Hi all,
I was a little surprised by a recent thread about a cracked crankshaft on a Mk3 Commando. We can’t know what abuses the bike had endured in it’s 45 year life but photos did indicate incorrectly radiused corners on the crank. If this is the case, it is damming evidence of poor quality control. After the Combat debacle and the much vaunted Superblend bearings I thought the crank might have been bulletproof in road usage (as it should be)
It did start me thinking though. I always assumed that the the Mark3, apart from the obvious gear change, brakes, isolastics and electric start and some cleaning up of cosmetic electrics was really an improved, slower, slightly de-tuned, heavier, less incontinent but more robust bike, that attempted to restore reliability back into the Commando’s reputation.
I thought the previous 750s and 850s being leaner, lighter and faster but with a greater proclivity to self destruct their cranks, among other things. Is this assumption correct? With 45 years of experience did the many small improvements to the Mk3 make it a substantially better bike, a more reliable bike or an easier bike to live with.
As a Trident T160 owner I believe it to be a better, more modern bike than it’s T150 forebear, albeit not sufficiently better to make large inroads into the marketplace by 1975/6. It has numerous minor mechanical improvements and handles better than the T150. Could the same be said about the it’s stablemate, the Mk3? As a 17 year old desperately wanting either of the bikes. I remember ogling (no pun) over the ‘Power Choice’ Brochure, that extolled the virtues of both the 160 and the Mk3. As it turned out I bought the Triumph, a decision I foolishly regretted for many years, not so now I own both brands.
What is considered the pick of Commandos today after half a century of use and abuse, as well as love and care. Which would be the fastest, the most sporting, the most reliable? Did Norton achieve many of their design goals with the Mk3?
Just interested, that’s all, although a Commando owner, there seems to be large gaps in my knowledge.
regards
alan
I was a little surprised by a recent thread about a cracked crankshaft on a Mk3 Commando. We can’t know what abuses the bike had endured in it’s 45 year life but photos did indicate incorrectly radiused corners on the crank. If this is the case, it is damming evidence of poor quality control. After the Combat debacle and the much vaunted Superblend bearings I thought the crank might have been bulletproof in road usage (as it should be)
It did start me thinking though. I always assumed that the the Mark3, apart from the obvious gear change, brakes, isolastics and electric start and some cleaning up of cosmetic electrics was really an improved, slower, slightly de-tuned, heavier, less incontinent but more robust bike, that attempted to restore reliability back into the Commando’s reputation.
I thought the previous 750s and 850s being leaner, lighter and faster but with a greater proclivity to self destruct their cranks, among other things. Is this assumption correct? With 45 years of experience did the many small improvements to the Mk3 make it a substantially better bike, a more reliable bike or an easier bike to live with.
As a Trident T160 owner I believe it to be a better, more modern bike than it’s T150 forebear, albeit not sufficiently better to make large inroads into the marketplace by 1975/6. It has numerous minor mechanical improvements and handles better than the T150. Could the same be said about the it’s stablemate, the Mk3? As a 17 year old desperately wanting either of the bikes. I remember ogling (no pun) over the ‘Power Choice’ Brochure, that extolled the virtues of both the 160 and the Mk3. As it turned out I bought the Triumph, a decision I foolishly regretted for many years, not so now I own both brands.
What is considered the pick of Commandos today after half a century of use and abuse, as well as love and care. Which would be the fastest, the most sporting, the most reliable? Did Norton achieve many of their design goals with the Mk3?
Just interested, that’s all, although a Commando owner, there seems to be large gaps in my knowledge.
regards
alan
