Interesting variation

Stephen Hill · Jul 1, 2017

Fullauto wrote: "I have a Commando that would run rings around just about any classic you could mention, including Featherbeds."

When I want a classic that handles, I dig out my 1988 Honda Hawk NT650. Run rings around that.

Stephen Hill

Fullauto · Jul 1, 2017

Stephen Hill said:
Fullauto wrote: "I have a Commando that would run rings around just about any classic you could mention, including Featherbeds."

When I want a classic that handles, I dig out my 1988 Honda Hawk NT650. Run rings around that.

Stephen Hill

Since when has a Honda Hawk been a classic? You have no idea how my Norton handles. And what have you done to your Commando to make it handle so badly?

Onder · Jul 2, 2017

1988?
Classic?
...Im hard pressed to consider my 74 Commando a classic.
Too new!

acotrel · Jul 2, 2017

How do you know what is good handling unless you have ridden something which is really good ? In any case, it is always 'horses for courses' and a lot depends on your own riding style. Some guys like lumbering stable bikes with lots of horsepower and always take the high line in corners. Others like bikes which are quick-steering and tighten their line in corners and use less power to achieve the same goal.. The slow-steering bike is safer.

Stephen Hill · Jul 2, 2017

Not just a classic, a Cult Classic.
http://raresportbikesforsale.com/cult-c ... a-hawk-gt/
Short wheel base, stiff frame, handles like a go cart.

Stephen Hill

wrecks · Jul 2, 2017

Fullauto said:
The total amount to attain this perfection is about AU$2500.

And as for what people think, they are just following the path of some guru who decided that a particular mod was the business forty years ago and blindly follow the pack.

I'm genuinely interested in what mods you have done and what you have focused on in setting up your Commando that make you so happy with the way it handles.

Fullauto · Jul 2, 2017

wrecks said:
Fullauto said:

The total amount to attain this perfection is about AU$2500.

And as for what people think, they are just following the path of some guru who decided that a particular mod was the business forty years ago and blindly follow the pack.

Click to expand...

I'm genuinely interested in what mods you have done and what you have focused on in setting up your Commando that make you so happy with the way it handles.

No problems. get your Isos in order and adjusted. Jim Comstock head steady. Don't bother with the other junk out there. Ikon rear shocks. Just the basic model, nothing fancy, Lansdowne front fork conversion, available from our friend and fellow forum member Don Pender (maddass). Gives adjustable compression and rebound damping. Excellent control and comfort. Rims and tyres. VERY important. 2.5 inch (WM4) x 19 inch rims with 100/90 Avon Roadrider tyres. Very quick in the steering and yet amazingly stable, even at higher speeds. Surprisingly, maintains the quick steering at higher speeds. Very, very good over bumps. Maintains comfort and doesn't get pushed off line.

That's it. Simple. You will be amazed at it's capabilities. I am. Constantly. Run rings around any pseudo classic with three admirers.

My focus is concentrating on issues and solving them rather than listening to forty year old observations about how we used to do it. Some old stuff is good, but other stuff was bullshit then, and remains so.

marinatlas · Jul 3, 2017

http://www.norbsa03.freeuk.com/goffynorbsa850.htm

have a look ........

Fullauto · Jul 3, 2017

marinatlas said:
http://www.norbsa03.freeuk.com/goffynorbsa850.htm

have a look ........

If that's your thing, go for it. Doesn't do anything for me.

lcrken · Jul 3, 2017

Interesting read, though.

I enjoy seeing the story of a bike's long term development. This bike is not exactly my cup of tea either. But I'm also one of those folks who like to tinker with the same bike over the long term, trying to "perfect" it, and I appreciate seeing others who share the same malady.

Ken

Triton Thrasher · Jul 3, 2017

If the swing arm mounting is not integral with the rubber mounted engine, then it's not Isolastic: It's just rubber mounted. I hope the builder has considered rear chain tension.

It's certainly a way of giving a Commando a much heavier frame.

baz · Jul 3, 2017

Triton Thrasher said:
If the swing arm mounting is not integral with the rubber mounted engine, then it's not Isolastic: It's just rubber mounted. I hope the builder has considered rear chain tension.

It's certainly a way of giving a Commando a much heavier frame.

from memory it was a full isolastic conversion ,as i said earlier in this post the engineering was superb ,there was another norbsa next to it a full flat tracker, this one was a commando motor mounted rigidly in an A10 frame ,i assume both bikes were built by the same person?

lcrken · Jul 3, 2017

The bike that started this thread is as baz remembers. It has the full isolastic treatment, with the swingarm pivoting on the Commando engine subframe, not the BSA frame. It's very clear in the pictures and description on eBay.

The NORBSA that marinatlas posted a link to is the one without the isolastics. And the owner did mention how badly it shakes at high rpm.

Ken

o0norton0o · Jul 4, 2017

I wouldn't assume that a Norbsa which shares the isolastic components of a norton commando automatically handles any better than a commando... would you?

I had a long time handling issue with my 70 commando. I changed a lot of good parts trying to find the problem. I did eventually find the big problem which was the cradle swingarm tube which I fixed with the kegler clamp modification. My bike handled so well after the fix that I decided to add Jim C's rose joint headsteady to see if I could take it's handling even further. I'm happy I modified my bike because the STOCK handling did suck... I wouldn't argue that point.

I don't think the answer to a better handling commando powered bike is to mount it in a BSA frame, but that BSA is a cool project all the same. I could see going to a special frame built for a commando engine like a seely, but I don't see the BSA frame as being any less problematic to work out good handling than just modifying the stock norton commando frame..

Cool bike, I'm sure someone will want it but not me. Out of curiousity, I'd like to take if for a test ride all the same... :lol:

Triton Thrasher · Jul 4, 2017

I couldn't see the swing arm mounting and I assumed the worst!

I saw a Commando with a BSA A10 engine once.

acotrel · Jul 5, 2017

In the olden days the first thing the guys who bought Manx Nortons used to change for bronze bushes, were the rubberised silentbloc bushes in the swing arm. It actually makes a difference to the handling, especially if you are using hard compound tyres which make good feel important. Isolastics are obviously OK if you want vibrationless comfort. However I've never ridden solo with them, - only as a passenger, so what would I know ? In the 50s and 60s, many riders uses T1 compound triangular tyres which were often rock-hard. So to stop crashing a good connection between the bars and the rear tyre contact patch was essential. when we went to 398 and 498 compound triangular tyres things were a bit easier. In the 70s we got the first gumball tyres and lean angles increased dramatically, and we got away with a lot more mistakes without crashing. With isolastics you would probably never have been able to live without crashing, with the very old compound tyres.

norsa1 · Jul 5, 2017

Here is my take on a Commando powered A10. I have always liked the looks of the A10 but the original motor lacked the punch of the Commando. Bert Hopwood designed both motors so the project is not too sacrilegious. No Norton was hurt in this project as it was built from spare parts. As far as handling goes, Acotrel is quite right the bronze swing arm bushings do make a difference and on the street the bike handles exceptionally well . The engine and trans are solidly mounted into the frame with adapter plates that run the full length of the engine bay. The engine is a 270 degree crank, as a consequence the vibration level is less than a standard BSA.

gripper · Jul 5, 2017

There is a company called Metal Malarkey in the wilds of Shropshire (UK) that make a frame to take all the Commando bits. It looks just like a Commando. The pictures on their web site would indicate a swinging arm mounted on the frame and the headstock area is similar to the featherbed setup.

baz · Jul 5, 2017

norsa1 said:
Here is my take on a Commando powered A10. I have always liked the looks of the A10 but the original motor lacked the punch of the Commando. Bert Hopwood designed both motors so the project is not too sacrilegious. No Norton was hurt in this project as it was built from spare parts. As far as handling goes, Acotrel is quite right the bronze swing arm bushings do make a difference and on the street the bike handles exceptionally well . The engine and trans are solidly mounted into the frame with adapter plates that run the full length of the engine bay. The engine is a 270 degree crank, as a consequence the vibration level is less than a standard BSA.

That's one cool bike,how would you compare the handling to an unmodified commando?

cliffa · Jul 6, 2017

Norsa1 I have only two words for your bike - bloody gorgeous!!

Did you document it's build somewhere?

On the subject of Commando handling - before the advent of Kegler clamps, Vernier ISO's, DT head steadies etc. A Commando was know commonly as a "Bendy", and I can vividly remember owners accounts of very serious tank slappers being written in such magazines as Motorcycle Sport.

Cheers,

Cliffa.

Interesting variation

Similar threads