One of these days I'll find someone who works with finite element analysis and will run a standard Commando chassis, then one of my monoshock conversions, side-by-side.
There is virtually NO DIFFERENCE in the way the isolastics are loaded on my monoshock bikes, and the monoshock design MIGHT slightly better (across the range of motion) with the higher, more forward upper anchor point of the single shock at the main tube. (dosn't ANYONE else wonder why all the modern bikes went that way?)
I ran this stuff by my Stuctural/Architectural/Mechanical engineer brother, my Mechanical/Electrical engineer brother, and my Structural engineer uncle, and all agreed that the design was sound (actually, they all agreed it was OVERDESIGNED for the loads imposed). I also explained to one of my brothers and my uncle the basics of the isolastic system; the other brother is a fellow Nortonphile (although he's a classic Triumph Bonneville owner/rider) and understands it completely. So, that WAS taken into consideration.
Sadly, I don't think it will be let go of 'till I produce a hard copy of a duly certified engineering design analysis report...
...just realized i may need to also have weld integrity x-ray analysis done as part of the test's basis, that might take a bit longer...