Daily Telegraph Commando article

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
9
Frank,

That was pretty interesting....I had no idea the engine was such a dinosaur...and I'm glad I got a pre-Mark III version.

Thanks!
 

worntorn

VIP MEMBER
Joined
Dec 22, 2006
Messages
7,060
I guess just because you write an article that doesn't automatically mean you know what you are talking about.
The stock 850 produces 56 foot lbs of torque vs the 750 at 48. Hardly dull and flabby, this is a 17% torque increase over the 750, which was already a considered a pretty torquey bike.
As far as the weight goes, the only way you could get 45 lbs of extra weight out of a MK111, would be to compare an fully fueled InterstateMK111 to a fully fueled earlier Roadster model, that would do it, the weight being mostly in extra fuel. Otherwise, according to my findings, my friend's 750 weighs about 16 pounds less than my 850 MK111, mostly the electric starter and gear, I think. In spite of the bit of extra weight, my 850 is quicker than his 750, and, after switching bikes, we both agree the extra torque of the 850 is quite noticeable.
According to the owner of British/Italian Motors here in Vancouver, a former Norton dealer and long time Commando rider, the MK111 version was the most durable and best overall version of the Commando, with stronger Crankcases and many other improvements/refinements over the earlier bikes, not that the earlier bikes aren't good as well.
 
Joined
May 19, 2006
Messages
1,612
Country flag
Frank Melling again. I rest my case. My memory of him in the "Motorcycle Mechanics" of the 1970s is that he was always expounding the delights of the latest Kawayamahonduki stinkwheel whizzbang. Now that he's got a contract with a posh newspaper, the digs are less overt but they're there just the same.

I'm glad to know that I've ridden a Parody. Another model to tick off on my list :)

In any form of competition where capacity was not restricted such as sidecar scrambles, no-one carried on using 750 motors once the 850 was available, preferably with Mk111 cases and crank.

750s have a special feel but that doesn't make the 850 a failed Harley !
 
Joined
Mar 19, 2005
Messages
696
As they say here, "What the farmer doesn't grow...the farmer doesn't eat."

This guy hasn't even tasted.

Round file it.....not worth getting into a huff about some Bozo who needs to show the world how biased and misinformed he is..... :lol:
 
Joined
Dec 4, 2006
Messages
29
worntorn said:
I guess just because you write an article that doesn't automatically mean you know what you are talking about.
... agreed :D :lol:

worntorn said:
The stock 850 produces 56 foot lbs of torque vs the 750 at 48. Hardly dull and flabby, this is a 17% torque increase over the 750, which was already a considered a pretty torquey bike.
... as above ... :D :lol:

worntorn said:
As far as the weight goes, the only way you could get 45 lbs of extra weight out of a MK111, would be to compare an fully fueled InterstateMK111 to a fully fueled earlier Roadster model, that would do it, the weight being mostly in extra fuel.
A-b-s-o-l-u-t-e-l-y correct ... 8)

worntorn said:
Otherwise, according to my findings, my friend's 750 weighs about 16 pounds less than my 850 MK111, mostly the electric starter and gear, I think.
Precisely so. Using a belt drive w/aluminium pulley and clutch basket, removing all e-start parts, generously ventilationg the inner chain chase with cutaways, fitting lightweight aluminium rimsmakes a Mk.III even some pounds lighter than an earlier roadster in stock trim.

worntorn said:
In spite of the bit of extra weight, my 850 is quicker than his 750, and, after switching bikes, we both agree the extra torque of the 850 is quite noticeable.
850 torque rulez ... :wink:

A
worntorn said:
ccording to the owner of British/Italian Motors here in Vancouver, a former Norton dealer and long time Commando rider, the MK111 version was the most durable and best overall version of the Commando, with stronger Crankcases and many other improvements/refinements over the earlier bikes, not that the earlier bikes aren't good as well.
True. strongest crankcase and best lubrication system of them all, including a somewhat reinforced frame and a much better gearbox cradle/swinging arm pivot assembly (w/cotter pins).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top