How to tell a MK1 from a MK2

Ferreteer · Feb 26, 2020

I'm asking this for a pal who is interested in in buying a 961 that was road registered in 2015 but doesn't have Mark 2 written on the air box??

Can anyone shed any light on what what to look for as proof of MK1/MK2 status in a private sale scenario.

For example did every single Mark2 actually leave the factory with Mark 2 written on the air box.

Was the definitive change that all Mark2s all had diecast casings.

Please shout up! regards

TonyA · Feb 26, 2020

Omex ECU , for sure . I would say the 2016 is the first year for MK2 . If that bike has the SC then not MK2. Also, the other improvements it will have like the later clutch basket . My late (November 2014) already had the latest balance shaft and clutch basket. There were other things done to the balance shaft split gear ( I don't have this) . But this can still be a good bike though , even if it is not MK2 . If it is late 2014 or newer than it is OK ! But if you are looking a definite year that would be 2016 or newer of course..

Fast Eddie · Feb 27, 2020

Just because it was registered in 2015 doesn’t mean it was made then. These bikes often sat in show rooms for a while.

It may not be definitive proof, but if it hasn't got mk11 on the airbox, I would assume it is not a mk11.

The mk11 changes were gradual though, so a late mk1 will most likely have all mk11 improvements on it. But it will be virtually impossible to tell for certain.

There are no shortages of bikes for sale at the moment, and it’s a buyers market. So I’d say be patient, look around, test ride a few, and try and buy a good ‘un !

Ferreteer · Feb 27, 2020

Thanks guys I think your comments will help him frame his view of it.

TonyA · Feb 27, 2020

Ferreteer said:
Thanks guys I think your comments will help him frame his view of it.

There is a date marking label on my frame too. Maybe you should buy one hey ?

BLIGHTYBRIT/SF · Feb 27, 2020

Mine is a Mk2 ,ordered January 2016, picked up 6 weeks later end of March , I agree with all the above , and as said a lot were built one year & not registered for a couple years , I know a yellow one ( mark 1)that had been in Chicago Norton dealer for ages in 2016 , wonder where that one went , and with the SE 961 , I’m sure I’ve actually seen a Mk2 one of them somewhere & they were suppose to be 50 for UK & 150 rest of world

Britfan60 · Feb 27, 2020

They SAY the MK2 was improved, but from what I read on these forums and the problems had, I don't see it. Just like the MK1....some avoided the headaches and some didn't and most of the problems were the same. Was the casting/finish of the cases a little more refined on the II ?

Welshrugby · Feb 27, 2020

Britfan60 said:
They SAY the MK2 was improved, but from what I read on these forums and the problems had, I don't see it. Just like the MK1....some avoided the headaches and some didn't and most of the problems were the same. Was the casting/finish of the cases a little more refined on the II ?

Problems yes, but most attributed to sensors, and compliance with Euro 4 with strangled the bike. Most mark 2 owners will agree that once de-catted etc, problems went away, well some of them.

MxMartin · Feb 27, 2020

I don't think the Mk2 was improved any, I believe the factory applied all the 'mods' done to-date on the Mk1, two seater only, and made it EUR4 compliant as Wesh said. Probably the most notable differences between any Mk1/Mk2 was the various ltd. editions and the bits of polished billet/chrome/carbon etc. that some bikes got and others didn't

Fast Eddie · Feb 27, 2020

The gearbox is supposed to be a big difference. IIRC Wodgedodge is one who has owned both and said the gearbox was noticeably sweeter on the mk11.

Overall however I’m beginning to question whether or not they’re any better. There does seem to be as many complainants with mk11s as ever! Maybe the changes forced by Euro 4 etc created as many new issues as old solved ones?!

BLIGHTYBRIT/SF · Feb 28, 2020

[QUOTE="Britfan60, post:Was the casting/finish of the cases a little more refined on the II ?

Not sure bout that Curtis , but my mates 1974 commando roadster is a much better polished finish than my ones , right thru to the slots of screw/

bolt holes

ntst8 · Feb 28, 2020

Great photo's

TonyA · Feb 28, 2020

Fast Eddie said:
The gearbox is supposed to be a big difference. IIRC Wodgedodge is one who has owned both and said the gearbox was noticeably sweeter on the mk11.

Overall however I’m beginning to question whether or not they’re any better. There does seem to be as many complainants with mk11s as ever! Maybe the changes forced by Euro 4 etc created as many new issues as old solved ones?!

Yes , the transmission got smoother in the MK2 . But when David C. , gets done with it does smooth as soft butter describe ?

TonyA · Feb 28, 2020

There was no major change in the transmission , it was down to finish of the parts shift drum and shift forks . This can be fixed on any 961. The transmission is nearly the same in the HD Sportster and it is obvious the 961 transmission was derived from HD Sportster design which is robust . But the 961 transmission is far smoother and sweeter ! Just ask anybody that has both a HD Sportster and a Norton 961 .

Eljahara · Feb 28, 2020

TonyA said:
it was down to finish of the parts shift drum and shift forks

Have you spelled shift correctly?

biggeoff · Feb 28, 2020

Britfan60 said:
They SAY the MK2 was improved, but from what I read on these forums and the problems had, I don't see it. Just like the MK1....some avoided the headaches and some didn't and most of the problems were the same. Was the casting/finish of the cases a little more refined on the II ?

bikes had two types of castings one was sand cast and the other was die cast which was I believe constructed on the mk2 correct me if im wrong

TonyA · Feb 29, 2020

I thought the casting method was changed before the MK2 came out.
Long before .

Britfan60 · Feb 29, 2020

TonyA said:
Yes , the transmission got smoother in the MK2 . But when David C. , gets done with it does smooth as soft butter describe ?

I've had both transmissions. Although I was told by the factory the new transmission is smoother, it is not. The orginal would barely have a notched feel, however, finding neutral was a breeze either up or down. The new one does feel a bit notchy. Also, on the original, it was obvious when you bottom out to first gear. The new one makes it more difficult to tell. Even in first, If I step down on it, it clicks. Not a big deal, but not as nice. That said, the first one only lasted 700 miles.

TonyA · Feb 29, 2020

I guess we should be happy that our bikes work at all .

Raphi · Mar 1, 2020

Fast Eddie said:
The gearbox is supposed to be a big difference. IIRC Wodgedodge is one who has owned both and said the gearbox was noticeably sweeter on the mk11.

Overall however I’m beginning to question whether or not they’re any better. There does seem to be as many complainants with mk11s as ever! Maybe the changes forced by Euro 4 etc created as many new issues as old solved ones?!

Gearbox is better. Don’t know yet about clutch basket...

How to tell a MK1 from a MK2

Similar threads