Norton Commando
Jerrydoe.com  Forum Home  Norton Commando Forum  Photos  [FAQ]  [Search]  [Memberlist]   
 [Profile]  [Check your private messages]  [Register]  [Log in] 
Sparx better than 3phase lucas?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Norton Commando Forum Index -> Norton Commando Motorcycles.
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
jimbo



Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 29

PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 11:47 am    Post subject: Sparx better than 3phase lucas? Reply with quote

Is a 3 phase 210 watt Sparx alternator better than a lucas 3 phase?
Back to top
kommando



Joined: 07 May 2005
Posts: 288
Location: Scotland

PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 12:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No as far as I can tell, the 210W seems to be double speak as they use 14V in the Volts times amps = Watts equation where as Lucas used 12V, so for the same ampage Sparks can claim 16.6% more watts. So a Lucas 12V 180W is 209.998 W in Sparx speak.
Back to top
jimbo



Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 29

PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 10:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, I have a 3 phase Lucas , I've been out of the Norton game for a while and now I'm riding the bike in the cold and the charging system is not keeping up. I thought there might be something out there that would be better than the Lucas 3 phase I installed several years ago. I have a 24amp hour battery in it. Shocked
Back to top
Keith1069



Joined: 10 Jan 2005
Posts: 201
Location: Hampshire UK

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 1:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jimbo, I used to work for POD and have some original alternator curves. All tests were done at a nominal 14v (13.7-14.4) and on paper the Sparx shows another amp at peak but it's real advantage is that it produces considerably higher amps at low rpms. For example the Lucas
3 ph gave about 10A at 2700 rpm. Sparx claim the same output at 2000 rpm which helps if you idle a lot or only putt around at 35mph.
Back to top
jimbo



Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 29

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 6:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Keith1069 wrote:
Jimbo, I used to work for POD and have some original alternator curves. All tests were done at a nominal 14v (13.7-14.4) and on paper the Sparx shows another amp at peak but it's real advantage is that it produces considerably higher amps at low rpms. For example the Lucas
3 ph gave about 10A at 2700 rpm. Sparx claim the same output at 2000 rpm which helps if you idle a lot or only putt around at 35mph.


Thanks for the info, I have tall gearing and my commute is short on secondary roads, so the Sparx would work better . Expensive to change out but I could resell my Lucas too.
Back to top
Ron L



Joined: 27 Feb 2004
Posts: 1018
Location: Ohio

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jimbo,
I have a Lucas 3-phase with a Podtronics regulator that allows me to idle around Daytona during Bike Week for 5 days with my halogen headlight on and requires no supplemental charging.

Since you have the Lucas 3 phase stator, perhaps all you need is a new regulator/rectifier such as the Podtronics, Tympanium, or Boyer Powerbox? I am assuming you are running the wafer rectifier and zener diodes currently.

Or perhaps your battery has a weak cell?

I certainly would not change out the stator for a small gain. Is this an electric start? Are you running ancillary electrical equipment? (electric vest, GPS, driving lights, etc.)
Back to top
jimbo



Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 29

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have a wafer and dual zeners, maybe updating the control system would help. I have alot of extra e. equipment too. Checked the battery out, I was suspect but Farm and Fleet checked it out OK. Electric start? yes. Weak rotor?


Ron L wrote:
Jimbo,
I have a Lucas 3-phase with a Podtronics regulator that allows me to idle around Daytona during Bike Week for 5 days with my halogen headlight on and requires no supplemental charging.

Since you have the Lucas 3 phase stator, perhaps all you need is a new regulator/rectifier such as the Podtronics, Tympanium, or Boyer Powerbox? I am assuming you are running the wafer rectifier and zener diodes currently.

Or perhaps your battery has a weak cell?

I certainly would not change out the stator for a small gain. Is this an electric start? Are you running ancillary electrical equipment? (electric vest, GPS, driving lights, etc.)
Back to top
Ron L



Joined: 27 Feb 2004
Posts: 1018
Location: Ohio

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 1:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Electric start? yes.


Ahh. When you say you hava 3-phase alternator, did you replace the stock 180 watt single phase, half-wave rectified stator with a 180 watt three phase rotor?

The Mk3 came with the half-wave rectifier to obtain the 180 watt rating, but at a much higher rpm. These units provide little advantage over the earlier 120 watt single phase units below 3000 rpm.

It is possible that your rotor has lost some magnetism. That would reduce your current output also.

Does anyone know if you can use a standard single phase electronic regulator/rectifier with the Mk3 stator (RM23)? Will this produce more power than the zener diodes/half-wave rectifier? Does it produce more power than the earlier RM21 stator with an electronic regulator/rectifier?
Back to top
jimbo



Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 29

PostPosted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 9:35 pm    Post subject: smoking gun found in the case Reply with quote

One wire of three was ground in half by the floppy primary chain ,found during the trany overhaul,sooo I had a 2 phase 33% loss system Shocked
Back to top
steven wardlaw



Joined: 22 May 2008
Posts: 7

PostPosted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 5:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I HAD TO BUY TWO SYSTEMS BEFORE I FOUND THE REAL PROBLEM WITH MY CHARGING SYSTEM. EVERY SO CALLED EXPERT TOLD ME THAT MY 71 COMMANDO HAD A BAD STATOR. AFTER I REPLACED THE STATOR AND UPGRADED TO A POD VOLTAGE REGULATOR I STILL HAD VERY LITTLE CHARGE. NEXT STEP WAS TO TRY THE THREE PHASE SPARX SYSTEM. IT CAME WITH A NEW ROTOR. I TRIED THE ROTOR WITH MY SINGLE PHASE SYSTEM AND THE CHARGE WAS UP TO SNUFF. I STILL SWITCHED TO THE THREE PHASE. IT REALLY PUTS OUT THE JUICE.
Back to top
jimbo



Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 29

PostPosted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 6:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

steven wardlaw wrote:
I HAD TO BUY TWO SYSTEMS BEFORE I FOUND THE REAL PROBLEM WITH MY CHARGING SYSTEM. EVERY SO CALLED EXPERT TOLD ME THAT MY 71 COMMANDO HAD A BAD STATOR. AFTER I REPLACED THE STATOR AND UPGRADED TO A POD VOLTAGE REGULATOR I STILL HAD VERY LITTLE CHARGE. NEXT STEP WAS TO TRY THE THREE PHASE SPARX SYSTEM. IT CAME WITH A NEW ROTOR. I TRIED THE ROTOR WITH MY SINGLE PHASE SYSTEM AND THE CHARGE WAS UP TO SNUFF. I STILL SWITCHED TO THE THREE PHASE. IT REALLY PUTS OUT THE JUICE.

i think my rotor is OK,when on the workbench , it sticks everything to it within three feet Shocked
Back to top
steven wardlaw



Joined: 22 May 2008
Posts: 7

PostPosted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 6:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

my rotor would not even hold it's own weight when picked up with a screw driver blade.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Norton Commando Forum Index -> Norton Commando Motorcycles. All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

The Unapproachable Norton Commando

At the end of 1967 the Norton Commando was announced.

The Norton Commando was greeted with a certain amount of scepticism because on first sight the commando appeared to comprise of the old Norton Dominator twin cylinder engine mounted at an inclined angle in a set of new cylinder parts.

It was not realized that the new Norton Commando Isolastic method of engine suspension damped out all engine vibration and produced a machine which had uncanny smoothness for a vertical twin. In due course the critics were silenced and the Norton Commando had the distinction of being regarded as the first of todays so called superbikes. There can be little doubt that the original design concept of the Norton Commando has proved correct, since comparatively few modifications of any real consequence have been made since production commenced during 1968.

Now nearly 40 years later Norton Commando riders like us are a breed of our own, and as far as we are concerned its still more fun to go for a blat on the old Norton Commando, and fast. As a Norton Commando owner and enthusiast, my goal here is to promote and give credit to those who keep the Norton name going.

It is more deserving to give credit to the Commando itself, for after all these years it continues to be respected. The original Commando designers like John Favill are those who deserve the credit for developing this incredible motorcycle.

The Norton Commando Roadster and Interstate of the late seventies, never died. Although the Norton Villiers factory dispersed the tradition lived on. Today Kenny Dreer in the USA is developing the new 952 CC Norton. What a great looking bike this is, and its engineering is still based on the original layout. It will be interesting to see how the new 952CC Norton does in todays tough motorcycle market. One thing is for sure, I would own one if I could afford it.