I realise this subject has previously been discussed but I would like clarification please. I managed to obtain 2 of the above rims from separate sources and on inspection, found that the holes for the nipples are different sizes, not by much but are different. I don't think the rim with the larger holes is, due to wear and I recall reading, that for some reason, they came from the factory that way, any advice would be appreciated, David '69 S Commando
Dunlop WM2 19 MB 41 rims
- Thread starter fireflake
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2005
- Messages
- 18,978
All wheel builders say ok to open holes for slightly bigger spokes as just the very edges of nipple that seat in rim so the real issue is if the rims have holes drilled in the dimples at angles that allow sweet lacing to match Commando hubs and brakes. WM2 are front size which is the most tricky for hole angles to match.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2005
- Messages
- 18,978
WM2 are standard width front fit. Has anyone ever heard of any one claiming they mounted a WM2 on rear, only WM3 and wider. Norton front disc requires essentially 2 row of vertical spokes which requires rather extreme angles of those holes not to bind spokes. Lace em up and see. Ben English that ran vintage mc shop in NY area told me this then shortly after Mr. Buchannon told me too when their Combat front rim left spokes in a bind and told could beat em to bend better. Another oddity of my Commando upbring likely no one else can relate too.
We all know by now (!!) that hobot puts into words here the 1st thought that crosses his mind.
Accuracy needn't come into it, nor any checking to make sure its right.
18,000+ times .....
Having been playing with lacing rims lately, I'd have said that the front and rear rims for Norton alloy drum wheels are near interchangeable,
since the spokes will fit front or back wheels. (For the right years).
Not having studied the parts books to see if this is indeed true, or for what years.
Which is where we come back to the OP here...
Last time I looked, all Commando had WM2 x 19 rear rims. (?).
Accuracy needn't come into it, nor any checking to make sure its right.
18,000+ times .....
Having been playing with lacing rims lately, I'd have said that the front and rear rims for Norton alloy drum wheels are near interchangeable,
since the spokes will fit front or back wheels. (For the right years).
Not having studied the parts books to see if this is indeed true, or for what years.
Which is where we come back to the OP here...
Last time I looked, all Commando had WM2 x 19 rear rims. (?).
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2005
- Messages
- 2,835
I would be going to WM-4 rims front and back. Edited: Your 69 would need to change to the later 850 front fender including the stays.
Cheers,
Thomas
CNN
Cheers,
Thomas
CNN
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2005
- Messages
- 18,978
Rohan you obviously have not experience hobot hassles so buzz off till ya have some useful input. Dual drum Commandos had same size tires on Wm2 rims and normal angle spoke holes.
Has anyone tired to fit stepped SS spokes on Excel alu rim from Buchanan. They sent wrong spoke set first time with which throw me at first especially with everyone at Buchannons telling me I was wrong till I pow wowed with the Mr. B and hopeful they corrected their records on which Commandos got first disc brake drilled rim with disc side marked. They goofed up on the data I supplied - serial number model name and description with month/yr on stem plate.
Has anyone tired to fit stepped SS spokes on Excel alu rim from Buchanan. They sent wrong spoke set first time with which throw me at first especially with everyone at Buchannons telling me I was wrong till I pow wowed with the Mr. B and hopeful they corrected their records on which Commandos got first disc brake drilled rim with disc side marked. They goofed up on the data I supplied - serial number model name and description with month/yr on stem plate.
madass140
VIP MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2011
- Messages
- 2,126
Pre Commando as well, didnt want to mention that as Atlas had an WM3 X 18" rear rim , not sure of the markings on that one off hand.
regarding the bigger holes , cant say I've ever come across that, my thoughts initally were its been drilled for 7.3mm nipples (straight 8G spokes not the
standard 8/10G swaged or butted spokes}. but I could be wrong.
Far as I know The Atlas was the only one that used a WM3" rim.
regarding the bigger holes , cant say I've ever come across that, my thoughts initally were its been drilled for 7.3mm nipples (straight 8G spokes not the
standard 8/10G swaged or butted spokes}. but I could be wrong.
Far as I know The Atlas was the only one that used a WM3" rim.
- Joined
- May 28, 2003
- Messages
- 2,591
madass140 said:
61 manxman WM3-18 verified on my friends unrestored bike and documented plenty of other places. AFAIK 650ss went back to 19" in 1962
I was alerted to this in the recent 650SS NOC article, which I then researched on my own to verify since I was not aware of it. :mrgreen:
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2012
- Messages
- 14,017
Have any of you ever checked out what fat tyres do to the handling of an old British racing bike ? Skinny tyres are often better than fat ones, after all those old bikes never had much horsepower. My bike has a 4 inch tyre on the back with an old Battleaxe tyre. I gas it really hard when it is cranked right over and going fast because the steering geometry allows that. The rear end of the bike never moves. The tyre on the back far exceeds the requirements of the application unless it is raining.
I suggest that on a bike such as the 650ss or the first commandos the WM2 X 19 inch rims would be perfect. The fat rear tyre would be good if you also had ape-hanger handle bars.
I suggest that on a bike such as the 650ss or the first commandos the WM2 X 19 inch rims would be perfect. The fat rear tyre would be good if you also had ape-hanger handle bars.
dynodave said:
They are 19" in the 1961/2 parts book, same as all dommies.
So where is this 'documented'.
There are very few reliable posters on the NOC Forum these days, I'd comment....
What is to stop an Atlas back wheel being fitted to a Manxman either ??
I'd also comment that my dommie came with heavier spokes than standard on the back wheel.
I suppose we could call this 'original' too,
but I'd suggest that someone had a problem, and had it drilled and laced with heavier spokes.
Which is quite possibly what the OP here is seeing with his rims too (?).
- Joined
- May 28, 2003
- Messages
- 2,591
How do they get a rear 400-18 tire on a 19" rim???
just like my buddies manxman...
Berliner ad in Cycle magazine Dec 1960
Roy Bacon glossy books state the same
So yes, 3 sources is good enough to for me to believe.
Chances are excellent 1961 18" rear wheel manxman production was diverted to 1962 atlas and continued until the end in 68
just like my buddies manxman...
Berliner ad in Cycle magazine Dec 1960
Roy Bacon glossy books state the same
So yes, 3 sources is good enough to for me to believe.
Chances are excellent 1961 18" rear wheel manxman production was diverted to 1962 atlas and continued until the end in 68
"Additional features not commonly found on other standard models - Norton featherbed frame".
Presumeably this is other brands of bikes, featherbeds weren't exactly rare on other Nortons. !
Wonder why the 18" rim didn't get into the 650 parts book ?
The Manxman had its own parts book ?
Presumeably this is other brands of bikes, featherbeds weren't exactly rare on other Nortons. !
Wonder why the 18" rim didn't get into the 650 parts book ?
The Manxman had its own parts book ?
I've often wondered where the 52 horsepower rating came from for the Manxman. From everything I have read it is an identical engine to the early 650SS which was rated at 49 HP. The late 650SS was fitted with larger carbs and conceivably could have developed a few more horses than the early, but it too is generally written up as 1 horsepower shy of fifty.
Makes you wonder if there was a jump in UK insurance rates at 50 HP? I believe most of the 650SS bikes went to the UK.
Supposedly that is why my Triumph Daytona was rated at 149 hp. It kept the UK insurance rates lower than the 150 HP R1 Yamaha or 158 HP GSXR 1000. Pretty much every purchaser bought the factory open pipe and tune for about $1k before leaving the dealership, good extra profit for Triumph. UK purchasers were happy because they had a bike that was cheaper to insure than the competition but actually produced more HP.
According to Triumph, actual power output with free flowing pipe and tune was 162 HP, so it was sneaky of them.
Could Norton have been just as sneaky back in the sixties with the 1960s?
Glen
Makes you wonder if there was a jump in UK insurance rates at 50 HP? I believe most of the 650SS bikes went to the UK.
Supposedly that is why my Triumph Daytona was rated at 149 hp. It kept the UK insurance rates lower than the 150 HP R1 Yamaha or 158 HP GSXR 1000. Pretty much every purchaser bought the factory open pipe and tune for about $1k before leaving the dealership, good extra profit for Triumph. UK purchasers were happy because they had a bike that was cheaper to insure than the competition but actually produced more HP.
According to Triumph, actual power output with free flowing pipe and tune was 162 HP, so it was sneaky of them.
Could Norton have been just as sneaky back in the sixties with the 1960s?
Glen
The link, or non-link, betwixt marketing horsepower or brochure horsepower or real world horsepower has been well discussed here before.
And never the twain shall meet.
Guzzi at some stage claimed 80 hp for one of its beasties - considerably more than a Z1 at the time.
Which was hard to see on the road.
Some poking and prodding revealed that was with the race kit installed - and 80 hp was still not guaranteed. !
We diverge, muchly, from the OP 19" rim question here..
And never the twain shall meet.
Guzzi at some stage claimed 80 hp for one of its beasties - considerably more than a Z1 at the time.
Which was hard to see on the road.
Some poking and prodding revealed that was with the race kit installed - and 80 hp was still not guaranteed. !
We diverge, muchly, from the OP 19" rim question here..
- Status
