Mark said:Anyone too superior to ride a MK111 must be a spectacular human being. You are so COOL!
ML said:beng said:Charming. You are obviously on the wrong forum. Go ride an Atlas hard and then come back and tell me its "superior".
beng said:People who come into a PUBLIC forum and cry when anyone has an opinion or point of view different than theirs are amusing. What sort of country in the world ridicules and persecutes those with different opinions and philosophies than the establishment? Hitler's country? Sorry the world population was not cloned from a scrap of your hair.......
ZFD said:LAB,
Can only tell you what is in the book. Carl was indeed one of the few last dealers who got 850Mk3s from the last but one batch. The last complete batch went to NVT in Shenstone. I should be surprised if the book wasn't complete; it looks like it was well-kept till the very end. An indication is that the last batch did indeed go to NVT in Shenstone and as late as October 1977. Why there should be two more numbers that aren't in the book is beyond me and, frankly, I doubt it.
Last off the production line, unregistered, 7 miles from new,1977 Norton 850 Mk III Commando Interstate Frame no. 336539 Engine no. 336539Estimate: £12,000 - 16,000, € 14,000 - 18,000, $ 19,000 - 26,000
As borne out by the receipt the Commando was purchased by Carl Rosner, direct from the Pedley family, some years ago.
ZFD said:Looking at the description, it is obvious they effed up on the frame number- frame number would be an 850F1.
ZFD said:Frame number was stamped on the r.h. side of the steering head on Mk3s- previous types rarely had one stamped in.
ZFD said:Mk3s should have the 850F1.. ... frame numbers, see the Mk3 parts list: "commencing at Engine No.325001, Frame No.F125001".
ZFD said:The ones I saw had frame numbers put in by the factory. These had the circle with two lines through before and after the frame number
ZFD said:It may be bikes going to the States didn't have frame numbers because chassis numbers were of no interest in England and America at the time and the registration documents normally gave the ENGINE number.
ZFD said:Bikes that were imported into Europe in later years- say re-imported from the US- and had papers but no frame number (as is the case on most 750s and early 850s) then promptly got the ENGINE number hammered into the headstock, because that was the number the documents showed.
ZFD said:Mk3s should have the 850F1.. ... frame numbers, see the Mk3 parts list: "commencing at Engine No.325001, Frame No.F125001". The ones I saw had frame numbers put in by the factory. These had the circle with two lines through before and after the frame number and had 850F1... frame numbers. It may be bikes going to the States didn't have frame numbers because chassis numbers were of no interest in England and America at the time and the registration documents normally gave the ENGINE number. Bikes that were imported into Europe in later years- say re-imported from the US- and had papers but no frame number (as is the case on most 750s and early 850s) then promptly got the ENGINE number hammered into the headstock, because that was the number the documents showed.
Wolverhampton was a factory where things were done to established routines, so just because it was towards the end I doubt things were done differently- and, indeed, the Mk3 build book speaks against it.
79x100 said:Mine is marked 4 75 and is one of those without the 850 prefix on the engine number or the headstock plate. It is a 330*** number which suggests (if porterg's is from May) that 3000 plus must have been despatched in April / May 1975.
79x100 said:Did they really make 11,500 odd Mk111s ?
L.A.B. said:79x100 said:Mine is marked 4 75 and is one of those without the 850 prefix on the engine number or the headstock plate. It is a 330*** number which suggests (if porterg's is from May) that 3000 plus must have been despatched in April / May 1975.
I'm not sure how you arrived at a figure of 3000 as I make it 9000 (325000 + 9000 = 334000) built, but my own 334*** MkIII is date stamped 7 75, so perhaps batches were not built in sequence, or the date stamps are not particularly accurate?
79x100 said:Did they really make 11,500 odd Mk111s ?
If the factory built around 9000+ MkIIIs before it went into receivership and 1500 were built afterwards, then that would make a fugure of 11,500 about right, and there seems to be plenty of MkIIIs around, so I don't think the figure is too far out.
79x100 said:The 'new' records at Andover Norton could perhaps shed some light on this.
porterg said:I need to make a correction as I transposed the frame #, should be 332454 and not 334. I should have had another cup of coffee before going out to the shed and checking the #. My bad.