It is commonly stated that the Royal Enfield ‘Flying Flea', like the Bantam, was a copy of the pre-war DKW RT125 (eg. see Oddjobs last month). It is not so, even though 'war reparations' did indeed deliver the DKW RT125 as the basis of its mirror image Bantam (to make it right hand footchange), and indeed early Japanese bikes, the DKW & IFA/MZs of course, a rash of Italian makers (including MV), and even the Harley-Davidson Hmmerowed their designs to DKW. But the idea can be overstated, as, for example, Villiers had a long historyi nt wostrokes and continued their own development line. Royal Enfield, although associated with four-strokes, had produced their 225cc twostroke in the 20s, and that engine continued into the 30s for their three-wheeled delivery vehicle. When they first made their own 125 (the RE or RE125), it was 1939, and the RT125 design was not yet freely available. Nevertheless it was a DKW that they copied extremely closely as the basis of'the Flying Flea'- but not the RT125. Here is how it happened.
Over in the Netherlands Stokvis & Zonen were agents for DKW, who made sound and popular two-stroke lightweights on the continent. Stokvis, by the way, would later be involved with the postwar and unsuccessful Indian lightweights and parallel twins. But the Dutch firm's directors were Jewish, which was not popular with the powers in Germany in the late 30s. When pressure to oust those directors failed, the supply of DKW machines to their company was cut off. What to do?
