Featherbed FACTS.

This question of the Featherbed headstock angle has been around for awhile. When I was gathering info for my Vincent Special, I met with Terry Prince in Kanab, Utah at the North American Vincent Rally. I peppered him with build questions over several hours that we were at rally events together.
In the 1960s he was Fritz Egli's main cook and bottle washer. Terry fabricated the first 30 odd Egli Vincents for Fritz Egli. I had figured out most of my plan for my frame and swing arm, but was undecided of the headstock angle that I should use. Terry told me that they used the same headstock angle as the Manx Norton, as it was such a successful racebike and was renowned for its fantastic handling. He told me that the angle of the Manx headstock is 27 degrees or 63 measured the other way. I went with that and it just worked in allowing the front wheel on full compression to clear the standard Vincent mag cowl that I wanted to use. Some stock Vincents do jam up here and this has caused accidents.
For handling, I can only say that the bike handles very well, doesn't have any bad habits at all. It's a very light bike so it is pretty easy to throw around.
On reading this thread I have to think that Terry's info is incorrect, although that is unusual for Terry. He visited my shop a few weeks ago to finally have a look at the bike he provided engine parts for about 10 years ago. He was remembering many tiny details about our conversations in Kanab in 2011! For example, in the shop last month, he and I were looking at the giant kickstart that I made for this 1360 engine. He recalled that I had asked in Kanab in 2011 if it would be possible to kickstart a 1360 cc Vincent with his squish heads and 11 to 1 compression. In the shop last month He said " I think I told you, it depends on how big your right leg is!" Which is exactly what he did tell me in 2011, same exact words both in the question I had asked and in his answer ( I think!) . He is in his mid 80s but his mind is still razor
sharp!
Back to the 27 degree headstock angle. It works, but maybe headstock angle is not quite as critical as we might think it is, especially on a roadbike.

Before I built the bike I was able to trace out , full size on plywood, a Slater Egli Vincent frame which belongs to a friend who purchased a whole Truckload of Vincent projects in the early 70s. In the Truckload there was a complete Slater kit with Rapide engine and some ridiculously heavy Laverda wheels ( big brake though). I was only interested in getting the frame shape. The angle of that headstock was barely 20 degrees, like a modern Japanese Superbike. I determined that the front wheel in the Slater kit would definitely hit on the mag cowl, should someone someday assemble this Slater Egli- Vincent kit. That might never happen as the kit has now been in storage for 50 years and the owner will not sell, despite many good offers.

Glen

If it's wrong, it's too late to change it now!

Featherbed FACTS.
Featherbed FACTS.
 
Last edited:
I'm recalling now that I measured the 650ss headstock angle a few years ago and that was indeed at 26 degrees. Ken Sprayson would know, wouldn't he! I guess my Egli being at 27 is probably correct for Eglis, which were trying to be the same as a Manx but didn't quite make it.
Reading the article Baz posted makes me wonder if motorcycle headstock angles are like the most common Railroad track gauge-
I've read that comes from the wheel centres used on Roman carts, the ruts they created and so on. I can't recall the whole progression but it sounded plausible.
Perhaps the Mcandless Brothers, designers of the Featherbed frame, copied the headstock angle of some well known race bike from the 20s, which in turn borrowed from an 1890s bicycle.

Glen
 
The frame rake is related to wheel size and the rear suspension. If you carry a pillion on a Commando without winding-up the rear suspension, it must over-steer more in the direction of lean. Of all the 1960s frames, Seeleys are the best - there rake is 27 degrees, wheel size 19 niches, and my rear shocks are 80 pounds per inch of compression. Manx Nortons were, if I remember correctly 24.5 degrees rake and had 19inch wheels. Eglis would almost certainly have used Seeley geometry. The first Yamaha two strokes had neutral handling - did not oversteer when gassed when on a lean. The 70s Yamahas had Monoshock suspension similar to MX bikes - it gave much more travel. With the Suzuki T250 racer which I built, I cut the shock mounts off the frame and swapped them over to the opposite sides. It met the top mounts, instead of being 4 inches back were 4 inches down - there was more angle on the shocks - the rear of the bike was about 1 inch higher, and I had much more travel. The rake was 26 degrees, wheel size 18 inches, and the handling was excellent. Until I rode a Manx, I did not know why they were so much faster than other bikes of the era. You can use gas where the others cannot. It is heavy in the front and oversteers when you gas hard enough to compress the rear shocks - normal riders do not do that in corners.
With my Seeley 850, getting the yoke offset right gave a major improvement - it is 53mm - on a Manx Norton, I think it is 2.25 inches.
I am not going to say how good my Seeley 850 handles, but it became a real weapon. I got a real laugh out of it when it went under three guys leading a race on 1100cc Hondas, and about 30 MPH faster. It is possible to ride it full chat right through corners. - silly stuff !!
 
mdt-son said:
Come on guys, give us and Al a break. Take this rant to the Pub area.

- Knut
Click to expand...
The group's frustration and expression of frustration with Al, and his same dozen or so lines (10 of which are completely irrelevant, total BS, or backward) that are found on near every single thread on the forum, is surprisingly minimal.

Al's up to almost 15,000 posts. A few (mostly good natured) posts now and then calling out the stink coming off the BS is to be expected. We have to be able to look across the internet into each others' eye, wink, and recognize that it's still happening. We still get advice on race carb settings for methanol. We're still told that bikes corner better without lean. We're still told drum brakes will kill us. We're still told of a as-yet-substantiated illustrious race career. All while we're discussing Avon tire availability.

To keep this post quasi-relevant, in the previous post, Al's correct 2.25" Norton yoke offset dimension metric conversion is 57mm, not 53. A totally forgivable slip up, but ironically in a thread started to avoid the inaccuracies surrounding Featherbeds.

Featherbed FACTS.


We all are aging differently, and some of us require more patience than others. Sometimes we just need that wink.
 
t ingermanson said:
The group's frustration and expression of frustration with Al, and his same dozen or so lines (10 of which are completely irrelevant, total BS, or backward) that are found on near every single thread on the forum, is surprisingly minimal.

Al's up to almost 15,000 posts. A few (mostly good natured) posts now and then calling out the stink coming off the BS is to be expected. We have to be able to look across the internet into each others' eye, wink, and recognize that it's still happening. We still get advice on race carb settings for methanol. We're still told that bikes corner better without lean. We're still told drum brakes will kill us. We're still told of a as-yet-substantiated illustrious race career. All while we're discussing Avon tire availability.

To keep this post quasi-relevant, in the previous post, Al's correct 2.25" Norton yoke offset dimension metric conversion is 57mm, not 53. A totally forgivable slip up, but ironically in a thread started to avoid the inaccuracies surrounding Featherbeds.

View attachment 122608

We all are aging differently, and some of us require more patience than others. Sometimes we just need that wink.
Click to expand...
And what do you think about the comment from Al that someone should try removing the head steady assembly from a commando and fit a steering damper instead?
Personally I hope nobody tries it
 
baz said:
And what do you think about the comment from Al that someone should try removing the head steady assembly from a commando and fit a steering damper instead?
Personally I hope nobody tries it
Click to expand...
Even a cursory glance at the design kinda shows that would be pretty stupid !

An easy experiment would be… remove one leg from a three legged stool and see how that impacts stability !!

Featherbed FACTS.
 
t ingermanson said:
The group's frustration and expression of frustration with Al, and his same dozen or so lines (10 of which are completely irrelevant, total BS, or backward) that are found on near every single thread on the forum, is surprisingly minimal.
Click to expand...
Yes, I get it. In the end, it's the responsibility of moderator(s) to ensure postings are relevant and factual. The other day I signed up for a FB group on English bikes. One of the rules subscribers have to agree on is, staying on topic.
Maybe Jerry Doe just needs to implement stricter rules, preventing the forum turning into a swamp of arbitrary statements. There are tendencies, not only by AL.

- Knut
 
mdt-son said:
Yes, I get it. In the end, it's the responsibility of moderator(s) to ensure postings are relevant and factual. The other day I signed up for a FB group on English bikes. One of the rules subscribers have to agree on is, staying on topic.
Maybe Jerry Doe just needs to implement stricter rules, preventing the forum turning into a swamp of arbitrary statements. There are tendencies, not only by AL.

- Knut
Click to expand...
If you forced everyone to stay on topic all the time I think the content would drop substantially I personally don't mind if something I posted goes off track,but I fully understand that others do mind
Keeping postings factual would be good
But I'm guessing Jerry and Lab have enough to do without fact checking every post!
 
Yeah, being to strict on the ‘stay on topic’ is counterproductive IMO. It’s a conversation at the end of the day, and conversations meander by their very nature.

But…repetitive incorrect statements, posted as fact, are definitely harmful, especially to people who a new to the game who might search ‘respected’ sites to gain information.
 
Everyone has views on things, and some have different view to everyone else whether right or wrong and I am no expert, but I do know about my Commando/Featherbed set up and how well it handles in corners using the torque of the motor to push it through them corners, get into the corners and tight twisties, put the power on and the Featherbed just goes through it with ease, let the frame and motor do all the work the rider just points it in the right direction and controls the throttle, sometimes I got to look back to see if I did go through that corner, it's hard to explain how well a good set up Featherbed handles.
When I first built my Commando/Featherbed back in the early 80s it took me a few weeks of riding it to understand how good the Featherbed frame is, you have to learn how to ride it and let the frame and motor do all the work, the rider just controls the throttle and point the bike where you want to go, the frame and motor does the rest, the motor, GB, engine mounts is all part of the frame and plays a big part in how the Featherbed frame works that makes them handle so well.
As I have said it's hard to explain how well they handle if they are set up right of course.
Al keeps telling us how well his Seeley handles on the race track but Featherbeds have a long history of racing back in the days.
I brought my 74 850 Commando new and my mates couldn't understand why I started to convert it to the Featherbed frame back in 1980, but would I do it again if I had a chance, I sure would as I do know how well the 850/Featherbed handles, but my motor is built for the Featherbed frame, balanced crank, motor in the right position, I learned from my mate mistakes who got me into Commando/Featherbeds all them years ago and that was before the internet came along.
As for Al he doesn't ride on the road and his racing days have been limited and more so in memory these days and it be a shame to see his bike go to waste sitting in his shed and what will become of it when it's time to leave this world, be just another shed clean out and treated as junk to others in the family, we all get old, it's all part of life and I have had a great life with my Norton Commando/Featherbed and my other bikes but my Norton is my best, built by my own hands and it's been good to me, we have so much fun together up in them hills.

Ashley
 
Ashley, If you are ever travelling south, let me know a couple of months in advance. I will try to meet you at Wakefield Park in Goulburn with my Seeley 850, and we can both ride it. I think you would really enjoy the experience. I don't slag-off at Commandos or even Featherbed Commandos - they both have good aspects. I think you might really like a ride on my bike. It is a bit different.
I can no longer get onto Winton Raceway, and at Broadford we might neck ourselves.
Anything I have learned about motorcycles has usually involved pain. My Seeley 850 is a very safe ride.
To my mind, your Featherbed Commando is what a Commando should be and never could have become. A Seeley Commando on public roads would cause insanity in its riders.
My mate had an engineering business making after-market parts for motorcycles. His two specialties were putting two-strokes on methanol, and rubber-mounting their motors. Rubber mounted motors always make the bikes feel slower - but it might be due to the lack of vibration. The main reason for doing it was to stop the frames from cracking.
In the distant past, motorcycles were mainly about the adrenalin rush. The speed of modern motorcycles creates that, but these days the police have speed cameras. A Norton 650SS would probably give an adrenalin rush at 30 MPH. With my Seeley 850, adrenalin is not a factor, unless I get silly. It is a really fun ride.
 
Last edited:
I be right Al as I don't ride other peoples bikes, am quite happy with my own bikes thanks, only one good mate has ridden my Norton and that was a long time ago, he came back with a big grin on his face, but jumping on others bikes without knowing the bike or its ability, with any bike you got to take it slowly to see how the bike rides, handle etc, just jumping on a strange bike and start putting it into it can be a dangerous move as not knowing what it will do.
In my younger days I have seen mates jump on other mate's bikes and the first thing they did once they got out of sight is to lets see how fast it will go and start flogging it too come out second best and damaged bike.
I have nothing to prove with my Norton, I built it for me and my riding style, no one else, it's built for handling, lightness and performance and as I have always said it takes a little time to get use to how all these things come together, give it to someone else who don't know about learning what a bike can do instead of jumping on another persons bike and start to flog it without knowing what it will do.
Nothing better to know how my bike handle and cranking it right to the edge of my tyres pushing it through the tight twisties, pushing it to its limits and know I come through it with ease, doing that on someone else's bike without knowing can be dangerous to your health.

Ashley
 

Similar threads

Fast Eddie
NSU featherbed
Replies
3
Views
613
t ingermanson
t ingermanson
C
Fitting Jawa engine into featherbed frame
2 3
Replies
41
Views
3,986
Charkmandler
C
Norcoastal
Featherbed steering damper
Replies
11
Views
2,286
acotrel
acotrel
A
Featherbed 650 headsteady stud
Replies
13
Views
1,227
acotrel
acotrel
E
Can anyone can help identify some featherbed frames and a garden gate, I'm new to Nortons and don't know what to look for as far as lgs numbers etc.
Replies
6
Views
933
acotrel
acotrel
Back
Top