Trouble at Mill

Norton 961- best looking bike out of aproximately 160 new offerings on display at last years Vancouver Motorcycle show.

And I was not alone in that judgement, there was a big crowd around it when I saw it, a very positive buzz. My friend said there was a large crowd of admirers around it next day as well.

Glen

Motopixie said:

Who am I? I'm a rider just like all of you. I live in Texas and I have no affiliation with Norton. My day job has nothing to do with motorcycles, I work in oil and gas. But I get tired of seeing people beat up an individual - regardless of where they are or affiliation - just because it's convenient to do so. Tearing someone down to make yourself feel better is petty. Simply put, I don't like bullys.

Click to expand...

Pointing out facts is not bullying. Denial is not a good state to live in. Would pointing out the fact that Rossi has not won a race since joining Ducati make one a bullying Rossi detractor? I think not.

worntorn said:

Norton 961- best looking bike out of aproximately 160 new offerings on display at last years Vancouver Motorcycle show.

And I was not alone in that judgement, there was a big crowd around it when I saw it, a very positive buzz. My friend said there was a large crowd of admirers around it next day as well.

Glen

Click to expand...

I share your judgement. Problem isn't the new Norton, it's the new Norton company owner, Stuart Garner.

He has a very marketable product, even at a high price. This is something the big manufacturers spend mega bucks trying to achieve but often fail at.
So that part is excellent, a home run right out of the box. The rest of it may well get sorted over time.

Glen

worntorn said:

He has a very marketable product, even at a high price. This is something the big manufacturers spend mega bucks trying to achieve but often fail at.
So that part is excellent, a home run right out of the box. The rest of it may well get sorted over time.

Glen

Click to expand...

There is no doubt the initial reaction to the new Norton has been very positive. Delivery problems notwithstanding, the big hurdles of proven reliability, parts supply, dealer service have yet to addressed, as well as profitability. If Garner can't deliver Nortons as fast as he's taking deposits he may never have to face the aforementioned hurdles.

The attempted resurrection of Indian cleared all those hurdles, except profitability. They had bikes for sale on dealer showrooms. They had no big reliability problems, that I know of. For those who are attracted to that type of motorcycle, the appeal was great. What killed Indian was lack of profitability. Some say Indian was expecting profitability too soon, some say profitability could not be achieved with their business model.

Who am I? I'm a rider just like all of you. I live in Texas and I have no affiliation with Norton. My day job has nothing to do with motorcycles, I work in oil and gas. But I get tired of seeing people beat up an individual - regardless of where they are or affiliation - just because it's convenient to do so. Tearing someone down to make yourself feel better is petty. Simply put, I don't like bullys.

Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more, the comments against SG come across as almost a vendetta, I suspect he has upset a few in the trade and put a few noses out of joint who either have a commecial interest in selling Norton bits or use some of the trade marks. Clearly they have not delivered against their original promises but I honestly think they are trying to put that right as best they can, who knows it even could be that some interested parties are hoping the venture fails so they can swoop up the assets and market the bikes themselves.

I guess all will be revealed in due course

Fritz Egli has made some of nastiest comments about Garner. This most likely means Garner is a standup guy

"just for discussion's sake"... not that it would ever happen...

BUT...

Let's say Triumph was to buy all rights to the new Commando, shift the operation to a large-ish corner of the factory, infuse the proper amount of money to successfully release significant inventory numbers to dealers around the world,

What do y'all think would become of the new Commando? Smashing success, nominal success, failure, or abysmal failure?

I say "nominal success".

I believe the Norton brand would fairly quickly (5 years) need at least 3 - 5 different models / displacements to ever have a hope of standing on it's own. I suppose I would concede that a Spondon-framed Aprillia could be one, the rotary could be another; but, as it is, Norton is in pretty deep doo-doo that requires deeper pockets and a longer end-game plan than what currently exist.

It was not a vendetta that prompted the criticism of Garner. It was not EPA regulations that prompted criticism of Garner. It was the nondelivery of bikes after having taken deposits, as much as 100%, that prompted criticism of Garner. Had Garner delivered bikes as promised he would be hailed as a savior of the Norton brand. It's pretty obvious, to most anyway, that Garner's problems stem from Garner's lack of understanding the finances required and the scope of the endeavor he is attempting. It appears to me, from the reports I've read, that Garner's problems are multiplying. Vendors are cancelling contracts for nonpayment. Top level employees are leaving. I hardly see where these things qualify as having a vendetta against Garner.

I don't get it. What is the deal with this bike. Other than being new, a retro paint scheme and some resemblance of an old exhaust that really does not functionally apply, I see nothing special about this bike. All the componants are totally common and a power to weight ratio that is rather substandard. I expect it to handle as well as any Honda 750-4. Even their TT race bikes are Aprilia's.

Is it that "exclusive" or the "unattainability" that is so mysterously giving this bike appeal?

I would be better off buying one of a dozen comparable units with much better performance, reputable sales, not cost as much, and oh, attainable. Then I'll go get a set of Norton letters and basically have something that is just as much Norton as this thing is but maybe only better.

Let the bike die before it kills the Name.

They would have been better off calling it the Garner. What's the diff.

Whilst there is no doubt a number of people are not personal fans of Mr Garner- and that some ex-employees voice their doubts about his qualifications as the boss of a motorcycle firm, see bikerglory.com- this is not the core of critizism, and the overwhelming proportion of the critizism is not a personal vendetta.

The main problem from the word "go" was that we knew he had neither the funds, nor access to the funds, nor even an idea what the necessary size of the funding was, to start this ballgame. That said I admire Garner for how long he kept the balloon in the air.

The core problems so far can be mostly explained by underfunding, which is what the old hands in the industry expected.

Funding of bikes for a early customers by later customer's deposits or full payments only carries the enterprise so far. I agree with Grandpaul a medium- to long-term perspective needs more than just one model of which the manufacture is barely funded. An onward strategy is out of the question under the circumstances. The whole episode reminds me of the Norton rotary era where some racing successes blinded the public to the fact there was minimal motorcycle production and the company was virtually broke since 1990. It had its greates racing success- the IoM TT victory- two years later and won British championships 3 and 4 years later, when motorcycle production had ceased altogether.

What the public see is, more often than not, not what actually goes on.

Funding of bikes for a early customers by later customer's deposits or full payments only carries the enterprise so far.

Click to expand...

In the financial world that would be called a Ponzi scheme.

pvisseriii said:

I don't get it. What is the deal with this bike. Other than being new, a retro paint scheme and some resemblance of an old exhaust that really does not functionally apply, I see nothing special about this bike. All the componants are totally common and a power to weight ratio that is rather substandard. I expect it to handle as well as any Honda 750-4. Even their TT race bikes are Aprilia's.

Is it that "exclusive" or the "unattainability" that is so mysterously giving this bike appeal?

I would be better off buying one of a dozen comparable units with much better performance, reputable sales, not cost as much, and oh, attainable. Then I'll go get a set of Norton letters and basically have something that is just as much Norton as this thing is but maybe only better.

Let the bike die before it kills the Name.

They would have been better off calling it the Garner. What's the diff.

Click to expand...

The bike should be on par with Ducati monster/sport-classics which are great road bikes. If Dreer had succeeded,(American made, not made in China), I'd have one.

Haveing been well clear of all this , before tripping over this forum , the odd Motorcycle Magazine Id glared at gave me the impression someone in the U.S. had fleeced the sharemarket and got 20.000.000 into his company resurecting Norton . Apparently he built THREE Motorcycles . Which are blatently near
Standard Norton Componentry from the 70s , ( Swing arm and seat excepted ) as in ' Off the Shelf '.

Being a FORIGNER , the American conception of a Commando is somewhat forign , BAR ripping through the hills , pegs dragging , round the outside of rice burners , SOMETHING like that , anyway . :mrgreen: ( must be something I read somewhere , Cycle World , ' Best mountain road bike ' Big 10 test :lol: )

So therefore when someone comes along who hasnt been chained to machinary for five centuries , gets a sportster frame ( hidious in the first place ) puts the
Motor and Transmission in UNIT , gets some twerp who build Triumps like Jappers ( cheap ) on the Pen , and goes for glitter , Id probably rather walk .

But then where a trifle cantakerous here . Thinking thesmorning , Damn Russia is the only place theyd have done a decent job of a piece of antiquated machineary in its redesign ( by ME :lol: ) However , FORD , who did that TRI - Motor ( and one or two Cars ) or Chrysler would have the industrial wherewithall

The Fact that it IS a piece of ANTIQUATED MACHINARY is a or the , Essential part of its Charm , & or Character . A Sopwith Camel and a F !!! Arnt the same thing at all. As ALL the Mechanical Componetry for the Original Commando was available , he could have saved A LOT of money , AND GRIEF . Not only his. Apparently .

Nevertheless there are lots of tea bagger dickwhacks wholl go for his flashy gizmo , if he overcomes the obstacles ( and flecces a third 20.000.000 ) :shock:

Tragic when if all the exciteable retrobates had left it alone , WE would be No Worse Off .

IVE YET TO SEE ONE OF GARNERS DO 100 MILES IN A HOUR , a 24 Hour Race , or even a Race .
Therfore to me , ITS UNPROVEN , untill such has occured. Like It or Not. Wheter you give a damn , or consider the jackles have made it a Blanc Mange .

Basically , if theyd made something ( or Have :? 0 that would match an Old Guzzi ( 850 T ) we might rate it as better than useless . :shock:

Though ' Real Motorcyle ' Has more the dmenour of this here , AND Blakity Fuel Inj. WOULD have glued onto a NVT Commando , Rohan, as would a Cat .

I couldn't agree more Matt. But I did see it hit 112 on Cafe Racer. Might have been 106, not sure, but was over the ton anyway.

Matt,

Your post got me to thinking. A large part of the original Norton's cache was it's performance. In it's heyday it ruled the roost. The new Norton is probably one of the slower over 500 cc bikes being produced. Hadn't really thought of it in those terms before. When I saw all those teens and twenty somethings trade their GSXers for the BMW S1000RR, only to have horsepower bragging rights, I knew the younger buyer has little or no brand loyalty. This being the case, are there enough nostalgic motorcycle buyers with the required $20,000 to sustain a motorcycle manufacturer such as Norton? I am more inclined to see the viability of what CNW, as well as members comnoz and fullauto, and the many others I fail to recall, are doing with the original Norton. Improving upon the original.

Matt didn`t mean show 100mph on its speedo, he meant cover a certified 100 miles in 1 hour, like the old 6T Thunderbirds or Velo`s did to demonstrate mechanical capability..

J.A.W. said:

Matt didn`t mean show 100mph on its speedo, he meant cover a certified 100 miles in 1 hour, like the old 6T Thunderbirds or Velo`s did to demonstrate mechanical capability..

Click to expand...

Word heard. I noticed a VR 880 for sale. You gonna pony up the cake?

well if it was on "cafe racer" its gotta be true :roll:

(was it the episode where the guy was dismantling a front end with a crescent wrench.. :shock: .)

Snorton74 said:

I couldn't agree more Matt. But I did see it hit 112 on Cafe Racer. Might have been 106, not sure, but was over the ton anyway.

Click to expand...