Re: Arrogance (and ignorance)
Making his point for him? Not at all, just pointing out the absurdity of applying inappropriate standards when evaluating things. Is an H2 triple a crappy bike because it gets terrible mileage and blows blue smoke everywhere? Is a Norton Manx a crappy bike because you have to rebuild the motor several times a season if you are racing it? Is a Brough Superior a crappy bike because it goes much faster than it stops?
Compare a Royal Enfield to a Ducati, and it comes off poorly. Compare a Royal Enfield to a BSA B33, and all of a sudden it doesn't look so bad.
Enfields were built and used as basic transportation, which is the role that they still serve in India. Westerners that buy them for nostalgia shouldn't expect them to operate like a Japanese appliance. If you only want the vintage look, buy a W650 or new Triumph, but get the Enfield if you really want the vintage experience (and less hassles than with a REAL vintage bike).
And no, I don't have an Enfield. However, I do have a Norton Dominator cafe racer, and it does take a lot of extra maintenance if I average more than 70 mph for long periods. However, I can ride all day without problems (well, other than my neck and wrists) if I keep the speed to around 60-65.