Strange Frame

Status
Not open for further replies.
concours said:
How about a clever lad adapting an automotive alignment machine to clamp on the wheels of the bike and give a fast, easy, accurate summary of the wheels alignment to one another, as well as the headstock symmetry.
Click to expand...

Thats called a 'plank' ?
Or perhaps a string line.

You sit it either side of the wheels, and see that they are roughly in line, and the same alignment either side of the wheels.
Unless its way out one side, this is about good enough for most riding.

Having front and back tires that are different sizes complcates it a little, but as long as the relationship is the same both sides, you are still in business.
Its probably not going to be within 0.0001" accurate, but anyone like that probably doesn't ride...
 
:roll: :roll: :roll: FFS.... Getting back to the spindle pin for the DT's.............. Just imagine in your clinical heads that the spindle was fitted with tight, snug clearance... which mean no perceivebal "float"... Got that... DT's... No case hardening and a 3mm hole through the axis of the spindle to allow for "GREASE" to be pumped in ............. I know your just about turning green and the "Norton God's" are casting a shadow over your beliefs... But you will never wear it out and it will not catostophically fail as indicated .. It may become loose, but it wont "fail".. If you imply that the spindle is going to "fail/break in half" then say so ?????

Getting back to the reality of the spindle with 3mm lubrication channels , and my "bastardised bushes" cos they have been honed .................. in reality, lubed up nice tight fit and a few thousand miles a year..... (3 bikes here).... and i'm 62 and they will certainly last me out.

The person that buys it and a Jumble sale or an auction, (like your will be sold off) would'nt give a rats arse if it had a bastardised spindle, corbin seat, alloy wheels or a stainless bolt holding the case together.. It will work and be rideable.........

Your safety BS is nothing more than scare mongoring for the novices to bikes /motorcycle/engineering... Not to mention the free advertising for services available..

I am not a perfectionist, never tried to be but i do like to get the job done, to the best of my ability.. (not somebody's else's)..

Cant you DT"s beleive that people actually build machinery for ..... fun and enjoyment ...... Not to be faster , shinier, straighter or more "perfect" ..... :D :D :D


.
 
I have no idea what DT means, but as far as your comments...go for it man.

I'm done with this thread (so sigh in relief).

Your comments to people trying to give advice are pointed and approaching nasty.

Don't ask questions if you only want answers that agree with your original plans, which you it is obvious will do no matter what anyone else says.

The fact that there are known issues with the original manufacture of Norton Commando frames is all over the web and many believe this results in misalignment of the swing arm relative to the down tube along with the engine and gear box assembly within the frame. Since the front wheel is tied to the forks within the down tube, and the rear wheel is mounted to the swing arm it doesn't take a masters degree to realize this could create alignment problems with the wheels relative to one another. Whether this contributes to known Commando handling issues is debatable, but many believe it does.

I commented because your method of "insuring" your frame was straight is laughable at best.

As far as back yard mechanics using questionable practices to "build" a bike, the web is rampant with similar bad information so those reading this thread should beware. Do your own searches to get proper information if you don't know the answer.

Good luck on your "build".
 
Rohan said:
concours said:
How about a clever lad adapting an automotive alignment machine to clamp on the wheels of the bike and give a fast, easy, accurate summary of the wheels alignment to one another, as well as the headstock symmetry.
Click to expand...

Thats called a 'plank' ?
Or perhaps a string line.

You sit it either side of the wheels, and see that they are roughly in line, and the same alignment either side of the wheels.
Unless its way out one side, this is about good enough for most riding.

Having front and back tires that are different sizes complcates it a little, but as long as the relationship is the same both sides, you are still in business.
Its probably not going to be within 0.0001" accurate, but anyone like that probably doesn't ride...
Click to expand...


Pre-alignment I could achieve wheel alignment to possibly +/- 0.5 mm using nylon line and a steel rule. To achieve this the rear wheel had to be angled within the swingarm and had to be held in that position when tightening the wheel spindle to maintain alignment. From this alone I knew something wasn't right. Obviously the wheel adjuster bolts were not equal lengths either. Wheel alignment alone is not indicative of accurate frame alignment.
 
Chain adjusters are there to adjust chains . NOT to align wheels .
The problem with these rope /laser / planks /what have you.. methods is :
How do you determine if the front wheel is pointing straight ahead ? .
With a Commando , it is perfectly possible to have both wheels in line , and have the bike ride sideways , crab style .
And going by the number of complaints about poor handling Commandos , I think many do ride like a crab ..
 
79x100 said:
Al-otment said:
With the majority of Commando owners reporting handling problems the accuracy I'm talking about is obviously necessary
Click to expand...


Majority ? Do you have the survey results to hand ? The 'majority' of Commando owners based on my scientific research in pubs and bars will swear that their bikes out-handle anything apart from a Featherbed.

This talked about accuracy is all very well, but bearing in mind that engine plates and frame lugs are all bored with pretty generous clearance holes, I'm struggling to understand, unless the whole thing is re-engineered, just how the accuracy is maintained upon assembly....and even then, what happens when the chain line is loaded up and the swing arm line is pulled over, or the forks begin to twist under braking ? The things don't become unrideable.

I'm sure that it's worth doing if owners have a problem which has not responded to simpler checks but for normal road use, my impression is that only a small minority require this sort of work.
Click to expand...

Fair point regarding "...majority of Commando owners..." comment. I was talking bollocks there. But plenty of owners have commented on forums with reference to poor handling. Discussions on improved head steadies, extra iso mounts on cradle etc does indicate plenty of bikes with problems.

Swingarm to steering head axes are checked with the complete iso assembly bolted up tight in the frame. Correct spacing of components is crucial e.g position of front iso mount within its brackets. Shims and spacers are manufactured as required. Standard bolt to hole clearance, though not ideal, has no effect on alignment in the frame centreline plane providing side clearance of components is negligible.

I'm not aware of any problems under acceleration due to swingarm deflection from chain load. Fork twist is another subject, but again, I've not noticed any problems.
It does depend how you ride/what your expectations are from a Commando. In the past I've gone into certain bends at 60mph and experienced serious weaving. The bike dosen't do that anymore - I have total confidence on any bend - regularly at speeds between 80 - 90mph.
 
Time Warp said:
+/- 0.001 inch has been mentioned,good luck with determining that with a device little more accurate than a vernier caliper and a bodgy old table with a few vee bocks. :lol:
Just to put 0.001 inch into laymens terms.
That is one thousandth of one inch.
A piece of paper is around four one thousandths of an inch thick,getting any part of the Commando frame or any other part associated with the frame within that range is pure fantasy let alone a quarter of it .

Don't tell me the trans case is checked and all machining and faced surfaces are somehow clocked to both shafts.
The same is done with the engine case to the PTO point of the crankshaft then that is somehow plotted to the output shaft of the transmission. :roll:
Given the wobble in the clutch even when new that might be deemed wishful thinking.
Lets not even go near the head steady. :lol:

Norton owners. :lol:
Just set it up to the best of your ability,replace any consumables as needed and ride the thing.

Two more added to the C U list.
Click to expand...

I assume this drivel is aimed at myself. Decent Vernier calipers are accurate to 0.0005" so don't know why you'd have a problem with 0.001". I use a vernier height gauge accurate to 0.001". I'm sure you've heard of calibration. The tables flat over it's surface area to 0.006 mm. What's wrong with matched vee blocks? and what's a piece of paper got to do with things?

The gearbox face would have been milled at the same time the bearing housings were machined, so every thing square there. Ditto crankcases. Problem with cradle however, mounting holes require machining parallel to swingarm spindle tube and top hat bushes pressed in.

I do ride the thing, that's the whole point of getting the frame components aligned.
 
ludwig said:
Chain adjusters are there to adjust chains . NOT to align wheels .
The problem with these rope /laser / planks /what have you.. methods is :
How do you determine if the front wheel is pointing straight ahead ? .
With a Commando , it is perfectly possible to have both wheels in line , and have the bike ride sideways , crab style .
And going by the number of complaints about poor handling Commandos , I think many do ride like a crab ..
Click to expand...

Yeah, but you move the wheel through the adjusters....yes? Splitting hairs I think. The rest I agree with - it's exactly the point I was making.
 
Al-otment said:
L.A.B. said:
The "MkIII" arrangement also has a "sealed-for-life" assembly that requires no periodic maintenance or re-lubrication, and although the MkIII spindle and bushes were reduced in length in order to accommodate additional oil-retaining felt "wicks" (Items 3 & 12) the service life did not appear to have been adversly affected by the reduction in bearing surface area, in fact service life may have been extended if only due to the fact that the sealed system did at least prevent owners from pumping grease into it! :wink:
Click to expand...

It's worth junking the 'sealed-for-life' Mk3 arrangement for one where oil can be added to the swingarm spindle cavity as required. 'Sealed-for-life' is usually as long as it takes for the oil to leak out and be replaced with rain water.
Click to expand...

My experiences with sealed for life bearing units has been very positive, much better than "requires regular servicing" items which have at some point in time been left unserviced , either by me or a previous owner. Then the bearing/bushing/u joint/ball joint/ spline/ dries out, corrodes and self destructs. Of course the servicable items are just fine provided the owner actually does the servicing correctly with the appropriate lubricant on or ahead of time every time, but reality is that things often get missed.
I currently have a 2003 Ford F350 I purchased new. The lifetime sealed Ujoints have gone thru salt, mud and grit for ten years and 220,000 miles, still tight as a drum and smooth running. Same with it's factory sealed ball joints.
But it only works if the factory seal is a very good seal. Thankfully, most are.
From inspection of my 48 year old Mk3 swing arm, which does not show up in service records to have ever been touched, the seals are very good. The swingarm moves freely and smoothly with wheel and shocks off, side play is negligible. Will it be good for 220,000+ like the Ford seals? I wont be getting the answer to that, but they are fine to go at the moment.

Glen
 
With a Commando , it is perfectly possible to have both wheels in line , and have the bike ride sideways , crab style. And going by the number of complaints about poor handling Commandos , I think many do ride like a crab .. ludwig
Click to expand...


If anyone thinks and feels that a straighter-truer C'do than to just assemble w/o much binding/forcing matters a whitworth on handling is deluded and for sure has not really explored this matter as I have to life/death states, first quite by accident then on purpose discovering and firming up my disparaging statements. What ever improvement might be noticed is solely and completely d/t fitting of new tires and renewing wear items of gear box clutch wobble and chain and swing arm slackness. Period End of Story Throw the ole towel and go home.

I have had enough events and experiences now from various components wearing out to feel what each item does alone or in combo with other worn items on handling upsets and compensations by pilot strength bravery and plain luck. Only thing that really matters is to get slack out of what ever ya can to reduce the build up resonance of spring back of tires, chains flop, thin steel tubes and iso cushions from cyclic loads of conflicting tire directions steering angles, road lumps and wind gusts. I have tested on '71 with 1/4" loose gap at front Iso and 1/2" slack in swing arm spindle and easy detectable clutch wobble on unopened AMC box since new. The only thing I could detect on purpose to explore for sure was a slight twitch on sharp multiple direction changes that would hardly be noticed unless paying attention closely, but then held road as good as any un-tammed isolastic on *decent tires* fitted. BMW issued some past models with front and rear tire out of line as much as most factory C'do's w/o a crisis of crashing complaining owners. The 2nd most dangerous condition for any cycle is long held constant steering angle with steady or moderate increasing throttle as lets resonace build up to out of control. MOST dangerous state is braking in above 'steady' leaned state. Total Taboo to me now and forever more.

To improve C'do handling:
UMERO UNO BY FAR >>> is new tires with proper front-rear pressure differential.
2nd, AMC bushes to stifle clutch wobble which allows primary chain flop then drive chain flop to tug on iso's/swing arm spring backs.
3rd is swing arm spindle stability.
4th is streamlining air flow eddies.
5th is taming isolastic-steel tube spring backs via swash plates, extra isolastics or helms joint links with long enough radius not to bind at extremes of distortions from power and suspension road loads during the Innate Universal Crabbing angles conflicts of ordinary counter steering.
 
worntorn said:
From inspection of my 48 year old Mk3 swing arm, which does not show up in service records to have ever been touched,

Glen
Click to expand...

Hey Glen, how did you get a 1965 MKIII? :shock:

Sorry couldn't help myself.
 
hobot said:
With a Commando , it is perfectly possible to have both wheels in line , and have the bike ride sideways , crab style. And going by the number of complaints about poor handling Commandos , I think many do ride like a crab .. ludwig
Click to expand...


If anyone thinks and feels that a straighter-truer C'do than to just assemble w/o much binding/forcing matters a whitworth on handling is deluded and for sure has not really explored this matter as I have to life/death states, first quite by accident then on purpose discovering and firming up my disparaging statements. What ever improvement might be noticed is solely and completely d/t fitting of new tires and renewing wear items of gear box clutch wobble and chain and swing arm slackness. Period End of Story Throw the ole towel and go home.

I have had enough events and experiences now from various components wearing out to feel what each item does alone or in combo with other worn items on handling upsets and compensations by pilot strength bravery and plain luck. Only thing that really matters is to get slack out of what ever ya can to reduce the build up resonance of spring back of tires, chains flop, thin steel tubes and iso cushions from cyclic loads of conflicting tire directions steering angles, road lumps and wind gusts. I have tested on '71 with 1/4" loose gap at front Iso and 1/2" slack in swing arm spindle and easy detectable clutch wobble on unopened AMC box since new. The only thing I could detect on purpose to explore for sure was a slight twitch on sharp multiple direction changes that would hardly be noticed unless paying attention closely, but then held road as good as any un-tammed isolastic on *decent tires* fitted. BMW issued some past models with front and rear tire out of line as much as most factory C'do's w/o a crisis of crashing complaining owners. The 2nd most dangerous condition for any cycle is long held constant steering angle with steady or moderate increasing throttle as lets resonace build up to out of control. MOST dangerous state is braking in above 'steady' leaned state. Total Taboo to me now and forever more.

To improve C'do handling:
UMERO UNO BY FAR >>> is new tires with proper front-rear pressure differential.
2nd, AMC bushes to stifle clutch wobble which allows primary chain flop then drive chain flop to tug on iso's/swing arm spring backs.
3rd is swing arm spindle stability.
4th is streamlining air flow eddies.
5th is taming isolastic-steel tube spring backs via swash plates, extra isolastics or helms joint links with long enough radius not to bind at extremes of distortions from power and suspension road loads during the Innate Universal Crabbing angles conflicts of ordinary counter steering.
Click to expand...

Typical Hobot speak attempting to baffle with bullshit. Yeah, I've been making all this up.There's so many experts on this forum who seem to have invested a lot of time convincing themselves and others, that Commando handling problems are due to the frame design and isolastics, that when somebody puts forward a logical explanation and cure for the problems there is no way there going to admit they've been wrong and have been, and continue, to talk out of their backsides. IMHO :wink:
 
Typical Hobot speak attempting to baffle with bullshit. Yeah, I've been making all this up.There's so many experts on this forum who seem to have invested a lot of time convincing themselves and others, that Commando handling problems are due to the frame design and isolastics, that when somebody puts forward a logical explanation and cure for the problems there is no way there going to admit they've been wrong and have been, and continue, to talk out of their backsides. IMHO :wink:[/quote]

How did we make it this far without your insight. Seems like you have a problem with everything and everybody. NOC, Norvil, the new Norton and I suspect everyone else you come in contact with. Funny thing is you're the common denominator in all of your issues?????
 
Don't hold back Snorton. :) Thanks we needed that. This happens every winter... Don't get too upset.
 
Al-otment said:
ludwig said:
Chain adjusters are there to adjust chains . NOT to align wheels . ..
Click to expand...

Yeah, but you move the wheel through the adjusters....yes? Splitting hairs I think. ..
Click to expand...

I don't think it is splitting hairs .
On a bike with swingarm fixed on the frame you only have the chain tensioners to bring the wheels in line , but not on a Commando .
If you pull your sprockets out of alignment to set the rear wheel straight , then you are doing it wrong .

This picture ilustrates it pretty well :

Strange Frame


First line out the drive train ; gearbox to engine , rear sprocket to gearbox sprocket .
Then line out the craddle in the frame , to bring the wheels in line , or at least parallel .
Your are likely to end up with isolastic collars of diff. thickness L and R .
Final adjustment is by shifting the rim ( not the hub ) .
 
ludwig said:
Al-otment said:
ludwig said:
Chain adjusters are there to adjust chains . NOT to align wheels .
The problem with these rope /laser / planks /what have you.. methods is :
How do you determine if the front wheel is pointing straight ahead ? .
With a Commando , it is perfectly possible to have both wheels in line , and have the bike ride sideways , crab style .
And going by the number of complaints about poor handling Commandos , I think many do ride like a crab ..
Click to expand...

Yeah, but you move the wheel through the adjusters....yes? Splitting hairs I think. ..
Click to expand...

I don't think it is splitting hairs .
On a bike with swingarm fixed on the frame you only have the chain tensioners to bring the wheels in line , but not on a Commando .
If you pull your sprockets out of alignment to set the rear wheel straight , then you are doing it wrong .

This picture ilustrates it pretty well :

Strange Frame


First line out the drive train ; gearbox to engine , rear sprocket to gearbox sprocket .
Then line out the craddle in the frame , to bring the wheels in line , or at least parallel .
Your are likely to end up with isolastic collars of diff. thickness L and R .
Final adjustment is by shifting the rim ( not the hub) .
Click to expand...

I agree with the majority of your points. Frame with a 'fixed' swingarm can still suffer from the same manufacturing problems as the Commando. So it still can be the the case that just because the wheels are in alignment it's no guarantee they're aligned with the frame etc. Final alignment by spoke adjustment is what I did after first establishing final drive sprockets where in line.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top