1974 NORTON COMMANDO 750 SHORT STROKE on EBAY (2015)
- Thread starter snortonNorton
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2011
- Messages
- 358
L.A.B. said:
Based on the collective knowledge thus far, it appears likely a 1972 (ish) bike with a factory short stroke motor assembled and numbered most probably in the USA.
A lovely and unique bike well presented. Whether it is the "Missing Link" time will tell.
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2004
- Messages
- 20,415
Danno said:
A Commando with serial number in the 207xxx range would normally be expected to have been manufactured around mid-'72.
Danno said:
Normal "850" (or 750 short-stroke) cylinder barrels by the looks of it, so seen from early 1973.
http://www.classicbike.biz/Norton/Broch ... LineUp.pdf
Serial number says 72,
and the seller says 74.
Does anyone else see a problem here ?
so what is this statement based on ?
Be interesting to know what the NOC/factory records say about this 207000 number.
You'd think that that would have been checked on, and shown, for proof the sale bike was genuine.
and the seller says 74.
Does anyone else see a problem here ?
The few pics of the proposed short stroke road model that were shown didn't say 'short stroke',Danno said:
so what is this statement based on ?
Be interesting to know what the NOC/factory records say about this 207000 number.
You'd think that that would have been checked on, and shown, for proof the sale bike was genuine.
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2010
- Messages
- 4,195
Rohan said:
I was referring to differences between it and a stock '74. I'm not so naive to think this couldn't possibly be a hodge-podge of parts. I myself have a '71 with '75 motor, brakes and isos. However, I've never represented it as otherwise. According to LAB, the ad was '73 vintage, so that pic proves nothing in relation to a possible '74 short-stroke. I do however, wonder why everyone takes the VIN as creedence and everything else as smoke and mirrors. You can see the bike, but you can't see the VIN plate. Any chance the number could be a misprint or purposely falsified? The guy's holding out for more than the $14K+ that's been offered, so someone besides himself thinks it's worth high dollars for some reason. Maybe the whole bid process was staged to get someone to lay out major bucks for a fake? I mean, as long as you're going to be skeptical, why hold back? And if he wanted to do a fake, blank VIN plates are readily available.
He says he doesn't know the history, so assuming the 'faking' was done somewhere way back in the past,
he is simply selling it in good faith - as the saying goes.
Since its been restored, extensively ? recently, all traces of what it may have looked like have gone.
It seems to have acquired the twin pinstripes of the 850 models too.
And, 1973 was the year of the short stroke, so why would the factory wait until 1974 to produce an oddball of a bike,
using 1972 numbers.
As said earlier, the factory records of this would be interesting to see quoted.
he is simply selling it in good faith - as the saying goes.
Since its been restored, extensively ? recently, all traces of what it may have looked like have gone.
It seems to have acquired the twin pinstripes of the 850 models too.
And, 1973 was the year of the short stroke, so why would the factory wait until 1974 to produce an oddball of a bike,
using 1972 numbers.
As said earlier, the factory records of this would be interesting to see quoted.
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2013
- Messages
- 140
I'd say it looks as if someone is getting a beautiful well sorted bike
built by a man who's built beautiful Nortons for decades. In the end
the only opinion that will matter is whomever the highest bidder is.
I personally am not a purist, so I find a few of Ron's other bikes
more appealing. But If given the chance to have one of his "Big Nortons"
I would do it in a Heartbeat.
built by a man who's built beautiful Nortons for decades. In the end
the only opinion that will matter is whomever the highest bidder is.
I personally am not a purist, so I find a few of Ron's other bikes
more appealing. But If given the chance to have one of his "Big Nortons"
I would do it in a Heartbeat.
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2014
- Messages
- 103
Didn't sell. Ended at $14,600 reserve not met.
A factory built motor is an entirely different deal to a factory built bike.
Rewriting Norton history, selling something that was never made, and gaining a fistfull of $$ as well.
Rewriting Norton history, selling something that was never made, and gaining a fistfull of $$ as well.
If it had been sold on that basis, that is entirely a different matter ?Nortiboy said:
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2010
- Messages
- 673
207000 left the factory on 25th July 1972 as a black Roadster. Nothing short stroke about it. Indeed the short strokes I have seen so far and that I have found in our (incomplete) recordes are 235xxx- I agree with L.A.B. there. That engine went into that frame somewhere outside the factory or was modified to short stroke. This is possible: There was an (internal, for factory use) service sheet about converting shortstrokes back to standart spec. I suppose because there was no demand for shortstrokes.
Joe/Andover Norton
Not according to my memory- the 850 look barrels came into the market in the 1980s as a reproduction from outside the factory. The factory didn't offer barrels as a spare at that time. We later bought the tooling which had not been used for a number of years and after overhaul and modification have since produced 750 and 850 barrels from it. The Peter Willams Monocoque replicas have our barrels (and a lot of other parts, naturally).
Joe/Andover Norton
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2010
- Messages
- 4,195
Like anything else, it's worth as much as some damn fool will pay for it. One only has to look at the prices of classic late-sixties muscle cars to know that. In this case, some damn fool thought it was worth $14,600 but the current owner thinks it's worth more. Feigning ignorance is no excuse for misrepresentation. When you own something of great (relative) value, most folks would have done their homework and known EXACTLY what it was before even trying to pawn it off as something else. Buyer beware.
from what joe has stated it by all rights should be a 72 year bike, but the seller has it as a 74. it also has the 73/74 style large tail light and longer black instrument holders. it sure looks like some one is trying to pull the wool over an unsuspecting buyer.
ZFD said:
L.A.B. said:
At least the crank case numbers would suggest this. How relative is that, eh. What about the frame number, or the gearbox numbers? Maybe the date mentioned is of the first registration. And how much do numbers really matter with such machines? Are all the CNW bike all numbers matching, and does it make them less valuable if their not.
I am sure it's a bitsa, albeit the nicest bitsa I have seen. I have no doubt that it is worth what he wants for it. I feel that this bike didn't start out this way but as with CNW creation, it is what it is and that's not bad.
- Status
