The Purchasing Decision

Richard 1047 said:

NortonFactoryUK said:

as it happens the 961 passed so well it may even be possible to get it through Euro 5 giving it an 8 to 10 year future. so although there are no plans to expand this model range at the moment, who knows ?

Click to expand...

If the engine has a further 10 year production life then what's the downside of developing a relaxed naked sports/tourer? You have ten years to recover the investment and make money! The longer you delay, the shorter the lifespan and profit potential. Two people on this thread have said they're interested so surely there're others to make it viable? Plus of course it would create improved economies of scale and production line efficiency? :shock:

Click to expand...

Have you sat on or ridden one Richard? I have sat on (but not ridden) a few and the none cafe racer versions have good ergonomics I think.

Hey Mr Eddie, I haven't but I'm 6'7" with a 37" inside leg so I haven't sat on a Ducati either....

My CBX and Lav 1000 are perfect all day rides, I rode a BMW K100RS from Liverpool to Gibraltar (7,000 miles in 3 weeks...) and I've had a plethora of other good riding bikes.

We're all familiar with the ergonomics of a sports and sports/tourer so suffice to say if you picture a mid 1980's BMW R80/S model you get my drift (in terms of rider lean/reach/seat/pedal position etc..). Like the Interstate. Obviously not a fully dressed tourer as that wouldn't be Norton, but a sensible compromise:


I'd ride a Norton version of that all day if it was reliable.

Heck they've done the hard bit already in developing the engine and drivetrain and Richard's begging to help perfect it so now it's just a case of turning out the models a wider market wants. (How many current Bonneville models are there?)

Its all just personal taste. I am no lightweight but rode a Dominator with neoprene glued to the carbon fibre for two thousand plus miles to Italy and back. For me the canted over position resting on the tank and cars suits my riding style. And changing the ergonomics for a handful of prospective customers doesn't seem to be the best business model. Just my opinion.

I guess it depends one whether they want to explore a wider customer base or not, but if not they can't complain they remain a small company. What'd the R&D cost of developing a mule bike be?

It's vaguely amusing that I have to argue the case for doing something as opposed to doing nothing !

Britjunkie said:

A friend of mine has a 1200 Thruxton R and made me ride it. I didn't want too because I knew what would happen. Fabulous torque, fantastic gearbox and clutch, suspension great, [altho he'd had it worked on] ergonomic's sort of boy racer, style, well that's where the Triumph and I part ways. Hideous tank seams that look like early Honda, fake fuel injection covers that try to look like Amal Monoblocks but without cables rising from the top, not really air-cooled, etc. When you buy a 961, you are buying an updated, new 850 Commando. There is nothing fake about it.
When you park them side by side, guess which one the boys lust after. It was explained to me thus, The 961 is like the hot babe everyone wants, along with the upkeep of her. The Triumph is the one that is IMHO, an English Honda, more like the practical girl you should introduce to your mother. I'm sort of glad the 961 has some rough edges, It gives me something to smooth out. Mark.

Click to expand...

Simply put, you get what you pay for. Even a Hyundai is more reliable than a Mercedes.

Dead argument. I can't believe you are complaining that a manufacturer, any manufacturer, doesn't make a different product, just because YOU think they should. Think about it man! I'm not going to make any claims about how you can get a 961 and change this, alter that, and tweek the other thing, and turn it into something that fits your niche. No excuses. If you want something that Norton or Boeing or Peterbilt or Range Rover doesn't make, find a manufacturer that makes what you want. Buy the Triumph and quit whining about how you would've, could've, should've bought a Norton. Norton didn't build a CBX or a Grom either. There's a lot of forum members with a lot of bikes that weren't built by Norton and they don't whine about Norton not filling their needs. If you've read any of my other posts, you'll find I've got little time for crybabies. I like this forum because it has so much positive, problem SOLVING, fun sharing input. Responsible, resourceful, helpful people. Not the kind that want someone else to take care of them and always point a finger somewhere else instead of taking personal responsibility. Have fun with your Triumph.
Still love my Norton (my other bikes too)
Charlie

Dead argument. I can't believe you are complaining that a manufacturer, any manufacturer, doesn't make a different product, just because YOU think they should. Think about it man! I'm not going to make any claims about how you can get a 961 and change this, alter that, and tweek the other thing, and turn it into something that fits your niche. No excuses. If you want something that Norton or Boeing or Peterbilt or Range Rover doesn't make, find a manufacturer that makes what you want. Buy the Triumph and quit whining about how you would've, could've, should've bought a Norton. Norton didn't build a CBX or a Grom either. There's a lot of forum members with a lot of bikes that weren't built by Norton and they don't whine about Norton not filling their needs. If you've read any of my other posts, you'll find I've got little time for crybabies. I like this forum because it has so much positive, problem SOLVING, fun sharing input. Responsible, resourceful, helpful people. Not the kind that want someone else to take care of them and always point a finger somewhere else instead of taking personal responsibility. Have fun with your Triumph.
Still love my Norton (my other bikes too)
Charlie

Well said Charlie - threads like this are a drain on the soul!
Cheers
Rob

Fair enough Charlie, I withdraw my lament that Norton seem to cater for a very limited clientele when the market could be far larger if they developed the basic bike into different sectors, as you seem to support their lack of imagination and unwillingness to sort out the documented reliability issues. Whitewash complete, carry on!

Richard 1047 said:

Fair enough Charlie, I withdraw my lament that Norton seem to cater for a very limited clientele when the market could be far larger if they developed the basic bike into different sectors, as you seem to support their lack of imagination and unwillingness to sort out the documented reliability issues. Whitewash complete, carry on!

Click to expand...

I am not a 961 owner, but I do like Nortons and enjoy ownership and I am finding this thread compelling reading, just wondering what you are going to say next , quite mildly bemused . Maybe you should write to Mr Garner and offer your services, on a consultancy basis perhaps and next year we could see a Norton tourer with clip on panniers , higher bars, fairing and a larger fuel tank. A kind of flying brick Norton , might even take off you never know.

Jg

Richard, you are a tad optimistic in thinking you can come on a Norton site, have a pop at Norton, and not recieve some "incoming" yourself!

However, at the defenders, I think it would be very wrong indeed if this site descended into some kind of censored dictatorship where only gushing praise is allowed. Let's save that for the North Korean Access Norton franchise shall we? Richard has an interest and is an enthusiast and most certainly has a right to say his piece.

Personally, I don't agree with you Richard. My take is this; the market for more practical 'retro' bikes, capable of being used as every day runners and for long distances is actaully already saturated with some very good products from Japan, Ducati, Guzzi, BMW, and mainly Triumph. Actually we never had it so good in this sector, manufacturers now design bikes specifically for this sector rather than just 'restro-ise' existing products.

ALL of these bikes are better at this task than Norton and considerably cheaper. I therefore do not believe that Norton want to compete in this particular league, just like Morgan don't want to compete in the diesel family estate car league!

The good news for you is that there are a lot of very good bikes indeed in that sector, so you don't have to miss out or get angry with Norton (or their owners)! I have a BMW R nine T sport myself and it's a fabulous machine. My trouble is that I can't use a daily rider and don't have much time for long distance rides, so my BMW hardly gets used (so PM me if you wanna buy it)!

There really needs to be 'Like' button on this forum

Don't worry Eddie, I'm not going to curl up into a ball and blubber!

You make very valid points about the number of other make retro bikes out there and I'm sure they're all pretty good however I was just playing devils advocate because I actually wanted to buy a Norton but when reading this forum I realised there are still a number of well documented issues - that was off putting. I also wanted a more relaxed riding position and considering Norton have done 90% of the work I would have thought it feasible to produce a separate bike fairly cheaply. Hey, I'm an aggressive businessman so if Norton miss opportunities I find it strange.

Anyway, no problem, I enjoyed watching the V4 at the TT but goodness knows how Norton pay for it....

I picked up the T100 today, bit of a wet fart to be honest but it'll do as a daily commuter.

Givi quick release tank lock bag,handlebar risers( Dave coote prototype), 25 litre soft luggage Meant for a motocross bike ,indicators worked well in lieu of pannier rails,Alt rider rack meant for a Ducati multistrada,fabricated on by " faraday fabrications" broadstairs,Kent Uk , fuel range not a problem & never carried any spare,it worked for me,Dunlop Road smart 2 tyres fitted 5000 miles ago & loads of tread left,u can tour & tour on these bikes

Here's mine with 1 inch bar risers and hard bags. .

Just curious, Richard. Since you called the T100 a bit of a "wet fart" (I would readily agree with that for an experienced biker. Great for a newbie or staying in town) why didn't you go for the 80HP T120? Huge difference in power although I hear it can feel a little heavy in the twisties.

Despite my opinion of the 961, I'm surprised that some what a Commando Interstate style 961 - Err, why not just buy an nice reliable Commando Interstate then, better parts supply, easily fixable and no 4 month wait for warranty repairs. Considering some Commando owners do over 40K miles a year - they can't be that unreliable. The price of the old Commando's it seems that in some countries the 961 is already the cheap alternative!

Hi Britfan60, the point is I'm 6'7" so the older T100 with the 19" front wheel makes more sense than the latest model which is both lower and more cramped. I also got a good deal on it as it was 'new old stock'. If I can't have the bike I want (at this stage) then I'm not going to spend a penny more than I have to.

Mr Madnorton, are you saying that a rebuilt 850 Mk111 is more reliable or a better ride than a 961? :shock: I thought I was the heretic on the site!

Richard

What part of MAD Norton is on display here ? I think its the UNHAPPY , UNSATISFIED , DISGRUNTLED , in short Angry . You are not a happy Norton owner are you ? Anytime some poor Norton 961 owner puts a smile on his face , you will do your best to wipe it off. Why not just come out and tell us the whole story ?

I think that most of us agree the redesigned Triumph twins are very nice machines. And very capable . But why must you insist on being so persistent in your adversarial dialog ? It seems that a lot of you guys out there would rather Norton just went out of business ! And besides , didn't you promise to get your own room ?