Engine build prep (2014)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok I confess, this is slightly off topic, as I'm now talking about more than just the engine. But it's still a Norton Gentlemen, come on!

Some may remember I recently complained about my lack of ability to manage this project properly as the 'scope' just keeps extending! This resulted in a complete strip down to have the frame coated. It was worth it, its bloody lovely :D :D :D

Engine build prep (2014)


Some may also recall that I asked the Gentleman Mr Norman White to execute his rather splendid cotter pin mod to my cradle. This turned out very nice indeed. I know a new cradle can be purchased cw cotter pin bushes, but Norman's standard mod also includes new bushes, new spindle, line reaming and expert assembly. A bargain :D :D

Engine build prep (2014)


And like many in the Norton game, my old tranny case was cracked twixt main and layshaft bearing housings. A strengthened AN shell was thus procured, and whilst Norman was so involved in this area of the bike, I asked him to assemble and effectively blueprint the box. I was intending to do this myself, but it only took Norman an hour, whereas I'd have consumed a whole day. Plus he knows what he's doing, and, well, I don't! Here's the rebuilt tranny in its newly refurbished home 8)

Engine build prep (2014)


The family have apparently planned something called a 'holiday'. I'm unsure of the details of this, but I do know it will prevent me from being present in the workshop for a couple of weeks. How unsporting :roll:

Still, I've sent some stuff off for '3rd party attention' that I will hopefully receive back upon my return. So the re-build is still progressing without me :wink:

I'll update the progress upon return from said 'holiday'...
 
Fast Eddie said:
Some may remember I recently complained about my lack of ability to manage this project properly as the 'scope' just keeps extending! This resulted in a complete strip down to have the frame coated. It was worth it, its bloody lovely :D :D :D

I can't imagine another world-wide group with such determination and drive than the crew of this forum. I had no idea I'd get to be part of this when I got my old girl back. You guys do me proud!

More pictures!
 
Fast Eddie said:
JS Carrillo conrods vs stock, the carrillos are simply things of beauty! Overall they are slightly heavier than stock (only slightly), but the little end is lighter.

The bike is looking great, and should be really impressive when finished.

Please don't take this as a criticism, but I just noticed what you said in the original post about the weights of the rods, and thought I ought to correct it.

The small end on Jim's Carrillo rods is not lighter than the small end of stock rods. It is significantly lighter than the standard (steel) Carrillo Norton rod small end, but not than that of the stock aluminum rod. The small end weight of Jim's rods is 105 grams, where a standard Carrillo is more like 135 grams, but the small end of the stock rod is only 75 grams or so (75 - 78 on the ones I've measured). FWIW, the only aftermarket aluminum rods for Nortons that I've measured (from Kenny Dreer) were slightly heavier at the small end than Jim's, at 110 grams. Jim's setup gets it's lighter reciprocating weight from a lighter piston and lighter pin, not from the rod.

On total rod weight, the Carrillo rods, both Jim's and the standard Carrillos are heavier than the stock rod. A stock 750 rod weights around 390 grams, Jim's Carrillos weigh 431 grams, and a current standard Carrillo steel rod weighs 472 grams (earlier ones weighed as much as 512 grams). The additional weight is mostly in the big end, which is rotating weight, and doesn't affect vibration much, so I don't consider the total weight differences to be very significant.

None of this is a criticism of Jim's kit. He never claimed his rod small end was lighter than the stock rod, just lighter than the standard Carrillo and some aftermarket aluminum rods. He worked pretty hard to convince the Carrillo engineers that it was safe to make the small end that light, and the rod is indeed a thing of beauty. I've seen titanium rods for Commandos that were heavier at the small end than Jim's.

Ken
 
Looking at the pic of gearbox in cradle it appears that you may have installed a "twin" adjuster for the top of the gearbox... I dont know this for sure yet but i thought that the "secondary/additional" adjuster was drilled and fixed to the front side of the clamping bolt.. To allow clearance for the backhalf of the primary casing..??????. I hope others will have an opinion to confirm.. Or is in front for accessability!!
 
Ugh good eye and catch olChris or he'll have to adj primary with inner case off and pull crank sprocket to put case back on. Even in the front position its a tight reach tester to diddle. All renewed parts and finish look so good during handling and assembly but gradually decay if enjoying them much.

Engine build prep (2014)
 
Yea I saw that too. It really is a set and forget system with the belt drive system but Fast Ed will find that the inner case will be very much in the way if slight adjustments are needed. Not the end of the world. He can always just drill another hole.
Cheers,
Thomas
CNN
 
olChris said:
Looking at the pic of gearbox in cradle it appears that you may have installed a "twin" adjuster for the top of the gearbox... I dont know this for sure yet but i thought that the "secondary/additional" adjuster was drilled and fixed to the front side of the clamping bolt.. To allow clearance for the backhalf of the primary casing..??????. I hope others will have an opinion to confirm.. Or is in front for accessability!!

Yes, this is worth looking into before you get too far.
 
Good observations re the 2nd adjuster guys. I had been looking at that myself and couldn't decide if ok or not! Is it just awkward to adjust, or impossible in its current location?
Drilling another hole is no problem (more weight saving!) but in its current position it looks more 'correct' to me as it is nicely in line with the direction of the stresses applied.
 
Mine is a bit different than most but principal is same.. easy enough to access here but flipped over you may still adjust it but there is battery the box/cradle, probablly elec wires, possibly oil lines to filter and whatever.. Probably worth the effort to drill again..

Engine build prep (2014)
 
" me as it is nicely in line with the direction of the stresses applied." I dont think that right cos the primary chain it PULLING the gearbox forward..
"
 
olChris said:
" me as it is nicely in line with the direction of the stresses applied." I dont think that right cos the primary chain it PULLING the gearbox forward..
"

Maybe, but loose gearboxes always end up being pulled back!

My Rickman is currently at Norman Whites for a belt drive to be tailor made for it.....box will be fixed in position...flat plates bolted to engine/gearbox plates in place of adjusters....

Bit of scope creep here too.....
 
Your may likely be right but due to the leverage of the rear wheel torque if the g/b bolts are loose.... I wont leave room for "creep" if i can help it but accept a settling in period of 2-3 heat cycles and re torqing and adjusting everything necessary..

Tailor made belt..WOW , Im envious!!!
 
Better make sure the fixing plates leave enough belt slack cold, so heated state ends up just right, which should still allow almost 90' twist w/o much strain and so loose [properly] the belt can be worked on and off by hand and screw driver help w/o much strain. Could add a series of new holes to lighten up and conceal the over sight.
 
I'm lovin' this Fast Eddie, keep the posts coming, it's a bit boring here at Bagram after work, you'd think I'd be tired of looking at mechanical stuff after wrenching on blackhawks for 12 hours a day, but this is a great thread. I look forward to your updates and everyone's inputs. Cj
 
Fast Eddie said:
Ok I confess, this is slightly off topic, as I'm now talking about more than just the engine. But it's still a Norton Gentlemen, come on!

Some may remember I recently complained about my lack of ability to manage this project properly as the 'scope' just keeps extending! This resulted in a complete strip down to have the frame coated. It was worth it, its bloody lovely :D :D :D

Is this the same bike you showed off in December? My, you have been busy.
 
pete.v said:
Fast Eddie said:
Ok I confess, this is slightly off topic, as I'm now talking about more than just the engine. But it's still a Norton Gentlemen, come on!

Some may remember I recently complained about my lack of ability to manage this project properly as the 'scope' just keeps extending! This resulted in a complete strip down to have the frame coated. It was worth it, its bloody lovely :D :D :D

Is this the same bike you showed off in December? My, you have been busy.

Yes it is... Busy? Well yes, but I'm still frustrated that it ain't going quicker.
 
hobot said:
Better make sure the fixing plates leave enough belt slack cold, so heated state ends up just right, which should still allow almost 90' twist w/o much strain and so loose [properly] the belt can be worked on and off by hand and screw driver help w/o much strain. Could add a series of new holes to lighten up and conceal the over sight.

Steve, this guy was works Norton development engineer 40 years ago, and been developing parts and bike ever since, he remade the monocoques after the UK National Motorcycle Museum fire.

He makes the clutch complete, it is smaller and lighter than a Commando based one. Take a look at his road bike belt drive on

http://www.normanwhite.co.uk/

I have faith he knows how to set a belt, and if you had been party to our discussion when I left the bike there, you wouldn't have much doubt either.....

But an even bigger clue is in the drive cover he has made, the inner fits close around the gearbox shaft and the outer close over the cutch, you would not be able to adjust this without remaking the cover....when I said tailor made I meant it..... :wink:
 
Ohhhh yes SteveA, Norman would know how close to make things to get away with a long time. I tore Peel's drivetrain up learning the hard way on my own. Await photo's of this custom install to envy &/or mimic. Hope ya get to point ya have to keep racer awareness of tire heat and wear in mind zipping here and there, but not so much to need 40 mm belt. I've had a few craft each throttle up was like peeling off layers of cash wad but the lasting highs was worth it. My 6.9 Liter Mercedes also peeled off pavement 100 yd on either side of my driveway so Houston had to repave it. I've finally got more money than time this year but not enough of either to go though Trixie tranny and engine sealing or Peel finishing d/t homestead priorities this season. The progress and neat features folks show us here helps sustain my mood someday I'll get it all done too.
 
hobot said:
Ohhhh yes SteveA, Norman would know how close to make things to get away with a long time. I tore Peel's drivetrain up learning the hard way on my own. Await photo's of this custom install to envy &/or mimic. Hope ya get to point ya have to keep racer awareness of tire heat and wear in mind zipping here and there, but not so much to need 40 mm belt. I've had a few craft each throttle up was like peeling off layers of cash wad but the lasting highs was worth it. My 6.9 Liter Mercedes also peeled off pavement 100 yd on either side of my driveway so Houston had to repave it. I've finally got more money than time this year but not enough of either to go though Trixie tranny and engine sealing or Peel finishing d/t homestead priorities this season. The progress and neat features folks show us here helps sustain my mood someday I'll get it all done too.

Mine is a 40mm belt, and longer than a Commando one.....Norman is particular....a shorter belt would be more efficient...and he strives to make them as short as possible, so he proposed making new engine plates to get the crank and mainshaft closer together.....I resisted that.....it would have meant new or rejigged exhaust heaaders, new inlet manifolds, new head steady and new engine plates, it was much to big an ask since all those things are already new and custom made!, and it would be a huge extra potential delay in a 5 year plus project....but maybe one day...
 
lcrken said:
Fast Eddie said:
JS Carrillo conrods vs stock, the carrillos are simply things of beauty! Overall they are slightly heavier than stock (only slightly), but the little end is lighter.

The bike is looking great, and should be really impressive when finished.

Please don't take this as a criticism, but I just noticed what you said in the original post about the weights of the rods, and thought I ought to correct it.

The small end on Jim's Carrillo rods is not lighter than the small end of stock rods. It is significantly lighter than the standard (steel) Carrillo Norton rod small end, but not than that of the stock aluminum rod. The small end weight of Jim's rods is 105 grams, where a standard Carrillo is more like 135 grams, but the small end of the stock rod is only 75 grams or so (75 - 78 on the ones I've measured). FWIW, the only aftermarket aluminum rods for Nortons that I've measured (from Kenny Dreer) were slightly heavier at the small end than Jim's, at 110 grams. Jim's setup gets it's lighter reciprocating weight from a lighter piston and lighter pin, not from the rod.

On total rod weight, the Carrillo rods, both Jim's and the standard Carrillos are heavier than the stock rod. A stock 750 rod weights around 390 grams, Jim's Carrillos weigh 431 grams, and a current standard Carrillo steel rod weighs 472 grams (earlier ones weighed as much as 512 grams). The additional weight is mostly in the big end, which is rotating weight, and doesn't affect vibration much, so I don't consider the total weight differences to be very significant.

None of this is a criticism of Jim's kit. He never claimed his rod small end was lighter than the stock rod, just lighter than the standard Carrillo and some aftermarket aluminum rods. He worked pretty hard to convince the Carrillo engineers that it was safe to make the small end that light, and the rod is indeed a thing of beauty. I've seen titanium rods for Commandos that were heavier at the small end than Jim's.

Ken

You are quite right Ken. I stand corrected.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top