Pictures of your Norton Commandos

comnoz · Oct 23, 2010

And here are a couple pictures of my first perimeter framed Norton racer.

Here are some pictures of the modified Norton motor that was in it. It made 85 to 90 horse at around 9000 and the engine cases would last
about 6 weekends of racing even with the center support. Then they would get a spiderweb of cracks.

Hortons Norton · Oct 23, 2010

Really nice work Jim, What ever became of the race bike? That is very serious re-working of the motor, Very impressive. Also the old photo is great too, Thanks, Chuck.

RennieK · Oct 23, 2010

Holy crap! You're even more radical than I'd thought. That crank is amazing and the cases too. Is that the bike that was lost in the fire? Very interesting technology and ingenuity, great photos, thanks for posting.

comnoz · Oct 23, 2010

Yes the bike was lost in the fire. However I recently dug the remains out and tore the engine down. This is the second version of the engine that was in that bike. It is a short stroke motor with 900cc displacement. Billet cases,barrel and head. And I think there is enough parts left to put it back together. It made just over 100 horse at 9500 rpm. Here is what i started cleaning up.

There are more pictures here

http://s658.photobucket.com/albums/uu31 ... /?start=20

debby · Oct 23, 2010

Great stuff, Jim! Thanks for sharing. You look so young in those photos, lol.

How did that early fuel injection system turn out?

I wish I'd kept some old photos around. I tossed them about ten years ago when I was unemployed and downsizing to a little apartment. Now I wish I'd kept them. Too late, all gone. I had some nice photos of my first Norton too.

Debby

comnoz · Oct 23, 2010

Well thanks Debbie-I guess :|

That first fuel injection never ran as well as a carb and I would have been afraid to take it too far from home but I learned a lot. Jim

Jeandr · Oct 23, 2010

Jim, you take the prize for being the most stubborn Norton owner ever Most people and commities would have given up long ago (and they have).

Amazing to see how for a pre 1950 design can be pushed

Jean

Never throw away pictures, you can always buy another crock pot...

cash · Oct 24, 2010

Jim,

Very impressed, great work.

I'm no expert in this field, though if my memory serves me well, and these days, well the less said the better. I'm sure Matchless fitted a centre main to one of their 650 parallel twins and it wasn't too reliable, and I'm sure to over come the problem some owners even removed it. However, perhaps a 180deg or 90deg crank would give the cases an easier time. What do you think ?

Why fuel injection ? the bloody stuff (gas) is expensive as it is, it's bad enough sucking it in, but squirting it in under pressure, good grief man.

The world needs more like you.

Cash

comnoz · Oct 24, 2010

I'm no expert in this field, though if my memory serves me well, and these days, well the less said the better. I'm sure Matchless fitted a centre main to one of their 650 parallel twins and it wasn't too reliable, and I'm sure to over come the problem some owners even removed it. However, perhaps a 180deg or 90deg crank would give the cases an easier time. What do you think ?

Cash,
I ran 270 degree and a 180 degree cranks in this bike. The 270 [90 offset] was ok but it seemed to be "buzzier" at high rpm. And with the 180 degree crank your hands would crack and fall off in a couple laps. It had isolastic type mounts so a rocking couple was not good. The 360 worked best. Jim

And my FI Commando will run 350 to 400 miles on a tank of fuel.

RennieK · Oct 24, 2010

I'm curious, was your crank any wider between the bearings than stock? Could you run stock cams?

not-ron · Oct 24, 2010

Does it only rain in England so many shinny bikes how do you keep them so clean :roll: !!!!!

comnoz · Oct 24, 2010

Rennie, The first motor was stock width. The second motor was .125 wider between bores. I could run stock cams in both after grinding the journals for a inner needle bearing race. Jim

Hobot · Oct 24, 2010

I ran 270 degree and a 180 degree cranks in this bike. The 270 [90 offset] was ok but it seemed to be "buzzier" at high rpm. And with the 180 degree crank your hands would crack and fall off in a couple laps. It had isolastic type mounts so a rocking couple was not good. The 360 worked best. Jim

Jim, glad you spent the bloody sweat and burning cash on vibration testing for us.
Until I experienced the rear linked C-do chassis I too was being fooled by the rest of motor engineering concepts of what sticks best w/o a sense a motorcycle under ya or inside ya.

Too many features to take in by mere photo's of your perimeter frame wonder, but how'd you get the clutch so close to the crank? Was it worth it?

I'm completely satisfied by stick and fabric biplane construction to fly circles around hi tech elites. i had to cut my shoulder length blond hair for college application photo that had coat and tie dress code to suffer through. Was great
relief of expense and discomfort when disco polyester leisure suits came into style and was acceptable to facility. I had my P!! as school ride then too. Nil money for fuel or food let alone photo film. Steve-o hoboto

jsouthard · Oct 24, 2010

Some updated pictures of my girl(s). Put the standard bars, seat and footpegs back on. Only bummer is i didn't have my new AM26 tires on at the time the photos were taken. They really look nice.

Hobot · Oct 24, 2010

Joe, loved your politically incorrect couple photo in contrast to the totally correct Combat. I'll never have either to match, so good on you.

britbike220 · Oct 24, 2010

I think the standard K81's look much nicer with the stock set up. The AM's make the wheel look to small for the fender. A new set came on the last 850 I bought and I can't wait to get them off the bike. The AM'S would look good with the CNW fender. Nice lookin bike and couple.

Tim_S · Oct 24, 2010

Nice looking bike ! I see the trunsignals are mounted in an unusual place? Are they attached at the coil bracket? I thought I saw a dual port single coil pictured? Maybe a closeup shot of that area?

TIA,

Tim_S

RennieK · Oct 24, 2010

comnoz said:
And I think there is enough parts left to put it back together.

I can't think of a more worthy project for resurrection. Mechanically it is more unique and genuine than the TC Christianson museum piece and it definitely deserves a second life. Hope you are able to do it and document it with digital images.
Now if you can just do something about that gas tank : ) ....(the beauty lies within)

comnoz · Oct 24, 2010

Rennie, Unfortunately the bike chassis and fuel tank were burned beyond recognition. The only reason the engine and trans survived was because they got submerged by the firehoses before the heat got them. I always liked that flat top tank. It was a handy place to put trophies.

Actually the flat tank and seat had been replaced with a fiberglass body for the last year of use. It looked like this when I had the fire.

I am thinking I would like to put the engine in a bike for Bonnyville. Now all I need is time and a pile of money. Jim

RennieK · Oct 24, 2010

That's an improvement Jim. That flat tank reminded me of the technology in the movie "The Day The Earth Stood Still". If you haven't seen the movie it was filmed in the 50's and there was spaceships and robots in the movie.

But enough of my smart assed guffawing around, I'm totally with you on the importance of functionality (never thought of the trophy stand) and what happens when you twist the throttle being everything on a machine like yours. Glamorizing it up has to provide weight loss or aerodynamics or some useful benefit and would be the last consideration to warrant any attention to.

If the good fairy came down and offered me my choice of any commando based bike I'd probably pick the one in the last photo. It's quite an achievement.

Pictures of your Norton Commandos

Similar threads