1973 850 Mono shock / showa forks.

bwolfie said:

and not remove bore material. That addresses the concerns. As for you referring to it as "junkstall" I find that very disrespectful.

Another number I worked out was 895. as in cc's. Looks like my barrel will be running 80mm pistons.

Click to expand...

I still don't understand why you insist on heading down this route. you also gave conflicting statements about removing material. my guess is you are removing the sleeves and plating the barrel ? if this is what you are doing GOOD LUCK KEEPING A HEAD GASKET ON IT. also with the sleeves removed even with through bolts good luck keeping keeping it in one piece as it is awfully thin near the top of the casting in places. T C went through the trouble of machining off the top three fin's, welding around it to increase the strength of the barrel along with the depth of the head bolts and still gave up on it. you will be WAY AHEAD money wise to go with the 850 barrel and 880 pistons and E BAY the dunstall to some fool that wants it for a concoures resto as they have brought good money.

There have been cases where the sleeve could be seen oscillating between the fins from broken out thin cast iron and others where the fins them selves oscillated d/t missing metal between them. Ken Canaga has a 940 cast iron 850 barrel I decided against, he's pistons to fit it, might keep it in mind if 1st attempt goes sour. Nortons extremes are only known because of extremist experimenters so have at it and we all learn in awe or recoil at the outcome.

bill said:

bwolfie said:

and not remove bore material. That addresses the concerns. As for you referring to it as "junkstall" I find that very disrespectful.

Another number I worked out was 895. as in cc's. Looks like my barrel will be running 80mm pistons.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

+1 on the disrespect thing. I know Bill you've had lots of problems with some of Dunstall's products but looking at in perspective as in the 1960's and into the 70's Paul Dunstall was like many of us (well not me, he was WAY ahead of me) but he had no one to go to to buy this stuff from, certainly not you nor I so he did what he could and he tried to market some stuff too. Others have learned from his efforts and gone on to make improvements. He was somewhat a pioneer in an evolutionary chain. All in all he had some great accomplishments on Norton motorcycles. I never had the problems you had with the 2 into 1 exhaust and I put many hiway miles on my bike. One of the best things I ever bought from him was his tuning manual which I learned a lot from and still value today. I think it's fine to report any short comings you've had with any of his products but we shouldn't be dissing his name as he deserves our respect for his hard won successes he accomplished on his Nortons.

Ms Peel did not reach sport bike spanking power until I put on Dunstall's long megaphone, for surprise of my life I still ain't gotten over. hobot

Hey hobot, which Dunstall long megaphone are you refering to ??? (Could it be the "now unobtanium 2-1-2 Dr. Gordon Blair designed; with the equally unobtanuium actual Dunstall Decibal silencers ?) Please share ...

"norti"

Yes real deal but disappointing till experimenting found I had to open its tube cluster removing the bean can cover then put super trap and end plate on for low mid range power and ear and farmer protection which was still disappoint till in frustration remove all super trap [heavy] discs and shoot out the end plate, then got surprise in my driveway about being left behind on throttle blips and no end of top end till over 130. 2-one exhaust was just the last part of surprise combo.

Kool ... and great pics !!! BTW, is that Ms Peel I see, sporting the Beautiful Black with gold Pinstripe Intersate tank ???

If my memory serves me well PD used to race the system with open megaphones. He had to stuff the crap in there to make them street legal for resale as noise bylaws were being introduced around that time. I still don't think they were legal at the time in Vancouver (96 DB limit).

I'll never forget the time I rode out to the country to a buddies house who lived right on the hi-way. I had recently moved up north and they had never seen my bike before. Of coarse on the open hi-way on a rural setting I was likely doing the ton before slowing to turn off the hi-way onto their gravel rd, down a dip and up the other side past their house and turn in their back yard (all in about 70 yards/meters off the hi-way). As I was parking I looked up to see 1/2 dozen or so of them piling out of the back door all in a quandary. These guys all owned logging trucks and were in the front room having a brew when they heard me coming. An argument ensued as they heard me let off on the gas way down the hi-way and start down shifting. I was grabbing gears and stopping pretty hard. They were arguing over who's logging truck this could be figuring it was a big bad ass diesel jake braking. Apparently they all jumped up and looked out the side window as I went by the house on the gravel road but were miffed because I'd gone by already and they saw nothing. That's when they all rushed out the back door dumbfounded and in disbelief to see me on my snortin Nortin. I got a real kick out of that one. The Dr. Blair 2-1-2 sounds wicked.

Love that stainless pump Steve. Nice!

Appreciate the attention in bewolfe's fabulous fabrication post. Alas fibre tank paint job didn't last a year d/t a rear bead not seated so tire de-rimmed and fork tank slapped stem stop off and bashed in front of tank to save 50 mph hi side. Only thing louder than hollowed out Dunstall was the shorty open trumpets on my P!! dragger. Drilled by Salvage SS trench gun > 12 gal slug. New paint i call Electric Kool-aid. Plain holed end plate sounded - performed the best, deep soft gut thumping kettle drums beats on low throttle but ripping fabric of space as ski-blue-pink jets shot out.
I'm always impressed how much bigger Nortons sound than look. >>>>

This thread is screaming for my Monoshock Norton project shown for critizism by the high council also....I have been promising pictures, but the project was set aside for my current norton. i promise after christmas I will dig out this project, to once again continue it until complete!

I can tell you this much and still make sense, My monoshock still incorperates the isolastic system (I actually have 3 isolastics now, and the headsteady)). I have the front end of a 1995 CBR900
adapted using 17" front and rear wheels. I have no Idea how this thing will handle. But I think it will be neat to have all of the monoshock projects on this forum finished for comparison.

I really love the hi tech space age clear rear look of mono shocked Cdo's and potential to increase the travel and provide various adjustments to the shock. But I alert you that adding extra isolastics in headsteady or under frame ala Dreer and others was found to help control the hinged onset but no one I've heard of has been able to get them not to transmit annoying vibes. Norton geniuses started out with too wide of rubbers in the Two [2 as in not 3] mounts, so did not isolate till ~6000 rpm, then they cut rubber area in half and isolation dropped to ~4000 rpm range, then they cut rubber area in half again to get isolation in lower 2000 rpm. So what should you expect if you increase rubber support area by one third ? Buuzz!

I hobot [bfd] was 3rd to try a rod link, via the 1st installed top link and reported no, nada, none vibration If the radius rod set to most slackness, Ie: the ball/ring clearance, easy twisting. So my humble suggestion as always is think rod links
over extra rubbers if real secure handling is the goal. Softer rubbers in top isolastic mount has been tried but to avoid vibes became so soft as to not really steady up there no more. I've a slide plate head steady given me after removed to try to see if I could get it to run silent, nope but did get to see its witness marks of the motion between the iso mounts. Maybe someone else can make it work nice.

Rear patch loads, all pivot through rear iso, road lumps through shock push down with 100's lbs on front iso and rear patch side loads slap front iso silly side/side with 100's of lb on hi powered flings. I've seen evidence of front tab twisting the frame tubes. Only takes a silly mm springing to mess up ones lines.
Forks must oscillate to stay upright and forks should be free to follow road texture exactly, interfere with that too much by a damper interferes with handling too. I think a front cross brace helps increase the tube stiffness to twist and raise frame freq above tire hysteria rates. Fork brace similar.

It's been a good day. I finally got the duct work installed for the work room, finally heat!!!!! My rims arrived about an hour ago. My chain arrived, in 2 pieces, dam it.. Now off tgo figure out my sprocket spacing, and order my spokes.

Called Buchanons, spokes ordered. Next week I get to figure out how to lace a wheel, should be fun.

My hydraulic clutch cable (see other post) arrived today, should work out nicely. My new trans cover also arrived, one less chrome piece. On the yamaha front. I scored a complete kawasaki zx6r master lines and radial caliper setupalong with new lever and pads for $80. I'll fab up some adapters and have a kick ass setup on my XS. I installed some clubmans, and the factory master stopped working due to the angle. I never got my second stock caliper done, so this solves 2 problems and better braking to boot. I think i'll pull the rotors off and drill them while i'm at it. I like the look of a drilled rotor.

Santa sure dropping goodies in your lap, cool. Here's rotor plater that lost 1.5 lbs.

I now have to figure out some sort of cush drive for my harley hub. I think I have a design in my head that will work. I'll machine up some parts, get another bearing and see how it goes.. I don't want to start breaking transmission parts.

Here is a primitive sketch, I wish I knew how to use AutoCad.
I would also add curved slots in the retainer at each potted block.



The retainer will be held in with countersunk screws. the blocks will be potted in with a hard rubber substance. There will be curved slots in the retainer to allow for movment. And an extra wheel bearing in the sprocket for stability.

Any comments or suggestions. I can't change hubs at this point, i've allready machined the hub I have and ordered spokes. I'm past the point of change.

Ya don't say how deep the inter face can be but there's a few way to skin this cat.
Rubber folded wedges that flats fit in or round tube rubber that pegs fit in. I've never seen rubber holes with rubber insets around bolts but why not. It don't seem to require much compliance just enough area cushions don't get eat up fast.
Many Norton Twins and lessor have run a long time sans cushions but still good Idea.

Well 14 pounds of assorted round aluminum showed up. All this magnificance for $35!!! Now on to the business of making spacers, cush drive and other wonderful parts!!

How about using round holes and using an easily avalible poly suspension bush,seems to be what some aftermarket hub builders do, doesn't quite have the same surface drive area as a good modern hub but probably no worse than the standard one.

I have to ask if anyone has ever seen a real improvement in anything when using a cush drive hub. I know on the two bikes that I have used both a solid mount and cush drive I never experienced any difference in transmission durability or drivability. One was a Norton racebike and the other was my injected bike. I ran it for around 50 000 miles with a late model Triump rear hub without a cush and then somebody convinced me the bike would be smoother with a cushdrive. I went back to the MK3 hub but I couldn't tell the difference. Jim