Quality of AN Spares.

Onder · May 28, 2014

Norton world is a small pond. Norton supply is too. Your feet are held pretty close to the fire, in part, because you are on this popular forum and because you chose to actually respond in a public setting. By not hiding you naturally attract more complaints I think.
Thanks for standing up and facing the arrows. Hope you continue to move forward for our mutual benefit.

B.Rad · May 28, 2014

john robert bould said:
Joe, no doubt you do your best. customers will do the QA.

I will now report about a conversation I have just had with Keith from AN.
I was not impressed with a AN part I had just purchased. this led to correspondence with Keith.

I brought to Keith's attention another genuine part suffering from poor finish.
Keith indeed recognised that the finish was indeed poor, and undertook to get it rectified in the next batch. This part was poorly finished since Adam was a boy, it only needed to be brought to their attention and now it will be fixed. This is very good outcome for all.

As for the first part, I wont buy another one and as John Robert Bould says "the customer will do the QA."

So how good is it when you can directly communicate with the factory and get a positive response.
Consider if we would be better or worse off if AN ceased trading. we would be worse off I reckon.

Joe, just keep doing what you are doing, there will be customers who refuse to buy AN, and others who will buy nothing else.
I encourage your endeavors to be a manufacturer of obselete parts for 40 year old motorcycles.
Best wishes to all Bradley

lcrken · May 28, 2014

Well said, Joe. As one of the customers John thinks will do the QA for you, I can't resist pointing something out.

I've owned Nortons now for 42 years, and raced them for 20+ of those. In that time I've spent way too much money buying parts from almost everyone we talk about on the forum, including Norton before they crashed, Andover post NVT but pre Joe, everone's favorite, Les Emory at Fair Spares, Mick Hemmings before and after the "Norvil" fight, RGM, Unity Equipe, Rod Quaife back when you could still get parts directly from him, Dave Degens at Dresda, Dave Nourish, other Brit suppliers I've forgotten about, and a bunch of USA suppliers. It's obvious to me that Joe and Andover are the class of the field. Any supplier of parts, no matter how hard they try, will have occasional quality failures. I always though well of the quality of Quaife products, but I received a gear from them that broke first time I used it, and failure analysis showed it was way overhardened and brittle. Quaife promptly supplied a replacement gear, and admitted to having missed a bad batch from the heat treater. The good ones do their best to rectify such problems, as Joe appears to be doing.

I'm with the crowd here that is extremely grateful that Joe has worked so hard to keep the parts flowing for our old bikes. I'd say something nasty about all the whiners, but it wouldn't do any good, so I won't :twisted:

There, I feel better now.

Ken

andychain · May 28, 2014

Very well put Joe all points answered in a very concise way.

As a trader it is never going to possible to please every customer especially as the
client base grows and a client base in a market where every customer is an "expert",
if you get my point.

Keep up the good work, and to the disbelievers out there, Joe is not a client of mine.

Andy

Al-otment · May 29, 2014

lcrken said:
........I'd say something nasty about all the whiners, but it wouldn't do any good, so I won't :twisted:

There, I feel better now.

Ken

Making a complaint when a part is not fit for purpose is a consumer right. As I've finally had enough of having to replace out of warranty but relatively low mileage parts which have failed in use, causing the bike to to be unexpectedly off the road and at my expense and seen no improvement in the quality of parts from the responsible supplier then I'll 'whinge' all day. I don't understand why people don't complain - are they afraid that if they do complain the company that supplies the parts will close down and then they'll have no where to buy parts that don't fit or break in use? I'm the one losing out - not the supplier.

Al-otment · May 29, 2014

andychain said:
Very well put Joe all points answered in a very concise way.

As a trader it is never going to possible to please every customer especially as the
client base grows and a client base in a market where every customer is an "expert",
if you get my point.

Keep up the good work, and to the disbelievers out there, Joe is not a client of mine.

Andy

What experience do you have of the quality of AN spares in recent years? Bearing in mind you don't own or ride a Commando.

Al-otment · May 29, 2014

ZFD said:
Al-otment, I am a bit at a loss what policies you expect me to have on a part- like the crankcase- that gives up after 35.000 miles, not to mention a con-rod bolt that was bought before my ownership of the company. If a basic manufacturing flaw existed on the crankcases I should have expected that to show up far earlier............Since you first bought that crankcase we are now getting the crankcases machined by a different company, in a different material running through a different manufacturing process. I have detailed it in a private message to you.

The manufacturing process must have been changed for at least one of two reasons, reducing cost or a known problem. The new process of crankcases outlined by Joe involves more steps and I assume costs more. Therefore is the reason for change to address a known problem. e.g premature failure?

ZFD said:
From personal experience as well as speaking as the German importer of Andover Norton spares and one of the company’s biggest trade customers worldwide I cannot confirm your finding that as a rule

crucial parts breaking at 15,000 miles and 34,000 miles is totally unacceptable and happens only because the parts in question are not fit for purpose.

Click to expand...

Your claim that original parts were always better and fitter for the purpose is contradicted by facts.

I actually said, "....40 years down the road and overall the parts are worse than when my bike was built". I'm speaking from personal experience of AN replacement parts failing in use in comparison to original parts which either wore out or had to be replaced due to damage from a replacement part failing. I bought my bike from it's first owner with 17,000 miles on the clock and it came, unknown to me, with one pair of cam lobes badly worn. Replaced with AN cam from Russel Motors and similar wear at similar mileage then fitted cam from FairSpares (Norvil) which got changed during complete bike strip down at 100,000 miles, evidence of case hardening breaking down on one lobe. Apart from normal wear on pistons etc I cannot think of any other mechanical failure from any of the original engine components during this time 1987 - 2006. All recent problems 2008 - 2014 have stemmed from replacement AN parts failing.

ZFD said:
Was Andover Norton to develop the Commando to something it never was- o.k., I know of two bikes which have run for well over 100.000km unopened, but then they are the exception, not the rule- then we’d be looking at investment in a region that cannot be harvested from the sale of spare parts alone. We would need at least one Bob Rowley type destruction tester riding from morning till night every day and at least two Richard Negus type technicians gathering the data and converting them into drawings and eventually spares.
We would probably end up with the 100.000 mile-with-no-troubles Commando - though I doubt the original concept has the basis for it. But then, who needs it? Average mileage I have last read in the press for hobby motorcyclists is less than 3.000 miles per annum!

Amongst classic owners average mileage may be a lot less than that - many only covering a few hundred miles a year and at a relatively sedate pace - but I don't see the relevance unless you're suggesting what's the point of making spares that will last for many tens of thousands of miles when in reality many of the current owners will cover no more than 20,000 miles on their bikes.

john robert bould · May 29, 2014

Joe at Andover as not got full control over quaility, when he orders parts the whole supply chain can be a mine field...eg AN orders bolts, the supplier takes on the order,but as no stock....or is busy to produce the items. They [the supplier] phones "bolts are Us" down the road....they have "Some bolts in stock" the Girl on the phone asks the "Lad" in the stores to check out the stock.....I suppose YOU now where this is going? Do you think the "Lad" get's out a GO/No GO gauge and checks the threads? then the Rockwell/Vickers hardness tester, mic etc ? NO NO NO! BUT does AN do the QA when they arrive? I dont think so...they arrive in little box's a sticker is attached and out they go...I am not pointing a ugly Stick at them...just pointing out the facts .... Its nigh on impossible to ensure all suppliers are "UP to the job" and the task of QA is not cheap ..i bought a set of connecting rod shells , the overall dia was to large, when bolted up the rod was fast stuck..after some filing they turned...The shell's had arived in a sealed box..unchecked ..But what supplier would open all the box's and measure them.....NONE!
Thats the Issue here, NO QA ...AN cannot.wilnot check all the parts..COST is the issue..it's a fingers crossed they get the correct stuff.

ZFD · May 29, 2014

The manufacturing process must have been changed for at least one of two reasons, reducing cost or a known problem. The new process of crankcases outlined by Joe involves more steps and I assume costs more. Therefore is the reason for change is to address a known problem. e.g premature failure?

Actually, no, that wasn't the reason. The reason was that Pete came in as a buyer who had worked as a draughtman on the rotaries and suggested how to improve on what we had. Hence certain processes have been adopted for all our castings that were not previously used which strengthen their structure. This is our product improvement policy that we pursue whether there is a problem or not. On this part we have little competition so the price increase- which was small enough- could not endanger our sales of the part.

Amongst classic owners average mileage may be a lot less than that - many only covering a few hundred miles a year and at a relatively sedate pace - but I don't see the relevance unless you're suggesting what's the point of making spares that will last for many tens of thousands of miles when in reality many of the current owners will cover no more than 20,000 miles on their bikes.

No, I don't say the parts shouldn't last, but I don't see why the parts should last indefinitely, and much longer than the OE parts- most probably at a far higher cost to us and in effect then the Norton riders. Our parts, and that is my experience as a dealer for 35 years, last mostly better than the originals.

And please bear in mind most owners look at the retail price like the rabbit looks at the snake- hypnotized! What chance will Andover Norton have in the market with a "cost no object" policy against the EMGOs and Indian Child Labour outfits of this world with corresponding lower prices?

In my great old days, say in my first Commando year, I did 20.000 miles in one year. These days it is but a fraction of that- probably a quarter (I am self employed, and have little time......) I have very few customers doing more. I know of one who still does about 15.000 miles per annum, but that is a rare species.
Joe/Andover Norton

Al-otment · May 29, 2014

ZFD said:
Amongst classic owners average mileage may be a lot less than that - many only covering a few hundred miles a year and at a relatively sedate pace - but I don't see the relevance unless you're suggesting what's the point of making spares that will last for many tens of thousands of miles when in reality many of the current owners will cover no more than 20,000 miles on their bikes.

Click to expand...

No, I don't say the parts shouldn't last, but I don't see why the parts should last indefinitely, and much longer than the OE parts- most probably at a far higher cost to us and in effect then the Norton riders. Our parts, and that is my experience as a dealer for 35 years, last mostly better than the originals.

And please bear in mind most owners look at the retail price like the rabbit looks at the snake- hypnotized! What chance will Andover Norton have in the market with a "cost no object" policy against the EMGOs and Indian Child Labour outfits of this world with corresponding lower prices?

Joe/Andover Norton

My experience as a rider over the last 8 years is that several replacement parts failed prematurely. It's your decision what quality of parts AN produces. Either ones made down to a price or ones made up to a standard fit for purpose. All the owners who want cheap parts without thinking about quality will get what they deserve.

olChris · May 29, 2014

If you dont like AN parts then just go but them somewhere else, simple.. If you insist on using/riding/driving 40yr old + machinery then there is a price to pay..

JAYMAC · May 29, 2014

olChris said:
If you dont like AN parts then just go but them somewhere else, simple.. If you insist on using/riding/driving 40yr old + machinery then there is a price to pay..

Spot on Chris.

Al-otment · May 29, 2014

olChris said:
If you dont like AN parts then just go but them somewhere else, simple.. If you insist on using/riding/driving 40yr old + machinery then there is a price to pay..

The crankcases were purchased 8 years ago and since the con-rod bolt breakage I've always considered or chosen other options where possible e.g Carrillo, KibbleWhite, Maney. It's the new AN parts which are causing the problems not the 40 year old ones and I said previously consumers have rights so try reading the thread before posting.

Fullauto · May 29, 2014

A very interesting thread. I see both sides of the story as a consumer and a supplier. I have been supplying Fullauto Technologies heads to appreciative customers for some years now. I have sold 122 now worldwide with only one failure. An internal oilway broke through the casting at the rocker oil feed area. I immediately sent a replacement head as I wanted the customer without his bike for the shortest period of time. I then reimbursed the owner for what it cost him to have the head changed over. The head was returned to Harrop Engineering and they scrapped it and gave me a replacement head in the next batch.

I could afford to do this because of the superior quality of the product. If the the head was made to the cheapest standard possible do you think I would be interested in doing this? Hardly. What I'm saying is you get what you pay for. And sometimes not even that.

I'm currently wading through the development of my Fullauto Technologies aluminium replacement barrels for 850s. I've put over $12,000 into the modelling of the barrels and the design of the tooling. I next have to shell out the same or a bit more for the manufacture of the tooling and the development of the CNC machining program. I won't get any change out of $30,000 or perhaps more to accomplish this. This is just to get to the stage of being able to manufacture my first batch of 50. I've looked at it every which way to solve a number of issues, addressing reliability mainly. I have this crazy idea that I can use modern technology to solve some of the issues. After all, Ha***y Da*****n can manufacture barrels and pistons which stand up to 100,000 road miles before needing attention. My own Buell is on original bores and rings at about 100,000 km (about 60,000 miles) with no issues. If I can achieve my dream I will probably need to supply pistons with the barrels. I would really like to run the same minimal clearances as a HD but there are certain design limitations against me, mainly the need to keep the bores round, which can be a problem with the odd shaped Norton barrels which heat up at different rates because of the assymetry of the design. I would love to be able to offer a set of barrels and pistons to a customer and say "you will never have any problems with your pistons and barrels until the day you die."

However, this may be unachievable. But, by God I'm going to give it the best shot I can. Certainly they will be the best product of their type on the market.

I firmly believe that the Norton Commando is the most practical classic bike to cut it with today's modern traffic and to use as a daily rider. Bar none. Joe, keep on doing what you are doing and these bikes will live forever. That's not to say that I haven't had issues with some of your parts but they have been minor. My bike will be back on the road this year after the crash two years ago and it will be back to using it every day. As intended.

Reminds me of my favourite tale from the days of AMF's takeover of Ha***y Da*****n back in the 70's. A bloke had bought a Sportster and was having issues with the gearbox. Now management/labour relations weren't the best at this time and when the primary was taken off, a note was found inside.

"Ha ha. No second gear!"

Thank God things didn"t get that bad at Norton.

Onder · May 29, 2014

Although I love Al Otments name (I garden) I think Id say he needs to shop elsewhere and he clearly knows who the carriage trade fellows are. Actually AN is carriage trade too as nobody has any reason to own and ride a Commando except as a perverse hobby. Fine. Im one. But then when I saw the price of a ready to go AN gearbox I looked a bit
further and bought a TTI. I sent out my perfectly good RH10 head for full overhaul, got it back, took one glance at the rocker-stem contact cock up (rocker barely hits half of the
valve stem head, told it is very common) and I became one of the 122 Fullauto customers. It gets worse...Bob Newby, stuff from the two Jims etc.
What I am saying is this isnt based on anything but an old guy dumping his hard earned loot on toys that he couldnt afford in his youth. And since he is old he sure isnt
going to test this stuff to destruction.
You make your choice you pay the money. Yes complain if you arent happy. Absolutely. But complain to get a resolution. Free market response is to go elsewhere.

Al-otment · May 29, 2014

Perverse? Strange choice of word for one of the most usable British classic motorcycles. My problem is having to spend money to get the bike back on the road when I'd sooner be spending that money going places on the bike. What I call perverse is gardening - despite my user name I don't do much gardening. Last year the grass got cut about 4 times by a friend with a rotary mower (no, not a Wankel). Right now the front and back lawns look like small wild flower meadows, grass about 12"high

. I make priority decisions between motorcycling or gardening.

SteveA · May 29, 2014

Al-otment said:
Perverse? Strange choice of word for one of the most usable British classic motorcycles. My problem is having to spend money to get the bike back on the road when I'd sooner be spending that money going places on the bike. What I call perverse is gardening - despite my user name I don't do much gardening. Last year the grass got cut about 4 times by a friend with a rotary mower (no, not a Wankel). Right now the front and back lawns look like small wild flower meadows, grass about 12"high . I make priority decisions between motorcycling or gardening.

I am really pleased to see you don't call your friends Wankels! :shock:

My problem more often is having to spend the time......even if I also don't always have the money....

That's why I planted gravel in my garden and don't own a mower or have a friend who does.......the main use I have for the garden is as a walkway to the shed....but I expect to spend time in the shed or garage if I own a motorcycle....any motorcycle...let alone a 40 year old model....it is inherent in the design....

trident sam · May 29, 2014

Fullauto said:
A very interesting thread. I see both sides of the story as a consumer and a supplier. I have been supplying Fullauto Technologies heads to appreciative customers for some years now. I have sold 122 now worldwide with only one failure. An internal oilway broke through the casting at the rocker oil feed area. I immediately sent a replacement head as I wanted the customer without his bike for the shortest period of time. I then reimbursed the owner for what it cost him to have the head changed over. The head was returned to Harrop Engineering and they scrapped it and gave me a replacement head in the next batch.

I could afford to do this because of the superior quality of the product. If the the head was made to the cheapest standard possible do you think I would be interested in doing this? Hardly. What I'm saying is you get what you pay for. And sometimes not even that.

I'm currently wading through the development of my Fullauto Technologies aluminium replacement barrels for 850s. I've put over $12,000 into the modelling of the barrels and the design of the tooling. I next have to shell out the same or a bit more for the manufacture of the tooling and the development of the CNC machining program. I won't get any change out of $30,000 or perhaps more to accomplish this. This is just to get to the stage of being able to manufacture my first batch of 50. I've looked at it every which way to solve a number of issues, addressing reliability mainly. I have this crazy idea that I can use modern technology to solve some of the issues. After all, Ha***y Da*****n can manufacture barrels and pistons which stand up to 100,000 road miles before needing attention. My own Buell is on original bores and rings at about 100,000 km (about 60,000 miles) with no issues. If I can achieve my dream I will probably need to supply pistons with the barrels. I would really like to run the same minimal clearances as a HD but there are certain design limitations against me, mainly the need to keep the bores round, which can be a problem with the odd shaped Norton barrels which heat up at different rates because of the assymetry of the design. I would love to be able to offer a set of barrels and pistons to a customer and say "you will never have any problems with your pistons and barrels until the day you die."

However, this may be unachievable. But, by God I'm going to give it the best shot I can. Certainly they will be the best product of their type on the market.

I firmly believe that the Norton Commando is the most practical classic bike to cut it with today's modern traffic and to use as a daily rider. Bar none. Joe, keep on doing what you are doing and these bikes will live forever. That's not to say that I haven't had issues with some of your parts but they have been minor. My bike will be back on the road this year after the crash two years ago and it will be back to using it every day. As intended.

Reminds me of my favourite tale from the days of AMF's takeover of Ha***y Da*****n back in the 70's. A bloke had bought a Sportster and was having issues with the gearbox. Now management/labour relations weren't the best at this time and when the primary was taken off, a note was found inside.

"Ha ha. No second gear!"

Thank God things didn"t get that bad at Norton.

Ha, that reminds me of a rather unscrupulous mate of mine.
He owned a rather tired Rover V8 SD1 and decided to "adjust the mileage"
Took out the dash and got to the back of the speedo, whereupon he saw a sticker "OH no not again "

sam

Gino Rondelli · May 29, 2014

Just to add my tuppence (or 2 cents) worth, I've been riding Commandos since 77 when I was a kid, I remember still some of the crap spares I bought then, and even in the day the difficulty getting them. Thankfully Rodger at RGM started and at least I could get spares quickly. Over the years I've had my share of parts that haven't fitted or been substandard but I still think that's because we are sold in general parts of a standard that most people will buy (cheap)
If you use your bike and I do more Norton miles now than I did at 17 then you'd gladly pay more for better quality, however I know we are in the minority. Most people use them for local runs or as an investment.
So I'm happy with the service I get generally and realise that the bikes are 40+ years old and may break sometimes. If I wanted to travel at 90+ miles an hour all the time I'd buy a modern bike.

Onder · May 29, 2014

To Mr Otment: perverse as the previous poster points out that Nortons are not the bike for flogging or for a daily rider at this point in time. You can if you must burn time and money but really you should have a modern for that. In addition the authorities now have an iron grip on the roads and there are few places and few opportunities to
do much serious motorcycling.
And for Full Disclosure, this is the first time in nearly 20 years Ive not put in a proper vegetable garden as I need the time to finish the Norton in my kitchen and get it out
on the road!

Quality of AN Spares.

Similar threads