1970 SuperBike test-I want a rematch!

Must of gotten a Commando assembled on a bad day from sloppy parts.
A '71 factory Commando ran 12.24 sec in a magazine shoot out
before Combat Bombs came out.

http://data.sohc4.net/AR750/cycle_march_1970.pdf

So I'm working up for a rematch against current factory elites
and one off speicals, 0-100-0 and any other tests that matter.
Cargo loads, pillion and pilot comfort and fuel range and economy
and just plain sex appeal for picking up girls.

hobot

Thanks for publishing that; I remember that test from back in the day, and had the Norton had the later disc brake (and no clogged fuel feed), I suspect it would have won the track time and would have at least had a decent braking performance. Of course, re the accleration, it would have had the 19T sprocket where most of us nowadays are running something larger. I'd like to put a 20 on my 850 but the top speed would only be around 105 due to the lower red line of the 850. Maybe if/when I decide to go to the 520 o-ring chain I'll do the 20...

"So I'm working up for a rematch against current factory elites"

Are you saying our old bikes against current Nortons? Can't imagine the old bikes would have much of a chance since the new ones have around 20 more HP and better brakes/suspension. Of course if they gave points for looks, the old ones would start with a big advantage!

Hey ho MexicoMike,
1. Main issue in factory front disc is the tiny restrictor hole in big rubber
valve deep in master cylinder. Open that up 1/8" or more or
best completely like all the re-sleeved m/c do and its much more
effective for the effort squeezed. Put on RGM race lever and
must re-set brake reflexes not to lock up too easy, though siill
with ABS like squeeze at high speed and bit more forgiving in
panic grips.

2. I do not recommend 520 sprocket teeth on hi torque hi
mass Commandos. Its barely detectable for get go but
sure is for short sprocket service life. What I'm doing as
other have too is just put on 530 X-RING [not O-bsolete ring]
Then just let it eat its own clear path in gear box case,
a mere fraction of an inch notching, in some cases, not all.

3. I've already lost all respect for any cornering contest
with elite sports bikes with energized pissed off pilots,
including me learning the hard way fat tires and moderns
are corner cripples. If any leaning involved Ms Peel is
Unapproachable to them up to the ton where not so
much leaning involved as pure power/center tire traction.

So just need a bit more, ok a lot more power to press
the accelerations into the zones moderns can do -160+
once they have pasted apexes so mostly upright straight ahead.
But by then it was about a gear shift too late to catch
even mere Combat power Peel unless over 1/10 mile
where they could hit over 140.
To make up for narrow tire traction Peel will tuck nose 3".
Can ya imagine the look on 1200-1300 cc sport bikes
lifting for the sky as Peel drops and floats off level.

4. No way can best untamed Cdo stand a chance with modern
racers after 1st gear speeds exceeded in turns or straights.
Hell my wimpy SV650 can out run regular spiffed up Commandos
but got left behind the games with good 600's and past 750 Peel

5. I get angry feedback when I explain how surprising
Peel preformed, so a told ya so shoot out may be a way
to politely wipe the sneering smirks off unbelievers.
Can ya imagine the cycle engineering world upset if a cable
and fabric technology Vintage power plant and chassis
fly circles around them.

6. I know that good rigid chassis moderns ain't any thing
I care to press any more, so think thi applies to narrow
tire solid mount chassis vintage racers too, just don't know yet.
I ain't heard about their hobby of spanking sports bikes
in public for pure solo rides after 1st real turn.

hobot


hoboy

I recall some rumors that Brian Slark was involved from the Norton side on "massaging" that bike. Does that sound right?

quote

="swooshdave"]I recall some rumors that Brian Slark was involved from the Norton side on "massaging" that bike. Does that sound right?

Click to expand...

[/[/quote]

Brian had a section in the INOA Norton News several years ago about this. IIRC, he said an overbore to make sure the cylinders were true, which they sometimes were not, careful valve job, and re-assembly. Seems like they had more piston clearance than usual, and he made a comment something like "you couldn't hear the pistons rattling in the bores with all of the exhaust racket". I'm sure all of the bikes were carefully massaged prior to tests like that.

Interesting article for me, considering that I also own a 1970 T500 Suzuki.

I'm amazed the Norton beat the Kaw Mach III in the quarter. That's a pretty strong result.

Wouldn't it be fun to have one each of the test bikes in your garage? I've got two of them, but no plans to acquire the others. :wink:

Debby

Brithit said:

quote

="swooshdave"]I recall some rumors that Brian Slark was involved from the Norton side on "massaging" that bike. Does that sound right?

Click to expand...

[/

Click to expand...

Brian had a section in the INOA Norton News several years ago about this. IIRC, he said an overbore to make sure the cylinders were true, which they sometimes were not, careful valve job, and re-assembly. Seems like they had more piston clearance than usual, and he made a comment something like "you couldn't hear the pistons rattling in the bores with all of the exhaust racket". I'm sure all of the bikes were carefully massaged prior to tests like that.[/quote]

That's what he put in writing, I wonder what the story would be over a couple pints. :mrgreen:

debby said:

Interesting article for me, considering that I also own a 1970 T500 Suzuki.

I'm amazed the Norton beat the Kaw Mach III in the quarter. That's a pretty strong result.

Wouldn't it be fun to have one each of the test bikes in your garage? I've got two of them, but no plans to acquire the others. :wink:

Debby

Click to expand...

I suggest you race the two of them and post the results. Make sure you weigh them too.

results would be similar to the magazine test. The Norton is a lot faster and has vastly better suspension and brakes (custom front brake on mine though). The T500 does feel a bit lighter and is physically a bit smaller, but they're pretty close in size and perceived weight (as the article would suggest).

You can see a strong British influence in the T500's design. It can be set up to shift on the right side, they make extensive use of single bullet connectors in the wiring, and the regulator and rectifier are separate modules. The rectifier is a dead ringer for a Lucas rectifier! And it has the tank-mounted parcel rack, just like a 1960's Triumph. Powerband is very broad and smooth, like a four stroke.

Debby

I had a Mach III before I bought my '71 commando. The Macher was fun but was a scary handler. Per road tests at the time, the Kaw and the Commando could essentially trade 1/4 ETs back and forth - in the 12.4-12.6 range when properly set up/ridden.

Hob - as far as braking at the time, remember that the Commando had a drum front, all the others had a disc.

This thread reminds me of how much I miss Cook Neilson, Gordon Jennings, Jess Thomas, Phil Schilling and all the gang at Cycle. Man, I loved that magazine! I really like when they got a new bike in and stripped the engine to let us have a look see. And their famous K-mart coil tests. Good guys one and all! That California Hot Rod article on the Daytona winning Ducati was the high point of an illustrious run by that crew.

Great article Hobot. I thought that the Honda 750 tromped the Commando when it came out, but this article indicates otherwise (at least in acceleration).

I tell ya what, I'm mostly besides myself 24/7 working up serious
competition for likes of SR1000 or Ducati 1198 in close quarter
tracks like Barber's where no craft can get over 150 in straights.
Only thing that gives me the willies is the intelligent braking
systems, but even that may not be enough to over come
anti stoppie geometry advantage of Commandos.

If still a neck and neck braking contest, then might have to tap
another air line to stiffen forks while brake light is on.

When I was first learning of Peel capacities and seeking out
those willing to test pecking order of heated riders on hot bikes,
I was doing double takes to see all their brake lights come on
where Peel was down shifting on power to get best
acceleration by time I got to their initial braking point.
Back in 03 I tended to get in back of squads not wanting Peel
to get in their way. haha hoho hehe - everyone surprised
but not as pleased as me.

hobot

swooshdave said:

I recall some rumors that Brian Slark was involved from the Norton side on "massaging" that bike. Does that sound right?

Click to expand...

Yes, most people agreed that the Norton was a ringer in this or a previous test. But I didn't care.

Back in the day, the Commando was noticeably stronger in power/weight and handling over the Honda CB750. None of my friends' 750 fours could keep up with my 71 Commando on acceleration or in the twisties. But they could stop better and start easier! I went over to the Honda side in 1979 with the CB750 F which was a major step over the CB 750 and dramatically better than the Commando in everything.

The Norton is a lot lighter (better handling too) than the CB750 so that really helps.

I went to the dark side in 1979 as well, with a new GS750 Suzuki. It was better than the Norton in every way except one: soul. 30 years later and I have two Nortons but no UJM.

Debby

Gday Brithit, would dearly love to see Cycle mag still around to disect a 961!!
Foxy

Hobot Thanks for that link, that brought back some great memories. Bought the Mach 3 on its performance on paper then the Mach 4 for the same reason. Realised they were quick over a short distance (they did not go far on a tank of gas) and my riding mate on his BMW 75/5 ran all over my back in the corners but could not keep up in a straight line (may have been the smoke screen under full throttle and the fact he could not see where he was going.) On any trip over a tank of gas in the Kwakas he got sick of waiting while I filled the tank. Turned to the darker side and bought the CB750, what a difference relaxed but quicker over a longer distance and by then was 2 up all the time until 1999 and she got her 1st bike on the road. Something about if she was going to die on a bike she would rather be in control not on the back of and old fart who was losing the plot and not seeing things of a concern to her safety.
Ian

hobot said:

Must of gotten a Commando assembled on a bad day from sloppy parts.
A '71 factory Commando ran 12.24 sec in a magazine shoot out
before Combat Bombs came out.

http://data.sohc4.net/AR750/cycle_march_1970.pdf

So I'm working up for a rematch against current factory elites
and one off speicals, 0-100-0 and any other tests that matter.
Cargo loads, pillion and pilot comfort and fuel range and economy
and just plain sex appeal for picking up girls.

hobot

Click to expand...

Riverside, Ca 1973 and my first (new) '72 combat roadster. Street racing around San Berdo, Palm Springs and south to Camp Pendleton, ran into some of the competition in the article - Honda SOHC 750 (no problem), XLCH 1000 Sportster (not bad), Kawasaki H1 (beat him in a light to light race in Palm Springs). The Honda was absolutely no match for the Commando on SR76 coming back to March AFB from Pendleton. Saw him as a dot in front and just wanted to ride with someone. He got competitive and all I saw was a dot in the mirror. Bill's Cycle in San Bernadino did my tuning and after getting it back...what a ride.

I had a Suzuki T500 Titan!!!

Bought it new and rode it from Minnesota to Los Angeles and back.
Did not miss a beat.

Carried extra two stroke oil to refill the right side reservoir.

Fond memories of that bike, I think I recall it having 46 horsepower. Really a nice running, strong, two stroke.

And it was bulletproof reliable.

I loved it.