New Norton Caf'e Racer

swooshdave · Nov 26, 2009

RennieK said:
MarshalNorton said:

Why have we morphed our beloved nortons into cafe racers?
If I wanted a sport bike, I would have bought a vintage Ducati.
Allot of money for a vintage name that really doesn't represent the orig. concept.
Marshal

Click to expand...

I also disagree, case in point:

1930:

1948:

1954:

1963:

1971:

1973:

1974:

1989: [video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBg86bjr8l0[/video]

As well as the fastback and the JPS's you could also order a street legal production racer commando. Also Dunstall and Khan were authorized re-sellers furnishing cafe Nortons to the public. In the 70's Norton was considered the only bike you could buy in the show room and take out and race on the track after switching the bars and foot controls.

Sport bikes are what's happening today if you're 20. Dreer knew it and these guys know it, to go into production you have to sell to the masses. For us romantics who were around in the good ole days there's still CNW and BAB (had to mention Paul) who sell retro Nortons.

So what's stopping Norton from learning a few things from the Japanese and Europeans for a change and building competitive cafe racers again? I hope not much!

kebra · Nov 26, 2009

I like the bike and I guess this will be a wild beast. The paint scheme is really inappropriate, we would expect something much more
sexy like a yellow or red candy.
# The windshield looks ridiculous trash it Stuart !

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://southsiders-mc.blogspot.com

gtsun · Nov 27, 2009

Personaly I'm just happy the company is alive. If it has a pulse anything can be sorted out. (or fetted ? if your on that little rock over there) I love old Guzzies, Triumphs, Aprillas, Indians & Harleys etc etc. Not one of them make anything as pretty as there old bikes. Modern Ducks are amazing but I will never stare at one like I did ( & still do) stare at a 1977 750 Super Sport. A modern bike just has other priorities. The old bikes had detail to engine castings unheard of in our full fairing world. From what little I know Norton is planing "modern bikes" too? Not constrained to look like the old ones? I hope he pulls it off. I'm not in love with the look & I REALLY HATE chrome in place of polished aluminium but I will be very happy the day a truley new modern Norton kicks the piss out of all others AGAIN at the track. I would like to have one framed share of Norton stock hanging on my wall!!!

sns · Nov 28, 2009

now if they can stuff the new Aprilia V4 engine into it and rework the frame and..........

Fullauto · Nov 29, 2009

gtsun said:
Personaly I'm just happy the company is alive.

The "company" isn't alive. Not as we knew it. He just owns the name and the rights to manufacture what is, in essence, a "modern" bike. The same as modern Triumphs. Same name, no link at all in real terms to the old Triumphs. Just styling cues.

sns said:
now if they can stuff the new Aprilia V4 engine into it and rework the frame and..........

And you would want them to do that because.............

ILLF8ED · Nov 29, 2009

Keith1069 said:
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1119137831?bctid=52194789001
As usual MCN are the world's first to ride the bike.............hope someone at Norton has ridden and tested it for a few hundred miles!!! :lol:
Does look good but hope the poor sound they claim is a video problem, is.

It sounded like the videos of Kenny Dreers bikes....maybe the 270 degree crank. I've heard Kenny's bikes from three feet away "live" and they don't sound like the video. By the way what's wrong with this video riders right leg? He has it pointing outward even when going straight.

Still think the new Norton looks nice. It's not price competitive. A lot of choices for that money.

Richard Barks · Nov 29, 2009

illf8ed said:
Keith1069 said:

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1119137831?bctid=52194789001
As usual MCN are the world's first to ride the bike.............hope someone at Norton has ridden and tested it for a few hundred miles!!! :lol:
Does look good but hope the poor sound they claim is a video problem, is.

Click to expand...

It sounded like the videos of Kenny Dreers bikes....maybe the 270 degree crank. I've heard Kenny's bikes from three feet away "live" and they don't sound like the video. By the way what's wrong with this video riders right leg? He has it pointing outward even when going straight.

Still think the new Norton looks nice. It's not price competitive. A lot of choices for that money.

You're right the sound was a bit odd also note no Chainghard
on any of the bike's also Norton have gone a bit quiet on my
delivery date . The good news is they have agreed to do a red
ltd edt one as per kenny's when he first showed it in 2004

Ron L · Nov 30, 2009

Copied from a post from last Tuesday on the P11 forum.....

> Doug,
>
> The reason for the price gouging is that Mr. Stuart Garner, now Mr. Norton
> is 2 months late on his last $400k and 2 new bike payment to Norton
> Motorsports. Please encourage all of your readers to buy this piece so I
> can
> get my share of the final payment.
>
> Thanks and have a great day,
>
> Kenny Dreer
>

Nortasaki · Nov 30, 2009

I like the bike alot, I had only hoped the pricing would have been competitive with the modern Triumphs. :cry:

swooshdave · Nov 30, 2009

Nortasaki said:
I like the bike alot, I had only hoped the pricing would have been competitive with the modern Triumphs. :cry:

Weren't Nortons always more expensive than Triumphs?

lynxnsu · Nov 30, 2009

QUOTE The "company" isn't alive. Not as we knew it. He just owns the name and the rights to manufacture what is, in essence, a "modern" bike. The same as modern Triumphs. Same name, no link at all in real terms to the old Triumphs. Just styling cues.

I cannot agree more .As far as I can see it only DUCATI can claim to call themselfs so because Mr T was there until the end (his I mean)All those reborn firms are what they are , but do not call a rotary or a Donington bike a Norton because they are not !!!!
Norton died late seventies RIP

mikegray660 · Nov 30, 2009

lynxnsu said:
QUOTE The "company" isn't alive. Not as we knew it. He just owns the name and the rights to manufacture what is, in essence, a "modern" bike. The same as modern Triumphs. Same name, no link at all in real terms to the old Triumphs. Just styling cues.

I cannot agree more .As far as I can see it only DUCATI can claim to call themselfs so because Mr T was there until the end (his I mean)All those reborn firms are what they are , but do not call a rotary or a Donington bike a Norton because they are not !!!!
Norton died late seventies RIP

yep RIP Norton, Triumph, Etc - Ducati also died - Cagiva bought and resurrected them - only one of the great euro 60-70s marques that didn't crap itself -
Guzzi!
of course they are still are kinda the harley of the italia breed

JimC · Nov 30, 2009

I've ridden the new Guzzi Norge. Now, that's torque!

BillT · Dec 1, 2009

I think the new Norton has the potential to be called 'Norton' - let's see what Mr. Garner can do. I understand he also owns Spondon, which has a connection to the Rotary Norton.

If Mr. Garner can resurrect the brand, more power to him. I think it would bear the right to the name far better than the new 'Indian' does. After the new 'Commando' takes off, Garner will need to create a 'clean sheet' design. There's a limited market for 80HP retro bikes.

I think the Hinckley Triumphs have earned the right to be called 'Triumph', because Mr. Bloor did a decent job of renewing the company.

When Meriden Triumph was liquidated in '83, John Bloor outbid Indian Enfield, with the idea of turning the Meriden site into a housing sub-division. He could have simply plowed the factory under and built his homes, but he did two things:
He licensed the Bonneville to Les Harris' Racing Spares for five years, and
He built a new factory down the road, in Hinckley.

Hinckley produced a few bikes in 1989, and after some testing, went into full production in 1990. Triumph has been producing bikes steadily ever since, currently producing around 40,000 bikes a year, most in Hinckley, and some in Thailand. Though the '88 and '89 production is a bit sketchy, Triumph claims continuous production of motorcycles from 1902. More importantly, Triumph has been running at a profit for quite some time (though this worldwide recession will probably impact the 2009 balance sheet).

Triumph has also committed some money to racing, and did achieve a podium this year in World SuperSport with their Daytona 675.

The 'classic' models Triumph produces (Bonneville, Thruxton, Scrambler) are nice bikes, but to me, the heart of the company lies in the Daytona, Speed Triple, and Street Triple. These are bikes that can compete head-to-head with anything the Japanese and Europeans offer, with a lot more character than the Japanese firms.

Engie · Dec 1, 2009

:roll: I dont understand this 270 Crank ?

All old brit twins were 360 even firing which made them sound goooood !

but vibes !
Honda CB72 CB250/350 and I think Laverda 750SF were 180 cranks, one piston up, other down, produced a slight rocking motion and uneven tickover ( bRRm -bRRm-bRRm )
Isolastics work because all vibration is in the vertical plane.
Balancer shafts, methinks, were used on the Honda 250/400 Dream 360 cranks, 1st balancer to remove primary vibration ie of the crank weight going forward and backward as well as up and down, and another balancer shaft to cancel out secondary vibration.

270 ? Well it will have some vertical and some rocking and I guess no balancer shafts and an engine ridgedly mounted in the frame. It won't sound characteristic brit twin either.

Perhaps it's a compromise and does a bit of everthing rather than alot of one type !

Can anyone enlighten me as to how they have tackled the vibes of a big vertical twin ?

The Isolastic concept was a such brilliant idea, perhaps is should be further developed, self adjusting isolastics ! :lol:

Seeley920 · Dec 1, 2009

why not just balance the crank properly and put it in a rigid frame e.g. Seeley, Rickman, featherbed??? All can be smooth with a properly balanced crank!!

OK, I admit, in 30 years of racing commandos I've never ridden a rubber framed one!!

B+Bogus · Dec 1, 2009

The only viable solution is to rotate one cylinder forward by 90 degrees.

Sorry....

Seeley920 · Dec 1, 2009

yeah, I've got an 851 too.......a bit quicker than the seeley......but not loads!!

B+Bogus · Dec 1, 2009

Seeley920 said:
yeah, I've got an 851 too.......a bit quicker than the seeley......but not loads!!

Would you believe I sold my 851 to buy the Commando!?
The biggest problem I had - apart from it being a bit cramped for my oversize frame - was that it sounded best above 5,500rpm, so I ended up going too fast everywhere :shock:
The bevels are more than quick enough for me these days :wink:

Seeley920 · Dec 1, 2009

Yep I agree, last time I took it out I averaged 150mph for the last 20 miles home(on a private road....honestly officer!!)!! Thats why I prefer to stick to the track! Have to admit the sound of 851 with Termi's is addictive though......sod the neighbours

New Norton Caf'e Racer

Similar threads