Which is the best year for Commando

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
22
I feel like a traitor. I currently own 14 TRIUMPH motorcycles including two T140 AHRMA Sportsman 750 race bikes. I finished second in the class in 2009. I am selling three T140s and would like to run a NORTON Commando as my street bike. Which is the best year to pursue? The bike will be used for commuting to work (25 miles one way) and weekend excursion in the Adirondack Mountains in upstate NY. I am a mechanical engineer and have rebuilt many Triumphs. Thanks, Team FASTLIKEJUDY
 
The correct answer is YES. Any Commando is a good year. 75 for left shift, all the rest had the shifter on the correct side.
 
swooshdave said:
The correct answer is YES. Any Commando is a good year. 75 for left shift, all the rest had the shifter on the correct side.

An electric starter is always nice, the later models have them. If you are looking for the best looking, the Fastback is the one, followed closely by the Production Racer.

Jean
 
I am used to the right hand shift and I really do not want an electric start. So are we talking pre 1974? Thanks Team FASTLIKEJUDY
 
FASTLIKEJUDY said:
I feel like a traitor. I currently own 14 TRIUMPH motorcycles including two T140 AHRMA Sportsman 750 race bikes.

Welcome to the forum, and don't worry, there are plenty of other traitors here!



FASTLIKEJUDY said:
I am used to the right hand shift and I really do not want an electric start. So are we talking pre 1974? Thanks Team FASTLIKEJUDY

Pre '75 then, as the electric start 850 MkIII L/H shift models were introduced for 1975.

http://www.nortonownersclub.org/models/commando
http://www.nortonmotors.de/ANIL/Commando.htm
 
I love them all - even Hi-Riders! Many consider the MKIIA of 1974 as the "best", or the most developed - before a lot of the changes that the 75 MKIII had. Some of those changes were not well recieved - more weight, e-start, rear disc, dash with idiot lights, etc. I used to turn up my nose at the MKIII and the left hand shift, but that was before I owned one. They are fine bikes, but really the most different of the lot. I have both a 75 MKIII and a 72 Roadster, and they both are just magnificent bikes. You'll love whatever you end up with. I used to have a '73 T140V Tiger, which was very nice, but a Commando's smoothness puts it in another league.
 
Yes, but "right" explains it all. I'm really not trying to be anal here, much.

Dave
69S
 
Line up your Children and pick a favorite, I don't think so!

1975 (Mark III's) TO SOME do not have that "classic look" BUT the rear Disc brake and the E-start (now that it can be made to actually work, in the beginning we referred to it as "electric kick assist") are GOOD!

Mark IIA 's are a good choice, I run with a guy (Cliff Holland South Houston, Texas) who had the quickest Commando around for years and he started with a Mark IIA.

Unclviny
 
They just had more time to "refine and polish", they are just the latest and greatest Mark II's.

Unclviny
 
Good question Brian. Why exactly is a 74 850 better than a 73 850?

Same motor, same tranny, same frame. What is different?

What? Bean can silencers are "better" than pea shooters? Joking, right?
 
Team Judy,
I have a 72 combat and like the sprinter.
If you like the US style flat tracker/sportster look then a roadster is right for you.
If you prefer a more UK look a fastback is an eloquent looking bike.
I see no fastbacks around me in Penna.
Berlinners must have sols allot of roadsters though.
Marshal
 
Unclviny said:
They just had more time to "refine and polish", they are just the latest and greatest Mark II's.

Unclviny


I was hoping for something a bit more, um... specific...?
 
Sorry to disappoint you but there are not any big changes that I know of, just tiny "adjustments".

Unclviny

Edited to add:
I cannot get there right now (this work Confuser is firewalled) but
home.clara.net/captain.norton/cnn1.html
Captain Norton should cover the changes thoroughly.
 
Not disappointed. Have heard some folks give the early ones the nod, some the later ones, but specifics have always been a bit lacking.

I have always thought that but for some small, mostly cosmetic changes (striping, cylinder color, mufflers, etc.) there wasn't much separating the pre-Mk III 850s. I think you're confirming that.

Thanks - Brian
 
BrianK said:
Not disappointed. Have heard some folks give the early ones the nod, some the later ones, but specifics have always been a bit lacking.

I have always thought that but for some small, mostly cosmetic changes (striping, cylinder color, mufflers, etc.) there wasn't much separating the pre-Mk III 850s. I think you're confirming that.

Thanks - Brian

That's about right until you get to the MkIIa.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top