Help ID a 1969 Commando

Do the R's have the tyre pump and the notched rear mudguard?

Dave
69S

ARRGHH , she Looks Gen u iron .

When I was building my LR Fastback , Id been given a set of the pipes and mufflers , larger Dia pipes than the latter ones ,Straight through glass pack mufflers
Mightntve been free , but close . Hows 20 bucks a set these days ? . :shock: :? . Definately a worry . Cant recall who got half the stuff. Not that it'd do anything
anyway .
Nice to see a few of the ' Vintage Look ' types on the road .

I would say that the balance of probability makes this a converted Fastback. Any evidence for it being an R-type rather than a Fastback rests entirely on the tank and the seat. I would say the tank is either aftermarket or a converted Roadster tank, the fuel cap is not a typical Norton one even for the screw in type of earlier Long range Fastbacks and some Interpols, all of the photos of R-Types show a flip-up cap. The seat is obviously a later Roadster one, as the R-type photos show a seat identical to the S-Type. The bike has clearly had some work done, as it would have had a silver barrel, the speedo is from a later bike and pipes, mudguards etc are also new looking. It's a good looking bike I would simply ride it and enjoy it.

There's no question the bike has had some work and it's clear some is not original (for instance the pipes). However, the mudguards are of that time and appear to be original Norton - front and back. We are just fanatical about rubbing and polishing and making things shiny. As for the barrel, when we were getting started on the project, we acquired several old cycle mags with road tests and good pictures of the '69 Commando. Seems the early ones came both ways. A January 1969 Cycle Guide cover shows a new Fastback with the black barrels. Another article in February 1969 Cycle Illustrated shows one with a black barrel also. In August 1969, Cycle Sport magazine had an article that shows two Fastbacks - one with the black barrel and one with the silver - but both with the distributor behind the engine. We suspect the change may have come about the time of the factory changeover. I'd be happy to try and post them, but found the Photobucket a huge hassle and don't know of an easy way to do it. I'll try later if there's interest.

Took a closer look at the rear mudguard. It is definitely original Norton. It does have the notch for the tyre pump, but the pump is long gone and the tits for attaching it to the frame have been filed down. The front is orignial also and has the appropriate nuts, bolt and screwheads holding it to the braces.

The point is with trying to identify the bike all of these original elements present would exist on a Fastback, with the exception of the tank and seat, which don't look like standard R-type components. Unless you can get information to the contrary from the Norton owners Club or else The Vintage Motorcycle club - who possess much of the factory archives related to British motorcycle production - you would have to conclude that it is probably a modified Fastback.

I would love to see that it was originally an R. The black stays on the front mudguard point there, but then the early Fastbacks had that too. It's really hard to tell unless you can get the real info from the records. I'd love to hear it. I imagine there were very few R's made. In any case it looks good and ride it. I'm sure it pulls through 2nd from 25 to 70 just like mine.

Dave
69S

Well, whatever it is, it looks good.

Jean

Thanks for the compliments, and it really does run well. We researched this bike some years ago and came to the same conclusion that the forum has. We also found years ago that it's hard to get anybody with official records to respond. The forum has been very helpful vis a vis the rear mudguard. Not only is it an original, but also the attachment point at the front mates up to a Norton-made bracket that includes the horn on the same bracket. The original Norton Villiers Commando Spares List for 1969-1970 (Fastback) doesn't have any illustrations or photos of the rear mudguard or horn parts or assembly. Nor does my workshop manual of same vintage. My question to the forum members is this. Does the Fastback use a faux fender that attaches similarly at the front to that same attachment point? Or is it only the R and S (and presumably later models) that use this bracket? Also, does anybody have the spares list addendum for the R-Types?

As far as parts list for the R, the Commando Spares List that I have has 'supplements for 69 and 70'. It's the 68 commando spares list. My page 36 has "Spares list for 1969 Commando 'R' to be used in conjunction with 1968 Commando Spares List". In other words they just list the different items for the R. It's the same with the S on page 39, and then on p 44 'Spares list for 1969 Commando Fastback' which is apparently a bit different than the 68. Then on page 48 is the 70 Commando-all models (changed from 69) and the 70 Roadster only. It's quite confusing and I am not convinced that everything is correct.



I'm not familiar with how the rear mudguard on the fastback and R attaches in the horn area, much less the battery tray but I do know that on the S model there are 2 different mudguards, one mounts on a bracket down by the horn off the frame and the earlier ones mount off a strap between the shock top mounts (mine).

I have never seen pictures or drawings of lots of commando parts for 70 and earlier except what is shown in the 68 book. You can find the 69-70 parts book on line here http://www.eurooldtimers.com/eng/manual ... 1970-.html

Dave
69S

Thanks, Dave! That was really helpful! Now we can try to ferret out any unique parts. It would be nice to find we have a jewel, but regardless, it's a great bike.

Snortinnorton I have a 70 that i have restored to a S [i do not know what it started life as] I also have an early 69 fastback 1308xx, when restoring the 70 i have done consideral research on early commando's, I beleive yours is to origanal not to be genuine- the notched [tyrepump] rear guardand early syle reflectors on the taillight oil tank and steel? sidecover all early parts and very rear, Yes it could be a early fastback stripped down but the chances of getting the correct "S" guard and taillight would be remote, yes i have checked the fastback guard is diferent. I have never seen another screw in tank cap but again do'nt beleive someone fitted it for fun. Untill someone proves differently i beleive you have a "R".
Al

If they were out of a certain part , its unlikely theyd stop the line and wait for it .
A bit of improviseation from neccesity was bound to occur .

Same story if they changed supplyers or specs . Not neccesarily a ' smooth ' changeover .

Though Id think such would be more ' panic ' solutions , or management balls ups . Stores .

The likelyhood of a batch of machines being held up for components on final assembly for more than a few weeks would have been unlikely .
With the large export volume scheduled to be avaiable for the American Summer, the reultant ' slack ' period after would be more inclined
to be the ' change over' period , and a few ' mix and match ' devises contrived.If surplous components wernt consigned to stores .

On ' certain other makes ' ( BSA / Triumph ) the U.S. spec seldom had a identical ' home market ' version . Though I believe Norton Spec'd
bikes more for a considerable home market . Wasnt really till the 2A update that continuous high volume standard specifications were
envisaged ' across the board ' . side note , the Aussie P-38 Leyland was a ' across the range ' standardised Shell .That gave'the Big Three '
or at Least particularly Holden Fits . Design ( and production )philosophy evolved through the years. Pity the plug was pulled when it was .

With there finger out , we couldve had a Rotary and a 4 valve Twin Cam in the late 70s , Mustve been the traffic fumes .

Maybe its just they display occasional flashes of brilliance , The climate hardly suits flawless objectivity .