TRITON, at last...

Finally received the Dresda engine plate kits (one for me, one for my friend Mark who sold me the Featherbed frame, and one for sale)

TRITON, at last...


While these do require SOME minor drilling, they are otherwise bolt-up and go.
 
Danno said:
I've never understood what the reason was for these hybrids. I suspect is was from Norton motors being pirated out of Featherbed chassis for sidecar racing. It sure doesn't seem like there would be any sort of advantage of using a Triumph twin in place of a Domi motor.
Click to expand...

The Triton started back when the Dominator motor was a real POS. It was low on power and up on weight. The cammy Manx engines were always big-bucks but Triumph had their nice all-alloy T100 lump with loads of race-kit parts available for it. So if you add poor guys who want to race to the mix, it was a cheap way for them to get a fast bike for the track or the street.

For the street scene Triumph had a 650cc twin motor out in it's home market a DOZEN years before Norton did. Norton catered to the G.P. racer or the practical rider and nothing in between all through the fifties. Poor kids who wanted to go fast had their best option buying a clapped out Norton road bike or Manx with a blown engine and putting any 65o Triumph lump in it they could get their hands on, and they instantly had a bike that would keep up with just about anything.

Even though Norton finally came out with the SS bikes in 61' and the 650ss for it's home market for 62, new bikes cost big bucks, so the Triton made a lot of sense right into the seventies as it was not until then that poor boys could get their hands on second-hand four-cylinder bikes, which still did not handle as well.

Does it make sense to build a Triton now? It is still easier and cheaper to find Triumph engine parts than Norton engine parts. And there are a lot of featherbed frames out there that have out-lived their engines, so it is bound to happen. I would certainly hope that no one is scrapping out matching number featherbed Nortons to build Tritons, as they are really rare bikes compared to BSA's and Triumphs. I am sure that for any year in the fifties or early sixties Norton only put out one featherbed bike for every dozen Triumphs or BSA twins that were shit out.

If someone is going to spend their good time building a Triton, or their hard-earned money buying one, do yourself a favor and stay away from the butt-ugly unit-engined jobs.....
 
Preliminary mock-up done with the conversion plates, I'm planning some mods already-

TRITON, at last...


Head steady needs some work, that was unexpected-

TRITON, at last...


Coil mounts are nifty-

TRITON, at last...


Too tired to mess with the footpeg / outer plates; maybe this weekend, I need to finish the N15 and get the lower end done on the Commando.
 
Nope, it doesn't fit back to front.

Heck, it doesn't even fit here, I'll need to do some re-shaping.
 
Are the two holes on our left in that pic not spaced to fit the bigger hole of the two in the plate behind the steering head and the hole in the plate welded to the top of the cross tube between the two top tubes? I think some frames don't have the plate on the cross tube. Just looked- yours has it. you've attached the coils to it.
 
As it is sitting in the photo, the right end at the headstock is sitting next to the tab I had the coils temporarily mounted on.
 
So if you turn it round, but don't turn it upside down, do the two widely spaced holes not line up with that lug and the one at the back of the steering head?

Like this below:

TRITON, at last...
 
beng said:
Danno said:
I've never understood what the reason was for these hybrids. I suspect is was from Norton motors being pirated out of Featherbed chassis for sidecar racing. It sure doesn't seem like there would be any sort of advantage of using a Triumph twin in place of a Domi motor.
Click to expand...


If someone is going to spend their good time building a Triton, or their hard-earned money buying one, do yourself a favor and stay away from the butt-ugly unit-engined jobs.....
Click to expand...

Good Reply BenG, I think you pretty much explained the history of Tritons there :)
I am one of those that is building one of those "butt-ugly unit-engined jobs"!
Let me explain why, I did a lot of research before choosing my frame and engine, as part of this I called several Triton gurus and bored them with many questions. Whist they (and I) agree that the pre unit is a great looking bike, if you want something reliable to ride day in day out you're better with a unit. I know that a pre unit can be upgraded to the same spec as as the unit motors but it costs a lot of cash (new crank, timing side oil seal, needle bearings for the gearbox etc.) A unit can be easily tuned and upgraded for a lot less cash, for me as well, I already have a unit 650 so I don't have to go out and buy more tools etc. They just make life easier I guess. And one last thing, they're lighter :)

All the best

Webby
 
grandpaul said:
Nope, it doesn't fit back to front.

Heck, it doesn't even fit here, I'll need to do some re-shaping.
Click to expand...

Hi GPZ,
The front hole in the headsteady (on the Right of the photo) should bolt up to the headstock, the third hole (the one behind the "shark fin") should bolt to frame cross bar lug, the rear hole (far left on the photo) should then bolt to a 90° bracket on the exhaust rocker box. The remaining hole is for the coil mounts.

I hope this makes sense :)

Webby
 
I turned it and flipped it for 10 minutes and gave up. I figured I was too sleepy to make sense of anything.

I might have time to mess with it this evening...
 
Regarding Triton history, there was apparently quite a number of Manx rolling chassis available because the 4 wheeled guys bought them for the engines which were very competitive in the 500 cc open wheel category. Norton would not sell engines separately, so the car chaps would buy a complete Manx, remove the engine and sell the rest on. Triumph engines lent themselves readily to tuning and the factory had go-faster parts avaialble, however the original Triumph frames were a bit flexible until about the mid-60s - the fuel tank and front mudguard were actually stressed members, which made the bikes even worse when the cafe-lads put fibreglass components on in their place. Norton made some realy sluggish push-rod singles in Featherbed frames, so this was potentially a good pairing.
 
dave M said:
the fuel tank and front mudguard were actually stressed members,
Click to expand...

The front guard and stays can provide useful bracing on Roadholders too.

Triumph soon stuck another tube under the petrol tank, after frames broke. Their weaving problems were probably caused by mounting the swingarm pivot onto the single saddle tube. Late "dry frame" 650s had the pivot ends braced to the engine/gearbox unit casings.
 
I got some wisecracks on another forum regarding mounting the coils facing downward; someone said all the sparks would drain out, another said that wouldn't be an issue because they are Lucas coils, so they don't produce sparks most of the time.

My reply:

Actually, I still need to AIM the coils; I'm going wireless.

All you have to do is ramp up the input voltage (I'm using a Radio Shack 110V inverter) and the coils will shoot a spark all the way to the plug, as long as you don't exceed 8" on the distance.

I figure (if I did the cipherin' correctly) that i'll be putting out somewhere near half a million volts.

Pretty trick, although I suppose the inverter weighs more than the coil wires...

...good thing it's not a race bike.
 
Webby, thanx for the tip. I feel somewhat stupid, but my excuses are that I'd never seen a photo of a TriTon head steady 9much less installed one), and I was very tired.

Sure enough, fits like a glove.

TRITON, at last...


TRITON, at last...
 
grandpaul said:
Webby, thanx for the tip. I feel somewhat stupid, but my excuses are that I'd never seen a photo of a TriTon head steady 9much less installed one), and I was very tired.

Sure enough, fits like a glove.

TRITON, at last...


TRITON, at last...
Click to expand...

No worries GPZ, it happens to all of us!
I'm in the same boat, I never seen a Norton in bits or worked on one, never mind a Triton!
At least they make you think!

Webby
 
TT, you are sharp.

That shark fin is reputed to be good for a gain of over .0001 MPH!

...not to mention the assistance to the cooling it provides by directing the air straight at the individual rockerboxes.
 
grandpaul said:
TT, you are sharp.

That shark fin is reputed to be good for a gain of over .0001 MPH!

...not to mention the assistance to the cooling it provides by directing the air straight at the individual rockerboxes.
Click to expand...


I hear if you cut it off the weight savings is good for .0002 MPH!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top