"The Oldest American Motorcycle Company"

[Jeff Higgins]

"Since 1901"...

The Indian Motorcycle Company. Founded in 1901 by Mr. Hendee and Mr. Hedstrom. Timing covers on their motorcycles still marked "Since 1901".

I stopped for lunch today at a favorite little pub that often has a pretty good crowd of motorcyclists. Pretty mixed bunch, but Harleys definitely in the majority. I was on the Ducati.

I was outside looking at bikes when I stumbled upon a pretty "spirited" conversation between a couple of guys with newer Indian Chiefs and a few Harley riders. There is, of course, a "friendly rivalry", but this was pushing the limits of that. I woulda popped some popcorn, but I already had a beer in hand.

The Indian guys were, of course, touting all of the demonstrably untrue nonsense about their supposedly "oldest motorcycle company in America". The Harley guys didn't have anywhere near all of the facts, nor could they get their story straight, with the only thing they really got right being that "Indian" is really Polaris.

The original company went bankrupt and out of business in 1953. There were eight or nine (maybe more) various interests that tried to capitalize on the name after that, right up until Polaris won the legal right to use the name in 2011. They started delivering bikes in 2013.

The Polaris owned company has, of course, nothing to do with the company that went out of business in 1953. No lineage whatsoever. That's not to say that this new "Indian" does not build some exceptional motorcycles, but that's not the point. It just kinda struck me, after having listened to this exchange, that the Harley guys are kinda right - "stolen valor" is how one put it, although I think that's a bit strong.

While I know this has been a point of contention ever since Polaris did this, it would be hard for me to care any less than I do. Just a non-issue to me. I'm just wondering what the rest of you might think about it. These guys were certainly, umm, "passionate"...

[Bill Douglas]

Yep all about the name.

I can't imagine a bunch of guys dressed in leathers with Polaris proudly written across the back of their jackets.

[varmint]

Harley claims 1903. There is no evidence of a motorcycle produced in 1903.

That said, the Indian guys need to give it up. It’s not the same company.





BMW just celebrated 100 years. As an engine maker they go back to 1914 or so. But with breaks for a couple lost wars. There is no rule book for how these things are calculated.

[varmint]

Originally Posted by Bill Douglas

Yep all about the name.

I can't imagine a bunch of guys dressed in leathers with Polaris proudly written across the back of their jackets.

I still have my Polaris/Victory leather jacket. It was a good bike.

[Chocaholic]

And Moto Guzzi has been going out of business for 103 years.

Many claims to fame for all.

[unclebilly]

I had a Gilroy Indian Chief. In a word, it was beautiful. In another word, it was junk.

It’s the only cruiser I’ve ever ridden so I have no other point of reference. Handling was terrible, it was best about 70 MPH. Any faster and the riding experience was like crapping in a cowboy hat before putting it on.

[varmint]

I had an 01 victory V92C. Friend had a gilroy indian. We rode up to the rock store for lunch one weekend. A crowd formed to ooh and aah at his bike. My poor girl might as well have been invisible.

Buying the name and the valenced fenders was the smartest thing Polaris ever did.




The main point of this argument isn’t the truth of it. It’s just fun to annoy Harley people. Walk around a road king and point out what parts were made in Canada, Mexico, Pakistan, Japan, etc. good times.

[911boost]

I had Polaris as a customer back before the Victory came out. There were torn apart HD’s in their R&D department everywhere.

[flatbutt]

I think such arguments are beyond silly. Do these guys actually think their personalities, lives or reputations are enhanced in any way by what they choose to ride?

I enjoy my Ducati enormously and couldn't care less that the Ducati name was first associated with electronic component manufacturing.

I only care that my ride suits me.

[Synchro Joe]

Harley-Davidson was founded in 1903 in Milwaukee, WI and officially incorporated in 1907.They had some prototypes for racing in 1904-05, but didn't build their first real factory on Chestnut Street in 1906. The company produced about 50 motorcycles that year. So, bragging rights would likely be Indian, but depends upon what date you choose. Went back to their 100th Anniversary in 2003, and there was a lot of tours of the plants where they emphasized that timeline.

[LWJ]

I have no opinion. But, a buddy bought this beauty recently. Saddle is black now.

[ckcarr]

The missing word is "continuous."

I haven't read it for a year or so but I think Triumph in England is essentially a completely different company now.. But is maintaining the heritage, etc.

[herr_oberst]

Originally Posted by LWJ

I have no opinion. But, a buddy bought this beauty recently. Saddle is black now.

Beautiful! What year is this? I'm assuming from the money shot this is BaT by way of avant garde?

[pwd72s]

Cindy's hairdresser rides a full dress Indian...Pretty bike. Sorry no more info. He's a hard core motorcycle guy. He & a buddy left Albany Oregon in early July and rode to the furthest point north and back. Not on the Indian...knobby tired "all purpose" bikes, a modern version of what they called scramblers back in my day. I followed the blog...they got rained on a lot, stops for repairs, camped most of the time..

[varmint]

https://kiwiindian.com/collections/replicas

This company makes every part needed to build a 39 chief from scratch.

They have the best “since 1901” claim I can see.

[cockerpunk]

brands are only useful in so far as what they communicate about the objects and the people who drive them.

for example, we know harleys are ****, and driven by people you'd rather not socialize with. how old or how continuous that brand is, is not super relevant.

porsches are well engineered cars, but mostly overpriced and driven by people who dont know any better. there is a lot of badge going on here.

corvettes are great cars, much better than their reputation and owners would lead you to believe, however their owners are mostly people you dont want to associate with who think that since there car was the only one made in yellow on thursday october 3rd, that makes them special.

just a few examples.

[911boost]

Miata's are driven by trolls that live with their mommy.

See, I can be an idiot and stereotype too!

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by 911boost

Miata's are driven by trolls that live with their mommy.

See, I can be an idiot and stereotype too!

yup. thats the stereotype.

what did you think id be offended? lol. Miata people are the literal worst.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by ckcarr

The missing word is "continuous."

I haven't read it for a year or so but I think Triumph in England is essentially a completely different company now.. But is maintaining the heritage, etc.

Things are a little murkier with Triumph. The original went into receivership sometime in the early 1980's. The guy who purchased it kept many of the employees, and initially tried to keep it in the same facility. They built and delivered bikes from remaining inventory for awhile, while he was deciding where to go with the company. He eventually had to scrap all of the old tooling and production machinery, at which point he moved to a different, more modern facility in Hinckley. Which promptly burned down, or at least most of it. They now source a lot of stuff from Taiwan (or is it Thailand?), and I believe make at least some models overseas. Their main plant is still in Hinckley, I believe, and I think the original guy who bought it out of receivership passed it on to his son. So there is more or less "continuity" where, as you point out, there is none whatsoever with Indian.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by LWJ

I have no opinion. But, a buddy bought this beauty recently. Saddle is black now.

They were beautiful bikes, for sure. When I started riding in the 1970's, the last ones made were still just over 20 years old, so they were just "old bikes". Parts were still pretty much available, so it was not uncommon to see them on the road. The problem with them by then was that they had simply become outdated. Reliable as can be, but underpowered by the standards of the day, and with terrible brakes to boot. Relatively cheap, though, so most guys riding them only did so because they couldn't afford anything newer. Same situation with Harley flat heads, Knuckleheads, and Panheads. Even though the newest Pans were only 10-12 years old, they were really showing their age by then. None of those bikes were yet old enough to be considered "classics", or "collectible", they were just old, and we kinda felt sorry for the guys "stuck" with them. They just couldn't keep up, especially on the freeway or more open highways.

Any of those bikes sure fetch a pretty penny today, though. I bet that Chief was pushing six figures. I see Pans regularly going up to and over $40k, with Knucks getting even more. I don't think anyone actually rides them, at least not very far. I think trying to navigate modern traffic on any of them would probably be downright dangerous.