engine?
ThisOneGoesToEleven says
A S&S engine- seriously? That would instantly devalue and corrupt the whole bike- we’d be writing it off entirely, and that would be the number one criticism. That said, I agree that the machine as a whole doesn’t work. The wheels look are inappropriate and look like something from Roland Sands (zero design education). The swingarm (and whole rear section, actually) don’t look correct. The girder look fork clashes mechanically and design wise with the radial caliper brakes. Necessary radiator integration is utter failure of effort- looks like nothing was done to attempt to integrate it. Exhaust draws attention to itself for the wrong reasons, missed the mark on classic Brough look. Where’s Glynn Kerr , Miguel Galuzzi, or even Terblanche’s take on this- I’ll bet any could have done much better.
Hey- they nailed the fuel tank, though!
You'reStuckAtZero says
S&S? Why not? Did Brough own J A Prestwich (AKA JAP)? Or Matchless? Or any of the other firms that provided engines for him? At least an X-wedge would perform about the same as the above whilst looking quite a bit better, all for less money.
What is your design education and/or motorcycle design experience? I look forward to seeing your contribution to the motorcycle world that doesn’t involve a keyboard. For a change.
PS – JT nailed it – thanks for sharing that!
Dr Robert Harms says
WOW more electron-bikes from the ether. Good to see they’re not entirely limited to Birmingham and Denver
Hugh says
I appreciate the effort and the quality of the parts; however, I simply do not like the execution. It seems to me that they tried hard to create something close to the original lines, but took it too far. It does not speak to me as an updated original, but as a new bike trying to copy a classic. Sort of like the first Japanese cruisers trying to look too much like Harley-Davidsons.
Hooligan says
JAP engines are still being manufacturered by a man called Ewan Cameron who is in Malvern in England. Trouble is he only makes 5 or 6 a year. £13.000 for a new one. Or he will reffle an old one up to his modern standards.
http://www.cameronracingengines.com
Geo says
I didn’t like the new Brough at first…then I saw this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6p6_dcGKlH0
Now I love it…except for the radiator.
Klaus says
I think the designers made a logical error. What was cutting-edge design in 1924 can not not be tweaked a bit and sold as cutting-edge design 90 years later.
90 years later cutting-edge design is still what it always was – but looks entirely different.
They should have asked: “What would George Brough design today?”