S vs regular Commando frame

This Forum is for Norton Commando Motorcycle related topics.

S vs regular Commando frame

Postby littlefield » Sat May 09, 2009 2:19 pm

I thought there was an anomaly with the battery tray in my box of parts. L.A.B. identified it as a tray off a Commando S. As it turns out the frame looks like an S, also. The twist lock fastener for a removalble cover is on the right hand side. Rather than butcher it to fit, no doubt the best thing would be to find an S oil tank and keep the matching number S frame and crank case together and intact.
Both the frame and engine are 137717. Is there a reference that id's a serial number as a specific model?
littlefield
 
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:20 am
Location: Clute, TX

Re: S vs regular Commando frame

Postby L.A.B. » Sat May 09, 2009 2:38 pm

littlefield wrote:As it turns out the frame looks like an S, also. The twist lock fastener for a removalble cover is on the right hand side.

Both the frame and engine are 137717. Is there a reference that id's a serial number as a specific model?



I think you have already identified it as being an S model frame?

However, you could contact the records and machine dating sections of either the UK VMCC, or the UK NOC, as both have access to the Norton factory records that remain?

I don't think the VMCC charge for giving out basic information, the NOC may do?
Don't expect an immediate response from either service.

http://www.vmcc.net/

http://www.nortonownersclub.org/


According to Roy Bacon's "Norton Twin Restoration" book, the S model started at serial 131257 and the last was 135088, which puts yours outside the normal range of S model serial numbers?
User avatar
L.A.B.
Moderator
 
Posts: 6593
{ IMAGES }: 1
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:41 pm
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: S vs regular Commando frame

Postby L.A.B. » Sat May 09, 2009 2:55 pm

I think some '70 Fastbacks could have been built with the S model oil tank arrangement?

So maybe it was a Fastback originally, and not an S model?
User avatar
L.A.B.
Moderator
 
Posts: 6593
{ IMAGES }: 1
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:41 pm
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: S vs regular Commando frame

Postby DogT » Sat May 09, 2009 3:08 pm

The list I have, which is not verifiable, lists it as a Fastback MK II. My list shows the last S as s/n 135088 in June of 70. Then in Sept 70 the Fastback MK II but no serial numbers, so it may be one of those numbers that is hard to find.

Dave
69/70 S
User avatar
DogT
 
Posts: 3908
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:03 pm
Location: Hume, VA

Re: S vs regular Commando frame

Postby littlefield » Sat May 09, 2009 3:29 pm

Okay, thanks for the information.
littlefield
 
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:20 am
Location: Clute, TX

Re: S vs regular Commando frame

Postby littlefield » Sat May 09, 2009 3:47 pm

Norvil shows engine number 131257 (I guess that's a series beginning with that number) as a 1970 Fastback S-Type Roadster with an engine seriel number preceeded by 20M3S which mine has. I reckon that's what I've got even though it's registered as a 71.
littlefield
 
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:20 am
Location: Clute, TX

Re: S vs regular Commando frame

Postby L.A.B. » Sat May 09, 2009 3:56 pm

OK mystery solved I think?

As I've found a couple of photos in books showing early Roadsters which have the S type oil tank, so it's more likely to be an early Roadster model than a Fastback at least? And a Roadster model would be the most logical, as it originally started out as a low pipe S model.
User avatar
L.A.B.
Moderator
 
Posts: 6593
{ IMAGES }: 1
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:41 pm
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: S vs regular Commando frame

Postby L.A.B. » Sat May 09, 2009 4:18 pm

littlefield wrote:Norvil shows engine number 131257.... as a 1970 Fastback S-Type Roadster with an engine seriel number preceeded by 20M3S which mine has. I reckon that's what I've got even though it's registered as a 71.


Well, its got to be one of them, (Fastback? S? or Roadster?) but it can't be all three?

Norvil's Commando model identification list is rather basic and incomplete, and therefore is slightly misleading, so the information as it's written isn't totally reliable, unfortunately.
User avatar
L.A.B.
Moderator
 
Posts: 6593
{ IMAGES }: 1
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 3:41 pm
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: S vs regular Commando frame

Postby FastbackLR » Sun May 10, 2009 4:57 am

I have an early roadster with some of the S-styling, like the ring around the headlight and more chrome than later roadsters, nr 20M3S 135676
It also has the S-battery tray. So it might well be an early roadster.
Mine is stamped dec69, which is strange since an earlier post mentioned a higher number for jun70....
regards,
Thomas
FastbackLR
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 11:27 pm

Re: S vs regular Commando frame

Postby Ron L » Sun May 10, 2009 7:35 pm

1968-1970 frames are all alike (except for the few '68 Fastback "widowmakers"). 1971 frames are different, having the centerstand mounted to the subframe rather than the frame, and a couple other small diferences. 1972-1973 750 frames are alike, as are 1973-1974 850 frames. The 1975 frame has slight differences. Of course this does not include English vs. Italian (Verlicchi?) manufacture.

In 1969 the 'S' was the only model to use the centermount oil tank. In 1970 they built the first Roadster which was essentially an 'S' with low pipes. This used the center mount oil tank. 1968-1970 Fastbacks all used the large side mount tank with the sight tube and no cover. In 1971 the Roadster and Fastback used the smaller side mount tank and side cover that continued until the end of Norton Production.

Hope this helps.
Ron L
'73 MkV 750 Roadster
'73 850 Interstate
'75 850 cafe racer
'68 Fastback
'67 P11
'69 Ranger 750
'81 Ducati 900SS
'96 Ducati 900SS SP
'99 BMW R1100RS
'81 BMW R65/Velorex sidecar
'59 Triumph T120 Bonneville
Ron L
 
Posts: 2202
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 5:37 am
Location: Ohio


Return to Norton Commando Motorcycles.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: flibity, Google [Bot] and 1 guest