lcgtr said:With modern CNC techniques it would be a lot easier to produce than in the 80s
Dont suppose any one could scan in the article if they have it?
without overhead cams to suit,this would be pointless, infact allmost 30's design...Rudge :?:lcgtr said:Anyone know of one or started work on one?
swooshdave said:lcgtr said:With modern CNC techniques it would be a lot easier to produce than in the 80s
Dont suppose any one could scan in the article if they have it?
You should probably chat with comnoz and fullauto about just how easy it is...
've always been under the impression that the less ignition advance you have to run, then the more efficient the combustion chamber design. Compare the Norton head to some pretty fancy runners and you may get a surprise.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Please.
lcgtr said:What about twin spark? or is it a waste of time with modern sparkplugs
Compared to the domed pistons and wide valve angles of the Triumph twins, it's no wonder that Commandos chew them up and spit them out power and torque wise. It'
hobot said:Compared to the domed pistons and wide valve angles of the Triumph twins, it's no wonder that Commandos chew them up and spit them out power and torque wise. It'
Yes sir, generally seems so, BUT and I mean it in capitols, I lost a bunch of Norton ego to Tim's Turnip that so blazed past the Nortons, Kenny included - Kennny did not even mention it = because it so out classed the rest of the field I can only assume its head mods made it a whole nother class that the best Nortons couldn't touch to compete against. I quizzed forum some seasons ago on this but no one offered a reason for such advantage over the good Norton head flow.