Talk:List of motorcycle manufacturers

Untitled

Does anybody know the full name of the "AMC" referred to in this article? If so, please fix the link, as it currently points to a disambiguation page, and the disambiguation page doesn't list this particular company. Aerion 16:24, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

Not really - I've a sneaking suspicion it was associated motorcycles. It was the amalgamation of AJS and Matchless and was just called AMC - all parts were still labelled AJS or matchless and they became interchangeable. I'll ask as the factory was nearby in Plumstead (near Woolwich, London, UK).

216.135.67.180 wrote the comment to: "*Yankee — USA - i like these" -- but it shouldn't be in the article

Nationality Sometimes Difficult to Say

Sherco is announced as being a Spanish company, when actually it is a French company. Its trials models are made in Spain but its enduro models and its foundations are in France. The full name of the company is "Sherco Moto S.A.R.L.". "S.A.R.L." meaning "Société Anonyme a Responsabilité Limité", the French equivalent of the American "L.L.C.". The Spanish version is "S.A.p.A.".

Sources: - Bottom of the Web site http://www.sherco.com for company's full name - Wikipedia for types of corporations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_corporations WhiteEcho 17:42, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

It is very difficult these days to keep up with the nationality of a marque. If indeed there is such a thing, with modern cross-border mergers, it is not as clearcut as it was in the past. Norton, originally a UK firm, for example, was being revived in the US, while it is expected that the defunct US Indian, with the rights bought by a British investor, will reappear soon as a UK company. Meanwhile formerly Swedish firms Husqvarna and Husaberg are, respectively, Italian (owned by the Caviga) and Austrian (recently purchased by KTM). In light of all this (and more) should there be some kind of dual nationality listed (original/contemporary)? Or perhaps some disclaimer that says nationality may not be up to date? Also does it matter if a make is owned by an Italian company, but still manufactured in Sweden, for example? What if in that case, development goes on at the new headquarters while manufacturing is still done in the old location? Anyone have any thoughts on how to deal with this?RUReady2Testify 21:52, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Well there are always going to be complexities like Sherco, Husky, Husaberg, etc. There is a clear issue of joint companies like Sherco. Ones that have moved lock stock and barrel - ie Husky and Husaberg are clear line in the sand jobs, for some purposes, eg modern usage its important to know that they are Italian and Austrian respectively while in historic contexts its very important to know they are Swedish. The plethora of defunct British (or American) names that are or are not making revivals on the other side of the pond is a tad more complex. AFAIK in most contexts i can conceive Norton, AJS, etc are considered and are in most contexts British.... Pickle 01:49, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Demak is Malaysian motorcycle, not Indonesian (See: http://www.demakmotor.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=20&Itemid=19) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.27.33.86 (talk) 03:20, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Miscellaneous

• Forgot to log in, American Ironhorse (added) and Bimota (moved) changes are mine.
• Dnipro seems to be a Honda importer to the Ukrane, not a manufacturer Dnipro Page
• Should mfg websites be included with each listing or as a line under External? It would seem like a waste of space to do it under External. I don't care either way.

Tirdun 15:51, 7 February 2006 (UTC)Tirdun

DniproMotorInvest is the Honda importer to the Ukraine, KMZ is the manufacturer of a motorcycle branded Dnepr(Russian)/Dnipro(Ukrainian). The two entities are unrelated. M-72 07:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I've never heard of the "Gagiva" brand. See under "Motorcycle manufacturers no longer in production"

It's Caviga, it's Italian. It makes MV Agusta, Caviga (used to be mostly small bikes and scooters) and recently acquired Husqvarna. See http://www.cagiva.it/ RUReady2Testify 21:52, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Names in bold

Okay, maybe I didn't look deep enough, but there's no explanation of what the names in bold are. Bigger than $XX million in sales? Someone please help... Bastique▼^parler _voir 14:32, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Looks subjective, unless someone clarifies the bolding scheme on the page, I suggest it be stripped. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 14:37, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Italy — Italian motorcycles in production — really??

Are all the many manufacturers listed under "Motorcycle manufacturers in production" in Italy actually still producing motorcycles? Hard to believe.

Perhaps this section should be cleaned up.

Jeff dean 17:21, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Are you all prepared for the 700-800 or so Chinese manufacturers that make motorcycles? Or should we let you all rest in your American delusion that nothing happens outside of the US.M-72 14:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Template

I've recently added all 6 templates to this list, that WikiProject Motorcycling has made - see here. The British one is at the most advanced design stage, and at some point i intend to bring the other 5 up to this standard, and maybee make a few more countries (let me know if any is desperate for a particualr country to be done).

I've also created a box for trials, i might make a few more for other sports, or other purpose if anyone can think of them... Pickle 21:19, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

U.S. Manufacturers - What is a manufacturer?

I've rv'ed Jeff Deans mass deletion of U.S manufacturers on the basis that a quick google-search of several, produced websites indicating that they manufactured bikes. Deletion should be made on facts, not suspicions. One or two seem to be only badge engineered bikes. Are they manufacturers? Is a company that only produces a handful of bikes a year a manufacturer? Is someone that only assembles bikes from other companies components a manufacturer? Badge engineering is almost as old as motorcycle manufacture - bikes are often known by a totally different name in different countries. Many extremely famous and influential companies were very low volume manufacturers. Any comments? M-72 05:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

My only question would be did you put back only the ones for which you found evidence? That would make sense. Jeff dean 14:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

re recent deletions, can you lot establish a criteria for inclusion. There is a vast difference between volume manufactures and specialist manufacture, perhaps the list should reflect this as both types are notable... ??? Pickle 18:39, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

M-72 wants to leave anything and everything in the USA list. Frankly, I have put a number of fictional, fake maufacturers there to see if anyone cares about veracity. When I deleted all the "red" listings and left only those with Wiki pages, I was accused by M-72 of vandalism. I thought it was appropriate clean-up, apparently wrongly. So, you can go ahead and list whatever nonsense fictional "manufacturers" you want, but for heaven's sake, don't delete any of the nonsense of you will be called a vandal. Go figure. Jeff dean 19:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

When the first brand you deleted shows up in a Google search as a long time manufacturer, it merely shows that you are too lazy to do any valid research. To place fictitous brands in the listing indicates childishness and a disregard for the intention of Wikipaedia. There are several brands within the deleted group that I don't personally consider to be manufacturers, but since their is NO definition to follow in this regard, I've done what I've asked to do in the past and accepted "good faith" on the part of the original poster. That few people are interested in U.S, brands doesn't really surprise me. Maybe a mass deletion of your own fiction would be a good idea followed by a little research and even maybe some discussion as to what constitutes a manufacturer. M-72 08:02, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that this list does not follow the list guideline. There should be a lead that gives criteria for inclusion in the list. As it stands, I could build a bike in my back yard and include myself in the list. I would suggest limiting the list to motorcycle manufacturers who have received notice or writeups in multiple non-trivial third-party sources. A shop just having a website stating that they've been building motorcycles for over thirty years would not suffice. Or limit the list to manufacturers who mass produce motorcycles and create another list for custom motorcycle manufacturers. Killa Kitty 13:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Interesting to see that Jeff Dean has failed to remove his vandalism of U.S manufacturers, but has engaged in childish vandalism of Australian manufacturers. Nevermind his admitted use of sock puppets. Truly a valued user to these pages. M-72 12:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Good points made about list criteria and badge engineering by Killa Kitty and M-72.

As for what makes a make eligible for the list, I think it is acceptable at this stage (fairly well along in development, but still under development) to apply an informal notion of what makes are generally accepted as makes rather than custom shop made to order bikes. I think if there is a dealer franchise system is another good indicator; the custom builders do not have dealer networks they sell all their bikes on premisis and most are made to order, so there wouldn't be much of a dealer's showroom.

As for the venerable practise of badge engineering and what makes a make, remember that Triumph, BSA, Brough Superior, and many other British and American makes (but not Indian or H-D) started out by building chasssis inhouse and installing brought-in engines (made by J.A.P., Villiers and others). So I would say bought in engines from S&S or Rotax or Yamaha and so on do not disqualify a builder from being a make or a marque.

I like M-72's acceptance of a editor's good faith in adding a make. If one can be factually researched and eliminated, I think that would be OK too. Others that are marginal could be put up for discussion, allowing the original editor to participate in making his case for inclusion and in the vote, if any. RUReady2Testify 22:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

The time to properly discuss "What is a manufacturer?" is probably upon us. Many of the recent, especially U.S. manufacturers, are perhaps more properly described as "customisers". Given previous discussions, can a concensus view be established as to what constitutes a manufacturer? M-72 (talk) 02:15, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Defunct Makes

I think AJS is back in business. The new firm appears to claim to be a successor to the old firm, click link on company history.

http://www.ajsmotorcycles.co.uk/

RUReady2Testify 21:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Missing defunct German manufacturers are

• Brennabor (Germany, also bicycles and automobiles)
• Dürkopp (Germany, also sewing machines, bicycles, automobiles and micro cars)
• Miele (Gütersloh, Germany, although this is not yet mentioned in the corresponding article) --Chief tin cloud (talk) 10:33, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Hard to read

Hard

These lists are confusing. What are the dark bars? Looking for the famous British brand Vincent, all I found was a red-linked U. S. (!?) brand. Only by clicking on and opening up one of the dark barks did I find Vincent. Why is it hidden? 07:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

For information on the bars, read Talk:List_of_motorcycle_manufacturers#Template. The defunct U.K. firm is found under List_of_motorcycle_manufacturers#Motorcycle_manufacturers_no_longer_in_production and the U.S. firm has not yet had an article created about it. M-72 (talk) 00:46, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Added list criteria

As per Wikipedia:Lists (stand-alone lists)#Lead and selection criteria, I have added selection criteria for the two lists, current and defunct. Availabiltity to the public is one criterion, and exclusion of Badge engineering and customizers is another. Obviously this implies creation of a new list, so West Coast Choppers and others have a warm sunset to ride off into. I decided to keep non-street legal manufacturers, since they are a significant, well-recognized sector, and including them should not present the problem of having to mention companies that heinously fail WP:Notability. Which is the problem with the badge engineering outfits and so many customizers. A lot of these customizers consist of nothing but a web site with pictures of a couple bikes they once put together. Some of them are only CAD renderings of what they wish they could build.

Many encyclopedic sources of golden oldie companies use much looser criteria, and they often include badge engineered bikes or basically customiziers, so I followed that lead and allowed them on the defunct list, provided they are of some kind of historical importance.

One choice quote from the list policy above: Don't use a list as a "creation guide" containing a large number of redlinked unwritten articles; instead consider listing them in the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Requested articles or in the appropriate Wikiproject.

I think most of those redlinked Chinese companies could be removed unless we have any information at all on them, as could many of the others, though I'm doing my best to check carefully before deleting any. Keep in mind that sooner or later, probably sooner, any motorcycle manufacturer that actually exists and actually builds bikes is going to come to somebody's attention and get put back on the list even if we overzealously deleted it today.

Flame away. Be bold. --Dbratland (talk) 05:28, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

West Coast Choppers makes street-legal bikes. Maybe the criterion should be mass-produced bikes, not one-offs? So Big Dog would be included, but not WCC.

Finally, I agree on the Chinese companies- this list has a lot of cruft, you are removing them in good faith. Go for it. tedder (talk) 05:48, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

I had meant that it wouldn't matter if WCC was street legal or not -- all would be on this list, as long as they were available to the public, and are mass-produced. Probably need a better definition of what is mass produced and what is unique, but I think what's important is that you either go on this list or the customizer list, rather than getting deleted entirely.

Thanks for the encouragement! At the time it seems like such a great idea and then when you're done you wonder "should I have really done that?"--Dbratland (talk) 15:47, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

A comment on the article just now, which I removed as it was really more of a talk page comment, reminded me how awful this article is. Under WP:BOLD I'm going to remove all the red links and non-articles. Then I'll give some thought to the customisers. --Biker Biker (talk) 06:56, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Indonesian brands

Kymco, Honda, Kawasaki and Suzuki are reported to be Indonesian manufacturers: unless Taiwan and Japan have both been conquered in the recent past I believe this is not correct... Can anyone explain? Otherwise I'll just delete the four of them. Thanks

Edit: also, in the UK section, Matchless and Rickman are reported to be in production, but apart from being obviously wrong it's not even internally consistent (both are correctly classified in wiki as defunct). Again, can anyone explain? Thanks Davide.tassinari (talk) 14:42, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Bangladeshi brand

I have added a Bangladeshi motorcycle manufacturer in the list. But I just see it is deleted. Can anybody say me what had happened here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.234.55.249 (talk) 07:39, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it is very simple. Read WP:WTAF. --Biker Biker (talk) 08:21, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Crap in List of motorcycle manufacturers

I have been keeping the current manufacturers section of List of motorcycle manufacturers clear of red links and non-links for a while and I think the article looks better for it. Would anyone object if I now did the same to the former manufacturers section? It is getting bogged down with red links, and while red links do a have a place in articles to encourage the creation of new articles on those topics, I don't believe they should be used in lists, especially the extent that they are used in this one. Comments? --Biker Biker (talk) 13:19, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Questionable, uncited entries on the list don't benefit the reader in any way. They benefit an editor who might be interested in tracking down sources, but that's what the talk page is for. Move them all here and ruthlessly move any new red links here too. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:30, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I think I added most of the list of Australian motorcycle manufacturers (and most of the content on the two links). There were a surprisingly large number of companies (well documented in a book by Rob Saward that I reference on the Waratah motorcycle entry) that made motorcycles in Australia. I chose at this point just to add the major companies. I felt that a list even without details does provide valuable information: that there was indeed significant motorcycle manufacturing in Australia - a fact that most people would be unaware of. The dates also make clear that most of these did not survive into modern times. My intent was ultimately to provide specific entries on each of the manufacturers. Pyobon (talk) 10:49, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Motorcycle and/or bicycle and/or manufacturers?

• Allright
• Bismarck (Germany)
• ESWECO
• Meister

All of them were available with Saxonette auxiliary motors by Fichtel & Sachs. --Chief tin cloud (talk) 10:37, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

AJS

Afraid to say that AJS have been Chinese Importers for some time now, this also according to their website - no listings for the old "250 Stormer" as being sold, the last UK built model. As such, according to the rules of this article, AJS is not eligible for inclusion under "Current Manufacturers."

There was a list of British Bike makers in MotorCycle News a few months back which included other brands the only one I remember is NorVil http://www.norvilmotorcycle.co.uk/bike.htm

For other Brit Bike Brands, I've heard on the Owner's Forums that Greeves made a prototype bike which is alluded to be made in Holland in the future and Brough Superior make replicas somewhere in Europe. Might be something for "hard evidence" research?

Agent9 20:22, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Rokon: still in production or not?

Rokon is listed under both "Manufacturers currently in production" and "Manufacturers no longer in production". Perhaps it should be removed from one of these categories? It probably should be removed from "Manufacturers no longer in production", since there is a web site currently advertizng Rokon motorcycles: http://www.rokon.com/ Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 19:23, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

I clicked through to a number of dealer sites and they all currently advertise the bikes so I think your assumption is correct. --Biker Biker (talk) 20:15, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Pearson & Cox

Do they qualify for this list?--BeckenhamBear (talk) 11:00, 6 March 2018 (UTC)