Surpriseing no one sees relevance between ' the old heap ' and Norton's Twin . Typical example of Cowboys Vs Establishment

Design Wise, Not sure there future development ideas wouldnt throw it out of kilter . But what a machine . gimme gimme .

Motorwise maybe the Sporster has evolved to near the power / Wt of this sucker . perhaps . . . maybe . . . why not .

Matt Spencer wrote:Surpriseing no one sees relevance between ' the old heap ' and Norton's Twin . ?

Boy how did we miss that? One is a V-twin one is a parallel twin, one has four separate cams the other has one cam, one is in unit with it's gearbox the other is not. The similarities just keep piling up the longer you think about it! Oh, lets not forget they both have two wheels......

Long stroke pushrod motors comes to mind.
But suppose thats too obvious....

beng wrote:

Matt Spencer wrote:Surpriseing no one sees relevance between ' the old heap ' and Norton's Twin . ?

Boy how did we miss that? One is a V-twin one is a parallel twin, one has four separate cams the other has one cam, one is in unit with it's gearbox the other is not. The similarities just keep piling up the longer you think about it! Oh, lets not forget they both have two wheels......

I think youll find Im refering to the Dynamic Characteristics ( off the Engine ) . IF you dont put a Single Carb on It .

Two Cylinders , Two Valve per Cyl , Hemishpereical Cambers , Comparable Valve Angle ( not flat ).

Why , its even Got FOUR Cam lobes . . Of intrest is his Output Vs Wt . philosophy , rather than hp / litre,
which could be said to have led us up ( Down ? ) the garden path .Adequate Cooling / Temperatures Stability
is perhaps a noteworthy Feature . ( Finning comparable to P&W / Wright ) Why , with Two PARRALLEL Cylinders
to these specifications , a Norton Might Start to Get Somewhere . Though perhaps its allredy been done ,
Not that anyone would believe it , word of Mouth . And a damn sight tougher than that , too . . .Amost before My Time .
In fact .