วีดีโอ

Having owned a couple of Vincent's dack in the early 60s In my humble opinion the Vincent wins hands down all designed and built in house Fantastic Machines, Where Brough was a Bitsa/ Mongrel 😃.

A Vincent or a Banksy. Not a tough call.

I rode a Honda Four on rough roads and loaded with luggage. That frame and suspension were just dangerous. Frame flex and under dampened suspension. I just bought a Laverda and solved the problems - reliable, comfortable and good handling.

Personally love the look of the rocket 3

Saw this on secrets of the transport museam vs the mid 30s napier railton car , the bike would've won if it wasn't babied

There was a lack of progress with the triples in engineering terms. There was still pushrod tubes and short studs instead of full long barrel through studs which are simple engineering improvements that would have cut assembly costs and superior engineering. Indeed they kept the way too much of the old decades old assemblies. If they had just looked at what was happening with other European manufacturers and what Honda had already done or even things like the Hillman Imp was far more modern, better and cheaper to manufacture. The Trident/Rocket 3 range never really made a profit as they were so labour intensive/costly to make.

Argue as much like the the Honda 750/4 changed the motorcycling world forever 😅

I'll take one of each, thanks.

The Brough Superior is using a JAP engine, and without the efforts of a certain Bert Le Vack, ( whose nephew was the great Wal Phillips ) the JAP engine would be just another Vee Twin. However, Brough put this highly tuned engine into their record breaking bike and took the credit for the work that Bert Le Vack had done. This makes the Brough Superior a " bitza" and not a fully integrated model such as the Vincent, which is a superior to the Brough Superior.

It's not really a fair fight. The Vincent is just So.Obviously. Superior.

The rarity of the brough makes it so special, the period it came out and its history. The Vincent is in house but is more modern. They are both beautiful.

Honda got a sweetheart deal from the Japanese government to build a new factory to build Honda 750. A new CB 750 came off the assembly line every 3 mins.

the Vincent like a Bentley was a truck of a machine should have had big leaf springs a s a tow bar and winch fitted.😅

Just saw this and it made me smile. I owned more than a dozen British triples and several Honders which is why I ended up riding a Laverda 3C back in the 70's/80s. Rocket 3, too little too late. CB750 too much, too soon. Honda made some great bikes once they worked out the bugs. Anyone who thinks CB 750s handled never tried riding one around a bend.

125mph for the Honda? Mickey mouse speedo's! My commando and trident used to fly past them and certainly outhandle them,they were balanced when the cb 750 felt dead weight. Yes, they were well made and modern but not fun to ride and that is what biking should be

I would love to own both at the same time, a beautiful snapshot of English motorcycles at their best😊

17 k for the Vincent yes please , forward July 23 ....85 k

My problem is I don't have a VINCENT BLACK LIGHTNING in my LIVING ROOM!

I would give both of them space in my shed...

I had later versions of both bikes, and in many ways came to the same conclusions. I had a CN750F1 first, and it was the quickest and best handling Japanese 840s of the time (the Kawasaki nutter machines excepted with regards to speed)! But very early on I upgraded the rear shocks to Koni’s. Even so, on a u roads with more than gentle curves I couldn’t keep up with my brother on his BSA B40, despite more than twice the engine capacity and huge amounts more horsepower! The engine was bullet-proof, with rumoursthat their 24-hour endurance racers used the sane bottom end, unmodified! One journey back from Oulton Park involved a road which had a right-angle bend in the middle of a railway bridge. But someone had removed the “sharp bend” signs and I was confronted with the black and white chevrons only hards away, at nearly 70 mph! I cogged down 3 gears, hit the brakes and got round the bend with everything scraping! The rev counter needle shot out of the top of the red band, so who knows ehat revs the engine was doing, but it was fine. If I had done that on the Trident there would have been engine bits for miles around! When I got the Trident, a T160V, it wasn’t as smooth as I thought it should be, lumpy compared with the buzziness of the F1. UntiI swapped the standard Norton Commando silencers (why did they do that?) for those original ray-guns, and suddenly I knew what silky-smooth meant! Visiting my brother at uni involved an 80 mile round trip, and on the F1 I would get home tired, but on the T160V I would want to go again because the bike was such a joy to ride. The bike was let down by shoddy engineering and design work.Triumph converted the bike to left-foot gearchange - the clutch operating mechanism stayed put but was actuated by a pushrod running through the width of the gearbox which was no thicker than a knitting needle. The resultant flexing meant that the clutch always dragged, despite having it stripped 7 or 8 times. When it started burning oil I had the whole thing overhauled, and the engineer’s report was that there were only 3 beatings in the entire engine and gearbox which were any good. This was after only 26,000 miles! Not inly was the centre cylinder known for running hot, the exhaust clamps were also a heat trap which meant that the bores wore oval!!! 🙄 O what might have been with just a bit of design skill! So the Trident was by far the best bike to ride, but only when it was working, but the Honda was made properly and gave customers exactly what they were looking for, until the realised that going round bends safely was actually a rather good idea!

I owned an A75 and a rode a friend's Honda 750. The Rocket 3 would outperform the Honda until something went bang

Royal Enfield was The First Motorcycle to use stressed member cnstruction.Not Vincent.The venerable Bullet was first.

Dick Mann won the Daytona 200 on a BSA triple against all the competition rice burners included

They are two very different motorcycles.

My father, was in 1949, sponsored by JAP as a flat track racer, and through connections ended up trialling as a production rider for Vincent with a eye to ride Isle of Man, in 1950, I think. his two most vivid recollections of the Black Shadow was that he felt the back wheel was trying to overtake the front wheel at any given moment, due to the lack of a actual frame, and hitting 85 mph in second gear. He decided very quickly that riding a Vincent was not in the cards, and went back to flat track racing..

THE VINCENT !!!!!g

Should have had the black lightning as a comparison.

Evan Cosmos? I have an old porno dvd. The main actor got the same name!!! The bike is magnificent! British Sex Advice.

I have had both sequentially I nearly died riding the Honda. the rocket 3 handled superbly, the Honda handled like a sack of potatoes, no comparison. I loved my rocket 3, but the Honda was more reliable. The Honda was mass produced the BSA was a hand made work of art. My brain says Honda, my heart says BSA ; a motorcyclist should follow his heart.

I'm a Honda trail rider from years ago , what is Very disappointing from Honda is ther lack of oem spare parts , I have a GL1000, a T160 and a Norton 750 even an old Matchless g80 , the British need to be commended big time on the spares they still sell , it is Fantastic .

Lance Capon raced a Vincent against Japanese super bikes in the 70s and won many titles. Nuff said.!!

The CB750 killed the English motorcycle Industry

the Honda started when you wanted it to , brakes worked , lights worked lol unlike pommy , and they went fast .

Only the brits can try and compare a leaky POS british bike to anything. Just british garbage. To anywhere else in the world it's a complete insult to pit that crap to a CB750. Only in britian...

I remember when BSA took four rocket threes to Daytona uncrated them prep them and they circulated the field at 130 miles an hour stock everything that was BSA before they went Belly Up. Yeah the company was going under while they were spending thousands and thousands of dollars for racing. They should have concentrated on the business of making motorcycles and supplying their dealers with parts they would still be in business if they Supply the dealers with what they wanted instead of what they told them they could have the dealers knows what sells.

BSA had a prototype 4 cylinder called the Rocket 4 and it looks like a BSA Rocket 3 with an extra cylinder and four pipes. Like the triumph quadrant what bikes they could have been

When I was a new rider in the early seventies I had a book on how to write a motorcycle written by an English lady and on the back cover she had her and her BSA rocketry and I thought wow what a beautiful motorcycle that is I had no idea BSA had gone out of business a couple years earlier. The Honda 750 was a cheap bike built cheap and they had a brand new Factory that was pumping them out one every three minutes imagine that of course a 750 Honda that cost $2,500 in America was $3,500 in Germany and $4,000 in France. Peter Egan of Cycle World Fame once said in his column that his Honda 750 was cheaper to throw away and buy a new one then fix the old one. You can get anything for a BSA Rocket 3 you can't get anything for a Honda 750. Of course people will say that's because they always need parts

Sad that the panel got so much wrong about the Rocket III, I am not talking about their opinions, although I have strong reservations on some of those, it is the factual errors that annoy me. Styling was the problem with the early Trident/Rocket III, the Ogle styling was supposed to make it look modern, and it was more modern than the previous bikes, and THAT was the problem - the "bread loaf" tank was, in my opinion, a complete disaster. One of the awful results of the Ogle styling was that it delayed the introduction of the bike by years, some sources say 18 months, but others consider the delay to be much longer, perhaps four years, the Triumph prototype (still exists) was running in 1966 from a design mostly complete in 1962! It also added weight and lost the "made for purpose" aesthetic of the earlier bikes. Further, the decision to make two different engines (I will admit that the sloping cylinders did look better and had some advantage in packaging) added further delays to the launch of the bike. IMHO, the delay and cost was probably not worth it, if I had never seen the sloping cylinders of the Rocket III, I would not have missed them, the upright Trident still looks the part. The engine was all Triumph design as Doug Hele worked for Triumph, and he designed the engine based on the Triumph 250 single, not the 500 twin - check the bore and stroke. Bert Hopwood designed the bike, and he worked for BSA, although the two companies were one, they still operated as two different companies in many important areas and there was rivalry and jealously resulting in truly stupid decisions. The only difference between the two engines was the crankcase angle. After the end of Rocket III production in 1972, there were a considerable number of surplus BSA engines and frames at the factory, these were used on the initial Hurricanes, new crankcases had to be made for later Hurricanes and this sealed the fate of the upright Triumph cylinders. Fortunately, the inclined cylinders allowed enough space to fit the electric start of the T160. All the engines were completely built at BSA's factory, not just the crankshafts, but it was not an easy build. The 56 operations, one panel member speaks of, were apparently required by the centre section of the crankcase, I find this difficult to believe, almost as difficult as 56 operations to build an entire engine - any engine. The engine build number per week was small but this was not due to the crankshafts but difficulties with the old-fashioned build. The Trident was supposed to be a temporary measure to keep the company going while Hopwood and Hele designed a whole new (modular) range of modern, oil leak free, easy to build, OHC engines, this is probably the reason Hele stayed with Triumph rather than going over to Norton. I think the OHC engines would have been good marketing, but a very good pushrod design can do wonders in most road bikes. As well as the better CofG, the engine can be lighter and more compact, sure it will reach limits before a OHC but on a road machine, that is not so great a limitation. For those who doubt the British builder's ability to build OVC engines at that time, look up Coventry Climax. If only Cosworth, ahh well. While the engines were the same, the frames were not, the Triumph used the classic Bonneville single down tube frame and the Rocket III used the classic BSA double down tube frame. The reason the bike was not a success was terrible management, internal conflict, dithering, unfavourable exchange rate, typical of the day management/workforce relations (WAR!), emissions standards, Meriden!, NVT!!!!, the list goes on - it was not the technical details of the bike, Hele was confident of getting considerably more power out of the engine (as was proved in racing) at least 90hp, the CofG was lower than an overhead cam would have been resulting in improving handling. Had they brought the Trident out in, say, 66 (quite possible with decent management, Hele and Hopwood were capable if let off the leash) using the styling of the time and keeping the bike lean, mean and tuned, it would have been a force. Faced with such a potent machine, I wonder what the Japanese would have done, I doubt it would have been the CB750 as we know it. Disc brakes are also a significant point. The full width, double-leading-shoe, front drum brake was also an excellent stopper only failing after repeated heavy braking from high speed. The British discs were far better than the Japanese discs, the Japanese discs were designed to not rust (the British ones rusted up very quickly), this resulted in a less than optimal co-efficent of friction, but they looked prettier. Earlier modernisation to say T160 specs would have made the Trident more attractive to US buyers, but the exchange rate made it too expensive, and it was white-anted by the cheaper Norton Commando. At this stage, the cost of Japanese bikes was artificially lowered by government action, they were playing the long game With the British, this was not necessary, they were determined to destroy their once great motorcycle industry, much the same as they destroyed most of their other industries. Even if this was not the case, some previously mentioned other factors were at play. Don't forget that Vincent had gone extinct in the 1950s despite all of its technical excellence and reputation. The Honda was technically advanced but tubby, the difference between a sports car and a powerful but, well, tubby sedan/saloon, my view, I am allowed to have it. Anyhow, a Trident, with a sympathetic exhaust system (MUST keep the split centre cylinder pipes), at mid revs under load can produce a glorious sound, almost like a big six sometimes, , as the revs go up it can get a bit of a bark to it. Once, in special circumstances, I could not tell if it was the Trident coming or an old 50s Mack Thermodyne. 😁 The Honda, like a sewing machine - meeeh - who wants to ride a sewing machine (see above). Enough! It still makes me angry, so many lost opportunities, so much stupidity, so many experiences forgone.

Brough? a triumph of marketing. Vincent, a triumph of engineering

If the reason why BSA went bust is because the Japanese bikes are more modern then how come Harley Davidson and BMW survived? Obviously this is not the reason. Look no further than the car industry do we all drive the same three or four car brands even though some companies make much better cars than others, the answer is no we buy cars and motorbikes for many different reasons

If I remember correctly the first production bike with a disc front brake was a Honda CB450, they didn't sell well so perhaps they have gone unnoticed.

miller an absolute motorcycling legend a wonderful man with an amazing history a true icon of an era i will always cherish thank you for sharing

Different motorcycles. Blonde or brunette? Well measure the tatas.

🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯 it’s like GOAT vs GOAT! That said, the Brough is truly priceless ! A true one off! Just like one of judges said, I’d be afraid to ride it any place other than a closed track. Vincent is my dream bike and as one of judges said, one can “afford” a Vincent.

I still have my two Rockets and two Tridents since 1978. They steel the show all thoughout the state of Wisconsin...I love my British!

Absolutely awesome duo in their own right however I think it would be the Honda for me.

I remember Sir Lawrence of Arabia died while riding his Brought Superior.

Vincent 👍

Definitely honda

Or even a vetter hurricane