Brough Superior Debuts Familiar Moto2 Race Bike

09/06/2013 @ 7:15 am, by Jensen Beeler25 COMMENTS


When you hear the name “Brough Superior” mentioned, the image that condures in your mind surely is not one of a Moto2 race bike, but that might change. Debuting at the Petersen Museum its intentions to race in the Moto2 Championship, Brough Superior unveiled a new race bike that might look familiar to avid Asphalt & Rubber readers.

Rebranding the Taylormade Carbon 2 Moto2 bike that we explored back in July, which answered David’s call for chassis innovation to return to GP racing, it would seem that Brough Superior’s own return to proper racing is being accomplished with the pocketbook.

Talking more about the celebrities and personalities in attendance at the unveiling (four paragraphs in total), Brough Superior is light on the details of its actual racing plans, but thankfuly we already know a bit about the Taylormade Carbon2.

Developed by Paul Taylor and designer John Keogh, the Carbon2 has some interesting design elements at its core. For starters, the radiator is in the tail section, and draws air from the front of the motorcycle (much like the 2012 MotoCzysz E1pc).

Below the seat, and at the Cg of the machine, Taylormade has positioned the fuel cell vertically, so as to minimize handling changes during fuel consumption. The swingarm is made to be super-stiff, and of course is made from carbon fiber as well. Up front is a fork tube and wishbone configuration, which BMW owners might find to be familiar design element, as the dampening duties are handled by the conventional fork tubes.







Source: Brough Superior; Photos: Taylormade

  • Norm G.

    I suppose if you can snap a cameo of jay on your bike, that’s kind of a big deal.

  • Andrew


  • smiler

    In what PR disaster is the name of a company started by George Brough in Nottingham, GB to be transferred to a US made moto2 bike. Brough never built any circuit race bikes either. Hillclimbs and straight line only.

    Utterly tragic.

  • SBPilot

    Since I don’t know anything about the company, all I can say is it’s a sin to create a race bike that fugly.

  • tony

    it aint asposed ta be purdy…does seem to be a stretch calling it a brough…interesting though!

  • David N

    +1 on the Britten comment. The main difference between the two, I feel, is that the Britten is something you could look at immediately after eating

    Trivia fact: the bloke who runs a bike shop near my work in Amsterdam rode the Britten to victory at Daytona in ’99

  • tony

    oooh +1…i like that…i’m gonna borrow that from now on! thanks dn!

  • Damo


  • Doctor Jelly

    I don’t care about a company’s history as long as they try to progress themselves and their product. The looks are a non-point for me as well because I find innovation that makes something better to be the mark of true beauty in a machine. That said, there are some fair sized hills to overcome with some of these designs and I don’t have a lot of faith in the overall competetiveness of this current design. Nor do I think Brough has enough cash to race and encourage the developement at a rate that it needs to be to be competetive within a few years…

    Good luck to them, and I hope to see that bike on the grid soon!

  • Richard Gozinya

    Why would looks matter at all when it comes to a bike built for racing? If it makes things faster, it’s better. If you want pretty, a modern sportbike really isn’t going to be your best bet. Probably why sportbike sales suck so much these days.

  • SBPilot

    I happen to find the Suter and Kalex quite nice on the eyes. The Bimoto Moto2 is also stunning to look at. And race machinery historically are considered works of art. Engineers and designers take pride in not only functionality but also aesthetic look. Otherwise race cars/race bikes would all look fugly. A Ferrari would not be a Ferrari, and a Ducati would not be a Ducati. That’s my point. OK, if you’re not so design inclined then that’s ok too.

    @Richard, I don’t know what modern sport bike you’re talking about but I find the RSV4, Panigale, 1000RR, MV F3/F4 all very easy on the eyes. I’d even go a stretch further and say a KTM RC8R Track and Yamaha R1 look nice as well. And if ugly looks really did dictate why there are poor sport bike sales, then you just clearly stated precisely why it is important to design a good looking sport bike.

  • Craig

    Just give me innovation and someone give it a try. It’s hard to innovate in a lot of ways outside of local race series, but I hope they can make it as that is where machine is truly tested and crashed.

    I too hope the design changes a little bit, but give them a shake and see what happens… you just never know. In moto 2… they should be just as fast in a straight line… right? :)


  • paulus – Thailand

    ‘Tank badges do not a brand make’
    At best Brough is a main sponsor… they can not claim this to be a Brough product.
    Honda engined, pre-developed chassis.

    It is as authentic as a Norton TT racer ;)

  • coreyvwc

    Oh, so this is like the Norton IOMTT bike (April RSV4 with Norton stickers) that has gotten absolutely stomped at the TT for the last 2 years? The IOM is a great race, but the competition is not nearly as tough as Moto2 racing! This project is dead on arrival unless “New Brough” is being backed by a carefree billionaire…

    Brough had it’s years in the sun, just let the name die in peace!

  • Gary

    Yawn. Nothing less imaginative than the brand r@pe of an old motorcycle company. Who remembers the exploitation of Excelsior Henderson in the late 1990’s or Vincent in the early 2000’s?

  • Mike the Bike

    While the bike might or might not be competitive in the future, their branding and marketing effort is pathetic and poorly chosen. Having Jay Leno park his fat arse on any Moto2 machine for a publicity pic is quite embarassing and wrong on a few levels.

  • Not so Brittenish

    Radiator in the tail: yes
    Handmade v-twin motor: no
    Hossack front suspension: no
    Chassisless design: no Taylor made has carbon monocoque.

  • tom

    I like that someone is trying something outside the box, but they should give that bike to an Italian designer an see what comes back. John Keogh has never been a favorite of mine and with this bike he has proven once again he shouldn’t be designing motorcycles.( Google his designs ) To add the Brough Superior logo to this monstrosity is sacrilegious at the very least. To my eye those were some of the most beautiful motorcycles ever made. Nonetheless I hope the design is competitive since no one is pushing the envelope in Moto2 at all and alternative front suspension seems to remain a novelty.


  • Norm G.

    well shitfire… A1 mike’s gotta point. that AND a damn good steak sauce.

  • Personally I don’t find Taylor’s carbon parts to be very high quality which makes me question the quality of an entire race bike built by them.

    The proof will be in the pudding of how it performs, but the idea of a super stiff rear swing arm negates literally all of the capabilities of engineered flex for smoothing the bike out especially in rough corners.

    I’d hate to be the livery guy charged with making the design palatable for sponsors.

  • Tom


    Excelsior-Henderson engineered a whole new bike from the ground up and it remains an underappreciated good bike today. Hardly a brand r@pe like simply rebadging a different builder’s bike.

  • JoeD

    The recent Benelli Tornado has/had the tail radiator and after spending a couple of hundred miles on one, I like the idea. Very narrow at the front and the air flow is better than you think. At speed, the low pressure area behind makes a BIG difference. No engine heat at stops either.

  • Computer Solutions

    Agreed very very Fugly indeed

  • That looks like a Martin Wimmer front suspension design.