Norvil Head steady...worn out...fix?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 19, 2005
Messages
696
Hi,

Got a Norvil Head steady on the old stinker and it has happened again. The main bolt wears an egg shaped hole in the side plates and the rattles start to re-appear. Anybody come up with a bushing set and a new correct length main bolt set to fix the egg shaped holes or know anyone know who sells a repair kit for these? If I had a machine shop I'd bore out the plates and bush them to orig specs with a "tophat" shaped bush that would extend past the plates so you could then also lengthen the non-threaded section of the main bolt so the threads just don't eat up the side plates any more. That's the actual problem as the threads are so long that they go all the way through the side plates and eventually the threads just eat the side plates like a pair of round files. Then all gets quite loose, loud, and the vibes and rattles start to make themselves known. I suppose I could just order new parts from Les but if they are still the original specs, the problem will re-appear again and again. Rather fix it right. I know how it should be done, just have no means to get into a machine shop and do it to it. Hopeing there is an "order and install" solution.

Thankful for any tips or ideas!

Hewho....
 
See what Keith has done, he made his own head steady and it looks like it will be better than a Norvil... more pictures on http://s424.photobucket.com/albums/pp322/keith1069/

Jean


Norvil Head steady...worn out...fix?
 
your timing, valve lash, carb sync are all in check? I don't mean to demean your capabilities as a mechanic i just thought i would throw that out as thinking outside the box....maybe iso's too?? I haven't ever seen a post with that headsteady being a problem but who knows :?:
 
They are available new with the spring at 74 pounds from RGM Motors, this is about US$110 at current exchange rates. They are even cheaper if you don't want the spring and attachment. This price discrepancy may be something to do with US vendors having to pay for their stock not so long ago in very expensive pounds.
 
Yeh...I got it, you guys.

I should break the stubborness barrier and buy one of those rose joint things. Look to be the cat's meow. Still back to the same question though. The Norvil setup is great other than being poorly designed and I'd still like to just repair what I got and have done with it. The budget for the bike just isn't up to the Dave Taylor approach at the moment. The future might hold one in sight, but not now. If I had the lathe and such I'd just bore out the plates to oversize, turn a couple bushings to bring the holes back down to specs and make a longer bolt to go all the way though the bushes and be done with it. I was just hoping there was some kit to be had so I could just get it fixed.

I did a good 200 miles today on a club run up in the mountains. Beautiful day and we had a good time with about 25 bikes or so. But the rattle at the idle is a bit annoying and I will have to do something soon before it pops a crack in the frame or tank or something. Thanks again for the tips. Just wish I could afford to take the advise...
:lol:
 
There's nothing in a basic rose-joint headsteady that you couldn't replicate with a couple of metric rose joints and some second hand angle-iron - It might not be pretty but it would work.

Best bet in terms of re-conditioning the Norvil steady would be to check if you can drill it out to take the next oversize metric equivalent otherwise it's down to scrounging from someone who can make the bits you need.
 
Thanks for that! I certainly can't take credit as it was based on Mike Taglieri's steel version which I copied as a test and then remade in aluminum. Mine started with 3/16", 2" x 1-1/2" angle with 3/8" rod ends and SS bolts. I thought this may not be heavy enough guage in aluminum due to vibration/fracturing but since the rod ends allow the engine to move vertically and fore and aft it only has to support cornering side loads. Sorry I don't have a list of parts to hand but basically it is the head base plate mounted using existing fasteners, 2pcs 2-1/2" 3/8" bolts and nylocs, a half nut, washers to shim the fore/aft and vertical position of the rod (parallel to engine in both planes), two identical side plates (one faces in, one faces out to attach the vertical bolt), 6 pcs M4 mushroom head capscrews (could be 8 or 10-32) to bolt the side plates and it's baseplate together. Alternatively, if you can weld aluminum that would be a better way. Dimension between the side plates is 1-1/2". I've got to lift the tank to retorque the head so I'll see if I can get more dimensions if anyone's interested but due to individual bike tolerances you will need to adjust the rod end and shimming for best alignment. Only downside I see to this is that there is no vertical support for the ISOs. Removing the original top cotton reel mounts lets the engine drop further and may be a longer term problem with the front ISO. I don't know and I guess that's where the Taylor + Mk3 spring is better.
 
Redrider, your head steady looks to be a copy of the Dave Taylor model except yours is over 3 times more expensive!!
 
There is no need for welding or to screw the top to the bottom, if you assemble the angle so it faces the same direction and one sits on top of the other one, the bolt for the ball joint holds it together and both pieces of angle are bolted to the frame on the original mount holes. I used 3/8 joints,1/2'' way to big, and I reckon you could get away with 5/16 ball joints. Out come of new head steady is that I will need a new set of header pipes with more cornering clearance. :roll:
 
dave M said:
Redrider, your head steady looks to be a copy of the Dave Taylor model except yours is over 3 times more expensive!!

You need to exercise your powers of perception. The similarity ends at the concept. If you understand what the head steady is about, then you would not think what you say. Look again. With all due respect, if you don't understand the differences, you should reconsider your level of understanding of the Norton Commando. As to it being a copy - yes, if the bolt has been designed, then it is designed; the next challenge is to improve upon it!
 
swooshdave said:
How about if you tell us the difference?

Glad to:
For those having trouble with the DT Head Steady, Toss it. Replace it with this one - http://rides.webshots.com/photo/2986651 ... 6412bJyCnf
It resolves all the shortcomings and retains the simplicity of the concept. For those still using the isolastic head steady - Toss it. This is the best head steady available. But, if you are not in search of superior handling for your Commando, you need not bother - just keep the OEM rubber donuts, and enjoy that OEM bouncy, hingey, wandering handling!
Advantages -
1) Fits all frame (tube) sizes
2) Fits under all OEM tanks and frame combinations
3) Clamp will not slip
4) Clamp will not conflict with junction of main tube and support tube junction
5) Superior quality heim joints and fasteners provided
6) All fasteners are Imperial, not metric
7) Adjustable for precise alignment after installation.
8) On-line installation advise and assistance available.

Now, maybe you wonder what "alignment" this refers to, or can you tell us?
 
RedRider1971 said:
Advantages -
1) Fits all frame (tube) sizes
2) Fits under all OEM tanks and frame combinations
3) Clamp will not slip
4) Clamp will not conflict with junction of main tube and support tube junction
5) Superior quality heim joints and fasteners provided
6) All fasteners are Imperial, not metric
7) Adjustable for precise alignment after installation.
8) On-line installation advise and assistance available.

Now, maybe you wonder what "alignment" this refers to, or can you tell us?

I don't want to defend the DT Headsteady, but looking at your list I'm curious as the to the threefold price difference? Is it just the better quality of heim joints?
 
swooshdave said:
I don't want to defend the DT Headsteady, but looking at your list I'm curious as the to the threefold price difference? Is it just the better quality of heim joints?

It's across the board. Matt Rambo recently posted a comment about the cost of r & d that CNW puts into their [crankcase breather] parts. Much the same here. I designed and manufactured this item with CAD and CNC precision. The material is aviation grade alloy, machined to that same standard. The heim is top quality chrome moly, sealed joints. There is a turnbuckle. All fasteners are stainless, Imperial coarse threads. There are specially sized spacers for custom fitting to each particular tank/frame combination. There is one year of on-the-road research and development behind the design. The price is the result of all these factors applied to a limited production run. As in all things, the greater the quantity produced, the lower the unit cost. The current price reflects these facts. You can hold this item in your hand, along with the DT unit, and judge for yourself - you get what you pay for. You can ponder the price of the DT after the hours spent on trying to correctly install it and "adjust" it to your particular bike's requirements. On the other hand, you can just slap it on and "believe" you've improved your bike to the standards you were expecting when you bought it. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding.
 
First of all the Dave Taylor head-steady and it's basic concept as utilised by others seems to have many satisfied customers - you just have to look through previous threads on this site - by all accounts it is a product that provides a significant handling improvement for a reasonable price, so it doesn't really deserve to be disparaged. The price of the D.T. unit undoubtedly also contains some R&D cost. There has been some discussion on the thread on crankcase breathing about taking someone elses ideas and modifying or reproducing them. You can cast as many aspersions as you like on the technical knowledge of myself or other visitors to this site, but I have looked again and you seem to have taken the DT concept and added a turnbuckle and possibly some different spec rose joints - or is that rose coloured spectacles? My powers of perception are pretty acute when it comes to parting with my money and I don't see this as worth nearly $400
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top