Norton P-11 ??

Acotrel, I get that you like certain characteristics of the big ol`4Ts [so do I] , but as competition machines, may the better bike win.
1st handicapping ,then banning, 2Ts, to let 4Ts win - is hardly progress.
 
I purcased a p11 ranger [from memorey] s/n 129110 in the late 1980's a recent import to our country though low millage it showed the usual signs of modifacations, exhaust no aircleaner etc, i tidied, painted and fitted a new set of Dunlop k70's plus an ariginal style low leval exhaust system, from memory i borrowed a genuine muffler from a local dealer and had it copied by a local manufacturer [said dealer followed suit and exported same mufflers back to the states]. i owned this bike for about 15 years. Billt's comments were correct long seat chrome guards and finnd hubs though mine still had tank badges [not decals], I owned this bike for 15 years finally selling it to a freind, it handled like the type of bike it was light and fast it did not speed wabble and yes [as long as your are not a cop] i exceeded 70mph though at 100 thank christ for wide bars, this bike suited the type of roads we have here tight and windy.
Al
 
Ludwig makes a good point, and I stand corrected on the last of the hybrids. I thought the Ranger was the last, but Ludwig's with number 132xxx is clearly a 1969 production piece (all Rangers were built in roughly a one-month period in Sept-Oct, 1968). I have spoken to former dealers here in the US who remember late Scramblers coming without badges on the tanks, and two sets in the crate (the Norton 'N' round badge and the Matchless winged 'M').

The N15 is a stunning machine, but I like the the look of the P11 a little more. The shape of the oil tank and the upswept mufflers were an influence on the Commando Roadster. The only downside is the funny battery cover which sticks out way too far, and was re-designed three times in an effort to keep them from falling off. The original press picture on the P11 didn't have a battery cover, and it was airbrushed on and made to look like the oil tank.
Norton P-11 ??


This pic is the only one I could find that shows the cover fairly well. Most pics of the P11 are of the prettier timing side.

This P11 shows the alloy fenders, big black taillight assembly of the '67, and skimmed hubs of the P11 and P11A. The battery cover sticks out from the frame about 3 inches. The front has a tab that fits on the stud that holds the left coil bracket, the top rear has a hole that fits on a pin bolted through a tab sticking out from the top frame tube (standing proud, I think would be the British term), and the rear has a special knurled screw that attaches to a nut welded to another tab on the rear frame downtube. Usually, this vibrates loose, and the cover flies off when you hit a bump.

If you look closely at the back of the rear fender, you can see the oil tank vent hose sticking just below the trailing edge.
 
Bill:

Your photo was a revelation to me. All these years, I'd thought the Matchless frame used for the P11 was a single front downtube design.

The bike we tested must have been a 1967 US-built one, I think. The vibration level was horrible. I did a shake-down run (while breaking in the new engine) from Wolverhampton to York (about 180 miles) and on the way back the rear light assembly fell off the fender and was hanging by its wires.
 
Frank,

The P11 is a double-down tube design, with Reynolds 531 tubing, pressed and brazed into a one-piece head stock. I believe the only difference between it and the G85 frame is the relocation of one of the front engine lugs. The top tube is larger than the others, 1-1/2" compared to 1-1/4" for the loops and about 1-1/8" for the rear section. The four tubes for the rear section are brazed onto the top tube just ahead of the back end, which is left open. Each of these rear tubes ties back into the main frame loops, creating a series of triangulated sections, with cross-pieces on the top behind the oil tank, near the junction of the forward tube and loop for the engine plate mount, and the swing arm. To me, it looks similar to a Rickman frame, the main difference being the single top tube and head stock.
Norton P-11 ??


When I rebuilt the motor, I used .020 over flat-top pistons, superblends and an 84% balance factor. Vibration isn't that bad until I hit about 80 MPH. It smooths out at 90, and that's as fast as I've had it. I'm running the stock front sprocket - 19 tooth.
 
J.A.W. said:
Or this one?
http://www.classicstyle.com.au
Click to expand...

Interesting bike. It's a '68 P11A if original. 68s had the tank badge, dual seat and skimmed hubs. 67s had no badging and a solo seat. 69s had unskimmed hubs, no badge and a dual seat different from the 68 (narrower and just a bit longer).
 
BillT said:
If an ignoble reason is to win races, then they were guilty.
Click to expand...

The N/G15 was not built to win any races, it was just a way to increase production numbers to try and keep up with BSA/Triumph who had many times the sales.

The P11 was designed in the USA by someone who knew what they were doing and was a much better idea for off-road use.

American riders were such that they would have raced anything that was available and they did just that. So they deserve any credit, not AMC or Berliner who were simply interested in sales and money.

Featherbed Dominators were very successfully raced on dirt, for instance call up Kenny Hayes, he and his brother Jim won many dirt events with featherbed Manxman/Atlas bikes including a grueling race called the "Southern 500", yes a 500 mile long dirt race which they won on featherbed bikes three or four years in a row.

Racers won off-road and scrambles events on Harley Davidson Sportsters as often or more so than any Norton did, and BSA and especially Triumph did the bulk of winning and sales in their class. This says much less about the bikes than the riders who were resisting change to 2-stroke technology and who wrestled 3-400 pounds of iron for the duration of any event. Men of steel.

Ludwig I applaud your purchase and use of the N15 over the last decades. You have found what it is best suited for. You would agree that any similarly prepared classic including a featherbed framed or Matchless twin engined bike with comparable modern upgrades by a smart and dedicated owner would certainly do the same job.

The AMC hybrids have their place in history as do all the obsolete machinery marketed in the late 60s, but they are certainly not from or representative of the golden age of the British Motorcycle industry or outstanding in any way compared to their contemporaries. I will never disrespect someone like Ludwig or all the other forgotten souls who bought them new, and I already said that if it is what you have and you enjoy it then good for you. I simply reserve the right to say they are not my cup of tea and share what information I have concerning them.
 
This is Jim on a 1961 Norton Manxman 650 running in the 1961 "Southern 500. Who wants to try wrestling a Brit 650 like this for 500 miles on dirt? Holy shit...

Norton P-11 ??
 
beng said:
This is Jim on a 1961 Norton Manxman 650 running in the 1961 "Southern 500. Who wants to try wrestling a Brit 650 like this for 500 miles on dirt? Holy shit...
Click to expand...

The Norton Factory entered featherbed framed Dommie 500s in ISDT events (International Six Day Trials) in the quite early 1950s. It was said they had alloy heads , and cylinders, but possibly painted black to disguise this, well before these were production items. ?
I seem to recall that one of the riders was quoted as saying that some of the steeper events required "starting 6 fields back, and give it everything". !!
 
Well, I have three of these buggers, representing the Cheetah, P11A, and Ranger. Not a comfortable bike to ride very far to say the least. Acceleration is fun, at my age, I won't take it above 80. Bikes sure draw attention as no one has seen any. At first they jump to Commando and then look closer. Lots of fun telling the story..........
 
I've never seen factory produc ed aluminium barr els on a Norton. The Commando barrels were silver painted cast iron. I'd love an aluiminium stet
 
acotrel said:
I've never seen factory produc ed aluminium barr els on a Norton. The Commando barrels were silver painted cast iron. I'd love an aluiminium stet
Click to expand...

Didn't some of the early brochures mention alloy heads/barrels for dommies, as an option.
But they never materialised. ?

Triumph had those close pitch finned alloy cylinders, on the T100 was it , with alloy head. But the thin liners caused problems, not least when it was rebore time ?? And the engines were said to be noisy. All iron heads and cylinders persisted at Triumphs for quite a few years after that, on some models, and iron cylinders stayed the standard for decades more with many manufacturers...

Don't some of the Norton goodies makers make alloy cylinders for Dommies and Commandos these days ??
 
Maneys the Man .

http://www.stevemaney.com/


Norton P-11 ??


MANEY ALUMINIUM BARRELS
A great way to save weight (5kg) and enhance engine performance due to better heat dissipation.
Since 1990, literally hundreds of races and dozens of championships have been won by racers using our cylinder barrels, proving time and time again they are the best.
My barrels come with spun cast iron liners that are bored and honed to standard sizes, and a full kit of fixing nuts bolts and studs.

Cylinder barrels 750cc, 850cc & 920cc … £695.00

Special bore sizes or deck heights please add ... £100.00

Wonder if i'll get a free one , for mentioning it . :(
 
Triumph had those close pitch finned alloy cylinders, on the T100 was it , with alloy head. But the thin liners caused problems, not least when it was rebore time ?? And the engines were said to be noisy

The sleeves slide in so wtf . NOISEY , you cant here it over the exhaust . :D Iron was more dimensionally stable , & sound damping.
Not to mention cheap .
 
Hi,
I am new to the forum and located in North Florida. I have just come across a 1967 P11 stored in a garage. Number P11 121xxx. Bike was running 20 years ago but was disassembled for restoration and has been sitting in that state. Seems to be complete other than exhaust and there is also a box of various misc. NOS parts. I would love to hear from anyone who can offer advice on restoration, sources for parts, pictures, literature, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top