which bike do you prefer, and let us know why.

Carry on from the other thread.

We should start anew thread here. We are off track but its all still interesting.
MY 2d worth.

I have 2 commando's.
The 71, 750 T L S front brake is my favourite. It looks the best with the brake and its single orange colour. It is higher compression and lets you know when it wants to get up go. It still has the 19 teeth from sprocket so is a rocket off the mark compared to the other bike. I have nearly fully restored it. Just needs new wheel rims etc and new exhausts.

The 74, 850 is my rider. I go everywhere on it when i need to ride distances, It is smooth and it is quieter because of the lower compression. It isn't a garage queen, and although it still looks quite reasonable, it has some rust on the rims and it has a slightly damaged front guard, where it fell over on me when I stalled it getting into my daughters driveway. It does not leak oil, and does not get cleaned that often [ thank goodness ]. I do polish the alloy on occasions and polish the side covers and tank when I go away. It is fitted with a nighthawk LED front headlamp, which is as bright as any modern car headlamp, and 2 auxiliary lamps which I can turn on when on high beam to light up the edges of the road at night on those fast sharp corners. I am not going to say its reliable, but the only thing that went wrong on my last 3145 mile ride was the ignition switch, which I have now cleaned out and is back on the bike. On the last big ride in which I covered 1250 miles, I lost the end out of one of my mufflers. This bike is my preferred ride because I dont have to worry about scratching it. I once read an article in a bike mag by one of the dealerships in NZ and the comment was, if you dont shit yourself Every now aND AGAIN, YOU ARE NOT RIDING PROPERLY. { yes, I have used my front wheel as a plow Hobot ]

Dereck

I look forward to checking the performance of the flood victim ('73 850 nearly bone stock) compared with the SS clone, which is a true Bitsa being built from parts of the original '71 and a wrecked '75 Mk III I bought from the original owner. The clone's engine is pretty close to stock, but it's a bit lighter than a standard Commando and has a few small upgrades like braided-stainless brake lines, alloy rims, adjustable isos et cetera.

Other than upgraded carbs and ignition, the flood bike will be really close to what came off the assembly line in England, so the comparison should tell me if all the twiddly bits and lightening I did to the '71 made a notable difference.

I have the following:

Dreer New Norton prototype monoshock 850 e-start w/ ZX6 forks w/ dual disc brakes, single rear disc brake, RIGHT foot shift conversion, Sparx ignition, Mikuni FCRs, solo VR880 seat, standard (low rise) bars, 18" alloy wheels, SS adjustable isolastics, Dave Taylor head steady, Bill Eads front steady.


'75 Commando 850 MkIII e-start Interstate, basically stock (peashooters & Sparx ignition).


'72 Combat 750 Commando w/ Leo Goff / Megacycle engine, Dunstall bodywork (bikini fairing & dualseat), clip-ons & rearsets, ARD mini magneto.


Hands down, the Interstate is my favorite of the three, I can jump on it and ride cross-country at 80MPH till it runs out of gas, fill it back up and keep riding. It will not miss a beat, and is in every way a modern bike. It will do the ton without breaking a sweat, handles like a dream in the twisty stuff, and isn't a wounded elephant in a parking lot.

The monoshock bike is more of a novelty, although it is every bit as capable as the Interstate, and even better in the twisty bits (braking is far superior). The solo seat is fine for rides of an hour or so, but I wouldn't want to take it out for an all-day ride. For having a pillion along, this bike is out. Really, the seat is the only thing that keeps it from topping my list.

The Combat is strictly a toy. It is a rocket ship on rails. Engine is superior in performance to the Inter & Mono; brake are superior to the Inter, inferior to the Mono. Seat falls in the middle, clip-ons are inferior in all but very spirited riding for an hour or two, max. It would make a wonderful vintage roadracer. Coincidentally, I have a guy coming over to look at it this evening that has been corresponding with me for over a month, and it's likely to be sold.

I would rate the John Player about equal to the Combat, but absolutely more beautiful (an acquired taste, to be sure). Just sold last week, so not listed above.

I have considered getting a Roadster tank, seat, and sidecovers, so that I could convert my Interstate from time to time, but that would involve play money, which I don't have at the moment.

It would be nice if the people who posted in the other thread would copy & paste them into this thread...

A lot of "dishing" of the MKIII in the other thread.

I own an MKIII that when I got it was missing the e-start. It started first kick after I sorted the engine since it hadn't run in 10 years, so you can just remove it if the extra weight bothers you. I also owned an MKIII new back in the day. I had a number of Brit bikes including a 1967 BSA Spitfire Hornet. The difference between the BSA and the Norton even though the Norton was considered a compromise bike was ride quality and smoothness. The BSA would vibrate my hands numb. The Norton never did that. The BSA was quicker and lighter.

Today I look at the Norton MKIII as a classic Brit bike with looks and style that I can ride and enjoy. I've left the speed and craziness behind long ago. The slight performance difference from earlier Commandos is really of no matter to me.

In terms of performance I have other newer bikes that will out run and out handle the Norton that I can ride if I need a thrill. Sorry to say that they didn't cost me an arm and a leg like a built up Norton would...only to have a bike that still would never compare to any of them. The Norton is a pure classic and fun...that's it's place for me. Any Norton is a wonderful bike to own so I have no argument which is better.

grandpaul said:

It would be nice if the people who posted in the other thread would copy & paste them into this thread...

Click to expand...

But, would members please limit the discussion in this thread to Commandos. No other makes, thanks.

grandpaul said:

I have the following:

'.....
Hands down, the Interstate is my favorite of the three, I can jump on it and ride cross-country at 80MPH till it runs out of gas, fill it back up and keep riding. It will not miss a beat, and is in every way a modern bike. It will do the ton without breaking a sweat, handles like a dream in the twisty stuff, and isn't a wounded elephant in a parking lot.

.......

Click to expand...

I'm with you on the MKIII vote. ( notice where I put the kickstarter !)

Which bike do I prefer?
Mine?

Why?
Cos it has been very carefully rebuilt and awfully tastefully modified. The work clearly having been executed by a true gentleman of impeccable taste.

this question is really 2 questions.

1) If you have more than one commando or have owned numerous commandos over the years, then the question is one that compares various models.

2) If you have only owned one commando (like me) then the differences are theoretical.

Would I rather have a commando that has,...

a key sticking out of the sidecover?
a timed breather on the end of the camshaft?
a frame crossmember that blocks the comstock sump breather?
a non cush rear wheel?
a weaker crankcase?
a drum brake front wheel?
no directional lights?
a 2.25 gallon miniature gas tank?
a ball bearing on the timing side of the crank?
weak headlight brightness?
a lower amperage stator?
a single bolt sloppy fitting swingarm tube?

I supose the answer to all of those is

YES, I prefer my commando because I fixed all those deficiencies myself. Considering the effort I put into it, I wouldn't trade my commando for a brand new CNW bike, because (for me) it's been more about the 40 year journey we've taken together to modify and improve my commando than to buy an already finished collectable masterpiece like CNW's bike.... (which are very impressive, of course)

.... which reminds me of a joke..

What's the difference between a porcupine and a porsche???

A: The porcupine has the prick on the outside...

Fast Eddie said:

Which bike do I prefer?
Mine?

Why?
Cos it has been very carefully rebuilt and awfully tastefully modified. The work clearly having been executed by a true gentleman of impeccable taste.

Click to expand...

^^^ With that reasoning, I'm not gonna pick my bike because I know all that I've done to it. :mrgreen:

The blue springs don't look right. Otherwise it is lovely.

grandpaul's comparison of his three bikes was very to the point and though I've no real experience with either the mono or the Combat I guessing they are as spot on as the MK3 description. The hottest Commando I've ever ridden was one of Dreer's creations when he first got into the game. Still very much original style Commando's but 'blue printed throughout' with some upgrades. It was very much like my MK3, BUT with more. In other words, where mine made torque, it made more at the same place. Where mine made HP, it made more, again at about the same place. Great Norton.

From that other thread:
"The FACTORY vernier adjustable isosalastis, a plus.
Hydraulic, auto adjusted primary chain, a plus.
This means with no monkeying around with the primary chain the gearbox is fixed so no follow-up drive chain adjustment is needed, a plus.
This also allows the chaincase to have a proper seal instead of a piece of cloth for a seal, a plus.
Oh, and consider the gasket and capscrew method of securing the primary instead of a great big 'o' ring, a plus."

This is just a list of what I believe to be overall improvements with the MK3. Notice I did not mention 'E' START, it would have hade to be a lot more seamless to be a plus. Nor did I mention the mandated left side shift pattern because that was to me different, that's all. I will concede a one -up, the rest down pattern no matter what side the change is on is better for the track. Otherwise, what's the real difference?

Last of all, I hope no one is taking this as a "CHEVY vs. FORD" argument. "YOUR CHEVY SUCKS!". "OH YEH, YOUR FORD SUCKS MORE!". Because, to me at least, All Nortons, particularly Commandos deserve to be preserved FOR riding.

Hi Les. I left the topic open ended but I see your point, maybe only compare bikes of similar age to our commandos. Eg Dennis has talked about his BSA vibrating like hell. We will get honest opinions form our Norton owners on this site. I could compare my commando to another mans 650 matchy. I ran out of petrol one time about 3 miles from a servo. He gave me a lift, and i swear as soon as then matcy hit about 55 mph, the vibration coming up through the seat was bloody awful. Don't know how he rode the bloody thing, I can compare that to sitting in seat no. 3 on a Beach 1900 aircraft that used to fly between kERIKERI AND aUCKALND IN THE EARLY 2000's,. The only time I could relax was when the pilot reduced power to glide into Kerikeri. The vibrations coming through the seat on that thing meant I had to lean right back and sit on the very front edge of the seat. Bloody awful.
Dereck

dennisgb said:

A lot of "dishing" of the MKIII in the other thread.

I own an MKIII that when I got it was missing the e-start. It started first kick after I sorted the engine since it hadn't run in 10 years, so you can just remove it if the extra weight bothers you. I also owned an MKIII new back in the day. I had a number of Brit bikes including a 1967 BSA Spitfire Hornet. The difference between the BSA and the Norton even though the Norton was considered a compromise bike was ride quality and smoothness. The BSA would vibrate my hands numb. The Norton never did that. The BSA was quicker and lighter.

Today I look at the Norton MKIII as a classic Brit bike with looks and style that I can ride and enjoy. I've left the speed and craziness behind long ago. The slight performance difference from earlier Commandos is really of no matter to me.

In terms of performance I have other newer bikes that will out run and out handle the Norton that I can ride if I need a thrill. Sorry to say that they didn't cost me an arm and a leg like a built up Norton would...only to have a bike that still would never compare to any of them. The Norton is a pure classic and fun...that's it's place for me. Any Norton is a wonderful bike to own so I have no argument which is better.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't say there was a lot of "dishing" (dissing?) of the Mark III. Just from me!

Let's put it this way, The MKIII is like the ugly as a man but even uglier as a woman transsexual with three day old stubble, standing on a street corner in a two sizes too small leopard print mini dress. You respect his/her right to exist, but I'm not hooking up with you!!!!!

Okay, I've also owned "a few" other Commandos, as well as restoring a few, and custom building a few.

Generally speaking, I personally like the backside of timing chest case breather setup, with one of my reed valves (I've done 5 or 6, and sold several dozen).

I like disc brakes better than drums.

I like modern full floating discs FAR better than the standard discs (5 different variations so far).

I like drilled standard discs better than plain ones (more than a dozen done, with 2 different patterns).

I like cush rear hubs better than non-cush.

I like adjustable isolastics FAR better than shim type (more than a dozen upgrades done, sold another dozen).

I like the Dave Taylor top steady (at least half a dozen installed) and Bill (Windy) Eads front steady (3 installed).

I like the Dyno Dave clutch rod seal (a half dozen installed).

I like right-foot shift, but I have many right AND left-foot shift bikes, and it has never been an issue since I flew through a fence the first time I rode a Bultaco Metralla, about 45 years ago.

I like rearset foot position better than feet-forward (I like Clubman brand).

I like a windscreen on the highway, or at least a quarter fairing if inclement weather (I have a Shoei quarter fairing, easy-on, easy-off).

I like standard bars with medium rise and slight pullback.

I like Barnett clutch friction plates (a half-dozen sets installed, and another half dozen sold). I like $urflex plates even better! (3 sets installed).

I like aftermarket or modified Lockheed front brake master cylinders.

I like Amal premiers, thoroughly cleaned (3 pairs installed).

I like Sparx electronic ignitions and alternators (dozens of ignitions with only 1 client having dual failures, a half-dozen alternators with perfect results). I also like the basic Pazon ignitions and Wassell alternators, but have only used one of each.

I like Avon Roadriders (6 or 8 sets installed).

________________________________________________________

Roadster- My idea of the upper echelon of classic Britbikes as far as styling. Good handling, excellent power, good ergonomics if not long distance. I've owned a half-dozen or so. They kinda need to be Black, with peashooters.


Interstate- Just behind the Roadster in styling & handling, otherwise superior in ergonomics and also good for distance riding. Owned 2, still have 1.


Fastback- An acquired taste, I've never owned or ridden one. The styling has grown on me and I wouldn't mind owning one.

High Rider- I personally don't care for the styling; otherwise essentially the same as the base model, year-by-year. I like the small steel tank on a roadster with a Corbin seat (although the Corbins are rock hard); it's a great look. Bought one as part of a commissioned cafe racer build, pretty funky to ride, don't like the "hands up" riding position at all.




Production Racer- Nice performance & handling (light), low ergonomic comfort. I built a PR replica and it was fun to ride. I like the looks a lot, especially in Yellow.


John Player Norton- An acquired tasted, reasonable performance (better with peashooters), heavy, low ergonomic comfort, decent handling. I restored one (just sold). Didn't ride it much; it's large and has a wide turning radius, so 5-point maneuvers in parking lots. Otherwise, it pulls hard as all the 850s do.


SS & S- Never owned, restored, or ridden either model. I had SS pipes on the PR replica that I built, they WILL burn you!

L.A.B. said:

grandpaul said:

It would be nice if the people who posted in the other thread would copy & paste them into this thread...

Click to expand...

But, would members please limit the discussion in this thread to Commandos. No other makes, thanks.

Click to expand...

What about Commandos that have been convered to Featherbed frames, my hot 850 Featherbed is 3/4 Commando and 1/4 Featherbed and other bits and pieces and all Norton except for oil tank and Joe hunt, to me its the best Norton that I have ever built and ride and can be ridden all day very comfortable, fast, reliable, very light, and will out handle any Commando Norton, well thats my opinion anyway, I just love riding it.

Ashley

Fast Eddie said:

Which bike do I prefer?
Mine?

Why?
Cos it has been very carefully rebuilt and awfully tastefully modified. The work clearly having been executed by a true gentleman of impeccable taste.

Click to expand...

Nigel,
I thought you did all the work?

This is a Kenny Dreer mod that I've adopted, the VR880 "Big Bearing" / box-section swingarm (like on Dave Edwards InterBack).

Mine uses standard Commando sealed steering bearings, Kenny used an off-size bearing for some reason.

Doesn't alter the handling unless you fit up a wider rear rim/tire (which was the reason for it's creation). Far superior anchorage at the transmission cradle, bearings will last forever over bushings, no lube required, and of course no chance of wallowing out the root tube.

Super easy spindle extraction from the timing side without disturbing ANYTHING. Has about 1/8" clearance to the backside of the primary inner cover; so no chance of gnashing it up like the standard swingarm can do, unless it's a real get-off. You can just make out the drilled alloy spindle retainer lug behind the transmission, and the chain adjuster end of the swingarm.



"clean" view

My fave is obviously the one I own and made into my bike .... I own and ride 2 modern Italians which out perform the Commando in all areas , no contest .... but love .... well the Commando gets it all , I really do love my Commando ...
Craig

It's hard to compare highly modded or otherwise improved Commandos that are loaded with upgrades with the factory stock or nearly stock examples. If the changes/upgrades are proven and/or reliable then the modified bike will almost certainly work better than the stock late '60's and 70's. I think all the stock variants are pretty much "the same but different". At least the Roadsters and Interstates.

Fullauto said:

I wouldn't say there was a lot of "dishing" (dissing?) of the Mark III. Just from me!

Let's put it this way, The MKIII is like the ugly as a man but even uglier as a woman transsexual with three day old stubble, standing on a street corner in a two sizes too small leopard print mini dress. You respect his/her right to exist, but I'm not hooking up with you!!!!!

Click to expand...

Because of the above crack, I am officially retracting the "pompous remark attributed to your post in the other thread. I am now calling you "pompous". If you are still fooling around, well then you got me. At any rate "Over and Out.