Murray B "The revisionists have done nothing to help sort this out"

Im in full agreement with this statement, only thing, after looking at all of the information, the revisionist is you Murray!

Glen

hobot wrote:...Tradition would be use up everything in a bin, get it out the door and let someone else sort it out...

Yes, I expect they would use up the SS camshafts instead of throwing them out. Of course the existance of 1973 model Combat engined bikes does not mean there were not some engines made with Combat heads and standard grind cams. This is especially likely if they had more heads than camshafts.

Nortoniggy wrote:BIRCO only cast the heads, they did no machining. As far as I know, all the machining was done at the Wolverhampton factory.

It does not matter who machined the heads. "Shaving" implies they milled them twice and I don't think anybody did that even though most written sources claim it was done. "History" is most often written by artsy dorks that do not know the difference between an overhead floormat and a foo-foo valve. They try to explain things they do not understand and history becomes fiction as a result. After a few years crazy zealots then adopt the nonsense as divine truth and start defending it with religious fervor. Sadly, this doesn't just happen with motorcycles.

L.A.B. wrote:"Murray B" - page 1...."Murray B" Above...

There is no contradiction here if that is what you mean. 'Dropping" the Combat does not mean they discarded thousands of engines or thousands of camshafts for those engines. They must have installed virtually all of the engines including the 'hot' camshafts in motorcycles and shipped them out to dealers.

A few years ago the following was posted on this site:

Ron L wrote:...I have a 1973 model MkV which was also built in October 1972...

Since we already know that some '73s were built in '72 it follows that a Combat engine made in '72 could still be installed in a '73 model bike that was also made in '72. Mid-year model year changes are a confusing but common practice among motor vehicle manufacturers.

What is more important here, the facts or the beliefs? Is it better to alter beliefs to suit the facts or alter the facts to suit the beliefs?

All I want to know is what really happened back then.

Murray B wrote:

L.A.B. wrote:"Murray B" - page 1...."Murray B" Above...

There is no contradiction here if that is what you mean.

I did, I still do, and it is.

Murray B wrote: 'Dropping" the Combat does not mean they discarded thousands of engines or thousands of camshafts for those engines.

No-one said that, except you.

Murray B wrote:They must have installed virtually all of the engines including the 'hot' camshafts in motorcycles and shipped them out to dealers.

Must they? Now who's guessing?

Murray B wrote:A few years ago the following was posted on this site:

Ron L wrote:...I have a 1973 model MkV which was also built in October 1972...

Since we already know that some '73s were built in '72 it follows that a Combat engine made in '72 could still be installed in a '73 model bike that was also made in '72. Mid-year model year changes are a confusing but common practice among motor vehicle manufacturers.

Once more, you are clutching at straws, putting 2 and 2 together and coming up with 5.
If you had a basic understanding of Commando production numbers you'd know that Combat production ended at 211110 that's the history it's only you who is attempting to change it.

Murray B wrote:What is more important here, the facts or the beliefs?

Your beliefs it seems.

Murray B wrote:All I want to know is what really happened back then.

Then I suggest you go back to page 19 and read through it all again?

L.A.B. wrote:...No-one said that, except you...Must they? Now who's guessing?...Once more, you are clutching at straws, putting 2 and 2 together and coming up with 5...If you had a basic understanding of Commando production numbers you'd know that Combat production ended at 211110 that's the history it's only you who is attempting to change it...Your beliefs it seems...

When "moderators" become 'trolls' the site becomes worthless. I'm outta here.

Goodbye!

Murray, if you are still there, If Norton had corrected all the Combat blow up problems in1973 with production of these hi output 73 Combats with Superblends, why on earth would they go to the expense of a big redesign? They went about strenghtening cases, increasing displacement, lowering compression and changing the camshaft etc. Why would Norton do all of this to produce what you say is a much lower powered machine when they had already on hand the existing reconfigured 750 Combat that would far outdo the new design for power and was a now a reliable engine?

Glen

L.A.B., That's another fine service you have done for the Norton community on this site.

Dave M

Carbonfibre wrote:Riding a motorcycle competently is something that requires some degree of experience. Very fast and light machines such as the H1 or H2 need more rider input than most, hence the ridiculous nonsense about them not handling properly, and even claims that these bikes can be beaten in a drag race by old Brits with less power and more weight!

In terms of sports related machinery around in the 70s the Kawasaki 500 and 750 triples were pretty much the very best bikes available, being bulletproof reliable, and easily outperforming any other stock machines on sale during that period. They would certainly bite an inexperienced rider though, as they were in effect a race bike with road going equipment added.

For anyone who wasnt a reasonably good rider one of these bikes certainly wasnt that great an idea, as many riders simply couldnt deal with the levels of performance available, and often traded the bikes in following near misses, which in most cases were related directly to lack of riding ability.

I seem to recall that Motor Cycle Mechanics raced successfully a HI 500 in production races in the 1970s and had to fit a swinging arm 1.5 inches longer to keep the front wheel on the tarmac, and, after looking at the featherbed frame, brazed some tubes onto the frame in strategic places where there should be some to stop it becoming a “bendy”.

You are right Bernard, its more one eyed drivel from that Nippon worshipping nincompoop - " myth that Kawasaki triples did not handle" - Greg Hansford was a Team Kawasaki 750 Production Champion ins Aus and NZ in the early 70's a great rider and his production H2 had a lot of frame mods - nothing stock about any of them! CF goes on to say the 500 and 750 triples were basically "race bikes with road equipment" Ha! what a dunce. A race bike of that type in those days had nothing like the productions frame! Even several of Suzuki's GP500 bikes in the UK actually had Seeley frames at one stage because the original race frame was substandard and they could not get a redesign out of Japan on time. Historical evidence and facts are something this forum can benefit from, an obligation that the irritating one fails to comprehend.

Mick

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEmCfl-Cwww
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eFYmSYp ... re=related

The one rule to the exception , is theres the exeption to each rule .
I always said - There's an exception to every rule w/o exception.

I hate it when tail wags the pilot w/o warning but that's how it is on THE Gravel so pretty much just stay locked on bars so can resist it with butt or even steer it back in line by butt alone. Usually at anal pucking speed or how else would I've adrenaline enough to develop involuntary muscle grip force : (

Slightly off topic to most but spot on what I'm up to if I can, break into 9 sec 1/4.
Even I take that with a toss of salt seeing what bikes it takes to do that. X-mass tree sprinting where an error can smash you and bike or just look stupid is about as much adrenaline over short interval as can be done on a cycle with clothes on.

I ordered one of these for the Vincent project bike

http://www.dakotadigital.com/index.cfm/ ... prd264.htm

In addition to a zillion warnings light and indicator light features, it will provide accurate 1/4 mile et times and terminal speed numbers, plus give 0 -60 times.
The device has internal infinite calibration adjustment so the speedo readings can be set dead on against a GPS, for example.
Once that is done and the odometer is also calibrated, the Et times will be right on.

Should provide lots of entertainment!

I also like the fact that it doesnt require a speedo and tacho drive&cables, just a wire from the coil and a wire from a speedo sending unit that can read off sprocket bolts, gear teeth or brake rotor fasteners.

Glen

Yes I've been window shopping various display, loggers and preformance calculator gizmo's. I though I could adapt a OBD II digital sensor CPU to blue tooth tablet programe like say Torque app, but the OBD 'puter brains needs to see all sorta of date feeds even windsheild wipper levers or it goes bonkers on displays and codes etc. So back to old school mechical and some stand alone GPS digital thingy.
I've had serous dragster that was a scary whiplash leaper forward floating front but also two bikes, a Combat and Ninja that ground looped on me un intended un expected so don't take Christmas tree launches lightly. Both times injured serious.

Although, in the early 70's I used to occasionally ride with some of the Cycle magazine staff, I cannot say whether this came from them or not, but somehow, somewhere, I came to "know" that the '71-'72 Combat 1/4 mile time in the 12s that that magazine published was made with a bike that had been prepared by Brian Slark and that the most obvious mod was that the peashooters were gutted. Again, I do not attribute what I think I "know" to anyone; I honestly do not recall where I got that datum.

A prepared machine is obviously got a better chance of running right .

Gutted ? some were semi baffled , some straight thru , perforated tube , glass pack surrounded .
After a few years of hard use , the fibre glass packing had dematerialised anyway .
Jetted biased rich , the perforated tube would be red hot with hard rideing , alledgedly enhanceing
the megaphone effect .

Two Wheels test , on the the hand ( I should check the time of year = summer ? ) The thing was
quater mile tested at 600 miles on the clock , after theyd thrashed it around Oran park . Hardly
the ideal running in and optimiseation regime .

Most people if takeing the bike to the Drag Strip for a hoolie would check tappets , points and
chain tensions , rear wheel alignment and run a spanner over at least the axle nuts , beforehand.



Of course , a few bits might fall of on the way to the track . . .