650ss

Thirty or so years ago a Seattle-area fellow built up a 650SS. Much of the work was done in the shop where I worked and I did a good bit of it. It ended up looking much like the bike pictured in this thread - beautiful. Please Sir. Can I have one too? One trial I recall was the head gasket. It was my job to file the bolt holes and rough edges from a solid copper fabrication. Perhaps no gaskets were available at the time or perhaps we did it to lower the compression ratio. I don't recall. I always lusted after that bike.
 
I'm lucky there, so far the head joint is dry on my ss. The compression has been bumped as well, mainly by a .060" overbore.
That head joint seems to be a potentially troublesome area on any high compression Norton twin.

Glen
 
Interesting to see the quote, but I still struggle to see how there could be that much weight difference. Molnar claims 37kg ish. Is a twin really only 24kg ??

For the record, I never said the twins were crap! Nor that they didn’t win races!

But they are no where near as successful as the Manx.

But like I said, my only point really is that the Manx is the ultimate incarnation of the featherbed Norton FOR ME.
 
Last edited:
I'll go with Hele's assessment and numbers. I can't see him ever getting the numbers wrong, that was his world.

I've recently been reading Triumph Experimental. It deals briefly with his time at Norton designing the 650ss and coaxing more power out of the Manx.
A few years later when he made handling and power improvements to Triumph's Bonneville, they were tested in production racing.
The bike that kept putting his tuned Bonnevilles in the shade was his old design, the Norton 650ss!

I think the phrase is " Hoisted by his own petard"

Glen
 
Last edited:
Y’all can argue all you like.
You’re wrong.
Simple.
Mechanical perfection…
650ss
 
Fast Eddie said:
Interesting to see the quote, but I still struggle to see how there could be that much weight difference. Molnar claims 37kg ish. Is a twin really only 24kg ??

For the record, I never said the twins were crap! Nor that they didn’t win races!

But they are no where near as successful as the Manx.

But like I said, my only point really is that the Manx is the ultimate incarnation of the featherbed Norton FOR ME.
Click to expand...
I don't think all that many got to race.
Because the Manx was a ready to go production racebike, lots and lots of privateers bought them and went racing. I guess that is still happening today with the replicas?

Norton decided not to proceed with a Featherbed twin production racer, which was the main reason Hele left Norton.

So if you wanted to go racing with a Hele type Featherbed twin, you would have to build your own.
A few did (Dunstall) and they tended to leave a Manx behind.

Glen
 
Then Hele makes the 650ss, Dunstall immediately gets one and makes a racer out of it.
It gets really interesting.
650ss
 
So the 650ss engine in race tune could go racing and " Dominate". Too bad Norton didn't work more on that.
It could also Dominate on the road (in 1963 ) in basic road engine tune.
The road version of the Manx, the International, wasn't much of a performer. A Goldstar DBD34 would leave it far behind. A 650ss leaves a Goldie behind ( this I know!)

But I do love the Manx, wouldn't say no to owning one.
Unfortunately there isn't any place around Vancouver BC to make proper use of it.

Glen
 
Interesting back and forth you guys have going on here.
This will be third party here say, I read somewhere that Joe Craig was committed to the Manx, and had little or no interest in the
'New' twin.
Carry on.......
 
MichaelB said:
Interesting back and forth you guys have going on here.
This will be third party here say, I read somewhere that Joe Craig was committed to the Manx, and had little or no interest in the
'New' twin.
Carry on.......
Click to expand...

There is no debate.

Glen has pulled up a few stories about race wins etc, which is nice.

But if I was to reply in kind, I’d get typers cramp and it’d take me weeks.

Taken in it’s time, and taken in its totality, there is no contest.

Taken in todays time, there is no contest either. Y’all only gotta look at vintage race results for that.

There is no debate.

Some things just don’t need defending:

650ss
 
Motorcycle porn there.

Singles are fun. Never owned a Manx, but I think I would have enjoyed it. Edit: When I was in top condition and still thought that riding position was comfortable.

Thumper dual sport bikes, the illegal ones I got licensed, were always a good time.

Large nads would be required to hold those titles as long as they were held.

Can I say nads around members here? Probably not. ;)
 
Last edited:
Fast Eddie said:
There is no debate.

Glen has pulled up a few stories about race wins etc, which is nice.

But if I was to reply in kind, I’d get typers cramp and it’d take me weeks.

Taken in it’s time, and taken in its totality, there is no contest.

Taken in todays time, there is no contest either. Y’all only gotta look at vintage race results for that.

There is no debate.

Some things just don’t need defending:

View attachment 96969
Click to expand...
The Manx certainly has a rich history of winning.
I think you are in love with the history and, above all, the look of the bike. You aren't alone on that, so am I.
Looks aside-
The 650 only got a wee tryout in racing, and when it was tried, it won. At that it was a privateer effort . It never had the full Factory onslaught of support and development that the Manx received for decades.
Hele saw the potential of the twin as a race engine, Joe Craig said forget it, the Manx is all that matters. Hele left Norton, a big loss to Norton.


That is Norton history as well!

Glen
 
Did I mention 3 Thruxton 500 wins in a row? Until Syd Lawton was told to keep it in the shop, give someone else a chance?
No, I totally forgot that one didn't I? :)
 
Mark Savage said:
How many times does a true "vintage" Manx win vintage races though?
Click to expand...

Don’t think they win very often, but they still compete WAY past their sell by dates. All that magnesium and 531 tubing should have been recycled decades ago !
 
worntorn said:
The Manx certainly has a rich history of winning.
I think you are in love with the history and, above all, the look of the bike. You aren't alone on that, so am I.
Looks aside-
The 650 only got a wee tryout in racing, and when it was tried, it won. At that it was a privateer effort . It never had the full Factory onslaught of support and development that the Manx received for decades.
Hele saw the potential of the twin as a race engine, Joe Craig said forget it, the Manx is all that matters. Hele left Norton, a big loss to Norton.


That is Norton history as well!

Glen
Click to expand...

But the Manx DID it Glen. It’s not a ‘what could have been’ story.

If we want to celebrate the ‘what could have been’ then we should be celebrating the 500cc liquid cooled DOHC 4 cylinder featherbed racer that got drawn up in the early 50s !!
 
Last edited:
worntorn said:
The Manx certainly has a rich history of winning.
I think you are in love with the history and, above all, the look of the bike. You aren't alone on that, so am I.
Click to expand...

Yes you’re right. Bit actually, what I’m in love with more is how quickly good ones (with good pilots) go around race tracks. They have to be right up there on the list of bikes that make the absolute most of their available BHP.

That WITH the history and looks. That’s what does it for me.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
Custom Norton Cafe Racer jacket
Replies
2
Views
345
wilkey113
W
Matchless
Atlas based Domiracer.
2 3
Replies
42
Views
2,324
ashman
ashman
Britstuff
Norton Dominator timing cover fit problems. Recess for oil pump seal too shallow?
Replies
7
Views
842
mean gene
mean gene
Britstuff
Tire / Tyre Recommendations for pre 1964 Norton dominator with 7" forks
Replies
14
Views
1,716
norton bob
norton bob
Britstuff
1962 Norton 650SS. Chopped 376 Monoblocs. Rough idle when hot. Change pilot jet?
2
Replies
36
Views
2,975
baz
baz
Back
Top