California Scooter Company puts classic Mustang back on two wheels, reports 60 mpg
California Scooter Company Greaser – Click above for image gallery
When you think of a classic road-going Mustang, visions of Blue Ovals and good ol' Carroll Shelby likely begin dancing in your head. But there was a highly collectible Mustang in America way before Ford decided what we really needed was an inexpensive sportscar for the masses. Instead of four wheels, the first Mustangs needed just two to get the job done.
The original Mustang motorcycle was introduced in 1947 by a small company in Glendale, CA. The diminutive machines used a small 122cc two-stroke engine from Villiers and wheels measuring a scant 12-inches in diameter. They weren't exactly performance machines, but the Mustang got around pretty smartly and allowed 20,000 new riders to hit the wide open road.
Now, California Scooter Company plans to launch a new Mustang to the American market, this time using a more environmentally friendly 149cc four-stroke powerplant that can reportedly return some 60 miles per gallon in normal operation with a top speed of 55 miles per hour. Wheels retain the original dinner plate-size. Three versions will be available; one standard model that's tough to distinguish at first glance from the original, a (completely unfortunate) pink Babydoll version and a flat-black bobber called the Greaser. Alternatively, you can order a custom model just the way you want it.
Production bikes are scheduled for availability in March for a starting price of $4,995 for all three models. Check out the image gallery below and click past the break for a couple videos showing the bikes in action.
[Source: California Scooter Company via Motorcycle Classics]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
DasBoese 8:23PM (1/28/2010)
I do love me small bikes, BUT...
Only 55mph from a 150cc engine? That's seriously underwhelming, even for a four-stroke. All modern 125cc motorcycles I can think of and even the scooters easily do 60, most top out at 70-75 and that is with 25cc less! 60mpg isn't stellar for this class either.
Sorry, no.
I've got a nasty suspicion, and it's being reinforced by the skinny frame tubes and forks, scooter tyres and awkward stance, all of which look sort of familiar... Yeah.
This looks very much like the cheap Chinese death traps that are being peddled at supermarkets and DIY stores over here, and of course on eBay. Some of them are so unsafe they have been banned outright by the EU.
Reply
jsrl 4:44PM (4/06/2010)
The Motorcycle shown are similar to a Mustang but it is built setting higher from the rear to the front. The gas tank angles differently higher the seat is higher off of the back fender. The fenders are more rounded and the rear fender does not have the square buddy seat on it. There are some similarity but don't set it side by side with the real thing and don't try to talk 55 MPH to anyone who knows Mustangs. If you really want to do well do it right and exact.
Jerry Johns
Ponca City, Ok.
neptronix 9:20PM (1/28/2010)
Maybe it's geared for acceleration and poops out at 55mph because of the gear ratios? dunno. Four stroke is a disadvantage. 60mpg is not too great, but not horrible at the same time.
You might be right.
Not sure what this story is doing on autobloggreen anyway.
Reply
harlanx6 9:24PM (1/28/2010)
My Burgman consistently gets over 60 MPG, Goes 90 MPH, is 400cc, and has California smog on it, plus it has a 14 gallon trunk. This thing better be cheap.
Reply
nrb 9:54PM (1/28/2010)
The original 1947 model probably got 60 mpg on whatever (non-EPA) cycle they're using.
Reply
Michael Hippenhammer 1:44AM (1/29/2010)
I have to play Simon Cowell here. My 1983 GPZ 305 could go 115 mph which I attempted every day and my worst mileage was 60 mpg. My average was 80 mpg and my my best was 90 mpg. And it was a cool small bike.
I vote no.
I was born in the Glendale hostpital though.
Reply
Eugene 2:07AM (1/29/2010)
well, the honda rebel which is normal size, has twice the displacement and costs $1000 less... unless someone really want a replica of one of these, its a bit overpriced.
Reply
cWj 4:18PM (1/29/2010)
If Suzuki's claims for GS500 (55mpg) and Gladius 650 (58mpg) are true, 60mpg from a sub 200cc engine is fairly lackluster on a good day. Unless it does 0-75 in 2 secs.
Somebody needs to introduce this dude to the Honda small motor sales department.
Reply
Joe 11:20PM (1/31/2010)
Hi, Joe from California Scooter Company. Thanks for all of your comments, both positive and not so positive. We appreciate all of the feedback.
Regarding the top speed and miles per gallon, we plan to test our Scooters in the near future with a run-in engine and an average-sized rider. The figures being quoted above were for a new bike and a rather large rider.
Any of you folks in California, or plan to visit California? Would you like to come to our factory in La Verne and check out the bikes in person? I added some photos to my site at http://motofoto.cc/california_scooter_company.htm. There's a place there to contact me via e-mail. You can also contact us on the company site at www.CaliforniaScooterCo.com. The comparisons you make above are good input (and thanks for making them). We want you to see the bikes to understand what they are all about. They are resurrecting a riding niche left vacant nearly 50 years ago when the Mustang motorcycle company stopped production.
Reply
toto 8:38PM (4/01/2010)
I read In scoot magazine about this bike.It has no suspension,And within 150 miles the frame,mount,bolts,etc.etc.started to break.This bike sucks and way overpriced.I buils a motorized bicycle with a 66 cc motor total cost $300 bucks that Is more reliable than this piece of crap.No wonder with this kind of quality and price tag China and japan have took over the world In production.Save yourself a headache and don't buy this piece of junk.
Reply
jimwood123456 5:00PM (6/13/2010)
I really wanted to ride a Mustang before I kicked the bucket and I'm glad someone is making an attempt to bring it back. At first it looked exciting.
the design looks somewhat a miss slightly maybe front is to high???
The most negative thing is that small engine - that is really a foul up.
I would recommend go back to the drawing board to straighten up the design and put respectable engine. Your price structure is off for what your offering. I dont' care about the mileage. You like Mustangs for their style, sound, and speed. Nice try but no cigar. Good luck
Reply