![]() |
| Garbed for colonial duty —in America. (Cycle World Photo) |
Henry N. Manney III was a legendary automotive columnist whose writing invariably was salted with humorous wisecracks.
I was delighted, recently, when I came across Manney's appreciation of the Royal Enfield Bullet of 1977, published that year in Cycle World magazine.
Keep reading and I will submit for your appreciation some of what he wrote about the Royal Enfield 350.
Or, you can read the whole article here.
Somehow I had vaguely assumed Manney the Third was British. He did put on a faux Colonel Blimp accent ("...they may well larf...") for the Royal Enfield article.
But no, he was an American, born in Virginia, the son of a decorated Marine colonel and grandson of an admiral.
A World War II veteran himself, he used his G.I. Bill educational benefits to take ballet lessons. He'd have seen the humor in that.
He raced cars (including the tiny Crosley Hotshot), and became a motorsports journalists in 1955, when invited to submit an article for Motorcycling magazine.
Discovering that, as a journalist, he could get into races for free, "I have never looked back," he wrote.
His description of racing in the 1957 Mille Miglia in his Alfa Romeo Giulietta Veloce was a true classic of his style. He was the passenger (navigator), but his main role was "extruding the floorboards with my legs" as the car approached turns.
Today, Manney's many jibes at India, Indians and the Royal Enfield of that day could raise an eyebrow. Or two. But some context is necessary.
In the day, it was clear to readers that Manney was joshing. His digs were meant to be read as endearments. Obviously exaggerated and outdated, even when they were written, his criticisms typically brought a rueful smile, even from victims.
Among those victims would be the readers, whom Manney playfully demanded know what he meant by dubbing the Bullet a "coelacanth." That's a fish thought extinct for 66 million years, but found alive in 1938. You couldn't just Google that definition in 1977.
Nothing and no one was immune to his deliberate slander, which always seem to be made more in passing than in anger. How could you take it seriously?
It helped that Manney posed for goofy pictures of himself in costume, to accompany some articles. This one shows him dressed like a Victorian colonial gentleman. He once posed for an article dressed in a suit of armor.
I think it's fair to say that Manney wrote for an audience that would understand his asides.
An example here is his repeated insistence that the Royal Enfield Bullet did not need its neutral finder lever because neutral was "child's play to find" on an Enfield!
Later he would add "you could find neutral with your eyes closed."
Though he never explained, I assume, by this, he was making the point that a "false neutral" lurks between every gear on those old Albion gearboxes.
So, it's easy to find a neutral, wanted or not, right?
The neutral finder lever is often the only way to find the intended neutral. It's not useless; it's indispensable. But never mind.
Manney certainly would have believed that, if you recognized his distinctive byline, you were looking for entertainment.
And I like to think that he also believed that if you were interested in an article on the Royal Enfield Bullet you probably already were sold on liking it, flaws and all.
He died in 1988. I miss him still.
Quotes:
"Just getting on the bike shoots one backward 30 years in time — a time with clean teenagers, cheap gas and about 1/100th of the stoplights we now have."
"What we have here is a motorcycle for people
who
like
motorcycles
to look like motorcycles and act like them, preferably English motorcycles of the early Fifties."
"The whole picture may seem a bit dumpy in these days of streamlined cylinder head nuts, and the Madras Enfield budget apparently doesn't extend to buying quite enough spaghetti to cover the electrical wiring completely, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder."
"He rode it straight through the shop to the accompaniment of the clatter of downed tools and remarks like why would anybody want to restore an Enfield? followed by you don't mean that's NEW?"
"Gracious me, how the twilight of the British Raz has lingered on in Madras as, for old time's sake, the Enfield even showed the statutory float bowl drip and occasional oil leak."
"About the only complaints I can think of, as I really like the bike, are a too-stiff throttle return spring, miniscule grips, and a front brake too tiny and inefficient to ever stop before nailing your ever present sacred cow."
"Long stroke is not dead, good shifting is not dead: long live a 350 overhead that feels like a fussless 500 flathead! join us as we putt off into the distance on our Instant Classic..."
One final swipe, although possibly an honest error: the "Specification" box attached to the article lists the Enfield lubrication system as "wet sump."
Yeah; but it's supposed to be a dry sump system (I say, as I wave away clouds of oil smoke on start-up).
![]() |
| Here's what it looks like when a Royal Enfield Bullet "wet sumps." |



