MKIII headsteady

B+Bogus · Mar 16, 2012

1up3down said:
Yes, when I had my Taylor I cut out a piece of tin can as a shim between the Taylor and frame to make it fit snug.

Do you have a metric frame?
I have to say that the bore size was spot-on 1 inch, so shimming would have not been the best solution on mine.
If they were bored with a .020" shim clamped between the halves there wouldn't be a problem... at least for pre-metric frames (although mine is an Italian frame, and supposed to be metric it isn't)

swooshdave · Mar 16, 2012

jamesp said:
Anyone know how the Dave Taylor head steady compares to the CNW head steady, other than price? I have heard that the Dave Taylor has wear issues after 6-7000 miles. Thanks.

Bad/Good/Better/Best

Stock/DYI/DT/CNW

Does that help? :mrgreen:

jamesp · Mar 16, 2012

swooshdave said:
jamesp said:

Anyone know how the Dave Taylor head steady compares to the CNW head steady, other than price? I have heard that the Dave Taylor has wear issues after 6-7000 miles. Thanks.

Click to expand...

Bad/Good/Better/Best

Stock/DYI/DT/CNW

Does that help? :mrgreen:

Yes, but how is best better than better? Thank you.

swooshdave · Mar 16, 2012

jamesp said:
swooshdave said:

jamesp said:

Anyone know how the Dave Taylor head steady compares to the CNW head steady, other than price? I have heard that the Dave Taylor has wear issues after 6-7000 miles. Thanks.

Click to expand...

Bad/Good/Better/Best

Stock/DYI/DT/CNW

Does that help? :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

Yes, but how is best better than better? Thank you.

Sealed vs. open rod ends. One attached to frame via clamp vs. using the hole in the frame where it's suppose to mount...

jamesp · Mar 16, 2012

Ok, thanks. I appreciate your input.

B+Bogus · Mar 16, 2012

[quote="ludwig] From an engineering point of view , this DT headsteady is a real eyesore :
At one end , you have this massive chunk of alloy bolted to the head , and at the other end a flimsy clamp , held in place by shims cut out a coke can , while the perfect attachement point ( threaded bush) is poking right in your eye .
Ever heard the story of the weakest link in the chain ?[/quote]

Can't argue with the lack of Engineering elegance, but there's far more sway space up front. I recall Dave 'Davamb' Australia ran a batch up whigh used the original pick-up pionts on the frame and certainly looked 100% viable.

Not sure about the coke-can analogy though...unless you choose to do it that way of course

As delivered, it's quite a long way off being flimsy. The clamp is a big chunk of alloy and goes nowhere once fettled.

swooshdave · Mar 16, 2012

ludwig said:
B+Bogus said:

[quote="ludwig] ..Can't argue with the lack of Engineering elegance ..

Click to expand...

[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote].
It is not the elegance that is lacking , it is the engineering .
Filing off the clamps is even worse than shimming ( from round to oval ..)
What do you mean with sway space , and why do you need it ?
It is not so much the clamp in itself that is flimsy , but the 2 small bolts that hold it .
( looks like M6 or 1/4 " ? ) If one of these go : no more headsteady .
Not on my bike , even if they pay me ..[/quote][/quote][/quote]

Ironically you could actually make a simple attachment that would make it attach to the correct mounting point. Then it wouldn't be half bad.

davamb · Mar 16, 2012

B+Bogus said:
I recall Dave 'Davamb' Australia ran a batch up which used the original pick-up points on the frame and certainly looked 100% viable.

Yep sure seems to be working well, can't see why you wouldn't use the existing frame holes as you say. Silly not to. My 3mm steel ones may not look as nice, but I reckon steel is rather under-rated: Easy to do a 105degree bend too and large bend radii won't act as stress risers to promote cracks. Bit of paint wouldn't go astray, but I'm for function over form any day - you can always pretty it up next Winter. I had 5 sets made and all have gone or are going to good homes, but if there's any interest I'm prepared to make some more. Would probably need commitment for 20 sets.

DogT · Mar 16, 2012

swooshdave said:
One attached to frame via clamp vs. using the hole in the frame where it's suppose to mount...

Didn't I say that a back in the beginning of this discussion?

I'd still like to see a support spring on a DIY one. I think spaltt did it, but he's not responding. I'm tending towards that option.

Dave
69S

swooshdave · Mar 16, 2012

DogT said:
swooshdave said:

One attached to frame via clamp vs. using the hole in the frame where it's suppose to mount...

Click to expand...

Didn't I say that a back in the beginning of this discussion?

I'd still like to see a support spring on a DIY one. I think spaltt did it, but he's not responding. I'm tending towards that option.

Dave
69S

I'm probably going to add one to mine one of these days.

davamb · Mar 16, 2012

Now that I understand its function I too will do likewise.

79x100 · Mar 17, 2012

I have a DT steady and mine must be the 'one in a million' that fitted the frame tube (but my frame is a post-production Andover spare). The clamp fitted tightly with the screws even finger tight.

The set-up procedure involves ensuring that the rod is precisely in line, laterally and vertically and as I understand it, the adjustable clamp is intended to take account of variations in frame and engine positioning. I'd hazard a guess that the makers tried it out on a number of machines and found that there was no one-size-fits-all solution. The problems with the clamping diameter indicate that there are further variations which they hadn't taken into account.

Obviously, the preferred solution would be brackets made to fit each individual machine but that is clearly not possible with an item made for sale by mail-order.

It seems to me that if the clamp were to move (and I've seen no evidence of that) then the initial signs woould be an increase in vibration long before any misalignment caused stability problems, but hell, I'm not an engineer, far from it and I only potter around these days anyway.

DogT · Mar 17, 2012

swooshdave said:
I'm probably going to add one to mine one of these days.

DomiRacer has about the best prices on the spring parts.

1 of 2 Head Stead Spring Bracket 065458 $5.29
2 of 3 Hex bolt 1/4-28x5/8
2 of 4 Washer 1/4" flat
1 of 5 Hex Nut 1/4-28
1 of 6 Head Steady Trunnion 065456 $2.20
1 of 7 Nylock Nut 5/16-24 UNF
1 of 8 Head Steady Retainer 065585 $5.72D
1 of 9 Head Steady Spring 065454 $10.89

Now how to fashion a bracket off the HS? I'm not sure it will help the vibes, but it will keep the front iso centered, preventing sagging. My old ones were really squished.

Dave
69S

cash · Mar 17, 2012

ludwig said:
B+Bogus said:

[quote="ludwig] ..Can't argue with the lack of Engineering elegance ..

Click to expand...

[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote].
It is not the elegance that is lacking , it is the engineering .
Filing off the clamps is even worse than shimming ( from round to oval ..)
What do you mean with sway space , and why do you need it ?
It is not so much the clamp in itself that is flimsy , but the 2 small bolts that hold it .
( looks like M6 or 1/4 " ? ) If one of these go : no more headsteady .
Not on my bike , even if they pay me ..[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]

Ludwig,

The original head steady still has the original link, it shows no signs of wear at at all and is in regular use.
The tube clamp was used to make the installation simpler ie self adjusting as the position of the frame threaded bosses to head on the Commandos I looked at weren't exactly the same. With reference to the clamp bolts, I'm sure the frame tube would fail before the two 1/4" 8.8 cap screws would shear. True, tube diameters are a problem ranging from imperial to metric and varying in thickness coatings. However, if fitted correctly any ovality has remained within the elasticity of the tube and so far no permanent distortion has been found.

The proof is in the pudding as they say. I believe over a couple of thousand have so far been sold without any issues other than in 1997 one link failed a month after fitting. though asked for it was never returned for inspection, whatever the cause was we'll never know.

The truth is, yes I'm sure it could be improved. But whatever you say it is a fit and forget item requiring little maintenance, it does work, it reduces load and wear on the ISOs and is reliable and it is something anyone could make at home. And it has opened the door to many others who are attempting to make something better and good luck to them all I say.

If anyone wants to checkout the original steady feel free to drop in, just drop me a line first.

I wish to make it quite clear to all I gave the idea to RGM and have not received and do not receive any payments from them whatsoever. I'm just another Norton nut-case.

Cash

jamesp · Mar 17, 2012

"I wish to make it quite clear to all I gave the idea to RGM and have not received and do not receive any payments from them whatsoever. I'm just another Norton nut-case."

So, is RGM the maker of the Dave Taylor head steady? Their price is 85 pounds, with spring device, 70 without. . Even with shipping to US, that would be less than the ebay price of Commando Specialties. And far less than the one sold by CNW.

bwolfie · Mar 17, 2012

I have noticed most Items sold on ebay can be found cheaper direct from RGM.

DogT · Mar 17, 2012

Like I said, Clubman Racing has a DT for $169 with the spring. Unless you don't Frank. Can you ship it over here for $30?

Dave
69S

DogT · Mar 17, 2012

bwolfie said:
I have noticed most Items sold on ebay can be found cheaper direct from RGM.

Same with Norvil, hehe.

Dave
69S

splatt · Mar 18, 2012

[/quote]

Dave, this is a tidy design, I would prefer to see less gap between the frame tube and the bottom of bracket,it would be less likely to bend, there is also no need for the other two bolts clamping it together. As for the springs I mounted it off the two bolts holding the bracket to the frame down to an adjustable mount, it was experimental 2 years ago and have never really been happy with it, if I can find my camera I will try and send you a photo.
The mk3 spring mount is probably the easiest way to go, wouldn't be hard to make the angled mount on the front of the head bracket.

davamb · Mar 18, 2012

splatt said:
Dave, this is a tidy design, I would prefer to see less gap between the frame tube and the bottom of bracket,it would be less likely to bend, there is also no need for the other two bolts clamping it together. As for the springs I mounted it off the two bolts holding the bracket to the frame down to an adjustable mount, it was experimental 2 years ago and have never really been happy with it, if I can find my camera I will try and send you a photo. The mk3 spring mount is probably the easiest way to go, wouldn't be hard to make the angled mount on the front of the head bracket.

Thanks Splatt, I had to fiddle the design at the last moment to get enough clearance under the tank, so with existing laser-cut blanks I had to change the bend points, so the brackets grew 'down' to consume 'width'. I was thinking of adding the angled spring mount on the front just as you say. As with any design, a couple of iterations are required to reach optimal. Would like to see your pics.