New Member w/Gardengate Nortons

The tank looks just like a Matchless or AJS tank from the early 50s. (Maybe a Model 18 AJS which is a 500 single.) But I think the filler should be on the other side for that also.
 
On Norton tanks from the 1930s / 1940s it isn't normal to see an external weld round the filler neck. The original necks look to be a spun part, inserted in the tank and then welded from the inside, prior to the underside being closed. The hinge is usually on the rear with this type of tank (except for some military models fitted with a tank-top air filter).

The mountings look very close together. Do they match the frame lugs ?
 
79x100 said:
The mountings look very close together. Do they match the frame lugs ?
Click to expand...

Yes - thats why I suggested get some measurements and see that they matched....
 
P.S. This is what the underside of an ohv Norton single tank should look like.
http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k50 ... 6/tank.jpg

Inluding the tank serial number stamped on the right side middle there.
Year, and individual tank number ?
This one is 47 = 1947*, not sure if they were all the same or not...
(* at least thats what it is assumed it means).

Strange sunburst lighting effect in this pic....
 
Rohan said:
P.S. This is what the underside of an ohv Norton single tank should look like.
http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k50 ... 6/tank.jpg

Inluding the tank serial number stamped on the right side middle there.
Year, and individual tank number ?
This one is 47 = 1947*, not sure if they were all the same or not...
(* at least thats what it is assumed it means).

Strange sunburst lighting effect in this pic....
Click to expand...

Hard to say for sure, but going by the pics from the auction, it looks like my tank has a '13' stamped into the underside of the tank, but that doesn't make sense. I'll get some measurements when it arrives.
 
Lurkingclass said:
Thanks Bernhard. Are you aware of a functional alternative for the 10TT9? Unfortunately, the 1 5/32 10TT9 I had went with my BSA when I sold it. I've got a pair of 1 1/8" Amal 289 carbs as well as 389/Monoblocs up to 1 3/16". I might give one of those carbs a try.

Any idea how the new Amal TT carbs work? They're pricey, but if they work well, I may take the plunge. http://www.amalcarb.co.uk/buildCarb_TT.aspx

Also considering a new BTH magdyno- any input? http://bt-h.biz/mag-dyno.htm
Click to expand...



Probably of no use to you whatsoever but hers someone in the UK with a NEW Amal GP….

e-bay;
251057460982
 
Bernhard said:
ebay;
130734001697
Click to expand...

Looks more like a sidevalve tank, which has been reworked. ??
Enough rewelding to make iding it just guesswork.

Prewar CS1 or CJ tanks (1930s ones) were small like that though.
Inter always had the bigger tanks, very distinctive/recognizable shape.
 
I appreciate all the feedback on the bikes and the mystery parts. I've seen a few old pics of a CJ models that have what looks like the same tank- left side filler neck and all, but you never know. Either way, it fits the ES pretty well and looks right with the girder fork, so I'm going to use it.

Speaking of tanks, the '52 International has a bolt-through gas tank with the same front and rear mount as the Manx. It's also got an alloy and bronze head, and an alloy barrel. Is this stuff standard Inter equipment, or is this bike something special too?
 
Lurkingclass said:
It's also got an alloy and bronze head, and an alloy barrel. Is this stuff standard Inter equipment, or is this bike something special too?
Click to expand...

This was normal for a XX year old Manx.
 
Lurkingclass said:
Speaking of tanks, the '52 International has a bolt-through gas tank with the same front and rear mount as the Manx. It's also got an alloy and bronze head, and an alloy barrel. Is this stuff standard Inter equipment, or is this bike something special too?
Click to expand...

Is this tank alloy or steel ?
The bolt-thru type are supposed to survive better than other types, was a racing option (ie the std tank wouldn't go the distance )- in steel. Many replacement sources available these days, including in alloy.

A bronze skull head/alloy head by 1952 would be unusual, it sounds more like prewar (for the bronze skull head). Not sure when they went to full alloy heads - late 1940s ?
Alloy heads, and cylinders, were optional extras, for quite some years. (= lighter = faster).

Previous comment was on the money, that Daytona Manx is the opportunity of a lifetime !
Even if you just complete it cosmetically to be complete, do the mechanicals sometime later.
(They cost more than a house to buy new !?, worth spending to get it complete )
 
The bolt through tank on the International is steel that was chromed at some point, and is in great shape- maybe good enough to rechrome. It has the same large left-side filler cap as the Manx. The oil tank is also chromed steel and and is flat on the primary side to accomodate a battery, but has the filler neck on the timing side. I'll post some pics when I get a chance.
 
I'd you want to sell the foot pegs I have a use. I have aplunger frame with Manx/inter position lugs on the lower rails. Laydown box ands no clearance for a kickstart. Folding would be good here .....
 
Jonwawaone said:
I'd you want to sell the foot pegs I have a use. I have aplunger frame with Manx/inter position lugs on the lower rails. Laydown box ands no clearance for a kickstart. Folding would be good here .....
Click to expand...

Hi Jon. Actually, those folding pegs are already on my Inter and they fit perfectly. When bolted to the rearset lugs on my plunger Inter frame, they clear the primary cover, gearbox, and kickstart and line up perfectly. Were there any Inter or Manx bikes with folding footpegs as a factory item? The pegs came from the UK, and they're definitely not a home-made item. I'm wondering if it was a racing requirement to have folding footpegs like the AMA Class C racers?
 
Lurkingclass said:
Were there any Inter or Manx bikes with folding footpegs as a factory item? The pegs came from the UK, and they're definitely not a home-made item.
Click to expand...

No, not factory. Not that the factory ever mentioned anyway.
Someone has sourced them somewhere.

You be surprised what comes out of 'homemade' sources - much of the british motorcycle industry operated almost at that level....
 
For my own curiosity why are these called gardengate,do the frames resemble gates or something?. At the 2012 INOA rally there was no entrant in this class if I remember correctly.
 
speirmoor said:
For my own curiosity why are these called gardengate,do the frames resemble gates or something?. At the 2012 INOA rally there was no entrant in this class if I remember correctly.
Click to expand...

I have often wondered myself, the nearest that I can come up with is that the frame had so many joints that it resembled making a garden gate, please correct me if I am wrong.
 
Perhaps it was named for its handling characteristics. The famous Featherbed gots it name because it was a very comfortable frame, like riding a featherbed with wheels.
Im guessing that riding the earlier framed bike is like riding a Garden Gate with wheels.
On edit:
I couldnt remember the name of the racer responsible for naming the featherbed. Wikipedia provided that and an extended quote to the usual "it's like riding a featherbed". The wiki quote attributed to Norton Works Racer Harold Daniel is " it rides like a featherbed compared to the old Garden Gate" So perhaps Harold Daniel named both frames, or it could be that the Garden Gate name for the frame was already in common use. I do think it is intended to be a derogatory name which refers to the flex problems and heavy weight of the older frame type, but will have to do more reading to be sure.
Glen
 
worntorn said:
Perhaps it was named for its handling characteristics. ......I do think it is intended to be a derogatory name which refers to the flex problems and heavy weight of the older frame type, but will have to do more reading to be sure. Glen
Click to expand...
I'm sure i have read that somewhere as well, but can't find where at the moment.
 
I heard that 'garden gate' label when I first had a plunger framed dommie, and it was from looking like a garden gate. The plunger rear suspension units look like the gate pivots - you can still buy them like that (the gate pivot bits).

Hugely heavy when you pick the bare frame up - 44 lbs.
http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k50 ... 840bbb.jpg

As I like to point out, those Model 7 dommies weigh 40 lbs more than a Commando (roadster), and half the horsepower. Nice old clunker to ride though = not enough horsepower to make all that weight vibrate... !?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top