Commando Seeley vs Commando Manx

I’ve ridden quite a few Manx framed concoctions, Tritons, Nourish engined, etc. and have always been generally impressed.

I’ve never ridden a Seeley though.

My preference leans slightly more to the Manx chassis partly cos I like the traditional Manx design / style and partly because I’m not exactly a small bloke, and I suspect the biggish chassis, stretch to the bars, and slightly bigger distance between seat and foot pegs of a Manx chassis might suit me better.

Has anyone ridden both chassis in an otherwise similarly set up package (meaning same kind of engine, similar quality suspension, etc)?

I’d be interested in the learned opinions of those who have.

Your assesment is pretty much spot on with regards to size of rider. If one is larger, one needs to be limber to properly pack onto a Seeley. I am six foot tall, no longer physically young, and weigh in at over 1/10th of a ton (a long ton). I was challenged a few seasons ago with a fairly low seat on a Seeley; we increased the seat pad thickness trackside by only 3/4" inch and man what a difference that made to rider comfort, mobility and lap times. One the Featherbed I could always stretch out, not so on the Seeley. I still favor the Seeley for some reason I cannot put my finger on.

You seem to confirm my hypothesis there!

What about handling, any real difference between the two? My second hypothesis is that there’s probably nothing between two equally well prepared examples. And that it’s more down to rider preference and, as you already alluded to, rider comfort equalling better handling.

Am I right?

While at Philip Island, Kenny Cummings tried to coax me onto his Seeley Matchless G50. I'm a big framed bloke and it didn't look feasible to me. It must have looked like a kangaroo shagging a marble.

If I had my choice, I would tend towards a Seeley over a Featherbed but I've never ridden a true Manx Norton race frame prepared to anywhere near that of the Seeley's I have ridden. The Seeley is so steady in a turn and the set up to turn in and execution of the turn is so fast. Kenny Cummings spent more time with his Featherbed racer that I think he would be in a better position to weigh in on this. From a pragmatic standpoint, Featherbeds are relatively available whereas Seeleys are not. In my opinion, from an engineering design standpoint, the Seeley Mk2s have the Norton Manxs frames beat, hands down. The steering head is better supported on a Seeley Mk2 and again, in my opinion, the Seeley frame loop is the predecessor to most all modern frame designs.

Dances with Shrapnel said:

.....From a pragmatic standpoint, Featherbeds are relatively available whereas Seeleys are not.....

Click to expand...

Not sure I totally agree here, if we are talking lightweight tubing and bronze welded....you can get either made for you these days

Personally whenever I have sat on a featherbed I found it feeling too short for me, but then again, I ride a Rickman! Which I think suits the larger guy better, but doesn't turn with as little effort as a Seeley....

Ah ha! Two foam pads. Is that a Mk3. Just my limited experience on what’s more readily available. Maybe there are more Seeleys than true Manx Featherbeds.

Dances with Shrapnel said:

Ah ha! Two foam pads. Is that a Mk3. Just my limited experience on what’s more readily available. Maybe there are more Seeleys than true Manx Featherbeds.

Click to expand...

Actually it is a Mk IV made by John Caffrey with approval from Colin Seeley. Frame was made in the '80s I think......

Most Manx featherbeds these days are replicaa. Easy enough to buy a complete new bike on demand, choice of suppliers. Today there are more and more Seeley replicas being made, some excellent Roger Titchmarsh ones, and from other sources some good ones, and some not so good.....probably one of the easiest things to get hold of today, but the right quality isn't cheap.

A lot are used on G50s, you can get off the shelf brand new engines for those just as you can for a Manx....some Seeley reps are made for Norton twins, some for Nourish twin motors (though we know what has happend to Nourish) and several 2 strokey things like Suzuki T500s and Yamsels. Personally I find Seeley replicas very over represented in classic racing, even if I understand the appeal, they are excellent designs, which as you rightly suggest, a lot of other designs were developed from.

But then again, I am one of the few people racing an original '70s frame, a Rickman with the engine mounted as Rickman intended not a la Commando, and Oil in Frame! I am also 64 so this isn't going to be the case for much longer.....

Hi Nige

Dances,Steve.

Forgot about the garden kneeler foam pads.

Nige £1400 for a MK2 Seeley frame, cash or cheque please send a deposit as soon as possible as race entrees are due soon. I am at Oulton Park & Donington, Lydden. Come & see me & have a ride. Dances, Steve is on my MK4. The problem on the Seeley is the bend in the knee, I am 6ft 2" & I run with a bit of foam on the seat. One day I will get a decent seat made lol. I have no problems. You can alter that angle by raising the seat & make things more comfortable. Also you can drop the pegs a fair bit as well.
I think for comfort the Rickman may well be best for a big guy. However it is all down to pegs & seat. My problem is hanging on to the bars during heavy braking, if I raise my seat it makes it worse.
All the best Chris

I have ridden 500cc and 650cc Tritons, and a 1961 30M Manx. I now ride a Seeley 850 . The Manx was streets ahead of both Tritons. The Seeley is better than the Manx. The differences are as follows :
My 500cc Triton was very vague in corners, so I moved the motor forward until mounts touched, then it was better. The 650 Triton was faster, but the motor was still back that inch, so it felt airey in corners. When I rode the Manx, I found out why the A graders loved them so much. If you get offline coming out of a corner, you just give it more stick while it is cranked over and it will oversteer slightly and bring you back towards where you want to go. The feeling is very positive and confidence inspiring. On the Manx, I would have been a few seconds a lap faster than on my 500cc Triumph, however my Triumph was about 5 MPH faster in a straight line. The 650 Triton was miles faster than my 500cc Triton, but I was always right up with the guy who raced the 650, in most of my races. I would have beaten him with the Manx on a short circuit.
The Seeley 850 is a whole different ball game. The way I have it set up, if you gas it hard while cranked over in a corner, it over-steers much more than a Manx. So you are on the gas miles earlier in corners, than most other guys. It is very difficult to beat that on a tight circuit.
With the Seeley, the footrests are further back and higher, so you don't ground them. It means the first few laps on the bike are painful until your tendons stretch. After 5 laps on any day, we are always up to 95% of race speed. With the Tritons, I always seemed to be bashing my elbows and knees. I think a Commando engine in a featherbed frame might be OK because of the lean on the engine, but I'd always buy a Seeley frame in preference to a featherbed. A Seeley 750 should make any Triton look stupid.
I suggest that if any of you guys have never ridden an original short stroke 500cc Manx with the 19 inch wheels, you should pay somebody to let you ride one - they are the benchmark for good handling. There are better handling bikes, but they were the first. Once you have had that experience, you will know what handling is about.
Riding Kenny Cummins' Seeley G50 would be a real buzz. - I could do some damage with that !

Any problems with the head steady, I have a Mk4 from the 70's I am putting a Dommi engine in, at the cardboard and scissors stage at the moment, but I can see it causing structural problems if not careful......Norton vibes!

My MK3 Seeley frame was actually intended for the Commando engine, so there are two bosses on the inside of the upper frame tubes. I used four rose joints with two short tubes to hold the head back. The attachment of the two forward rose joints to the head is by two shoulder Unbrakos in shear. That way, the vibes can be sideways without doing destruction. With the Mk3, there is usually a ladder from the frame to the motor, which often breaks. I use a piece of curved chrome-moly pushbike tube, adequately gusseted with the top mount offset a bit. I can get head off the motor without pulling the whole thing out of the frame.

If you are doing the cardboard and scissors thing, it is important to keep the motor forward as much as possible - and the gearbox mainshaft centre slightly lower than the line between the rear sprocket and pivot centres. It is really nice to know that guys are still building Seeley Commandos. I love mine, it is a serious bit of motorcycle. I just wish I could afford to ride it more often.

Hi Steve's

My MK4 front tubes are a bolt up ladder. The headsteady has two plates that bolt to the outside of the ladder mounts on the frame. Most frames I see now have two bosses brazed on the top rails to mount the headsteady to. I ran my MK3 without the clamp on down tubes but with a headsteady & it cracked the top tubes of the frame. The frame however was a lightweight one built for a g50. I was told not to run it without the clamp on down tubes! The builder of Ken Redferns bike told me they never had this problem with any engine size until they ran an 850. Dave Watson's MK3 ran a little strip of metal for a headsteady without problems. Seems engine torque does the damage, you should be fine.

All the best Chris

Acotrel and Chris thanks. The frame has the two bosses you refer to with rubber inserts and 3/8th bushes. I going to try and put a (I think) Hemmings style Isolastic between the bushes connected to the head via a bracket.
The frame had the (clamp on) down tubes at some point from witness marks on paintwork but I am going to run it without at least initially.
Will keep an eye on engine and mainshaft position.

I was under the impression that only the Mk3 Seeley had the bolt-in ladder in place of front down tubes. I thought the Mk4 has four tubes going from above and below the centre bracket to the head-stock. And that on the MK 2 the tubes did similar, but crossed over. I know a guy who rode a MK3 Seeley with the ladder missing - said the bike felt as though it was wandering. The Mk3 is probably lighter than the other two. My Mk3 is genuine by Colin Seeley, not a copy. With my bike, the cylinder head cannot move backwards and forwards in reaction to the torque. It is restrained in that direction. However it is possible for the frame to spring open slightly if the piece of springy tube which is in place of the ladder straightens. It would only happen if you jumped the bike over a rise in the track. It means the welds in other places would not break.
I have only ever had frames break due to flex causing metal fatigue. And that was not with chrome-moly as used in the Seeley frames. There has to be some spring in them or they will probably break, but too much is bad.

acotrel said:

...... I thought the Mk4 has four tubes going from above and below the centre bracket to the head-stock. .........

Click to expand...

Just look at the picture of Chris's MKIV I provided and you will see the bolted in ladder section....

Back in the '70s I chose to build a Rickman because for me it was going to be a one shot, and every Seeley Commando frame I had looked at (Mainly MKIIIs) had a crack in it somewhere around the swinging arm pivot/crossbrace.....

SteveA said:

View attachment 4820

Click to expand...

Is this the Mk4 you mean ? It looks like an attempt at copying a MK3. The tubes from the steering head to the pivot are not like that on the Mk3. You might be right, but I always thought the only frame with the ladder was the Mk3. The frame in the photo is pretty ugly.

Looking at this, if it is correct - the Mk4 is the same as the MK3 except the tubes don't cross over above the motor. - It makes sense, because I was offered a MK3 7 R which had been crashed into a tyre wall. The frame was bent at the bit where the tubes cross over. So the next frame was probably made to avoid that happening. I think the frame that Kenny Cummins uses is the MK2 which has the tubes right around the motor. With the Mk3, the motor might be able to be slightly further forward - might be a good thing ?

https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/19766/lot/367/?category=list