Worn PW3 cam

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ben has your report, he had it a while back, he was also sent the suppliers spec and the UK test report Friday - wonder why he has not shown you it. A partially bonded tip I would certainly not use, nor would many others, it was most probably supplied that way back in the 70's when the factory would put anything in a bike, just because it has been all right so far is not really a good reason to carry on using it!
Phil Irving, yes Stellite 6 can be used for a cam / follower material but not in a Norton, it is just not tough enough. Read my earlier posts, I have sent you the links so you check yourself. I said previously Stellite Delcrome, Stellite was a company name that happened to produce both, about page 2 or 3 of this thread.
As for my qualification, I am registered with the UK engineering council at IEng level, one below CEng that you would expect a lieutenant to have, but not all as some come from the ranks and no more qualified than me, some less so that have the UK foundation degree, as I found out when I went to trade my units for a foundation degree. I have worked with some Lieutenants who a, have never used a spanner and b, have asked why the jaws are at an angle. I recently had a CEng owner tell me that the valve springs could not be coil bound because the tappet clearances were correct!! I did my training in the cold war years, when the MOD was well off, as time progressed and they needed to attract staff, training went down and the awards went up.
Followers have been tested, 1994, 2004, 2008, 2013, and this year, the tests have been consistent. It is has and always been Delcrome, even on the 1960's drawing that I have checked, and again on the 1972 drawing. We know that cam production changed 3 times, case hardened, tufftrided, and chill cast, the followers have been used with all three. The case hardened cam was long lived and lasted well - expensive to manufacture, many still in use today, this was superseded by tufftride and nitrided cams - cheaper to make and fine for most applications, then chill cast, which had high set up costs but ideal for mas production and fine for many applications where the cam could be supported.
Had the metallurgist of 60 years looked, he would have a spotted problem with every lobe on your cam, even a layman could spot that. It is not even mentioned in his report. I have asked 3 very experienced people what it is and none could tell me, I had to find out myself, I now know what it is but just need to find out why it has occurred. Ben will have the cam back soon so maybe his metallurgist can tell us that it is not normal and what it is, he maybe very good, and may like a another look, he is very welcome - I have confidence in my ability. I shall send you pictures in the morning.
Considering you have so much confidence in this metallurgist, then you and Ben would not have any reason for me to put your metallurgists report and findings and our report and findings along with the photos taken by myself and the testers on display at our open day at the end of the month. Something tells me that you and Ben may not agree to that, but it would be nice so those that are attending can see the amount of work going into this.
 
He hasn't shown me because he hasn't received it. Your communication with him has been sadly lacking.
He used AN followers purchased from AN! The other engine used genuine AN followers as well, which you claimed were non genuine! Ben only uses AN parts sourced from AN in his rebuilds. So, you are now claiming that he has used forty year old Norton followers in my rebuild? Seriously?

Regarding the display at your open day, you can show whatever you like. We have nothing to hide.

Your obfuscation, contrary statements, and outright denial of others abilities astounds me.
 
My lack of communication, he emailed me back earlier in the week confirming he has our report and was waiting for the test report which was sent to him Friday, I can send you the email trails if you like. Considering you have nothing to hide, the investment casting process leaves distinct marking on the tappets, the tool has been used since 1984, there was a mix of tappets used, some without tack weld marks, these are quite old manufacture. Some also show edge wear marks that do not correspond to the lobes they ran on, suggesting that they were not new. One has a double chamfer on it, one ground on correctly the other ground on by hand using a bench grinder, making it a left and right hand tappet. I will check to see what cam these were run against tomorrow, yours or the other cam that was sent, as one set is in better nick than the other. I haven't claimed that the followers were not genuine, just original stock items from years back - one modified badly, so seriously, yes, he has used old followers, sent to me complete with witness marks on them and they are still ty-wrapped, I took one look at them and considered it not worth parting them.
Show me where I have been contrary, I have not expressed denial of others abilities, you seem to be doing that, I said he maybe well qualified and experienced but failed to see what was on the lobe noses of your cam, that is not denying his ability. Anyone making a claim like he did, should provide a typical spec if they are to say it is typical of chill cast iron.
 
We all appreciate your frustration, Ken, and perhaps communications cd have been better between your mechanic and AN.
Still, it seems progress is being made in a good faith effort to find agreement among the experts with regard to the cause(s) of the failure, and I reckon that's what we all want, if it's possible at all.
But why your rebuild shd be stalled in the meantime just waiting for such an outcome, or (especially) why you believe that taking an adversarial (not to say insulting) position will be helpful, those are mysteries to me.
All that aside, I wish you well, and send thanks for posting this up in the first place. Let's hope we all learn something.
 
Mr. Rick said:
We all appreciate your frustration, Ken, and perhaps communications cd have been better between your mechanic and AN.
Still, it seems progress is being made in a good faith effort to find agreement among the experts with regard to the cause(s) of the failure, and I reckon that's what we all want, if it's possible at all.
But why your rebuild shd be stalled in the meantime just waiting for such an outcome, or (especially) why you believe that taking an adversarial (not to say insulting) position will be helpful, those are mysteries to me.
All that aside, I wish you well, and send thanks for posting this up in the first place. Let's hope we all learn something.
Click to expand...

Can I include you in the people who don't read posts? Sorry, but if you think that's insulting, then just re read the posts. Then read them again. My new cam hasn't arrived yet. I am moving ahead with a solution to the problem. Adversarial? How about "stonewalling" on the other side?
The engine builder has his own issues and he is moving ahead with all the evidence that he will need to prove his point. AN have provided NO evidence of anything yet, apart from reading from a report that they have commissioned, but not released, and may not, so we wait with bated breath to see if any is forthcoming. The fact that their engineer has given several different answers, all conflicting widely, doesn't seem to bother you or others on here. As I said, Norton owners need proof that the parts they are buying are going to do the job without any issues. This doesn't seem to bother you blokes either. Why the hell am I the bad guy here?

AN have not allowed my warranty claim because my cam and followers were coated! According to the metallurgist (in Australia) the coating was the very thing that made the cam last as long as it did!!!! Can you actually appreciate the delicious irony of this? And the fact that AN's engineer is casting doubt upon the credentials of our metallurgist based on a report that he did on my cam and followers which AN don't agree with and are not qualified to query because none of them are qualified in that field?

Just remember, I have built my business over ten years on my own, from my own resources, like Joe, and, up until the last batch, had about 230 heads out there in the world. I've had two (2) warranty claims. One, from New Zealand, had a blown out oil gallery, so, without waiting for the return of the suspect head, I immediately despatched a replacement head to NZ. I returned the suspect head to the manufacturers for a credit. It was then scrapped. I then paid for the replacement head to be fitted, including all costs. Not a part of it. All the labour charges. And didn't advertise the fact. Until now.

The other warranty claim was for a member on here, who returned it to AN because, get this, "he didn't like the look of the threads". I told Andover that they could keep it and sell it to somebody else who WOULD like the look of the threads" or send it back to me for a credit because I couldn't say when I would have a replacement. I never saw the head again, so, I imagine they onsold it without any issues as I haven't received a claim on it.

When it hit this forum, I was crucified by some over a non issue. So, when you're done with your triple and quadruple standards...........

At this point, the attempt to gain some sort of satisfaction over this has become too costly, both mentally emotionally and in time. I am withdrawing from this disaster and will now only deal with Joe. Also, anything that comes of this will be "commercial in confidence", to quote a certain well known company.

Then, you can all pursue your own claims because I don't care anymore.
 
This is a very confusing thread.

We have people who act like experts giving general opinions. We have actual experts giving expert opinions. We have wrenchers giving opinions. And we have people who are wanting information asking questions. And we have people like myself who are not quite sure which is which.

I think some of the confusion is from the fact that part of the crew here is wanting to discuss cam wear in general. Some posters want to use Fullauto's situation to argue their own beliefs on cams. And some of the information here is actually regarding specific cam shape, wear and material choice. And again it isn't always easy to separate these items.

And may I ask, Madnorton, who are you and what role do you play in this?

It helps us laypersons sort things out if we can understand the motivations of the poster.

Russ
 
Last edited:
"Madnorton" is our technical buyer Ashley- as he disclosed above without giving his name- whom I respect for the sterling work he has done for our product quality since he started with us about three years ago.
Having ridden Commandos for many years and, thus, having first-hand experience, he has tackled issues with parts many of which go back to production times, when cost and urgency of supply for production were of paramount importance and led to compromises we have learnt to live with ever since. Well, we don't have to any more!

We strive to always supply the best possible quality of Norton parts. Taking our long-proven camshafts off the market for the time being was solely a safety measure costing us currently a lot of sales (and putting twenty thousand Pounds worth of stock into quarantine to boot) that we decided to take until we are 100% sure there is nothing wrong with them. We believe there is not, but we want to be sure.

The issues Ken had with his valve train we think has had other causes that we are happy to discuss with him. Enough said.

Joe/Andover Norton
 
Russ,

I work for Andover Norton, it is my desk that the parts from Australia landed on. As my boss above points out, Ken's cam failed 2 chemistry tests, frustratingly, one cam taken randomly from stock passed, and he wants to establish why like any good boss would. It is my job to visit the supplier, present the facts and ask the awkward questions, worded so yes or no as answers are not possible.

You or anyone else are more than welcome to contact me via here or ring / email me at work, I am quite approachable as many worldwide will confirm. If I can't answer your query I will explain why. The open day is the 28th July, feel free to come along and you can see what we do, talk to us and get an appreciation of what else goes on behind the scenes.

And no, I am not open to bribes, that has been tried when I first started at Andover Norton - those that asked were politely let down.
 
I thought it was only Canadians who are obliged to be polite with those who propose criminal schemes? :rolleyes:

But the code phrase "commercial in confidence" has me worried. Does it imply the rest of us plebes will probably not learn the "outcome", or the experts' consensus, assuming there is one eventually?
 
Madnorton, thank you for the introduction. Might I respectfully ask that you fill out your member profile so that others here can properly identify your position.

Fullauto, I have always appreciated your candid and practical approach to things Commando. I hope you find a resolution to this quest.

Wish that I had some answers for any of this but I don't.

Good luck gentlemen,
Russ
 
And one request...

Can we verify whether or not new followers are indeed exactly as the old ones? It does seem a good question.
 
Not everyone involved has had a chance to answer, we have identified a problem with their chemistry, they have been made aware and need to answer. Had we waited until they have established what went wrong and if the mix, despite being not to their specification, is fit for purpose, then it could be another 5 or 6 weeks. Another 5 or 6 weeks of AN getting negative press when actually there is something going behind the scenes.
And a big thanks to all those that have let me know about their cams, some still in use with over 50K on them, it has helped immensely. Even an original steel case hardened cam was given to me today, that was failing in places other than the lobes which were looking good. Frustratingly, and strangely, the intel gap I have is our AN standard cams between 2002 and 2012, and PW3's from around 2000 - 2015 do you still have it fitted, when did you get it, mileage etc would be helpful, if it is sat under your bench, complete or in bits, then a photo would help me. This may cover a period of churn, where bikes are sold or passed on, the new owners not really knowing anything about the history of the bike, my timeline of this period really does need filling in.
As for those who tried to bribe me, I still use them, on better terms now all round, they dropped their guard when they tried and I refused giving me the upper hand, so I asked why, listened and came up with a proposal they could not refuse along the lines of if I win you win. Seems like the Canadians need lessons, being polite is one thing, kindly taking advantage of someone when they have played all their cards is a skill, you then have control - lots of control, for minimal effort.
 
rvich said:
This is a very confusing thread.

We have people who act like experts giving general opinions. We have actual experts giving expert opinions. We have wrenchers giving opinions. And we have people who are wanting information asking questions. And we have people like myself who are not quite sure which is which.

I think some of the confusion is from the fact that part of the crew here is wanting to discuss cam wear in general. Some posters want to use Fullauto's situation to argue their own beliefs on cams. And some of the information here is actually regarding specific cam shape, wear and material choice. And again it isn't always easy to separate these items.

And may I ask, Madnorton, who are you and what role do you play in this?

It helps us laypersons sort things out if we can understand the motivations of the poster.

Russ
Click to expand...

But you could say this about almost any thread on here -its what makes it a great web site.
 
Has there been any developments /conclusions on this thread?
 
Its all mentioned in the latest AN news letter. (email)
 
Having just read the newletter, may I post a quote that should be written on the soul of everyone with an old bike especially those of us of
a certain age:
<The way to build a Commando engine as I did in my university days, i.e. to take items out of the bag and put them together as per parts diagram is not good enough by far>

Joe, no truer words were ever spoken.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top