Access Norton Motorcycle Forum

Nice posts Lurkingclass, thx for the photos. I'll be following your thread with great interest. Cj

I see you are also after an Amal 1 5/32" 10TT9 carb with 15 degree floatbowl which might be very difficult to find and will cost a lot of money if you find one.
A Lucas magdyno are reasonably easy to obtain secondhand in theUK-- look on e bay.

Thanks Bernhard. Are you aware of a functional alternative for the 10TT9? Unfortunately, the 1 5/32 10TT9 I had went with my BSA when I sold it. I've got a pair of 1 1/8" Amal 289 carbs as well as 389/Monoblocs up to 1 3/16". I might give one of those carbs a try.

Any idea how the new Amal TT carbs work? They're pricey, but if they work well, I may take the plunge. http://www.amalcarb.co.uk/buildCarb_TT.aspx

Also considering a new BTH magdyno- any input? http://bt-h.biz/mag-dyno.htm

Rohan wrote:The Norton Factory manxes were rebuilt after every major race. So would have been many privateers bikes ?? (In the 1970s, Factory Trident racers had their cranks changed every 3 races.)
Are you saying that you KNOW that the factory didn't replace bits as needed, to get that reliability ??
P.S. Its been said that after all .And has been hinted that - may have been . Somewhere, it is mentioned that Ken Kavanagh commented that , so this may be a hint ?

Uh, what does a Triumph Trident motor have to do with Norton Manx engines? Your "P.S." comment is going to be the acknowledgement for your new book on Norton right?

How about actually picking up a book like Mick Walker's on the Manx Norton? If you did then you could credit it with the following written about the Manx by Ken Kavanagh, A FACTORY RIDER:

"Maintenance was almost nil; check the tappet clearance, adjust the chains, blow up the tyres. A whole European season could be done with three sets of valve springs, two spare valves, some spare rings and one big-end - maybe no more than fifty quid - and it could be overhauled in anybody's backyard with a few spanners."

Manx crankcases would crack across the drive side main bearing, and between the timing side main bearing and oil pump cavity, but only if stress from some other part breaking, a dropped valve for instance, put an unusual load or force on them. Otherwise they were no more prone to cracking that any other British bike engine, mag or aluminum used in racing, and if well maintained and cared for will last for decades of racing.
The Canadian importer for Nortons, McGill, who was involved in racing Nortons from WWII onwards into the vintage scene, said the long-stroke Manx engines were as reliable and needed as little maintenance during a season as a Briggs and Stratton lawn-mower.
90+ year old Bob McKeever, who raced a Manx on the beach at Daytona and who with his son is still involved in racing them , has a rider currently running and winning races on a cammy Norton with original pre-WWII magnesium crankcases.

So if you have an old Manx and you have it correctly put together and run it sanely, there is nothing you have to worry about.

Rohan, as usual you do a disservice to the history of Norton motorcycles and the Norton community in general with your hearsay , unfounded illogical conclusions and assumptions.....

beng wrote: Rohan, as usual you do a disservice to the history of Norton motorcycles and the Norton community in general with your hearsay , unfounded illogical conclusions and assumptions.....

Ben, You must have a strong pair of rose tinted glasses !! I've seen an x-ray of a magnesium brake plate, and seen a front hub explode while being laced - anyone that rides on junk like that without having it crack tested ain't sane. How this is a 'dis-service' in your mind is anyones guess...

Ben, like all race bikes, manxes were famous for the number of ways they could 'fail to proceed' in a race - someone wrote a list back in the 1970s, I'll see if I could find it. Top of the list were cracked fuel and oil tanks ? Followed by any number of mechanical failures. If Bob McGeever raced all those years without EVER having a mechanical failure, that would be quite remarkable. Quite remarkable indeed....

I've just had some frame cracks welded up in a Norton plunger frame (not manx) - this is the 4th of 5 plunger frames I've had that was cracked or broken. I know not the history of these, except that the best one has seen almost no use. You may recall the discussion where Ken Sprayson offered a frame welding service at race meets in the UK - and plenty required his services. What does that say about frame breakages back then ??

You have obviously not been in the garages of racing folk, and observed all the old bits hanging on the wall !! Some years ago I was given a small collection of someones 'offering to the gods of speed' (to use Burt Munros phrase) - broken manx bits - from someone who rebuilt them for folks. I'll post some pics. And reply to some other points, gotta go.

Just scored a few Norton parts off ebay. I'm hoping the tank will fit the ES2- it's supposed to be a Model 18 tank, but what's the deal with the left side filler? Then there's these folding footpegs. I'm not positive they'll fit a gardengate Norton, but they look like they might. Any ideas?

Yes, back to the thread at hand.

Those folding footpegs are an interesting and useful idea - but falling onto solid footpegs can prevent other damage (if you intend falling off !!). The only way to see if they will fit is to try them - Nortons seem to have made dozens of footpeg bits, every model seems to be different.
The bit to take note of is how long the arms are, and where that will put the pegs in relation to the gearlever and brake lever - and if the brakelever side will foul the clutch housing. The gearlever side footpeg will need spacing out from the frame, there is a spacer that is 2" to 3" long to do this. Nice splines on those.....

Tank looks right for an ohv, but that filler on that side is unusual. Prevents you over filling the tank, and then putting it on the sidestand and the fuel leaking out. Crusty looking tank, nothing that a bit of work won't fix. Measure the tank mounting bolts distance apart, and compare to your frame, make sure they are similar enough to fit. Hopethishelps.

Rohan- I should have mentioned that I'd like to run the pegs on the rear set lugs. I'm not dead set on them though, so I'll try them out and see how they work. I was just curious what they originally came off of. I take it the original rear set pegs/Manx style pegs would have been longer? Anyone got a picture of Gardengate manx footpegs or better yet, Daytona Manx footpegs?

Rohan wrote:You have obviously not been in the garages of racing folk

You have obviously changed the subject when you get in trouble, are you a politician?

beng wrote:

Rohan wrote:You have obviously not been in the garages of racing folk

You have obviously changed the subject when you get in trouble, are you a politician?

Dude- seriously? I know I'm the new guy here, but lets stick to the bikes. After seeing how the other Daytona Manx thread went, I was hesitant to post here, but there seems to be some very knowledgable folks here, so I guess I'll have to figure out how to filter certain posts.

Does this site have a moderator to clean up threads that get off track?

The tank looks just like a Matchless or AJS tank from the early 50s. (Maybe a Model 18 AJS which is a 500 single.) But I think the filler should be on the other side for that also.

On Norton tanks from the 1930s / 1940s it isn't normal to see an external weld round the filler neck. The original necks look to be a spun part, inserted in the tank and then welded from the inside, prior to the underside being closed. The hinge is usually on the rear with this type of tank (except for some military models fitted with a tank-top air filter).

The mountings look very close together. Do they match the frame lugs ?

79x100 wrote:
The mountings look very close together. Do they match the frame lugs ?

Yes - thats why I suggested get some measurements and see that they matched....

P.S. This is what the underside of an ohv Norton single tank should look like.
http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k50 ... 6/tank.jpg

Inluding the tank serial number stamped on the right side middle there.
Year, and individual tank number ?
This one is 47 = 1947*, not sure if they were all the same or not...
(* at least thats what it is assumed it means).

Strange sunburst lighting effect in this pic....

Rohan wrote:P.S. This is what the underside of an ohv Norton single tank should look like.
http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k50 ... 6/tank.jpg

Inluding the tank serial number stamped on the right side middle there.
Year, and individual tank number ?
This one is 47 = 1947*, not sure if they were all the same or not...
(* at least thats what it is assumed it means).

Strange sunburst lighting effect in this pic....

Hard to say for sure, but going by the pics from the auction, it looks like my tank has a '13' stamped into the underside of the tank, but that doesn't make sense. I'll get some measurements when it arrives.