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
