I agree that computing while intoxicated (CWI) should be reviewed by our dear lawmakers...

An unfared Commando at 130?

RS

Under 300lbs with a featherbed, iron barrel, alternator etc?........380 if it weighs an ounce!! (that is in Imperial Lbs, with 16Ozs to the lb, just in case Antipodean lbs are heavier ................oh wait, because he's upside down on the bottom of the world, anti-gravity kicks in

I know my Seeley, which has magnesium hubs, light crank, alloy barrel and every weight saving mod I can manage and afford still weighs 285lbs, my race featherbed weighed 330!!

285# is remarkable bragging rights to me, so is 330# in your Featherbed.
Ms Peel Combat with lighter flywheel and drilled brake rotor
and heavy chrome parts weighted 367# with about 3 gallons
gas + oil. Later reduced exhaust system mass by about half via 2 > 1
used small 1.2 ah battery and removed luggage rack for a bit
more spunk to toss but didn't weight again.

New Peel version as lost at least another 20 # mostly in wheels
and swing arm. Hoping for ~ 1 hp per 4lb of bike and pilot,
or 1 lb-ft torque per 2 lb of bike*pilot. That includes
added mass of blower and 2 quart water tank and air station.
Thinking about velcro on ride leather buttocks and seat notch
and inside knees and side of IS tank.

hobot

dorteerts wrote::oops: I hope everyone does not think these whimsical tales are common to all of us from the Antipodes.

Remember this one? http://www.villagebikenorton.com/index.htm

You Upsidedownies are building up a reputation, I'd say....

With the cautionary disclaimer that imbibing copious quantities of the amber brew have proven to dramatically increase speed and power and drastically reduce weight and the other various effects of gravity!.

Granted!


Tim

hobot wrote:285# is remarkable bragging rights to me, so is 330# in your Featherbed.
Ms Peel Combat with lighter flywheel and drilled brake rotor
and heavy chrome parts weighted 367# with about 3 gallons
gas + oil. Later reduced exhaust system mass by about half via 2 > 1
used small 1.2 ah battery and removed luggage rack for a bit
more spunk to toss but didn't weight again.

New Peel version as lost at least another 20 # mostly in wheels
and swing arm. Hoping for ~ 1 hp per 4lb of bike and pilot,
or 1 lb-ft torque per 2 lb of bike*pilot. That includes
added mass of blower and 2 quart water tank and air station.
Thinking about velcro on ride leather buttocks and seat notch
and inside knees and side of IS tank.

hobot

there are lighter ones around too..don't forget, no alternator etc, the bare motor is 25lbs lighter than a standard one, Seeley chassis, mag wheel hubs, belt drive.....it's a race bike.....no silly isolastics and other big lumps of stee to haul around. Actually, I think Ludwigs road bike is more impressive weight wise!!

Whoa! Thanks so much for pointing this builder out Tim.
Mass 353 lb, 120 hp, 100 lb-ft torque gives 1 hp per 3.3 lb
and about 1 lb-ft torque per 3.53 lb bike. If we plug in 175 lb pilot
give 530 lb total for 1 hp > 4.4 lb and 1 lb-ft > 5.3 lb mass.


I am so glad to know of 165 mph road going Commando is livable.
A race faired 750 [Mick Hemmings?] was clocked 175 in France.
I'll have to pester him on type/rated tires fitted.

Wouldn't it be a kicker if Peel's reviewing by me turns out to
be a bit conservative to carry around her 600 watt charger.

hobot

Steve, read this for a while:

norton-from-australia-t5731.html

Please remember that everything you read is not actually fact. If you forget I'll point you to some bonsai kitties...

Sorry, that was abit misleading: That was meant to refer to the 127bhp/l of the Village people - and that claim is allmost a massive 20% higher than Maney's. Given the fact that his numbers are from a full race engine with probably a rather short live I think that this is possible even if it might be a bit on the high side. As you've put engines on dynos you know the game, correction factors can be and are used in favor of your marketing claims. However the 127hp/l for a Roadster - no, I don't believe it. Tim

Thanks for pointing me at the prior discussion of Village engine claims.
I plucked hobot doubting Tim's comment as similar to my own this time.

I've done business with Steve Maney and still touch base by email.
He stated that his 920 full race engines are only run willingly to
7200 where 100.4 hp is measured. I do believe Maney's engines
could survive a dyno run to 8000 rpm to also claim well over 100 hp
by fudging standards of data interpretation factors.

Heck Tom Dourin's dyno graph in his ads reached the 8000 line
with the blower slapped on otherwise bone stock engine.
Yet in later installation instructions Drouin emphasized
6200 rpm as max. But that was mostly d/t blower limit with a
heavier impeller than his last models like Bruce's and mine.
Some have milled down impeller to at least 1/3 less mass
I do so want to try 8000+Drouin on a couple of dyno to judge by.

Hope the rider from OZ gets back with ride reports to judge
the important stuff to me.

hobot

RoadScholar wrote:I agree that computing while intoxicated (CWI) should be reviewed by our dear lawmakers...

An unfared Commando at 130?

RS

Well, it's a featherbed frame, not a Commando, and that helps keep it a little more compact, but those high bars are going to make 130 mph kind of hard to manage.

I took my AHRMA race bike, a featherbed Norton with 750 Commando engine, to Bonneville in 2001, and set records (all broken since) in three classes, one at 131.113 mph. That's a two way average. This was a serious race bike with a full Axtell package in the engine. I think it would be hard to push the same sort of bike much faster with a 750 Commando engine, unless you spent a lot of money on the engine, and a lot of time on the dyno. This is a shot of me on the bike while waiting to start a run,



an after a run.



Because of the high elevation at Bonneville, and tire slip on the salt, the same bike would be a bit faster at sea level on pavement. The same bike was clocked by the AMA radar gun at Daytona in 1985 at 141 mph, although with a different exhaust system.

Just adding some persepctive.

Ken

Just for comparison my Manx weighs in around 300lb. It's a magnesium 500cc single with no electrical system whatsoever, no lights, no alternator, no voltage regulator, no wiring, alloy mudguards, magnesium wheel hubs, alloy engine plates, no speedo or cable, alloy fuel and oil tanks and magnesium housed gearbox with no kickstart mechanism, etc, etc.

I could use some tips on getting my Manx down to 250.

Hortons Norton wrote: As to the weight of harvest one also knows what a gallon of water weighs.

Eight-plus pounds, I seem to recall.

Gday ken,
and a very interesting perspective it is!! What a blast on an unfaired bike at those speeds, got to have strong neck muscles to keep the head on and in line.
I tend to think aswell that the Johnny Walker wisdom was riding high stating that a Commando motor can rev freely to "Made in the U.K."(11000 rpm). It may do it a few times but not good for longevity. Could we see a video of it maybe??
Anyway ashman,all jokes aside, its a nice build and have some questions for you, what breed of oil cooler is that, what size rims and is the swing arm standard? Buy the way, could you post some more pics please at the smaller UPLOAD to photo bucket option of 900x780, that way we see the full pic.
Rgds FOXY

Hi Foxy

The rims are Akront 19", 2.15 40 spokes, the oilcooler is a Lockhart, it has been on the bike now for 30 years but you can still get them and the swingarm is standared 57 Wideline Featherbed, this bike I first built it in 1979 and it was set up with low bars and rearset foot pegs, but now I'm older have set it up for cruising and built for tight winding roads and a few hi speed runs... Will put some more pics up soon when its finished and on the road...

Ashman

lcrken wrote:.... The same bike was clocked by the AMA radar gun at Daytona in 1985 at 141 mph, although with a different exhaust system.

165mph is 117% of 141mph and thus for 165mph the bike would need a power injection of another 60%. For 175mph it would be almost twice the power.

Just adding some persepctive.

Thanks and ditto.


Tim

More persepective. In my previous post I forgot to mention weight. My racer weighs just barely under 300 pounds totally dry (no oil, no gas). I worked for quite a few years to get it under the magic 300 mark, with lots of titanium fasteners, axles, and such. There's still a bit more to be lost, but not a lot, and doing so would be both expensive and time consuming. Now that I've hit the 300 mark, I probably won't put a lot of effort into weight reduction. Now that my racing days are about over, I'm thinking about putting it back to a street legal cafe racer. That's what it was when I first bought it back in 1984. This is a shot of how it looked then. The owner didn't have a garage, so he parked it in his bedroom.



Ken