Mark 3 verses the rest

TBH I found the only thing the peashooters woke up was the neighbours
BUT: Can't claim to have done before/after measurements. Bike came with poorly set up mismatched Amals as well as a 23T gearbox sprocket.
Junked the lot for new balanced system, reconditioned SU and 20T sprocket.... Good enough for this boy!
It won't be the world's quickest Norton, but that was never the aim. I'm no Sunday morning scratcher, and the bike has to earn it's crust once in a while, but it's no liability either..
Yesterday, case in point: Needed some 'throttle therapy' so off to the not too local garden/aquatic centre. Last two miles of road just re covered, so loose chippings, then car park is all shingle, but the SU's tractability means no sweat there... And of course, with live fish on board the return had to be made at (or above) the legal limit. Again, 75+ no strain, and confidence in the braking system helps too....

Back in the day I would never have considered an "electric tart" commando with a "foot assist starter" we all thought that Norton had sold out to the masses
I don't think that so much these days!!!!!

At this point in my life the MK III is exactly all I need in performance and handling. My 140 MPH rice bikes are all in the past. I do like that the MK III sorted out lots of the earlier Commando issues and, for me, the only things left were a real front brake, a digital EI, sorting the E-start with a DD starter, heavy cables, and a 3 phase alternator. I did the transmission bearing mod as preventive maintenance although it all looked fine.
Although I owned Brit bikes with right shift and didn't have too much problem swapping between left back in the day, I now appreciate the left shift when invited to ride someone's new whatever bike and would be extra careful if getting on a right shift although I expect it would come back to me.
My MK III will easily go a month without wet sumping and after a winter's storage I just start it and let it smoke for a few minutes figuring it's good lube and corrosion protection.

The MK 3. A pale imitation of a real Commando. I've ridden a few and they totally underwhelm me.

As far as performance difference - it is clear that since the original 850/peashooters/ham can filter used a 260 main jet in the Amals and the same Amals on a black-capped muffler/plastic air filter 850 used smaller jets (240, I think), there was less air being moved through the cylinders which required a smaller main jet and therefore, less power produced at WOT. If there had been no restriction compared to the previous mufflers/air cleaner, the main jets would have remained 260s.

That's correct. Change the black cap silencers and you must go to 260 MJ.
The airbox is large as is the filter. It is not restrictive. Well maybe at 9000 rpm!

Fullauto said:

The MK 3. A pale imitation of a real Commando. I've ridden a few and they totally underwhelm me.

Click to expand...

Says the guy who ran a PW3(stock-5 bhp@ 4500rpm) and a single carb (stock-5 bhp @ 6000rpm)
Dyno tested.

Still have the huge plastic airbox but peashooters and 260 mains, followed by a Z1R owner in the 90's who said he was amazed at the performance and especially the acceleration out of slow bends. He could keep up and overtake at high speeds but had to work at it. So the airbox is not a performance issue.

Not listening. I love my Mk3.

Mart UK said:

Not listening. I love my Mk3.

Click to expand...

Same here mate ! both of em

MkIII was new, improved, better, etc, except they used cast butter to make the cams on a batch of them...

I love all my Nortons, But the MK3 became my ride of choice due to the E start and quiet pipes and low induction noise, Once sorted out , It was great. Now with a WEB cam and a ex race bike head. it is quite fast and still with OEM black caps. People enjoy seeing and not getting their ear drums blown out, They actually smile and wave as I purr by. And I can ride it in and enjoy it . The rack makes it a real grocery getter and I have carried many heavy loads.

Well I stick with the MkII because it shifts on the right as my other three bikes do and they all shift the same one up pattern.
When I need to get stuff or go far or all weather I take my car. It has electric start and shifts on the left.

I like the improved swing arm with the two tapered pins

Hi Glen,
Vincents are often quoted as the benchmark of performance but how quick are they actually? ( this is a question, not a statement). What was a Rapide’s time on the quarter mile or 0 to 60 time? It’s hard to imagine that they are as fast as legend makes them out to be.
I think for someone of my vintage (62) that the bikes I can relate to regarding performance would be a Honda 750/4 and a Kawasaki 900. I would think that a stock Mk3 would be just behind the Honda, I hope a good earlier commando might get it’s nose in front of it and a well fettled Combat tuned bike might approach the KawasakI. Would this be a fair estimation?
regards
Al

Probably depends mostly on the state of tune of each bike and how the rider makes use of what's under him/her.
Standard Vincents are not a zero to sixty speedster.
Two up with luggage the Vincent is stronger than the 850 Commando, which is stronger than a 750 when both are laden. That's my experience anyway.

Glen

I have owned at least one Commando since 1973 (currently 5 road ready). My MkIII is the only one I have ever sold. Of the many "improvements" touted by Norton in 1975, the ones that impressed me were the oil tight primary cover, vernier isolastics, and elimination of most of the bullet connectors. Not so much with the wet sump valve that seemed to always hang up in the timing cover, sloppy shift linkage, poorly designed electric starter system, rear disc that added more unsprung weight and little additional brake force, new design switchgear that were little or no improvement, and the ugly monstrous bean can mufflers.

With proper mufflers, head work, and a 2S cam performance was on par with a good running Combat. A 4-pole starter motor and carefully adjusted anti-kickback discs made life with a high compression engine and the self-destructing sprag clutch livable.

Everyone has there own favorites, but mine is the "bitsa" Mk II Interstate with a 2S cam, Brembo front and rear discs, and CNW starter kit/belt drive. That's the MK III I wish Norton had built.

So, back to the original question;
from an Atlas to early 750 Commandos through to a Mk3 Commando.
Who would win a drag?
Who has the highest terminal velocity?
Who is considered the best handling?
which is the most reliable with the best longevit?
who would get off the bike after a 500 mile trip the most comfortable and with the biggest smile on his dial?
I know it is difficult to do such comparisons but I’m just interested

On another matter, I would be very grateful if those with more Commando experience used less abbreviations

with thanks
al

worntorn said:

Says the guy who ran a PW3(stock-5 bhp@ 4500rpm) and a single carb (stock-5 bhp @ 6000rpm)
Dyno tested.

Click to expand...

True statement. Which can be fairly few and far between on this forum. However, my Commando will eat a standard 750/850 MK whatever Commando for breakfast. Right from idle. You don't have to ride at 8000 rpm to keep up. It is an absolute delight to ride. I've never felt the need to use more than 3500 revs to see off the most motivated commuter and the Commando does it easily without raising a sweat. The power band is flat from idle to 5000 rpm. I've had a couple of people comment on this. One old, one young, but both Jap bike riders. They both commented that they didn't NEED to rev it into the top end to be moving along rapidly. It has NO vibration anywhere in the rev range and, due to my handling mods, is the sweetest Commando or anything else I've ever ridden. Really light steering yet it will hold a line with unerring accuracy. I'm not against electric starters as such, but the factory effort was poor. Thanks to John Snead and Matt Rambow, I now have a CNW electric starter fitted. Tuned correctly, just a touch of the button will light it up immediately, hot or cold. I bought my first Commando as a young man of 19 and rode with a group where Commandos were popular. Worst thing I ever did was to sell that bike and buy a new 860 GTS Ducati. What a disappointment. Sure, it handled better with its' truck like geometry but the Norton would have chewed it up and spat it out in a straight line.
Now I have ridden a few Nortons over the years, but I have never ridden one that felt the same as another. Which is more than I can say about many other bikes. You've ridden one Honda 750 four and you've ridden them all. I've spoken about "accepted wisdom" before. It might be accepted but it's not necessarily wisdom. But certain "facts" remain alive and are oft repeated. Even on this forum. Along with the "I would think..." crowd who have never actually tried to prove their theories and just remain satisfied with their thoughts alone. Never to be tested and proven.
At the time of release very few Norton riders were impressed with the MK3. They had become a not so svelte "tourer" and that's how they were marketed, certainly not the raw, take on all comers the Commandos were up until then. Ahem, the less said about the Hi Rider the better.

Is this the right room for an argument ? I've told you once already. No, you haven't. Apologies to Monty Python.

Well I had my MK3 out for a 150 mile jaunt today and it was downright frisky!
Im always surprised at the midrange torque and 5-6500 is OK too.
Nothing " soft" about it!
1200cc Beemer rt peddling hard to keep up.

Glen