Strange Commando

luv the seat on that JD

I've always wanted a tasteful Norton bobber or chopper. I'm sure you guys have all seen that steampunk Norton.... I look at it and see art. My dad looks at it and sees an abomination.



Here's my theory: If you take a good original bike and destroy it to make something crazy or custom then maybe you have rocks in your head. If you take a good original bike and personalise it or make it more usable or more safe but the mods can be reversed, then good on you. If you take a bunch of parts and build a monster then so be it. I have an orphan frame, orphan cases, orphan gearbox, and plenty of old bits that aren't quite good enough for my main Norton. If it all comes together and ends up a crazy pile of crap then at least it's another Norton in existence.

I'd also rather ponder running a supercharger or turbo on a monster than a good original too

Now thats an idea!
Sure, Hobot could run an exhaust turbine connected via fluid drive[thermo-fan style] to his Drouin..

I see him starting the bike, but when he rides it, where do his knees go?

Its pure unridable art and only possible function is a bee line dragster with that fork range set up. Can't quite figure out what he done for the shifter, looks like swivel rods he toes up/dn behind the foot peddle. I've seen sierns mounted this way but with a chain to set on and tug spinner on tire. When the end times come and few sources of new engines the Norton crowd should look at this as a preserved one to break out of trailer captivity and put a diesel back in its place. I think the late Sir Eddy was asked to supply some parts for it but don't know which ones. Personally I think show offs like this bring more attention to Norton and Commando's and much more interesting that looking at another V-twin. With a cute engine like that ya can expect some to be abused.

Yeah, its like the difference between a technical drawing & an artists sketch.
So what about the turbo-boosted Drouin?

It's still a Norton. I can tell by the drip tray beneath the bike. :wink:

Dances with Shrapnel said:

It's still a Norton. I can tell by the drip tray beneath the bike. :wink:

Click to expand...

LOL!

My old man always said that Nortons don't leak oil, they mark their territory.

J.A.W. said:

Yeah, its like the difference between a technical drawing & an artists sketch.
So what about the turbo-boosted Drouin?

Click to expand...

Aren't they superchargers? Rare as rocking horse sh*t from what I hear too

These things are plentiful though:

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/AMR-500-...=AU_Car_Parts_Accessories&hash=item416cf37658

It is possible and not that uncommon nor recent history to stack different driven superchargers in same air path so each one adds its boost with least power drag.
With the Drouin is would be better to put in it front of a turbo so the blower could feed the slow turning turbo right off idle then no end in sight power rise as centrlfugal snail blowers rase boost non lineally with rpm rise. I've had a few craft that tires couldn't take full throttle until above go to jail speeds, so that's always in back of mind when talking serious power adds on about anything boats included. If risk hormones are low enough, female-ish level, then I guess one could toddle around on short small throttle play but then why would ya be seeking a supercharger?? HIT The Juice and let the tire melting begin! Leave instructions for handling remains.

Ok, Hobot, but - I meant using only the exhaust section of the turbo, linked directly [but by fluid/variable ratio coupling] to the supercharger ,- ,so as to utilize otherwise wasted energy, & reduce the supercharger drive power/ take-off losses, at higher revs?

UH UNH not on my hot headed Norton no Sir Ree Bobbie-doo. Last thing a Norton head needs is some hot gas flow blockage of turbo impeller. What you describe is a turbocharger just not direct connected so more drive train lose and wear. A centrifugal vane blower is not a pump that compresses aire all the time, its more like a fan and does not cost as much drag at low or no boost cruise as a positive displacement compressor does, so a non issue with the Drouin, which don't have to wait for no spin up - just uncove its opening, which the faster uncovered the higher the pressure flow spikes fed into the chambers. There are other ways to drive intake impeller with a turbo charger, make the exhaust side into a jet or point a flaming jet or rocket at it. Of course I'd rather aim the jets and rockets out the back for a passing gear that don't depend on traction reaction.

90% H2O2 in this size is worth about 100 hp and even more if flammables pumped in to flash off in super heated steam.

90%! Extremely oxidative,please note: the Nazi rocket scientists who developed combat applications for this 'stoff' had to fit out their test pilots with full-cover rubber flight suits in an attempt to prevent them being de-molecularised in accidental spillages- [that is if the steam explosion didn`t kill them on impact..]

This maybe informative... http://www.cdvandt.org./Wunderwaffen-file-11110.pdf
Ken, does 'Operation Paperclip' ring any bells?'

The extremely rare forerunner of the Drouin blower!

Wow, I wonder how long an impeller of that diameter takes to spool-up?

hobot said:

A centrifugal vane blower is not a pump that compresses aire all the time, its more like a fan and does not cost as much drag at low or no boost cruise as a positive displacement compressor does,

Click to expand...

Not quite.

A throttled mechanical blower (vane or impellor) does not take that much energy and I really do not see the difference between the two I would think the impellor is overall more efficient. Yes, an impellor blower will give more boost at lower rpm thus will require more power at lower rpm but the boost should more than make up for the loss. Detonation at lower rpm, well that's a different ball of wax.

So when throttled, neither a turbine nor an impellor are doing much work (pumping air).

i'm fairly up on blower vs kompressors to make note that the centrifugal blower/fans are considered soft booster as they don't make much boost down low, sorta like the infamous turbo spin up lag. Compressors are always compressing what ever ratio of air is let in on throttle so are most famous for their off idle launch power than turbo or centrifugal blowers. All the boosters make more power than they take to turn or why bother but blowers don't drag on engine at low boost as much as compressors nor tend to heat mixture to same degree per same boost levels. Of course if one were reving engine at X-mass tree staging then fan and compressor get closer together in behavior but the fan can continue to build boost while the compressor tend to level off to its set ratio. Of course on a slow rpm Norton that could well give advantage to the compressor type over snail type. On Peel this may be her limiting factor, ie: can't gear high enough for really high speeds as cuts down rpm for blower to pull the tall gearing.

Back to the power stacked bike, it should be a great puller with such long intakes and big throats, silly as it looks it looks. But shoot i think a lot of the race bike mods looks silly street wise but over look it d/t the function gained.

The vanes the ' Positive Displacement ' type .

However ,

The ' CENTRIFUGAL ' type at full whellie generates energy flinging the air outward , improveing the efficency .


Realy fancy ones get two stage , or Turbo Pre Compressor , to maintain pressure at compressor intake .

Be intresting to study the ford - ASTON / Jag contraptions for Comparison .
Alledgedly old V2 / Brook Henry ( the dewcati dude in W Aust ) is in partnership with Sprintex who do Centrifugal Superchargers. So they Say . :?

http://www.sprintex.com.au/sprintex/who-we-are/

I like the green TR4