Discussion in 'Norton Motorcycles (Modern)' started by hobot, Aug 4, 2010.
Scooped from Colin Sharpe on other lists.
http://www.imakenews.com/ptcexpress/e_a ... 7,b8tLccJ4
In that rendering the frame is connected to the swingarm? How does that work? or am I crazy?
"Norton..., based in the UK, designs the most quintessential and famous of British motorcycle brands. "
That is some claim right there.
Frame BETTER BE connected to the swingarm, OR ELSE!
I think you're perceiving a footpeg mounting point as an attachment of the swingarm to the frame. A different perspective would show they are not together. A better way of putting it would be that the swingarm pivots in the frame. Obviously, an old Commando's swingarm pivots in the rear of the mofot mount plate. Some modern machines (Ducati, Honda) pivot the swingarm directly in the rear of the engine case.
Actually I bet it's not. Swingarm is connected to the gearbox/engine and the engine is connected to the frame.
"...The small design team at Norton soon realized that the bikes needed to be totally re-engineered from the ground up..."
I've seen that statement before and I get annoyed. Are they trying to dist Kenny?
Today I read more,
"...In designing the Commando line, Skinner and his team had a very good start in the work that was done by former Norton owner, Kenny Dreer. Skinner explains, “We used Dreer’s bike as a basis, so our bikes look very similar to his, but from an engineering point of view, they are completely different.”
OK, there's some acknowledgement.
“There is not one component on the bike that we didn't re-engineer in Pro/ENGINEER,”
I think they are using the word 're-engineer' too loosely.
Look at where the original can be improved upon? OK
Redesign? Maybe some.
Re-engineer? Fuel induction, wiring... OK
But every component? I think not.
Simon Skinner is a member of this forum (skinthespin), so you could PM/e-mail him and ask if he would care to explain? [Edit don't worry,-I've already sent him a PM]
I assume they are trying to clam they are the key concept and designers, not Dreer.
Personally I think this shoots themselves in their tires not to hollar to world that they brought Kenny's wonder to the market, with as few tweaks as possible to boot!
May be legal reasons to cop such attitude publically. Hope they sell a bunch of 961's to to keep the logo accessory sales going.
In the link, I sure wouldnt mind getting my hands on one of those rotarys. Peripheral intakes
I recognise that CAD model!!!
Firstly, the swingarm is connected to the frame, not the crankcase.
Secondly, we did re-engineer or re-design every component on the bike, which is why it took us a year rather than a couple of months. Now, let me get this point across, this is NOT a slate on Kenny's bike, because, lets be honest it looks great, but it wasn't designed to be production friendly, plus there were some fundamental errors with daft stuff like light positions to pass homologation. Having worked in the production environment all my life it was easy for me to spot these things and change them, some to reduce cost (producing Kennys bike in numbers would be too cost prohibitive), some to improve reliability and durability, some for homologation reasons and a few to make the thing look a bit better.
Like I say Kenny's bike looks fantastic and its clear the guys in the US had an intimate understanding of what a Norton should look like, we kept the general layout of the bike the same as this takes time to market quicker.
Obviously the biggest technical change was fuel injection, which required a new fuel tank, fuel pump assembly, ECU & wiring, new rear bodywork to house it all, throttle bodies etc, also there was virtually no tooling for the bike, so we had to re-tool pretty much every component, hence its taken so long.
Like I say again, please don't take this as a knock on KD's bike, as it gave us a real flying start, but also do not under estimate the work required to make this thing remotely productionisable (if thats a word!!) and saleable.
That's the first time I've heard that detailed explanation of the re-engineering process for the 962.
Thank you, sir.
Checked out he Norton site and saw this
Does this mean that we might see a P11 coming out to compete with the Hypermotard for the hooligans that enjoy air-cooled simplicity?
sorry for the hijack
Oh!!!!!! Thanks for that Will, I have been dreaming of how to get a P11 project going and now you put the thought of a new one coming out in my head? I will have wet dreams of this new bike. I am really having trouble getting this new project out of my mind, I'm done now. :wink:
Re-engineered? Looks like a poor copy of a 15 year old Ducati Monster.
*Passes Mike a pencil*
Crack on then!
So how many 961s have been produced to date, and what is the current level of production per week?
I have yet to actually meet someone who doesn't like it (although I am sure there are plenty). The only thing stopping me buying one besides having to sell a few bikes to raise some cash is the hideous gear lever and the angle it points at but I believe that is being addressed.
In this post peter-howes-norton-canada-lumby-july22-2010-t7144.html there is talk about an Interstate but no mention of the true Norton hooligan. We can Only hope. What do you say Simon, is it in the works?