I Love and Hate the BSA Design

I think it was Abraham Lincoln who said, "You can please all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time."  With the design on the mid 60's BSA's (A50 and A65), I feel that BSA was trying to make a bike that adopted too many styling trends, and made a genuinely confused bike with a multiple personality disorder.

Here's what the stock bike looked like:

First, the engine is spectacular.  It's sleek, modern (for the era) and minimalist to the point that many folks called it "the egg".  There are some classic elements mixed in which do well to be great accents.  The exhaust mimics the simplicity with a subtle curve, ending in a nice, clean muffler.  These small, but interesting accents apply to the front wheel hub as well, since it's a clean, form-follows-function design, with only the slightest accent in the brake air scoop.  That's where the genuine BSA personality ends, and the anarchy begins.

The tank tries to be too "chopper-esque", following some of the American trends, and lacks the uniqueness that sets the British bikes apart.  It's covered in chrome and teardrop shapes that simply don't work for this type of bike in this era.

Just like the early 80's Hondas, the frame employs too much of a cruiser shape, with overly drastic angles.  However, the down tube and rear end are thankfully still in the straight-frame style, so a specialty tank can compensate for the abundance of angle.

The handlebars are halfway between a cruiser and an off-road bike.  This goes even further with the front end, have "scrambler style" forks rather than a road bike.  The gauges are bulky and overwhelming, bolted on as an afterthought.

The seat screams cafe bike, but is saddled (pun intended) with the idea of a comfortable ride for 2 people.  Of course, that's understandable for any production bike, but looks just plain ugly.  Add the goofball grab bar and the "too short for a cruiser, too long for a sport bike" rear fender, and you've got a mushy mix of neither.  Additionally, the angle of the rear shocks tends to be to vertical to be sporty, but not vertical enough to look classic.

You're probably asking, "Then why would you buy it, if you think it's so ugly?"  First, I'm not doing a restoration.  I'm doing a resto-mod.  The saying usually goes, "The whole is greater than the sum of its' parts", but in this case, the individual parts are spectacular, contrary to the stock design.  Rickman thought so, Clubman thought so, and now Ben thinks so.  The beauty of this bike is in the details, and even though the big cumbersome parts that stick out like Prince Charles ears are unsightly, the goal is to take the amazingly unique, intriguing bits and accent them.

I like a challenge.

(addendum - half of the challenge is convince the wife that it's not ugly, since her taste is wildly different to mine.)