is it a combat (2015)

pete.v said:

gortnipper said:

Come on. A Combat is a model produced a certain year, with certain features and marketed with a label. If someone owns one, rectifies certain defects and makes some mods, is it still a Combat? Of course. If someone builds one to spec is it a Combat model? No, it is simply built to the spec.

Click to expand...

You come on. A bastardized head, carbs, cam and a disc brake. That's It. You speak of spec in this instance as if it had technical significance. It is truly amazing how the mystique of this boondoggle and company embarrassment lives on.

Click to expand...

I write specs all the time. A spec can be good, bad, great, bland...written for technical significance or for marketing...

I'm in the camp that thinks the seller is misrepresenting the bike (perhaps unwittingly, not everyone is well versed in Commando history and it does have a head stamped with a 'C'). The fact is that a real Combat model does have a bit of a cache and might command a higher price than a standard bike even with Combat modifications. I have a 1972 750 which I put a Combat head, 4S cam and some other trick bits that means it will be a higher spec than a Combat when I am finished, but it will NEVER be a Combat.

Regarding date of manufacture versus date of first registration, it is quite common for the two not to match up, particularly when the bikes were destined for overseas markets, furthermore by 1973 the British factories were very much on the decline in the face of the new wave of Japanese superbikes and many dealers were lumbered with old stock for a number of years, resulting in some very good deals on new bikes that were almost considered obsolete by then - Oh, for a time machine and a couple of thousand bucks in the back pocket!

Hi Dart,
In any case the tacho and speed are of 1968/69 fastback, not the 1973.
Ciao
Piero

With an engine number 220947 it is not a combat. I own a 73 750 mark V with an engine no 2207xx which is not a combat. Most Mark V's came with silver painted barrels, although many also came with the black barrels( probably leftover from combat manufacture). ''73's should have black instrument clusters.




Bazz

1970 Bonneville
1973 Commando Mark V
1979 BMW R100S
1993 Harley Dyna Wide Glide

gortnipper said:

Come on. A Combat is a model produced a certain year, with certain features and marketed with a label. If someone owns one, rectifies certain defects and makes some mods, is it still a Combat? Of course. If someone builds one to spec is it a Combat model? No, it is simply built to the spec.

Click to expand...

I totally agree.

It is a Combat ring-in.
I would call this a 'Fine Cotton' Combat.

Seems Combat 'experts' that don't own one either:
1. dress the standard ones up (as in this case) or
2. pretend that ordinary ones were somehow a 'higher' spec.
Ta.

I don't think all combats blew up ... lots did just not all ... I got mine with 3000+ miles it had sat for years after original owner ran into a fence ... the mechanic I got it from said he did top end ... checked bottom , all good that was in mid 80's ... I have been riding it for 11 years no problems with engine .... lots of other stuff ... it was built April 1972 serial # 207384 .... I was told it was Combat .... acts like a Combat ....fast and loud
Craig

Craig said:

I don't think all combats blew up ... lots did just not all ... I got mine with 3000+ miles it had sat for years after original owner ran into a fence ... the mechanic I got it from said he did top end ... checked bottom , all good that was in mid 80's ... I have been riding it for 11 years no problems with engine .... lots of other stuff ... it was built April 1972 serial # 207384 .... I was told it was Combat .... acts like a Combat ....fast and loud
Craig

Click to expand...

What sort of fuel do you use? How many miles on the clock now? Is it possible the compression was lowered when the top-end work was done? Just curious as to how one has lasted this long.

8000 + miles on the clock although speedo cable was broke for one season ... I always use high test which here, is listed as 91 ... another funny is my FG fuel tank came lined with a black coating ... it has held up too, all these years with no problems ... I think maybe I have had some good luck with this particular bike ... the guy I got it from said it was a good bike ... he is "gone" now now but he was telling the truth ... had it out yesterday after seasonal oil change and it ran like a champ again ... and no compression has not been altered ... as far as I know ... no hand starting this machine ...
Craig

I have an unmolested Combat Interstate. Red plate date of manufacture says Dec. 71. Serial 2026.. . Black Barrels. 932 Amals. Shaved head. Disk brakes. Interestingly it has a 3s cam. The bike ran flawlessly when I garaged her 20 years ago. I believe I ran leaded Sunoco high test gas in her back then. There is 23,000 miles on the clock. I never so much heard a rumble from the bottom end. Since I am the second owner I'm curious if he put super blends in it. There was 5000 miles on it when I bought her. Never drove her too hard. I am in the process of doing a restoration this summer. It will be interesting to see which crank bearings I find. If they are the original ball type then there is merit to other discussions that the ball bearings did work so long as one doesn't drive them too hard or slug them. And I did on a couple of occasions kick in that 3rd cylinder that Hobot says exists. Lol. Norton's are a one of a kind that's for sure, and I love mine. Safe riding everyone!.

Railroader said:

I have an unmolested Combat Interstate. Red plate date of manufacture says Dec. 71. Serial 2026.. . Black Barrels. 932 Amals. Shaved head. Disk brakes. Interestingly it has a 3s cam. The bike ran flawlessly when I garaged her 20 years ago. I believe I ran leaded Sunoco high test gas in her back then. There is 23,000 miles on the clock. I never so much heard a rumble from the bottom end. Since I am the second owner I'm curious if he put super blends in it. There was 5000 miles on it when I bought her. Never drove her too hard. I am in the process of doing a restoration this summer. It will be interesting to see which crank bearings I find. If they are the original ball type then there is merit to other discussions that the ball bearings did work so long as one doesn't drive them too hard or slug them. And I did on a couple of occasions kick in that 3rd cylinder that Hobot says exists. Lol. Norton's are a one of a kind that's for sure, and I love mine. Safe riding everyone!.

Click to expand...

I bought my Combat new in '72, serial 203***, and the main bearings failed at 4K miles so there's every chance that yours have been replaced. They didn't have ball type bearing originally, they were rollers but just not up to the job. If it does have a 3S cam then it's obviously been apart at some stage.

Ian

Nortoniggy said:

I bought my Combat new in '72, serial 203***, and the main bearings failed at 4K miles so there's every chance that yours have been replaced. They didn't have ball type bearing originally, they were rollers but just not up to the job. If it does have a 3S cam then it's obviously been apart at some stage.

Ian

Click to expand...

Now THAT'S the voice of experience. I know crank flex at higher revs caused the square-edged rollers to take all the stress on their ends leading to failure. The Superblend name refers to the radius on the ends of the rollers that allows them to handle the stress without failure.

Radiused rollers, one-piece forged cranks, thickened drive-side cases, all made the engine more reliable and more able to withstand the stresses of making more than the design's original 40 or so bhp.

Norton and distributors became highly allergic to Combats so dropped those features before the full model yr was up. If real Combat and more than 8000 miles on it, it had the original bearing changed to pre-non-SuperDuper *Almost* all flat rollers on both ends - as only race level builders understood to put ball bearing on TS which have no advantage over flat rollers or SuperDupers and wear faster - unless run above 6800 when crank jump roping and case sides flexing as 3rd 2S piston power kicked in. Realize real Combat owners were young and could take other similar displacement cycles up over the ton+ - even 3 cylinder 2smokes if WOT spun up into red line. For immature ignorant soft body small brain squids like me its the Cream of the Commando Crop, partially because it lacks the following *improved* models features, thankgoodness.

Not sure what you mean Hobot ... but have heard not all combats created equal ... later serial numbers were given upgraded mains ? maybe that what I think I heard or read ... as for my bike ... it be genuine Norton Combat Commando with all the required tell tales except of course a hole in it ... to tame I run a 21 tooth counter shaft sprocket and a single 34vm mikuni ... no need for anything more ... Ducati is for thrills now...
Craig

Some new Combat's could have upgraded bearings from the dealer.
Years ago I had T.C. Christensen (Sunset Motors, Hogslayer, etc) do some engine work for my `71 Commando. I got to talking with him and during our conversations he told me back when the Combats started failing they identified the problems and he was pulling new Combat's out of crates and replacing the problematic TS roller bearing before they were sold. He did lots of them. Engine-in-frame I recall. I don't remember if he installed a ball bearing or a Superblend. They got so proficient at it they could do one in around 3 hours. I'm sure other dealers were doing the same thing to sell the bikes and put the buyers mind at ease.

most my lore comes form dead drag racers and a few live ones like TC or gone to fading UK vendors and owners and the extensive bickering archives of Capt Norton site which took me a few years to take in. My 1st Combat stamped Aug/72 and 2nd one March/72, both had taboo flat rollers still good to go when examined for other reasons and only replaced for the experience and thinking not to open back up again, ugh.
Rod shells should wear out long before the crank bearings. There is not that much difference between early 750s or later 850 to Combats in design or performance but for slipshod 1971-72 manufacturing errors let happen by managers directives to the bean counters priority. Its takes a mean racer heart to make bearing choice matter.

After my P!! and later Ms Peel my normal factory Trixie Combat is just too sluggish, unstable and frail to be worth while to run to redline but sure did test it to mid redline 6 times for a few hours and few 100 miles with sports bikes or solo, just to know I had assembled ok and learn its limits > to avoid forever more. Does not take too long at 90-115 mph to do this. Keeping up with 150 hp sports bikes going 120 in opens to piss them off not leaving my clunker out of the joy ride *was not* the fastest event for Trixie - just the last time I got that out my system on her forever. Trixie wakes up in 4th at 90 mph and temps me every ride to easy fast exceed that but refrain to just over the ton now and then so 90 is about top cruise on her anymore.

Craig said:

Not sure what you mean Hobot ... but have heard not all combats created equal ... later serial numbers were given upgraded mains ? maybe that what I think I heard or read ... as for my bike ... it be genuine Norton Combat Commando with all the required tell tales except of course a hole in it ... to tame I run a 21 tooth counter shaft sprocket and a single 34vm mikuni ... no need for anything more ... Ducati is for thrills now...
Craig

Click to expand...

Then I guess it's not a combat anymore, is it. Oh, unless, of course, you say it is.

Please dont, take me wrong. But I feel there are strong debatable issues here.
When I purchased my 72, I knew it had a Combat head and therefore it was a Combat in my mind. I joined the forum shortly thereafter. I had to came to the realization that all I really had was a Roadster with Cambat head. I also realized that all a Combat was is a Roadster with 4 addons.

I feel the front disc brake does not count cause they wre going that way anyhow. The head, we now know, is basically garbage and offers no real performance gains except to allow for the 32mm carbs. The 32mm Amal's may have contributed to many over rev'ed failures by allowing the hi rpm overruns in the first place. My early bike had 30's and in my mind felt that they were there to help detune the volital situatuon. Again, in my mind, my sick ass mind.

Now we come to the cam. If anything, the 2s is what makes/made a Combat a "Combat". Please excuse my freedom with the term, "Combat" was and seems the continue to be a marketing ploy.

I know that if I was in a position to purchase a Combat designation, I, and I am sure many more, would feel a responsibility to dismantle and confirm integrity before we could feel right about ringing it out.

Some years ago I got my hand on a real good set of updated reinforced cases 210xxx to replace the tired but usable 200xxx's. This older set was purchased by a member in the UK and are running now, I believe. Inside I found a standard cam, no suprise there, roller bearings in the drive side and ball in the timing side, all in good condition. That told me that this set of early cases have been opened at least once before.

I have added a many performace enhancements and have put in a lot of time to get it where it is today. It has a 149xxx frame, 210xxx crankcase and 235xxx gearbox. In my mind it is one awesome Combat. But that 's my problem and for the sake of continuity my signiture states something else.

Is the Combat desirable? It seems to be, at least in the minds of many.
Does the OEM Combat deserve the exaltation that many give it? That's where I have a hard time and is the source my issues with a 73 Combat with 220xxx cases.

All that being said, gortnipper must assume it is a true combat for it has all the specs.

mschmitz57 said:

Some new Combat's could have upgraded bearings from the dealer.
Years ago I had T.C. Christensen (Sunset Motors, Hogslayer, etc) do some engine work for my `71 Commando. I got to talking with him and during our conversations he told me back when the Combats started failing they identified the problems and he was pulling new Combat's out of crates and replacing the problematic TS roller bearing before they were sold. He did lots of them. Engine-in-frame I recall. I don't remember if he installed a ball bearing or a Superblend. They got so proficient at it they could do one in around 3 hours. I'm sure other dealers were doing the same thing to sell the bikes and put the buyers mind at ease.

Click to expand...

John Hudson rebuilt my mate's Combat at his (my mate's) house, he used to travel round the country doing this.
I eventually bought the bike and it flew, wish I had kept it !
sam

I n 2004 when I was thinking of classic Brit bike , my son said Norton ... I knew where this one was ... my mechanic friend had showed it to me in "S" form several years previous ... he was a real pack rat so I called and sure enough ... he would sell road ready and inspected for X dollars ... anyway the day of pick up I asked what should I know ... he say its a Combat ... meant nothing to me at the time ... he say $500 less ... I did top end, bottom is all good I checked ... that was a while ago and no engine troubles so far ... all the numbers frame , gearbox and engine are same ... guess I'm just lucky and happy
Craig

Nothing really exciting to add here, just feeling a need to summarize.

Can we at least agree on the following statements about Combat Commandos?

1. The Combat engine was an option available for Commandos only in 1972. The factory claimed 65 hp for the Combat engine, vs. 60 hp for the Standard engine.

2. The option consisted of milling the head .040", fitting 32 mm Amals, a 2S (or, as the brochure calls it, a Double S) cam, and black painted cylinders.

3. The disk front brake was an option for 1972 Standard Models, but was fitted to all models with the Combat engine.

4. As delivered from the factory the Combat engines had the same main bearing combo as the Standard Commando at that time, single-lipped rollers (R&M MRJ A30 type). Many Combat bikes had the bearings upgraded by dealers to the later "Superblend" double-lipped outer/single-lipped inner (FAG NJ306E type), either after failure of the originals, or as a preventative measure. No ball bearings on the mains. Those went away somewhere in 1971.

5. The factory recognized a problem with the Combat engines after an unexpected series of main bearing failure reports from customers, and issued a service note recommending that any replacements of the main bearings be done with the newer "Superblend" rollers. A lot of the Combat Commandos had main bearings replaced under warranty. The failures have been commonly attributed to how easy it was to rev the engine beyond it's safe limit. The engine made it's maximum horsepower at 6500 rpm, but would easily rev way past that. When treated more gently, they have been known to survive for much longer periods.

And some general observations on the use of the term:

The Combat label has been pretty loosely applied by some owners to Standard Commandos that have been modified to Combat specifications. To a collector, a Combat Commando is one that was produced by the factory with the Combat engine option. To a rider, an original Combat Commando is either regarded as a desirable factory hot rod, or as a disaster waiting to happen, or somewhere in between.

The use of the term Combat is a little like the use of Production Racer. To a collector, both refer to specific Commando models as delivered from the factory. But both are also commonly used as a description of a generic type, similar to the use of "Café Racer". It would be more correct to describe them as "replica Combat" or "replica Production Racer", or maybe "Combat style" or "Production Racer style", or something similar, but in common use the extra descriptors are frequently left off. Probably not technically correct, and annoying to purists, but that's how it is now, and we should probably get used to it.

Ken