My What Am I Getting Myself Into Combat Build Thread

I went ahead and got the IKON 7614 dampers. They are probably overkill, but didn't really care for the chrome body on the other models.

IMG_1311sm.jpg


They are slightly longer (not compressed) and surprisingly heavier (weights are kg)

IMG_1310sm.jpg


IMG_1308sm.jpg
 
Now on to the rocker oil feed. So i got the nice stainless feed from AN


And then i notice it's the same one as described in this thread


It's definitely too long (across the head as well as down to the crankcase), got the double banjo feed, and uses chrome bolts. Don't like any of that.

So my choices are:

1) Go with it as-is (can the feed at least be moved to the drive side vs the timing side?)
2) Cut the hose and reattach the fittings (with plenty of chances to screw it up)
3) Cut the hose and use a double banjo fitting (at $60 US :oops:)


4) Build a complete new set from scratch and try to sell the unused Venhill set
5) Go with the RGM set (think this is a better design, it feeds both rockers simultaneously)


6) Remove and drill out the rocker spindle




I probably should have gone with 6 from the get go, but did not know at the time. Now, it would mean removing the spindle and shipping it out and reinstalling it. And i'd still need to build a line from the crankcase to the head. So, i'm leaning between 3 and 4.
 
1) Go with it as-is (can the feed at least be moved to the drive side vs the timing side?)

Are you certain the lower section is too long as it is routed incorrectly in the first pictures of that linked thread?

Any extra length can be lost at the lower end by increasing the radius of the hose where it passes through the cradle from the timing cover.

My What Am I Getting Myself Into Combat Build Thread


My What Am I Getting Myself Into Combat Build Thread

Cut the hose and reattach the fittings (with plenty of chances to screw it up)

It's not too difficult to shorten them although probably just the cross-over section (but the tricky part is getting the cut end banjo realigned correctly or the line will end up twisted when fitted.
You will need at least one of these (if you get the banjo angled correctly the first time).
 
They are too long IMO. Maybe that's the way they are supposed to be, but IMO - too long

My What Am I Getting Myself Into Combat Build Thread


My What Am I Getting Myself Into Combat Build Thread
 
They are too long IMO. Maybe that's the way they are supposed to be, but IMO - too long

1, You have the lower line inverted (the straight banjo normally goes at the lower end). The upper end is angled too low (see my previous picture).
2, You haven't fed it through the cradle.
 
Doesn’t look too long to me to be honest, route it up from the head so it has a nice radius down through the middle of the carbs and through the cradle, then loop down and back up to the engine as mentioned by LAB.

As others have already said, you don’t want it running tight against anything, so long loose radiuses are needed.

In your pic it’s just draped approximately in place, routing it properly will consume a lot of length.
 
They are too long IMO. Maybe that's the way they are supposed to be, but IMO - too long

View attachment 98535

View attachment 98536

They are just right when installed as intended by the manufacturer.

To me, they are too short!!!!! I wish they were longer so I could install like on a Triumph - up the backbone, across the top and down. I hate that they not only go between the carbs but in the nook between the carbs, but then it is a Norton.
 
Now on to the rocker oil feed. So i got the nice stainless feed from AN


And then i notice it's the same one as described in this thread


It's definitely too long (across the head as well as down to the crankcase), got the double banjo feed, and uses chrome bolts. Don't like any of that.

So my choices are:

1) Go with it as-is (can the feed at least be moved to the drive side vs the timing side?)
2) Cut the hose and reattach the fittings (with plenty of chances to screw it up)
3) Cut the hose and use a double banjo fitting (at $60 US :oops:)


4) Build a complete new set from scratch and try to sell the unused Venhill set
5) Go with the RGM set (think this is a better design, it feeds both rockers simultaneously)


6) Remove and drill out the rocker spindle




I probably should have gone with 6 from the get go, but did not know at the time. Now, it would mean removing the spindle and shipping it out and reinstalling it. And i'd still need to build a line from the crankcase to the head. So, i'm leaning between 3 and 4.

Bring it to me, I'll give you what I pay AN for them.
 
Not if you check the dates.
The old thread was linked in this thread.

OK, even more confusing. I just know that I posted in what I thought was the old thread and found it here. Regardless of any linking, there are two threads active right now talking about this oil line subject. Glad it's not confusing to others, but it is to me.
 
OK, even more confusing. I just know that I posted in what I thought was the old thread and found it here.

You must have got your threads crossed as what you posted in the old 2011 thread is still there...
https://www.accessnorton.com/Norton...ocker-oil-line-too-long-2011.9649/post-591049


Regardless of any linking, there are two threads active right now talking about this oil line subject.
...thus you brought that old thread back to life by replying and why now there are two.
 
1, You have the lower line inverted (the straight banjo normally goes at the lower end). The upper end is angled too low (see my previous picture).
2, You haven't fed it through the cradle.
1. I installed it per the instructions

My What Am I Getting Myself Into Combat Build Thread


2. There's a lot of slack regardless

I think i'll move on to something else and let this one simmer
 
You must have got your threads crossed as what you posted in the old 2011 thread is still there...
https://www.accessnorton.com/Norton...ocker-oil-line-too-long-2011.9649/post-591049



...thus you brought that old thread back to life by replying and why now there are two.
OK, so I didn't search for it, it was at the top of the list with new beside it. I did miss that the last post was very old - never would have posted if I saw. This is why I asked Jerry to LOCK old threads - I'll ask again. It's good that you put the year in the subject but they are often resurrected and followed. Anyway, I deleted my post there - sure would be nice if the thread wasn't there if there no need for it.
 
The line with the straight banjo and the sheathing goes at the lower end in my opinion so what AN shows in that picture is wrong or at least not the best way to fit it.
You are probably right. Regardless, I don't like the double banjo there. I'm contimplating either replacing with the dual banjo or going with the RGM piece (which is a better design IMO). I would think a tee fitting that splits the oil feed between the rockers is a better design that a serial route. Or am i being anal?
 
OK, so I didn't search for it, it was at the top of the list with new beside it. I did miss that the last post was very old - never would have posted if I saw. This is why I asked Jerry to LOCK old threads - I'll ask again. It's good that you put the year in the subject but they are often resurrected and followed. Anyway, I deleted my post there - sure would be nice if the thread wasn't there if there no need for it.
Personally, i think it's good to have the ability to update old threads if the info is still relevent. I'd rather have all the info on one thread than scattered amongst a bunch of threads. But that's me
 
You are probably right. Regardless, I don't like the double banjo there. I'm contimplating either replacing with the dual banjo or going with the RGM piece (which is a better design IMO). I would think a tee fitting that splits the oil feed between the rockers is a better design that a serial route. Or am i being anal?
I had the same thoughts so I went for the RGM version.

But I do think we’re both being anal !!
 
OK, so I didn't search for it, it was at the top of the list with new beside it.

Well, it could only have been your reply that brought the old thread back to life and to the top of page 1 as your reply was the only recent post so that was the 'new' post.
Now you have deleted the post the thread has gone back to 2011.
 
Back
Top