You could equally say that though about the modern breed of race 'Manx Nortons', where almost everything has been improved and a genuine bike is not even in the race. Or the 6 second top fuel 'Harleys' out at the 1/4 mile - any resemblance between 2000+ hp and the road bikes is purely co-incidental ??beng said:these sort of bikes do not really have anything to do with 99.9% of the Norton owners out there......
Well my Seeley 750 ultra short stroke is close to 100 HP at the crankshaft and it is certainly rideable and raceable.....goes very fast and faster still with a skilled rider. According to Kenny Cummings who raced it a few times it pulls like an 89mm stroke race engine to 7,000 rpm and then continues to pull for another 1,500 rpm making even more powerbeng said:Well maybe they do mean crank horsepower, but if someone got that level of power out of a Norton twin, I would doubt it's quality, useability and reliability.
Then according to your above logic Peter Williams et al were not really building and riding "real Norton engine or motorcycle anyway". Uhhhh, opinions will certainly vary here. Modifications are the natural progression from a street bike to a race bike - it is all a matter of degree. They all could have been making this type of power "in the day" if they had the time and money. In other words, if Norton stayed in the game they would have figured it out and/or more likely morphed into something more modern and more competitive (again, assuming more time, money and vision).beng said:Then again we are not really talking about a real Norton engine or motorcycle anyway, but a newly manufactured and redesigned motorcycle based on the originals.
Well I was fascinated with getting more out of a bike based upon what I read and had seen. The old story goes "speed costs you money - how fast you want to go". Your view of costs are myopic. Costs were covered in another thread where building the bike is only one part of the whole cost package; there are entry fees, travel, lodging, hospital bills, fuel, tires, race PPE, vacation time, time to build the bike, time to race prepare/repair the bike, divorce lawyers, angry neighbors etc.beng said:Add the cost to that and these sort of bikes do not really have anything to do with 99.9% of the Norton owners out there......
Ah shucks anyone can lay em down in THE Gravel, but Peel will be pretty easy to drag back to grade and up onto her tires, especially with her love handles : )As for the picture of the bike in somenone's drvieway in Montclair, NJ; might as well be a picture of it layed on it's side along some gravel road in Arkansas.
Right, covered here: most-common-commando-model-t12836.htmlDances with Shrapnel said:Then according to your above logic Peter Williams et al were not really building and riding "real Norton engine or motorcycle anyway".
Agreed. Yet would you agee that Fullauto heads and Maney cases are a blessing to all Norton enthusiats (directly and indirectly) as it supplements the pool of useable parts and preserves the pool of original parts? I have seen many a Norton original component modified and then blown to smithereens.beng said:99% of Norton owners do not race their bikes on a track or rev them even to 7K rpm, if they run them at all they are street riders enjoying them as street bikes, practical transportation or show collectibles. They do not need Maney cases and fullauto heads etc..
I think you have jumped the gun on this particular thread as no one has tried to pass off what they are doing (including the Village Bike) as 1960's or earlier. But you must acknowledge that a key piece of the performance potential of a Norton (new, old or whatever) is the unique cylinder head design concept which goes back a few decades before the 1960's - correct?beng said:If the builders and owners are not interested in doing anything historical at all, there is nothing wrong with that as long as they don't try to pass what they are doing off as the 1960's or earlier, they have created their own little world.
100 useable horsepower with an original Norton head casting on a 750? I hope you don't mind if I wait for this to come from a source I have a little faith in....Dances with Shrapnel said:I can say with confidence that the only things original on an engine such as this would be the timing cover, maybe the oil pump and cam drive, cylinder head casting,
Now your only problem will be finding an association that has the technical scrutineering to ensure every bike on the grid is in compliance with it's class.beng said:(Items 1 through 8 )
Okay, now you are vintage racing.
Wait all you want, and hold your breath while you do itbeng said:100 useable horsepower with an original Norton head casting on a 750? I hope you don't mind if I wait for this to come from a source I have a little faith in....Dances with Shrapnel said:I can say with confidence that the only things original on an engine such as this would be the timing cover, maybe the oil pump and cam drive, cylinder head casting,
beng said:And I would not agree that fullauto heads and Maney cases etc. are a blessing at all. There is a much simpler and more practical way that vintage racing can be done that will not continue turning it into a millionaire's sport.
1. Limit the carburetors used in vintage racing to the original carburetors and choke size that the bike came with when produced. So in a pre-1968 racing class, a Norton 750 would have a 30mm Amal Concentric or a stock spec monobloc etc.
2. Limit cams to production profiles and springs to stock rate. Production boreXstrokes only. Saves engines, gearboxes etc..
3. Drum brakes only that are correct for the period. No disk brakes in pre-73 racing classes except on those bikes that had them as OEM equipment, and then they must be OEM parts or direct replacements to original specs.
4. Limit compression to 9:1 so everyone can use pump gas and make it easy on engine parts.
5. Transmissions to original spec, all parts interchangeable with originals and number of speeds limited to original amount.
6. Tires with original tread patterns used in the 60s, like Avon Gp and Speedmaster etc. Lessens load on chassis and keeps speeds down.
7. Historical documentation showing your type of bike was used in the type of competition in the era. If someone wants to run a particular engine/chassis combo, then they can prove it is historical or keep it on the trailer.
8. Real historical bikes will be granted exceptions. If someone wants to bring a real old race bike in and can document it ran with special modifications, like the Al Gunter disk brake Buddy Parriott used on his Manx in the early 1960's , then great.
Okay, now you are vintage racing.
Not making so much power, not using up parts so quickly and eliminating the incentive to develop ridiculously expensive parts that have nothing to do with what was raced in the 60s and earlier. The emphasis can be more on history and riding.
jseng1 said:I raced this crank in my 850 monoshock. Sold it to Ken Canaga and then he raced it for awhile. Now its in my streetbike with the lightweight pistons/longer rods. All this after the original owner was finished with it. It has a lightened flywheel and radiused and polished PTO shaft. Weighs 20lbs. I used to rev it into valve float range when I raced. I've magnifluxed it and there are no cracks. But I always used lightweight pistons of one version or another.
Good to see the lightweight pistons and bushless rods in the post above by "RoadScholar" - should be a smooth running motor.
Yep. Barber's Vintage Festival is under change orders from AHRMA to limit entries to SEVEN HUNDRED. let's say 25% are multiple class entries (probably optimistic), that's still over FIVE hundred. So, how many days, and how many guys do you suppose it would take to get them all through just ONE round of scrutineering? Never mind TWo days of a 4-day race weekend! (2 day practice, 2 days racing)beng said:I agree that it would be hard to find guys who know enough about old bikes to do the job scrutineering.
Bear in mind when reading through this thread that AMC acquired Norton circa late 1952/early 1953, and injected a much needed dose of funds to permit such 'modern' things as die-cast alloy heads, 8" brakes and the funds to continue to do welded featherbed framed road bikes and even non-featherbed swingarm framed bikes. Without this, Nortons were in dire financial straits, and trailing badly behind in 'modernising' their designs, offering mostly a range of near obsolete design bikes. So read the comments about AMC's acquisition in this light...beng said: