By Eric W Walford
It would be very difficult to say exactly why, at about this time, the motor bicycle revived in popularity and the "trike" waned in proportion. Makers had, of course, profited by their experience of the three wheeler and were finding out the faults of the motor bicycle, but it seems that the arrival of the belt drive, which Daimler had utilized so long ago, proved the turning point.
This belt drive, re-introduced by Werner, got rid, in one fell swoop, of all the troubles due to harsh transmissions, and though it introduced new troubles of its own, the greatest bogey - sideslip - was being laid. As an example of the change of feeling, one may quote perhaps an extract from a motor journal of the period which states that " ... Although anticipated by the generality of people, there is, we think, little doubt that motor bicycles are likely to have a much greater vogue than is supposed".
The following extract from a letter by a well-known motor cyclist, Mr. Jo Pennell, the celebrated artist-author, describing a short tour in France on a front-drive Werner motor bicycle, may be of interest as giving a slight idea of what motorcycling was like in those days and what an experienced rider thought of it:
"But is a motor bicycle a practical touring machine? Excellent as it is for excursions, I am afraid not; ... but is the machine practical? Is it a rival to the ordinary cycle for touring? I think not .... The machine must be lubricated every 15 miles, and to have to stop to do so would be a bore ... while there are no means of carrying anything but a small amount of lubricant.
"But is the system right? I am afraid not for touring. I do not in this matter refer to the Werner especially, which seems to me to be the only motor bicycle at all practicable; all the others that I have seen have some fatal or absurd defect. But can a motor, of say 1 or 2 horse-power, be attached to a bicycle? Can the bicycle be made strong enough to stand the strain? And, if so, is it safe to ride, over all sorts of roads and under all sorts of condi�tions? I regret to say, I am afraid not ... But, if the strength is obtained, is it safe to ride at from 12-25 miles an hour uphill and downhill, on dry and wet roads, and through traffic? Though it is most fascinating, I believe it is equally dangerous."
When one considers that the motor cycle frame was little stronger than that of the ordinary "push" cycle, that the forks were exactly like "push" cycle forks, and not infrequently broke, that the tyres were very poor, and that sideslip was quite common, it is not surpris�ing that it was somewhat of a toy. The makers must have considered it so, because they made no provision for lubrication of the engine from the seat, but expected one to stop every 10 or 20 miles and pour in oil from a can which one had to tie on anywhere as best one could. Really one had to be pretty hardened, or very enthusiastic, to be convinced that the motor bicycle was going to survive. The public looked upon it as a freak, whereas they had come to accept the "trike" as a practical proposition.
Nevertheless, by 1901, when motor bicycles were thought worthy of a lecture at the Society of Arts, small motorcycle manufacturers in Britain were buying foreign engines, such as the De Dion and Minerva, and building them into strengthened cycle frames. But although the larger manufacturers were beginning to market quite a number of machines they were to some extent handicapped by imports from the continent. These, however, helped to stimulate and improve the breed.
[page 4]