Centre Stand I don't have holes?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Burgs

Burgs

Joined
Dec 14, 2013
Messages
397
Country flag
Hi
Been thinking about fitting a centre stand to my 72 and found I don't have holes for the stand or the spring, earlier engine/gearbox mount maybe?

Any how anyone out there in Norton land have the measurements for the position of these holes, I guess mainly for balance purposes and ease of raising onto the centre stand?

I will most likely make my own stand as to engineer out the faults in the originals.

Best Regards
Burgs
 
Burgs said:
I will most likely make my own stand as to engineer out the faults in the originals.
Click to expand...

My 850 rolls onto the centrestand just by placing your foot on the pad and putting weight down on it.
Best stand of anything I've ever owned, although yet to try it out in the real world.

From a thread here though, I did discover the rear shocks are only 12", which was a surprise.
Explains why the wheels are nearly on the ground, in the shed, may be a different story out there in (uneven) parking lots etc.
 
Cradle without holes for a center stand? Only explanation I can think of is you have a 1968/70 cradle intended to be used with a center stand mounted on the frame.

Stephen Hill
 
Hi Stephen
That's what I reckon, therefore hoping to get the location of the holes and go from there?

Rohan
I did see on forum that someone had quoted 13", but 13" was for the early featherbed before they changed to the slimline which is the same as the Commandos at 12".
I once brought some 12" shockies back in the late 60s thinking they would be OK for my 1958, 99, only to find out they were too short, not to be outdone I extended them!

I like the idea of being able to roll on easy to the centre stand as I am a bit over the effort to lift my ZZR1100 onto it's stand.

Regards
Burgs
 
Aren't Commando rear shocks something like 13", or is that 12.75 inches.
 
Hi Rohan
Had to go back to the shed and check, here is what I got this time.
Manx (1955) 13 1/4" these are not the originals but Hagons, I would have used the originals as a guide as I have had this bike since 1971.
Commando (1972) 12 7/8" after jacking wheel off the table, confident they are the original shocks (Girlings).
650 SS (1962) 11 7/8" very confident these are original Girlings, for some reason I thought these were 12"?
I did have the original 99 shocks somewhere but could not find them, maybe after all these years and movements I have disposed of them?

Regards
Burgs
 
Burgs said:
couldn't see anything on the Manx?
Click to expand...

Here's an earlier Girling list:
Centre Stand I don't have holes?
 
Even the earlier models where the stand fitted onto the frame cross tube, still had holes in the cradle to suit the later mounted stand.
 
gripper said:
Even the earlier models where the stand fitted onto the frame cross tube, still had holes in the cradle to suit the later mounted stand.
Click to expand...
Hi Gripper
There are no holes in these?
Why would they have fitted holes in the earlier models, did they know something was amiss?
Centre Stand I don't have holes?


LAB
Thanks for the Girling information, but why did they go with thousands of an inch rather that fractions?
Why did Hagon supply 13 1/4" for my Manx, actually not sure where I got the Hagons from now, more than likely on a trip to the I.O.M back in 86, too long ago now, although I would have it documented somewhere?

Now need to find out the location of the damned mystical holes?

Burgs
 
kernel65 said:
Here is an old thread dealing with a similar situation.

850-center-stand-early-frame-t8567.html

Another thread about center stand hole wear but has a couple of pics that shows where the holes are in relationship to each other. I read elsewhere about having a template drawn from another cradle to properly mark the holes for drilling. Good luck.

cradle-damage-recommended-repairs-t8632.html
Click to expand...
Hi
Thanks for the info most helpful, I did search through before posting but didn't get to the same info you have supplied, possibly I am too impatient?
From the photos I should be able to get close to the correct spot. :lol:
Best regards
Burgs
 
Burgs said:
LAB Thanks for the Girling information, but why did they go with thousands of an inch rather that fractions?
Click to expand...

I have no idea. The lengths are given as a decimal (12.7 etc.) but 0.1 is equal to one tenth (not thousand) so 12.7 is 12-7/10 inches if you want to think in fractions.
 
a quick way to convert is take the decimal number and multiple by the fractional number you want to work with and that will give you the fraction,

Example

if you have .250" and want to convert to 1/8" inches

.250 x 8 = 2

so .250" is equal to 2/8" or 1/4"

if you have an odd ball number you can round it up (or down) or increase the size of the fraction you want to use

.318" x 8= 2.544"
2.544/8" is not a good number

in 1/16"
.318"" x 16 = 5.088
5.088/16" rounded down to 5 = 5/16" this is a good number to use

Pete
 
When I completed my Engineering Apprenticeship I worked in a machine shop manufacturing truck & bus components - the machines were imperial and the drawings were metric.
As all the components had originally been designed in Imperial the conversions were generally straightforward....

Anyway, I couldn't help noticing that no-one has really answered the question...
I measured up a cradle and got this:
Note that the drawing originally showed where to drill the holes for the oil filter housing - something else to consider?
I know I would :wink:

Centre Stand I don't have holes?


The datum is taken perpendicular to a line through the upper and lower engine mounts. Hole size not stated - better measure your hardware as there are different types of sleeve - the later ones had the stepped sleeve which fitted through the cradle, which I'd say are the better bet. I'm not sure when they were introduced - MkIII 850 or earlier?

The hole for the spring is on the LH side, and the corresponding numbers (Using the same philosophy) are 178 and 45mm (i.e. closer in but higher up). The hole is approx. 8mm dia.
 
Hi Andy
Exactly what I require, gets rid of the guess work.

As for imperial and metric, when I draw detailed imperial parts I often draw them in imperial and scale them to mm its only a couple of clicks, you can always do the opposite plus you can do alternate measurements ie imperial or metric so its not a big issue.

Back a while now about 1998 or so I had a chap come in who wanted some wheel nuts made for a late mode 2 door Pontiac (I think), when we measured the studs we were surprised to find they were metric?

I still prefer measuring in imperial even though we have been metric for yonks.

The young blokes here now have been brought up on metric so its no issue for them.
Thanks again

Burgs
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top