1972 ? Commando 750 Serial number
- Thread starter jesterday
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2004
- Messages
- 20,718
Rohan said:
And as I said, as 1972 models start at 200001 then it's irrelevant because you appear to think "1972" production started at a particular calendar date, but there is no evidence of this, if it did, I will ask you once again, what was that date and where is the reference?
The original question was:
jesterday said:
And what you originally said was: "That number would seem to fall somewhere between october 71 and jan 72, which where considered to be next years 72 model."
Which according to your thinking, makes any "15" Commando manufactured in or after October '71 a "1972 model".
Rohan said:
As it would obviously have taken several weeks for bikes to be shipped from the factory to dealers (presumably via the importer?) halfway around the world, then October production would probably get to dealers around Dec'71/Jan'72, therefore November production would arrive around Jan./Feb.'72, and December production in Feb/March.
Rohan said:
As we know the 200000 series bikes were being built prior to January then what other significance could that reference to "January" possibly have apart from being an official release?
We seem to be just going around in circles,
you are asking the same questions as I am, but phrased differently.
And one of us doesn't seem to be aware of this....
I wasn't there, so I'm pinning my hopes on some answers appearing out of some dispatch books,
if they happen to still be available.
Details/dates off some VIN plates could be useful too, failing that.
So who has got the final 15 series, to pin it down.
P.S.
If a bike is built to 71 spec, but manufactured in the 1972 PRODUCTION year,
what does that make it ??
A 1972 built 1971 model ?
1972 model, but pre 200,000 spec ?
you are asking the same questions as I am, but phrased differently.
And one of us doesn't seem to be aware of this....
I wasn't there, so I'm pinning my hopes on some answers appearing out of some dispatch books,
if they happen to still be available.
Details/dates off some VIN plates could be useful too, failing that.
So who has got the final 15 series, to pin it down.
P.S.
If a bike is built to 71 spec, but manufactured in the 1972 PRODUCTION year,
what does that make it ??
A 1972 built 1971 model ?
1972 model, but pre 200,000 spec ?
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2004
- Messages
- 20,718
Rohan said:
You are still thinking in terms of 1972 production starting from a particular calendar date!
As far as we know, there is no recorded date-only that '72 production commenced from 200001-so the whole "before" or "after" date thing is basically irrelevant.
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2004
- Messages
- 20,718
Rohan said:
All we have been able to glean from the dispatch records so far is serial number, date of build and date of dispatch, no reference to "model year" however going by the record sheet below it is clear they were still building "15" series machines quite late-on in the year, although we are aware of "20" series machines with October-December '71 date stamps-which suggests that October as a start date for '72 production may not figure in it at all.
illf8ed said:
Rohan said:
I don't think anyone said they did? :?
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2003
- Messages
- 3,689
There is definitely a model year change in respect to specification from '71 to '72 which is really all that matters. how Norton executed the change over seems a bit murky and the issue is made more difficult as the titles generated in U.S. states tended to be in the year of sale regardless of model year spec. It's likely Norton didn't specify in the new vehicle documents a production year.
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2004
- Messages
- 20,718
illf8ed said:
Very likely they didn't. And didn't in the UK or least it wasn't recorded on the registration document.
Although we don't have titles in the UK, for many years (including '71 & '72) the new vehicle registration year began on 1st August of the preceding year so a vehicle registered on or after 1st August 1971 would be considered a 1972 model at least in the eyes of the DVLA who simply take the registration year as year of manufacture.
For instance, my MkIII Commando was built in July '75 (according to the date stamp) but wasn't sold/registered until 7/76 (so has a '76 'P' reg. plate) and according to the DVLA website data it is "1976" year of manufacture, also my Trident T160, made October '75 wasn't registered until 4/77 (therefore has an 'R' [not "Q"] reg. plate) but once again, in the eyes of the DVLA, the year of manufacture is "1977".
Rohan said:
L.A.B. said:
If we had more of those dispatch book pages like David showed, we could see if production of 15 series was just a handful or large volume still, and when the earliest 20 series machine was. Didn't keep a copy of the Excel file at all, did you David ?
Rohan said:
L.A.B. said:
You seem to not have your 'helpful' hat on in this one LAB. ?
By that I meant they didn't just go and pluck a fully grown Commando of some variety out of the orchard,
someone had to deliberately bolt together one spec or other of Commando.
There DEFINITELY was a day when the 1st one appeared (1972 variety), or a whole batch of them after the initial test build one.
So I can't figure out the logic, at all, in your words "October as a start date for '72 production may not figure in it at all."
Huh ??
Are you saying they could be earlier ??
Do any press adverts from Berliners for the 72 spec Commandos appear in press adverts before Jan 72.
Anyone got a good collection of old bike mags ?
Probably find out on fleabay too, since chopped up mags are appearing in bits all over the place...
BTW, does this mean also the Combats were already being assembled in late 1971 ?
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2004
- Messages
- 20,718
Rohan said:
L.A.B. said:
Rohan said:
It's what happens when I'm forced to go over the same ground again and again.
Rohan said:
Er......yes...I think? :? :roll:
Rohan said:
Well, yes there would definitely have been a day when the first 1972 bike was built.....however....
Rohan said:
No, what I have said time and time again, is that 1972 production starts from a serial NUMBER (200001) and not from a CALENDAR DATE therefore, if so, (and we have no evidence to the contrary) then the actual day or date the first '20' series models were built is irrelevant, and even if 15 series bikes continued to be built after that date it is also irrelevant as it doesn't make them "1972" models, therefore October wouldn't figure in it either.
L.A.B. said:
Yes, but thats OFFICIALLY.
The DATE STAMPED INTO THE RED VIN PLATE may show otherwise.
And obviously the bikes were built, one at a time (in batches?) so the stamped date reflects that.
And thats where this line of questioning is all coming from.
You can stonewall all you like, but enquiring minds would like know.
We nailed this down for the 850, but you are blocking all you can on this one ???
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2004
- Messages
- 20,718
Rohan said:
Absolutely not.
Rohan said:
:?:
Rohan said:
Yet again you keep referring to DATE when it appears to have nothing to do with it.
Rohan said:
If you either can't or won't understand then there's no point going any further. :?
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2003
- Messages
- 3,689
No, I just got copies sent in the mail from the NOC when I worked on the factories records project late 90s.
For Commando I have 151673 to 151703; 200180 to 200389; 205883 to 205944. Six pages total. My task wasn't Commando, rather 1000 VINs from Jan to Mar 1947.
Yes 201123 stamped Oct 1971 my first combat. 201881 stamped Dec 1971 my current combat. I assume stamp date was the date of assembly completion. When these were shipped to the US or when first sold I have no idea. I bought 201123 May 18, 1973. It was previously owned with 300 miles on the odometer...was traded in for a Yamaha SX650 at Yamaha of Fontana in Southern California were I bought it. The dealer told me the original owner was a Riverside cop and it scared the crap out of him, so he went with the Yamaha. Good way to sell a motorcycle to a 20 year old wouldn't you say?
Roy Bacon quotes 200000 started Jan 1972, but doesn't qualify if he means sold from that date or manufactured from that date. I assume sold from that date.
The dispatch books will only confirm what LAB is tying to explain.
1. Model years are from an actual date ie for the UK, 01 Aug each year, so a '72 model would have been on sale in August, confusingly, the following year model was usually shown at shows in the Autumn, whilst the model was actually being retailed.
2. The actual assembly of the engine could have been months before the construction of the machine - the machine construction date, as many of you know, IS shown in the records - the engine build date is not.
3. Construction changes, whether it be engine, gearbox frame etc were recorded by engine number and date for engines or dates for other assemblies, and have no relation to the the year model it would have affected - it would have been from that date and fitted to what ever was being built.
4. With the variables above, it can be seen that there would have been a lot of overlap in sales of models of say '71 spec in the '72 model year. So if a UK Sept '71 registered (72 year model) was later exported abroad then it is easy to see where confusion can arise.
Maybe not so much with the Commando if at all, it was common for the changes to go onto machines destined for the foreign markets prior to the home (UK) market. I have proof of this with the Dominator's, as many of the magazines of the time tested the models with the changes prior to export, but I have no proof of this happening with the Commando's.
Like LAB's MK3, if the reasoning was straightforward, then I have a 1975 build year, first registered Sept '76 making it a '77 model, which is pretty irrelevant for the MK3, the engine could have been made late '74, I have no way of telling other identifying if it is left or right of build modification / material spec change date.
Confusion - this is the UK at it's best.
1. Model years are from an actual date ie for the UK, 01 Aug each year, so a '72 model would have been on sale in August, confusingly, the following year model was usually shown at shows in the Autumn, whilst the model was actually being retailed.
2. The actual assembly of the engine could have been months before the construction of the machine - the machine construction date, as many of you know, IS shown in the records - the engine build date is not.
3. Construction changes, whether it be engine, gearbox frame etc were recorded by engine number and date for engines or dates for other assemblies, and have no relation to the the year model it would have affected - it would have been from that date and fitted to what ever was being built.
4. With the variables above, it can be seen that there would have been a lot of overlap in sales of models of say '71 spec in the '72 model year. So if a UK Sept '71 registered (72 year model) was later exported abroad then it is easy to see where confusion can arise.
Maybe not so much with the Commando if at all, it was common for the changes to go onto machines destined for the foreign markets prior to the home (UK) market. I have proof of this with the Dominator's, as many of the magazines of the time tested the models with the changes prior to export, but I have no proof of this happening with the Commando's.
Like LAB's MK3, if the reasoning was straightforward, then I have a 1975 build year, first registered Sept '76 making it a '77 model, which is pretty irrelevant for the MK3, the engine could have been made late '74, I have no way of telling other identifying if it is left or right of build modification / material spec change date.
Confusion - this is the UK at it's best.
Madnorton said:
LAB is trying to keep it simple. Too simple ?
SOME of us want to know more.
The dispatch books may (or may not) show if the factory was building and SHIPPING thousands of +200,000 Commandos,
months in advance of the Jan 72 announcement date. And where they went - ALL to the USA ?
Surely, if they were shipping them from Sept or Oct 71, OR NOT, in bulk, then that shows 2 quite different scenarios ??
And if they were also still building 15 series alongside them and shipping them also in the same timeframe must be of some interest ?
LAB already told me I was "muddling", but Davids dispatch page proved they WERE still building and shipping them, one at least,
and surviving examples confirm they were earlier spec 71 bikes, not 72's that were wrongly numbered. (?)
I'd also comment that Tony Curzon in the UK has got a hold of a heap of factory records, and is writing (or has written) a history of the inside story on the development of the 650 dommies. OK, so its 10 years or more earlier, and not Commandos, but hearing of the ins and outs of committee meetings and seeing drawings of what was proposed and what was finally built for sale, and all the folks who were involved is a HUGE step forward on Norton history.
I'm not saying the history of the 72 models could be similarly written, but any info adds to our undertanding and history of what transpired back then.
At the moment, its just a huge blank area in history, and anything that adds to it must be good ?
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2003
- Messages
- 3,689
Madnorton said:
Now you're adding to the confusion. No one mentioned engine build date before your text above. I'm sure you are correct however. The only issue that makes any difference is the build specification or Mk number. Typically the '72 model year would be 750 Mk4 for the roadster and interstate variations with the main differentiator being the new crankcase. It looks like early Mk4 roadsters were being assembled before Sep 1971.
Yes, the engines could have been built way in advance of being finally assembled into bikes, and then shipped out at some point.
Months and months ahead, or possibly even longer.
Sure would be interesting to see a full record of how the factory operqated, and a history what they were building and when, components wise.
Co-ordinating buildingthe Commando would have involved getting production quantities of about 1500 parts made months
or even years (?) in advance of actually assembling them into bikes, a huge task when you think about it...
In earlier eras, the engines had a shop number on them, and the engine number was only stamped into the engine just before assembly (into the frame)
Did the Commando do this, or the engines number and the frame number applied at assembly ??
Months and months ahead, or possibly even longer.
Sure would be interesting to see a full record of how the factory operqated, and a history what they were building and when, components wise.
Co-ordinating buildingthe Commando would have involved getting production quantities of about 1500 parts made months
or even years (?) in advance of actually assembling them into bikes, a huge task when you think about it...
In earlier eras, the engines had a shop number on them, and the engine number was only stamped into the engine just before assembly (into the frame)
Did the Commando do this, or the engines number and the frame number applied at assembly ??
illf8ed said:
Thanks David. I don't quite understand though.
You were sent these 6 pages as looking into your bikes (Commando) history then. ?
That means the NOC at least has the dispatch records for this era, so could be investigated.
That Combat with that number built in Oct shows they were building them very early, in reasonable numbers then.
The 1st Combat was (supposedly) built some nearly 1000 numbers after the std build start number.
- Status
Similar threads
