As a long time collector of motorcycles I would say every bike has its place. Yes modern bikes are superior. Yes they are pretty much trouble free. However, most modern bikes lack the character you find in vintage iron. When the speedo says 100 MPH on an old Norton you feel like you are doing a hundred miles per hour! This is not so true on modern machines. There is some self-satisfaction on wrenching on your own bike and having it road worthy. It’s a type of relationship that is lost on modern bikes. Last time I checked a hobby is something you do for fun. And if buying parts and fixing up old bikes makes you happy I say go for it!Larso1 said:I guess I 'm just getting old but, I mean, I've owned my 74' 850 Roadster since 1974 ( it was 6 months old when I bought it from Harry's Motors in Denver, with 4,500 miles on the clock). I've come to the realization that it is a constant source of repairs, adjustments, fettling, upgrading, for what? I mean, your standard Japanese bike of smaller cc's outperforms it in every way, at a cheaper cost, and reliably. As an example, there are endless posts here about various inlet port sizes flowing better than others (RH4 vs RH10 vs ad infinitum). And for what? An increase of 4 or 5 HP over a couple thousand rpm rev band? I mean, really, you can go out and buy a reliable '09 Yamaha VMax for $9K and get 200 HP at the crank. Sure it's heavier and classified as a "power cruiser," but you all know what I'm talking about. You pay what for a Fullauto head...$2,500.?? How many HP per US$100 does that get you? There are a lot of used bikes available for under $5k that can outperform the Commando in every way (except maybe in low end torque due to shorter stroke) and be many times more reliable. It's like we're all living in the past, a Baby Boomer thing. Am I crazy here? Am I missing something obvious? I can see maybe modifying for special classic MC race events where you're competing against other old classic bikes, but other than racing... I don't get it. How many here race their bike in classic bike events? Sorry to be a buzz kill but just being honest, and I guess I'm burned out after putting "my all" into the bike doing a restoration... twice!
Bill
Torontonian said:Nortons are really neat curiousitys. Many here have other more high performance vehicles. I focus on reliability issues myself.
RennieK said:Sorry, you guys just missed the boat. You had to have gotten your Norton before 1973 to understand.
acotrel said:I'm not being critical, however I've watched this video quite a few times. Although depth perception is tricky, I think on average that I would be hard on the gas coming out of corners about 20 feet earlier. The bike in the video is extremely quick however appears to have a tendency to run wide rather than tighten up its line in the corners. It seems to be more 'point and squirt' than my bike.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QV0wEvhqb5Q
xbacksideslider said:Larso1 - welcome; great post, stirred the pot.
I have four MCs, two of them far quicker and faster than my Commando and the fourth is a dirt bike, so that makes the Commando the slowest of my street bikes. Still, my favorite is the Norton. And, as for my riding companions, she's their favorite too. They smile when I show up on the Norton instead of the GSXR or the CBR. Why? because an old man on that old bike just isn't supposed keep up; she always surprises, young guys think you have to have 150 horses, sleek plastic and 7 inch wide tires . . . . .