Billet Crankshaft

baz said:

Don't forget the front disc had to be tamed down with a larger master cylinder for the American market
And the ISOs and swinging arm pivot pin must be in fine fettle to handle really well
I've never ridden a p11 so I can't compare but a commando will sit at 90+ mph for mile after mile dead smooth
That's one of the attractions for me
The effortless miles they can eat up

Click to expand...

Hmm...tamed my arse!!

AP Lockheed were frankly stupid when it came to master cylinder bore, christ knows why Norton went with their ideas!

AP did not supply a cylinder suitable for a single disc, and really they don't now in their classic replica range. AP really only made a master suitable for twin discs (5/8" or 15.8mm bore).

It wasn't just the Norton set up that suffered. I bought a Rickman chassis new in late '75, it had AP Lockheed brakes front and rear as of course Rickman pioneered these brakes in 1966.

The force needed to stop the thing was huge, the feel was like trying to squeeze hardwood. Yes, it stopped better than my Fastback Commando, but the bike did weigh a lot less and it did have race tyres.

Unfortunately, at the time I didn't know a smaller master would have changed things completely....I do now and with a 12.7mm (1/2") bore master the same brake design with modern SBS pads is really great., less force, more feel and better stopping overall.

Schwany said:

........ I bought a '87 VFR right around the same time I bought it and for me the Honda made more sense to hold onto for cruising and the mountains.....

Click to expand...

I had a '96 VFR750...damn right that bike made more sense, it made more sense than most bikes I have owned and most bikes ever made.

Great bike, but deep down, no soul!

Traded it for a '96 GSXR750SRAD, now that bike made no sense at all....none whatsoever....loved it!

Only rode it on the road about 3 times, just booked track day days all summer!

SteveA said:

Hmm...tamed my arse!!

AP Lockheed were frankly stupid when it came to master cylinder bore, christ knows why Norton went with their ideas!

AP did not supply a cylinder suitable for a single disc, and really they don't now in their classic replica range. AP really only made a master suitable for twin discs (5/8" or 15.8mm bore).

It wasn't just the Norton set up that suffered. I bought a Rickman chassis new in late '75, it had AP Lockheed brakes front and rear as of course Rickman pioneered these brakes in 1966.

The force needed to stop the thing was huge, the feel was like trying to squeeze hardwood. Yes, it stopped better than my Fastback Commando, but the bike did weigh a lot less and it did have race tyres.

Unfortunately, at the time I didn't know a smaller master would have changed things completely....I do now and with a 12.7mm (1/2") bore master the same brake design with modern SBS pads is really great., less force, more feel and better stopping overall.

Click to expand...

I can only tell you what I have read
That Norton deliberately used a larger master cylinder when they went to production

SteveA said:

I had a '96 VFR750...damn right that bike made more sense, it made more sense than most bikes I have owned and most bikes ever made.

Great bike, but deep down, no soul!

Traded it for a '96 GSXR750SRAD, now that bike made no sense at all....none whatsoever....loved it!

Only rode it on the rode about 3 times, just booked track day days all summer!

Click to expand...

If Honda had done the decent thing & fitted the VFR 750 F with the same 360deg. crank as the VFR 750 R (RC30), it would have been one of the best road bikes ever with lots of soul, & also sounded fab. But they are bland with, all the character of a refrigerator.

SteveA said:

I had a '96 VFR750...damn right that bike made more sense, it made more sense than most bikes I have owned and most bikes ever made.

Great bike, but deep down, no soul!

Traded it for a '96 GSXR750SRAD, now that bike made no sense at all....none whatsoever....loved it!

Only rode it on the rode about 3 times, just booked track day days all summer!

Click to expand...

I've had a bunch of bikes that worked. I don't associate not having to tinker and listen to every moving part in the bike with having no soul though. Norton is just different and mine happens to be a little needy and likes attention. Maybe like a super model, but a low HP one.

baz said:

I can only tell you what I have read
That Norton deliberately used a larger master cylinder when they went to production

Click to expand...

I have read that while implementing the front disc, the goal was to have the same effort as the previous drum brake. I converted my '71 to disc with a retro kit from Norton and appreciated the fade free braking, but the effort was higher than the previous cable operated drum.

SteveA said:

Hmm...tamed my arse!!

AP Lockheed were frankly stupid when it came to master cylinder bore, christ knows why Norton went with their ideas!

AP did not supply a cylinder suitable for a single disc, and really they don't now in their classic replica range. AP really only made a master suitable for twin discs (5/8" or 15.8mm bore).

It wasn't just the Norton set up that suffered. I bought a Rickman chassis new in late '75, it had AP Lockheed brakes front and rear as of course Rickman pioneered these brakes in 1966.

The force needed to stop the thing was huge, the feel was like trying to squeeze hardwood. Yes, it stopped better than my Fastback Commando, but the bike did weigh a lot less and it did have race tyres.

Unfortunately, at the time I didn't know a smaller master would have changed things completely....I do now and with a 12.7mm (1/2") bore master the same brake design with modern SBS pads is really great., less force, more feel and better stopping overall.

Click to expand...

I used the Lockheed master cylinder with one caliper and a chromium plated Suzuki disc. It was hopeless. Then I used the same master cylinder with two Lockheed callipers and two high speed steel Suzuki discs. I tried carbon racing pads in the callipers. Asbestos pads work much better. My front brake works extremely well - I operate it with my fore-finger. And for racing, it needs to be like that. A drum brake can work just as well but if it does, it becomes extremely dangerous. Drum brakes heat up and change while you are using them. I had several high speed crashes due to that.

I had to laugh. I copped a dislocated collar bone when a so-called friend of mine popped in front of my drum-braked Triton and grabbed a handful of disc, during a club race. So I sold the bike back to my old mate who had built the bike in the 1950s. I told him nothing about it. A minute later I got a phone-call from him asking me what linings were in the front brake. He must have really shit himself when he first rode the bike and used the brake. I rode the bike again about a year later. It was back on petrol and almost sane, but still went sideways in a corner as I accelerated.
Nobody needs that sort of idiocy.

the standard norton caliper works Ok with two AP classic calipers and 14 inch modern discs , but still nothing like the twin discs on the 961... time moves on.

jan nelder said:

the standard norton caliper works Ok with two AP classic calipers and 14 inch modern discs , but still nothing like the twin discs on the 961... time moves on.

Click to expand...

Simple mechanics/hydraulics, bigger diameter disc less force required to stop, given caliper diameter and master cylinder diameter, brake lever ratio, but there are also centrifugal forces to consider with those big discs that affect handling, a good competent racer uses front and rear braking to assist steer in and out of corners, front brake at speed stands the bike up rear brake pulls the bike down in the corners, so a combination of both.
14" on a Norton seems extreme to me?
Time does move on, but mechanics of machines stays put, materials may change and do so.
Burgs

jan nelder said:

the standard norton caliper works Ok with two AP classic calipers and 14 inch modern discs , but still nothing like the twin discs on the 961... time moves on.

Click to expand...

Time does move on
I can remember thinking at the time the Norton Lockheed wasn't too bad compared to the single disc on the contemporary cb750 or the ATE single disc on a BMW boxer for example
The t140 front brake was way better and still worked in the wet (to a degree)
All of my classic bikes have uprated front brakes these days

IMHO Norton brakes can be improved with a bit of tweaking.

Did someone mention ‘extreme’ ?

I think disc pads will always be a problem for Commandos. I use very old asbestos-based pads which work very well, but modern pads probably do not use asbestos. When I tried the carbon race pads, I did not seem to get them hot enough.
However even in the worst situation, discs are always better than drums. The front brake on my Triton 500 stopped the bike as well as the double discs on my Seeley 850. But with the Triton 500, I never knew when I was going to get launched. I rode at Phillip Island a couple of times - as you go down the front straight and turn towards Southern Loop, - it does not matter what bike you are on, you are going like buggery, and that is where you brake. If a drum brake gets hot, it usually changes. It can fade, or the leading edge of the shoes can get sticky. Either way, you are in the shit. Discs don't usually do any of that bullshit.
I sold my Triton 500 because I could not stand the anxiety. My Seeley 850 does none of that. It is just as bloody good ride.
The sort of power delivery and the brakes you have, are extremely important when you ride at high speed. If the power curve has a bump in it, it is difficult to be smooth enough, - and you can only go as fast as you can brake.
Nigel, when you go for max power, the way it is usually delivered is often not smooth. A bike with less power but smooth delievery, can be much faster in corners. So the amounts of corners and straights on a race circuit changes how well your bike can do. A high powered bike is better at Phillip Island but worse at Winton Raceway and Mount Gambier and Broadford. With many bikes, you need to get them upright and pointed before you give them the berries.
Steering geometry is extremely important. Many guys ride converted road bikes which have neutral steering when they need some over-steer, when the motor is gassed. If you gas a road bike in a corner, it will usually run wide.

Fast Eddie said:

IMHO Norton brakes can be improved with a bit of tweaking.

Did someone mention ‘extreme’ ?

View attachment 103077

Click to expand...

OK, spill it.
What shop is that?

MichaelB said:

OK, spill it.
What shop is that?

Click to expand...

Minnovation Racing

Fast Eddie said:

Minnovation Racing

Click to expand...

I thought it was your shop with a Minnovation banner on the wall last time I saw an image of it.

I'd like to have that press, and naturally your front-end hardware laying there.

When is the big reveal going to take place?

Is there anyone on this forum who as used Andy Molnar's flywheel ? When I read about it on his website, it mentioned the balance factor was correct for normal Commandos. But it did not actually say what balance factor is offered. If it is balanced the same as a normal Commando, it is not designed for high revs. However if the balance factor is near 70%, it would be great.

MichaelB said:

OK, spill it.
What shop is that?

Click to expand...

My Seeley 850 has brakes which are more than adequate for racing. One finger is enough to stand the bike on it's head. The bike does not have 200 BHP, and it is light. The main thing is the type of disc pads and the disc material. Some do not work well. Never use cast iron discs, if they explode you might become dead.

BF numbers are mentioned for a complete Molnar crank. 52% Norton twin in ISO frame. 75% Norton twin in a solid mount frame. You can request whatever you want if you buy a complete crank. I am not familiar with just ordering the flywheel. He does respond to email if you want information you can't find.

I have not installed his crank yet. I've got all the parts to get started on the build, but I'm in the procrastination overthinking stage, that tends to last way too long. I don't enjoy the tear down of a good running motor part as much as the clean build part, so I put it off. Plus, I don't have a nice table lift to put the bike on. I have many excuses. It'll be done by the time the weather is better and the days longer.

Get you some:

Time to go into the garage and procrastinate some more.