1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Aftermarket head steadys

Discussion in 'Norton Commando Motorcycles (Classic)' started by richmont, Apr 5, 2019.

  1. ludwig

    ludwig

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    I still think mine is the better design .
    Light , ultra compact , no moving parts to wear out .. and dirt cheap .
    Works perfect .
    Only drawback is you 'll have to make it yourself .

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Spring is optional :

    [​IMG]closest shell
     
  2. Gilesy

    Gilesy VIP MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2017
    Even a Hi Rider tank?
     
  3. DogT

    DogT VIP MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2009
    I built one of those Keith joint head steadys and I guess it's OK. I even managed to get the spring on the thing which helped with the low end vibes, but I'll say after just a couple months with the original early HS, the iso rubbers in the front mount had already taken a set of about 1/4" or more. On the early bikes the engine sags down in the iso's because of the way the center stand is mounted on the frame. As far as vibration goes, I couldn't tell the diff. But after all that time building the thing, the CNW one I would like better. I enjoy making things anyhow and it was an experience. I made mine out of aluminum.
     
  4. CanukNortonNut

    CanukNortonNut

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2005
    ludwig,
    What s the wire running to the back between the carbs that is attached to the head steady?
    your system looks like the lightest.
    Cheers,
    Thomas
     
  5. ludwig

    ludwig

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Support for the rubber mounted carbs .
     
  6. CanukNortonNut

    CanukNortonNut

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2005
    I figured that is what it was for.
    Thanks
     
  7. o0norton0o

    o0norton0o VIP MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2015
    But,... by using only 2 screws into the head, you're only using 2 points of contact which can define a weakness to resisting rotation along the line that defines those 2 contact points. Had you made the base plate to include the third non linear contact point already existing in the head, then the base plate attached to the head would be less susceptible to perpendicular force along the line of the 2 head bolts that you currently have in use.
     
  8. cliffa

    cliffa

    Joined:
    May 26, 2013
    Any pics Martyn ?

    Cheers,

    cliffa
     
  9. worntorn

    worntorn

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Other than for out and out racebikes, do any of these headsteadies do a better job than the MK3 stocker?
    It's pretty light and strong, seems to keep vibration at bay, which is getting to be my main concern as I age.
    I really hate riding the shakers!





    Glen
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2019
  10. o0norton0o

    o0norton0o VIP MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2015
    Certainly there is angular force from the engine connection on to the frame from laying the bike over regardless of which headsteady you use. The question would be if that angular force would change the coefficient of friction at the frame mounting joint of each type of headsteady differently to make one, or some of them, transfer greater amounts of "up and down" motion to the frame.

    Pretty obviously the stock headsteadies would transfer the most "up and down" force since it's not a true isolastic connection, but just a rubberized joint. Ludwig's headsteady has a single isolastic arm with friction reducing material sandwiching his connection, so it's certainly better than the stock headsteady. The Production racer is a true isolastic mount with 2 arms capturing the frame and friction reducing material to reduce the transfer of "up and down" motion to the frame. I would bet it's the most rigid latterally and when set up correctly doesn't transfer much engine motion to the frame.

    Both of the "rose joint" style headsteadies have a pair of perpendicular ball joint arms to connect the frame to the engine. There's no question that they transfer the least "up and down" motion to the frame at the headsteady connection because of the angle of their connections and offset of the lever arm between those connections doesn't allow the transfer of up and down force.
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2019
  11. worntorn

    worntorn

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    That stock unit looks pretty isolastic to me.
    "The rubber biscuits in an isolastic mount are about as close to hanging in space as you can get without doing away with gravity.".
    Jim Comstock, from the Wayback machine, in reference to the Mk3 head steady before he designed and made his own head steady.
    I can see that the stock unit might offer a little flop around that could adversely affect handling for some, or at least make the rider think it does( are we really that fast?)
    As far as transmitting vibes to the rider with the stock MK3 headsteady, there really are none above 3 k.
    Is this true with the various upgraded headsteadies?

    Glen
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2019
  12. 1up3down

    1up3down

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    do any of these headsteadies do a better job than the MK3 stocker?..
    ================================

    Rod linkage head steadys like the CNW or Dave Taylor allow the head/motor to rotate up and down and fore and aft but most importantly they do not allow any,
    zero, side to side movement. This is in contrast to the rubber connections to the frame top tube that do allow side to side because rubber gives and deteriorates.
    I was amazed by the significant handling difference when I first installed a Dave Taylor many years ago. I now have the CNW which as many have said is much more robust, no messing with for life set up.
     
    Fullauto likes this.
  13. worntorn

    worntorn

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    So in upgrading to one of these head steadies expect a handling improvement and no increase in vibration?

    Glen
     
  14. swooshdave

    swooshdave

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2009
    In theory. In reality is a couple thou movement at the head going to be discernible with all the other bits flopping around?
     
  15. ntst8

    ntst8 VIP MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    A very noticeable handling improvement in my case, with no change in vibration - from Standard 1974 headsteady to Dave Taylor.
    Then replaced the old Iso's with new Andover adjustable ones and the vibes dissappeared, then changed to 90/90 tyre on the front and the steering became much sharper.
    YMMV etc.
     
    baz and batrider like this.
  16. 1up3down

    1up3down

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    the handling difference that the rod linkage head steadies provide is that they prohibit the head/motor from falling off to the side with leaned over
     
    baz and Fullauto like this.
  17. alan hodge

    alan hodge VIP MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2017
    Lawd! what difference do it make for folks like me who cruise backroads 55mph-ish?
     
  18. Onder

    Onder

    Joined:
    May 11, 2010
    Little until you find yourself in an "oh sh_t" situation and you need every bit of help you can get.
    Remember the Incomers Season is beginning...
     
    baz likes this.
  19. gortnipper

    gortnipper VIP MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2013
    If the backroads are twisty at all, you should notice.
     
    baz and Fullauto like this.
  20. 1up3down

    1up3down

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    I guess you could say a drum front brake works just fine, until you discover a disc
     
    baz and Fullauto like this.

Share This Page