Wobble and Weave

MKIII? I don't go for them modern fangled which-a-ma thingies. I have had all types. Even an XS850 Special, JimC. Last was a Duc I sold to get my current unit.
I'm more of a ES2 type and long for the G80cs of my youth.

Anyways, phil, who are you...........really?

pete.v said:

MKIII? I don't go for them modern fangled which-a-ma thingies. I have had all types. Even an XS850 Special, JimC. Last was a Duc I sold to get my current unit.
I'm more of a ES2 type and long for the G80cs of my youth.

Anyways, phil, who are you...........really?

Click to expand...

I have no idea Pete.
When I carry on like this Jenny sends me outside to play with the MkIII.
A cardboard cut out which I painted red with a crayon.
I just hope it doesn't bend (left or right) when I get it out on the road.

But who am I…………really?
Nothing more than a bloke who likes Commandos and likes riding them.
I've had quite a range of different machines, Jap Crap (only a few) BMW's etc.
But I keep coming back to Commandos. Bought the MkIII sight unseen from the States.
The boys in the pub thought I was crazy taking such a risk. But I trusted Baxter's in Iowa.
Like it so much I am buying another one from them. It is the best Commando I have ever
had. But once upon a time I hated the "modern" beast. Just like you.

I asked Baxter's if it was as advertised on TV, buy one, get one free?
They said no. So here goes another $22,000Aust. Importing is very expensive.

Unfortunately Jenny's Norton Agreement states for every penny I spend, I have to
put equal into her bank account. So $22,000 becomes $44,000.
She hasn't even seen the current MkIII in the garage yet.
I hide it behind the cardboard cut out!

highdesert said:

You are a closet MkIII lover and may need to be sent to the psychiatrist along with that "other guy".

Click to expand...

who is this "other guy" that you seem to think needs to see a psychiatrist?

no need to hide anything here, go ahead and name him


in addition, why don't you knock off the high school level talk, like a "granny getting her tits caught"
or talking about how you released your side car so your girl friend would get hit by oncoming traffic

nothing "funny' about that, well obviously to you, but this is a pretty classy forum, let's keep it that way..

Click to expand...

Who is the other guy? It is inappropriate in a classy forum to read bits and pieces and then ask the wrong person the wrong question. Use your high school level education, go back and read all the posts again (as you should have in the first place)
and then ask the person who made reference to the "other guy".
I'm not doing your work for you, I'm sure you can read yourself.
And try to stay on topic.

gripper said:

Al otment, Simon, I merely suggested a theory as to why the Commando may pull to the left. I haven't had a pulling to the left issue at all. I have sorted my weave out quite simply. It's a secret though. The Shropshire NOC meeting tonight attracted a very experienced racer of Triumphs, Nortons and Tritons. He confirmed my thoughts on weave. I'll let this thread run for a bit and maybe give you my threepenneth.

Click to expand...

Gripper, David, I merely stated why the theory you suggested was not relevant when applying it to the position of brake calipers in relation to the wheel spindle as the cause of crap steering. It's pointless referencing theories if you have a confused understanding of that theory. I'm very happy you've managed to stop your bike wobbling on the motorway whilst traveling in a straight line - I'm all for making the roads safer - and that you've met someone who agrees with your thoughts. Do report on how it handles cranked over through bumpy bends at 80mph for example.

Al-otment said:

gripper said:

Al otment, Simon, I merely suggested a theory as to why the Commando may pull to the left. I haven't had a pulling to the left issue at all. I have sorted my weave out quite simply. It's a secret though. The Shropshire NOC meeting tonight attracted a very experienced racer of Triumphs, Nortons and Tritons. He confirmed my thoughts on weave. I'll let this thread run for a bit and maybe give you my threepenneth.

Click to expand...

Gripper, David, I merely stated why the theory you suggested was not relevant when applying it to the position of brake calipers in relation to the wheel spindle as the cause of crap steering. It's pointless referencing theories if you have a confused understanding of that theory. I'm very happy you've managed to stop your bike wobbling on the motorway whilst traveling in a straight line - I'm all for making the roads safer - and that you've met someone who agrees with your thoughts. Do report on how it handles cranked over through bumpy bends at 80mph for example.

Click to expand...

I don't believe gripper did have a confused understanding of the theory. The front wheel is a gyroscope and the forces upon it were pretty well described by gripper. Granted, the handlebars have a far greater moment. And whether the calliper in its position has a large enough moment to apply a force is debatable but feasible. If it sits above the axil, as gripper points out when it on the left leg, it will apply no force. so where in the theory do you say gripper was confused? He may have been wrong but he was not confused.

phil yates said:

Al-otment said:

gripper said:

Al otment, Simon, I merely suggested a theory as to why the Commando may pull to the left. I haven't had a pulling to the left issue at all. I have sorted my weave out quite simply. It's a secret though. The Shropshire NOC meeting tonight attracted a very experienced racer of Triumphs, Nortons and Tritons. He confirmed my thoughts on weave. I'll let this thread run for a bit and maybe give you my threepenneth.

Click to expand...

Gripper, David, I merely stated why the theory you suggested was not relevant when applying it to the position of brake calipers in relation to the wheel spindle as the cause of crap steering. It's pointless referencing theories if you have a confused understanding of that theory. I'm very happy you've managed to stop your bike wobbling on the motorway whilst traveling in a straight line - I'm all for making the roads safer - and that you've met someone who agrees with your thoughts. Do report on how it handles cranked over through bumpy bends at 80mph for example.

Click to expand...

I don't believe gripper did have a confused understanding of the theory. The front wheel is a gyroscope and the forces upon it were pretty well described by gripper. Granted, the handlebars have a far greater moment. And whether the calliper in its position has a large enough moment to apply a force is debatable but feasible. If it sits above the axil, as gripper points out when it on the left leg, it will apply no force. so where in the theory do you say gripper was confused? He may have been wrong but he was not confused.

Click to expand...

Any mass mounted on a fork leg will apply a torque (force x dist.) to the wheel spindle, it dosen't matter if the mass is above, below, left, right, forward or rear. You still have a mass at a distance to the axis centre applying a force. So yes, I still say he's confused. Plus a downward force acting on the R.H.S of the spindle will cause the bike to steer right not left.

, below, left, right, forward or rear. You still have a mass at a distance to the axis centre applying a force. So yes, I still say he's confused. Plus a downward force acting on the R.H.S of the spindle will cause the bike to steer right not left.[/quote]

Al
The calliper weight (mass) will always have a downwards force regardless of position. Gravity causes that. But any weight on a fork forward or aft of the centre of gravity (spindle if you like) will also apply a sideways force to the wheel by applying a left or right force to the fork. gripper got it a bit wrong in his description when he mentioned that that force moves 90 degrees in the direction of rotation and is applied in the opposite direction. That is wrong. It is applied in the same direction. But if you read carefully through gripper's description, you will see he his description is not worded well but the result is the same.

In simple terms, assuming the force is strong enough (which we are not sure about), calliper on right fork somewhat behind CofG (spindle) applies a force wanting to turn wheel right. This a effectively a force at rear of wheel pushing left. Gyroscopic result is a force rotating 90 degrees in direction of rotation and now is a force pushing top of wheel left. Bike wants to lean left so bike pulls left, ever so slightly.

I think gripper's explanation put forward is correct Al. I don't mean correct in theory because it definitely is that, as I see it. But correct in the reason for the pulling left of right calliper mounted Nortons. The reasons gripper explains for a neutral effect when calliper is on right leg and forward of it, now being over spindle, I believe are also valid.

I am not always right, but I am never wrong
Jenny uses that one on me all the time!

The reasons gripper explains for a neutral effect when calliper is on right leg and forward of it, now being over spindle, I believe are also valid.

Sorry, all this left and right makes your head spin.
Above should read "when calliper is on LEFT leg and forward of it" (not right).

Phil

And for clarification, grippers statement that the force applied rotates 90 degrees and then is applied in the opposite direction, is talking about the force at the front of the wheel, not the rear. It rotates 90 degrees and applies a right force to the bottom of the wheel. This effectively is a force applied left at the top of the wheel. So same same.

So he got it correct, but worded it poorly. His explanation was a hell of a lot better than I could have offered. But on reading it I realised that gripper knew what he was talking about.

Phil.. Sit back and have another Bundi.. There is no winners or losers here.... Just opinions about fact, fiction and "ol wive's tales" about hearsay from a friends friend ....

At the end of the day, "we do what best for ourselves"... That's not to detract from valuable info the shared here regularly...

olChris said:

Phil.. Sit back and have another Bundi.. There is no winners or losers here.... Just opinions about fact, fiction and "ol wive's tales....

At the end of the day, "we do what best for ourselves"...

Click to expand...

olChris
I am sitting back, having a beer and working text, phone and email all at the same time. Such is the nature of my work and on occasions goes 24/7.

If I am coming across as trying to win something, I must be sending poor messages. I'm interested in theory and issues such as the current discussion are certainly interesting to me. I don't care if I am right or wrong. I just like to get to the bottom of an issue whether it be me who resolves it, or someone else. I'm happy with grippers explanation and will be until someone can prove him irrefutably wrong.

Why don't you take a late night swim and get eaten by a great white?

WOW.. :shock: :shock: :shock:... Have a nice day......

olChris said:

WOW.. :shock: :shock: :shock:... Have a nice day......

Click to expand...

You mean have a nice night. You are only two hours behind us here in the civilised world.

As a helicopter crewman with 8000 hours under my belt, I think I have a sound grasp on gyroscopic theory not only when related to rotor blades but also gyro instruments. Even motorcycle wheels at a pinch. As for cornering at 80 MPH on a bumpy road……… Yeah, I don't do a lot of that, so consider me a novice.

Thanks for the agreeable response Phil

gripper said:

As a helicopter crewman with 8000 hours under my belt, I think I have a sound grasp on gyroscopic theory not only when related to rotor blades but also gyro instruments. Even motorcycle wheels at a pinch. As for cornering at 80 MPH on a bumpy road……… Yeah, I don't do a lot of that, so consider me a novice.

Thanks for the agreeable response Phil

Click to expand...

I have found several references regarding moving the front brake to the left hand fork. Roy Bacon's book "Norton Buyer's Guide" is one and on page 102 states "the caliper was moved to the left side, ahead of the fork leg, as this improved the handling for some obscure technical reason".

So Norton were obviously trying to achieve something. It was not a cosmetic change. I believe they were trying to rectify the steering issue (and did) but it seems never revealed specifically what they were rectifying. You wouldn't would you? Saying or admitting your bikes had been pulling left for the last three years due to incorrect position of the front brake caliper would not go down well.

NOC Technical (England) were aware of why the brake was moved and made reference to it in their notes. I can't find those notes anymore but that was the first reference I saw. They did not however know why moving the brake cured the problem.

Then along comes gripper and offers the only feasible answer I have ever heard and suddenly it all became crystal clear to me.
I don't care what anybody else thinks gripper, you have nailed it in my opinion. No one else has offered any suggestion, let alone one that makes sense. It has had me puzzled for years. Now I can sleep at nights!!

Al
I tried to return your private message but for some reason it will not exit the outbox so I guess the best I can do is post it here.
Nothing personal in it of course. Sorry to others for no video and perhaps repeated views.


Al
Thanks for the video. I can see where you are coming from regarding the effect of a downwards force on the wheel. But I'm not sure if it is applicable to the calliper argument.

Handle bar pulling is dead easy for me to understand. Pulling right handle bar creates a left force at rear of wheel. This rotates 90 degrees to top of wheel and pulls top of wheel left. Bikes goes left.

Not so easy for me regarding the calliper but in another way it is. The guy in the video did not demonstrate twisting the axle and subsequent result. If he stood behind the spinning wheel so rotation is going away from him at top of wheel, then twisted or pulled (maybe better word) the right axle towards him, wheel would flop or lean left. Exactly the same as pulling right handle bar.

With calliper on right fork and behind axle, certainly there is a downwards force but also, I think, a force trying to pull the axle back. Same as pulling right handle bar. Calliper on left fork, directly above axle is not pulling axle forward or aft. Only effect is a downwards force.

I don't think the downwards force is sufficiently significant either side to do anything.

The video didn't show sideways forces applied to the spindle, only up or down at either side of spindle. Or so it seemed to me.

Why would I think the calliper could apply a significant sideways force to the axle but not a downwards one? Only that I just can't see any other reason why left or right calliper position could make a difference to the bike pulling. And I know it makes a difference because I experienced it first hand with my last bike when we swapped calliper sides.

Beyond that Al, I have no idea.

Cheers
Phil

Messages will leave the outbox when they are opened to be read.

I'm really quite surprised you didn't know that.

pete.v said:

Messages will leave the outbox when they are opened to be read.

I'm really quite surprised you didn't know that.

Click to expand...

Is it mentioned somewhere Pete?
I haven't sent anyone a message.
Other than in return.

phil yates said:

pete.v said:

Messages will leave the outbox when they are opened to be read.

I'm really quite surprised you didn't know that.

Click to expand...

Is it mentioned somewhere Pete?
I haven't sent anyone a message.
Other than in return.

Click to expand...

Here,

phil yates said:

Al
I tried to return your private message but for some reason it will not exit the outbox so I guess the best I can do is post it here.
Nothing personal in it of course. Sorry to others for no video and perhaps repeated views.

Click to expand...

Again, we're getting way off topic just to keep you in line.

Here,

phil yates said:

Al
I tried to return your private message but for some reason it will not exit the outbox so I guess the best I can do is post it here.
Nothing personal in it of course. Sorry to others for no video and perhaps repeated views.

Click to expand...

Again, we're getting way off topic just to keep you in line. [/quote]


Then I am rightly chastised if my message to Al was off topic. I didn't think it was. It was about gyros and precession and left pulling bikes which is not wobbling and weaving I admit, but has received some attention under this thread.

I've learnt why my original Combat wobbled, and how Norton fixed it.
I've learnt nothing about weaving, but never experienced it anyway.
I'm happy with gripper's left pull fix theory (though I guess it should have been a separate thread).
Now I've learnt about forum outboxes!

All good information, even if the only issue answered conclusively was the wobble.
And the outbox.