Useless assorted Norton musings.....

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

Rohan said:

If you want to go strictly historic racing, seem to recall that NZ has the strictest rules - frozen in time at 1962 (or 1963 ?), nothing later permitted in that class. ?? Maybe someone familar could elaborate - they get very big international attendances at Pukekohe, judging by reports, including lotsa famous past racing machines generally only seen in museums, out for a gallop....

Click to expand...

Rohan
i'm not up with the details of the rules but they will be available on www.nzcmrr.com
Ken McIntosh and others took bikes to the US this year (or was it last year already?) and were interested to see how they would go against what he expected to be much lighter machinery - they weren't disgraced, although having Kevin Schwanz riding one of the meetings can't have done any harm.

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

ntst8 said:

Rohan said:

If you want to go strictly historic racing, seem to recall that NZ has the strictest rules - frozen in time at 1962 (or 1963 ?), nothing later permitted in that class. ?? Maybe someone familar could elaborate - they get very big international attendances at Pukekohe, judging by reports, including lotsa famous past racing machines generally only seen in museums, out for a gallop....

Click to expand...

Rohan
i'm not up with the details of the rules but they will be available on http://www.nzcmrr.com
Ken McIntosh and others took bikes to the US this year (or was it last year already?) and were interested to see how they would go against what he expected to be much lighter machinery - they weren't disgraced, although having Kevin Schwanz riding one of the meetings can't have done any harm.

Click to expand...

The rider is one of the most significant factors but the boys from NZ bring some powerfully modified bikes too.

A look at their rules for Pre 1963 Modified Class (and other classes) allows for "Engine and gearbox to be the same silhouette as pre 1963 machines" which means modern metallurgy and improved thicknesses. Rules are wide open with regards to modifications. If what I have been looking at represents the rules in their entirety, the NZ rules appear to me to be much more accomodating.

Also telling is that all but the Clubman Class allow for the use of Alcohol. This may play in well in explaining the claim of "in excess of 100 HP" as it pertains to the subject bike of this thread. 100 HP can be achieved with reliability and lots of tuning on petrol but it is so much easier with alcohol.

All bullshit aside.

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

Superchargers seem to add a few ponies, too; although they also weigh as much as a small pony...

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

Beng

Not a chance

In the Uk we have a production class. Standard, nobody out there!!!! No tuning allowed. Post classic yes. Older British bikes, no. This is with CRMCC.
(ps post classic is the new class & appears to be taking off)
I am also a member of the British Historic Motorcycle Racing Club. Older bikes, much more standard, ie frames, brakes etc. Numbers are slowly declining.
Why? This club started with these rules. They started "specials" to 1972 a few years ago & have just started a bears class this season. Reason? bums on seats.
To try & alter rules to an older base setting would decimate the class overnight.

As to NZ rules, if you want the best Manx speak to Mr Macintosh. Spot on but if you dont run with the Landsdowne series (original spec bikes) ps they have a points system, the more original bits you have on the bikes the more points you get awarded. ie modern parts are allowed to keep bikes on the track.
If you want to run with the top Manxes in the Uk you are running short stroke nickasil bore etc etc super Manxes.
The old saying is you cant set the clock back.

Me
I have run what I had. I have updated as I have gone along. I have never raced with standard road drums. For my own saftey. (although my road Commando brake is superb. New shoes skimmed to match the drum,strengthening plate, longer brake arms etc) I raced my Commando engine with home spun crank balancing, lightening porting etc. However once I started to push the bike things broke! That is why I have updated. As my friend says, Steve Maneys engines are not any faster than early tuners of Norton engines were. However they may hold together a bit longer.I have never been lucky when things break on my bike. Others come in having snapped the crank. I end up hurting myself. If you race a bike hard it is very hard to run a Commando without things breaking.
I missed most of last year after breaking the Quaife then the Nourish gearboxes. I am rebuilding the Quaife for my 750 as it has been very good (however it is 36 years old) I have already updated the 960 with a TT box. It has taken many years for me to accept that being at a meeting is enough! I want to actually race!
And to finish!

all the best Chris

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

The fundamental point of the NZ rules is that they allow for three different classes within three different time periods. And under no circumstances are Japanese machines or parts allowed.

The Clubmans class most closely matches Bens list. All visible parts must be in period or exact replicas. But inside the engines you will find cams and other components/materials which were not made in the period. Carbs, brakes, ignition, no of speeds in gearbox, bore stroke etc are period or closely defined if not readily available. ie Concentrics can be used in pre 63. However I would think several of his other suggestions are not really practical for an amature club. Cam profile, valve spring rate, compression ratio, gear ratios would all be difficult to prove without an onerous technical inspection regime. The biggest out of period item allowed is belt drive which were introduced for safety oil control reasons. And having been down that particular road over a period of 5 years I would argue belt drives are actually cheaper given the replacment cost of primary chain.

The biggest constraints in the class are the brakes - basically single leading shoe and fuel. Max 100 octane petrol. A bike I built won the 500 Clubmans class championship twice - it had an excellent rider - and it was always the brakes that stopped it competing on level terms with most of the modified and race class bikes.

Having said all that most tuners eventually move on to the modified class. While Clubmans provides a somewhat more level playing field the modified class gives space for the good tuners and engineers to demonstrate their skills. Everyone wants to prove they can build a better hammer so thats where most of the best tuners end up.

John

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

Chris,

I tip my hat to you sir - rubber side down.

Johnm,

In the states with AHRMA, the closest we get to the "beng" model of vintage racing are Novice Historic Production and Exhibition classes. Over the years the Novice Historic Production class has had a good showing of participants as an introductory level race class. The spirit of the class is to move out and up once the rider has achieved a competence level or begins to dominate.

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

Here's a few pic's of what the Village Bike motor and internals looks like. I wouldn't like to see these scatered in the gravel, I cant help but appreciate machinery! :wink:

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

johnm said:

And under no circumstances are Japanese machines or parts allowed.
The Clubmans class most closely matches Bens list. All visible parts must be in period or exact replicas.
However I would think several of his other suggestions are not really practical for an amature club.
The biggest constraints in the class are the brakes - basically single leading shoe and fuel. Max 100 octane petrol.
John

Click to expand...

I think that Japanese bikes played a really important part in motorcycle racing in the 1960's, odd to disallow it, it is history.

My fantasy list of vintage racing rules has very impractical and unenforceable parts. But it was just spit-balling off the top of my head and an idea.

The Clubmans class that Johnm describes above looks interesting for those who like the old bikes and history. Premium pump gas here in the USA is usually around 93 octane, and a lot of power can be squeezed out of it.

Real vintage motorcycles, racers and their history is only a personal interest of mine, which of course not everyone will share. I grew up with the bikes and riders of the 60's and earlier and for me it is sad to see them all disappearing and being replaced with other things. So I am just making noise about my feelings again.

As DWS talks about, the original spec. parts on some of the current "Norton" racers can be fit into a women's handbag. I think that is an important thing to notice.

Racing a 100hp motorcycle like the one at the thread start with modern brakes, tires etc. is not really Vintage or historical racing to me, but that is what it is to most these days apparently.

To show how out of touch Giannini Racing is with history, just look at their quote below the photo of the bike; "VBNR of Australia has created the most exciting British contender for the Vintage 750 cc Class since the Norton factory race works closed in the early sixties."

Saying what they are doing trumps the entire history of motorcycle tuning from 1963 onwards makes it look like they hired a U.S. politician to write their web-page.

That is what is making "good press" and is fashionable and trendy though. As history shows, once the people following current fashion trends don't feel "special" enough being a part of it, then they throw it away and skip over to another trend. Maybe at one point in the future the fashionable trend will be actual history.

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

I agree with Beng.
The reason that we all supposedly love these Nortons is because of how they were made and designed, as well as when they were made and designed. Vintage racing is supposed to celebrate the machines for what they are and preserve their history while doing so. Certainly vintage racing can still be competitive on real vintage machines. The H in AHRMA stands for Historic, so let's not forget that. And I'm quite sure that the R doesn't stand for Replica. Vintage Norton motorcycles is my passion and I think we should all preserve them while we enjoy them. Wether it be riding them on the street or racing them competitively, the whole idea is to acknowledge and celebrate their history.

Building an old Norton into something that it's not, just doesn’t make any sense to me. I understand that my opinion is certainly in the minority, but I don't understand why. I thought that this was a Norton forum, so I'd think that by default there would be more people that agree with that. I suppose that having a purist view is an opinion that's dying quickly. Norton went out of business a long time ago. So it's history and progression is forever trapped in time. Progressing it past that time frame is just speculation on anyone's part.

If someone wanted a 100 HP motorcycle, there are certainly better choices than a Norton. There are endless motorcycles that were built for that. So to build a Norton into something that will surely blow up, only serves to burn through parts that already have a limited supply.

Maybe my views are a bit utopian. Maybe I'm an idiot. Maybe we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

"I think that Japanese bikes played a really important part in motorcycle racing in the 1960's, odd to disallow it, it is history."

That has been debated a few hundred times !

I wasnt about when the club was originally set up but I have been told the reason was the Japanese machines already had a place and club to race in.

Actually except for the Pukekohe festival all NZCMRR meetings are shared with the Post Classic Club which is dominated by Jap machines.

And much to my delight on really tight tracks the guy who rode my bike regularly set faster lap times on my single leading shoe braked featherbed 500 Norton Dommie than he did on his own Kawasaki 750 triple disc braked methanol rocket ship.

Pleased me no end and frustrated the hell out of him !!!!!!!

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

I concur with the balanced points of view above. For me there is a bit of a personal and philosophical struggle as to what has evolved in Vintage/Historic motorcycle racing - a bit of an arms race. I really do not lose any sleep over this.

On the other hand it is picking up in history where things left off and is exploring what "could have been" (within reasonable limits) in a weird parallel universe sort of way. After reviewing the NZ rules I see more common ground than uncommon ground between the NZ and AHRMA race organizations. I suspect the rules are tempered with practicality. As an example, for certain classes, AHRMA allows frame/engine combinations, materials and technologies that were available for that period with guidelines.

For me, there are several aspects of motorcycle racing which include the people, the technology, the act of road racing (which offers me some of my purist moments in life), and the competition. I am a technophile and the Norton engine just happens to be my engine of choice (somewhat of a blight). The modern crank cases and components have more to do with being practical (reliability) than anything else. Even the NZ rules seem to aknowledge this by allowing after market engine cases that meet the silohette.

What I despise are disparaging remarks that ranks ones view superior to anothers in a poorly vailed personal attack on people that contribute to the Vintage/Historic scene in various ways. I find it very disrespectful. I suppose the attacks have as much to do with a persons passion as it does with his or her's temperment. I will call it for what it is.

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

Dances with Shrapnel said:

What I despise are disparaging remarks that ranks ones view superior to anothers in a poorly vailed personal attack on people that contribute to the Vintage/Historic scene in various ways. I find it very disrespectful.

Click to expand...

Common sense and the idea of Free Speech says that being part of a "scene" does not mean someone/something is above criticism or instantly deserving of any respect.

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

beng said:

Dances with Shrapnel said:

What I despise are disparaging remarks that ranks ones view superior to anothers in a poorly vailed personal attack on people that contribute to the Vintage/Historic scene in various ways. I find it very disrespectful.

Click to expand...

Common sense and the idea of Free Speech says that being part of a "scene" does not mean someone/something is above criticism or instantly deserving of any respect.

Click to expand...

Fair enough where common sense is evident but to me and a vast majority, your model of how things should be flys in the face of pretty much every Vintage Motorcycle Club's practical rules. I get the impression that they all came to similar conclusions independently.

I don't dispute the apparent technical historical facts. I do not care for the poorly vailed personal attacks without a basis, they are out of line. I will refer you to another thread where I asked for something to back up your assertion that someone was saying, doing or representing something not factual and you failed to respond. I think the concept was sending you off to fetch the bucket of steam. So to me these attacks come across as borderline delusional.

Agreed with respect to crticism and respect but it is the showing of disrespect that is, in my opinion, out of line, especially when certain other assertions remain unfounded. My assumption is that you are reasonably fully cognizant of what you do, what you did, and how you go around your business. That is my assumption. Please advise if I am incorrect.

There are others, past and present, that share your views on what should be called Vintage or Historic, they express their opinions and move on without unfounded personal attacks. Even individuals you have targeted with your hate/jealousy/disrespect understand your point on historical matters.

Heinz Kegler (RIP) was one individual who apparently had the same view on what is truely historical. He did not go off on a rant about things of this nature; he expressed his opinions and moved on. Is it fair to say you worshiped Heinz?...but why carry the torch in such a manner. I would say he would be turning over in his grave if he heard some of the remarks and attacks that are so vitirol and mis directed.

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

I guess you will have to spell things out, because I don't have a clue as to what you are talking about.

If you think you see some conspiracy or assign motives to others actions, you have to know there is a possibility that it exists nowhere outside your little head..... and that others may not know or see what you are spouting off about. I am a big boy so don't feel you can't be direct.

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

Dances with Shrapnel said:

My assumption is that you are reasonably fully cognizant of what you do, what you did, and how you go around your business. That is my assumption. Please advise if I am incorrect.

Click to expand...

beng said:

I guess you will have to spell things out, because I don't have a clue as to what you are talking about.

Click to expand...

So I assumed incorrectly. Clueless is now the new defense.

Yawn.

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

Dances with Shrapnel said:

I will refer you to another thread where I asked for something to back up your assertion that someone was saying, doing or representing something not factual and you failed to respond.

Click to expand...

When you refer me to another thread, please do me a favor and put a link in so I don't have to waste any more of my time than I have to.

But I will have to assume you are talking about the crankshaft porn thread then. What it comes down to is that it is a waste of my time to discuss technical matters with you because I don't think you are that sharp on those matters. This ties in nicely with your, out of the blue, bringing up Heinz Kegler, who all will agree was sharp on technical matters.

I enjoyed talking to Heinz for decades about Nortons, and we always saw eye-to-eye and agreed on mechanical ideas, and there are a few other sharp Norton mechanics, craftsmen and engineers that I respect the opinions of.
I have had another friend for decades, Emery, who over the last 50+ years when he was not teaching engineering at Penn State Main Campus, he was running his own engineering firm. Emery liked my idea of a crankshaft and said yours and your thinking was flawed, and that was good enough for me and I saw no use in wasting any more time trying to make an apple into an orange.

So besides myself, I have quite a list of friends and other sources I will go to and look at, and you are not on the list at all, any more than my neighbors dog.

I will concede that you are probably better qualified to give advice in one area of expertise, but I do not plan on participating in "throwing shovelfuls of money at craftsmen to make toys for me", so I will probably never have any questions for you at all.

Like the neighbor's dog, you make a bit of irritating noise here and there and we will throw you a bone if we are in the mood, or if we are in the mood we will ignore you and do something that is important.... That you or your opinions ever meant anything more to me than that is the delusion.

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

Yikes.

Definitely not the standard flavor of this forum.

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

beng said:

When you refer me to another thread, please do me a favor and put a link in so I don't have to waste any more of my time than I have to.

Click to expand...

Spoon fed.

various-seeley-frames-mks-t12503-15.html

With some choice excerpts.

beng said:

If someone builds a motorcycle that is supposedly a replica of a "1968 Seeley Commando" and proceeds to parade it around the world as such, ..................................

Click to expand...

Dances with Shrapnel said:

So where is this instance of "a replica of a 1968 Seeley Commando being paraded as such?" Please inform us of what shadows these demons lurk in. We really should have specifics here as you have been very specific and deliberate all through this thread. As I see it, and paraphrasing your statement from your earlier post, this is your Wet Dream or Unicorn, all you have to do to make any Wet Dream or Unicorn a reality is simply come up with the documentation for it. And "documentation" means a records made of paper or film, not hot air and wishes....There must be URL's, pdf's, flyers, letters, photographs. You have made these assertions so it is fair to say the burden of proof is squarely on your shoulders. Go for it and back it up.

I for one do not represent my Seeley bikes as a whole as nothing other than my doings with credit due to the skilled people who helped put them together. I will state it is a Seeley replica frame and whether it was made by Roger T.

Please, please after all this please show us who or what is doing this wrong here. Is there any evidence of it?

And if you do have an instance, can you demonstrate that there was intent or malice as opposed to difference of opinion?

So do you have that bucket of steam for me mate?

Poof!!.......I did not think so.

Click to expand...

I am still waiting for some substantiation of this and various other assertions such as:

beng said:

a bunch of rich snot-nosed kids run spaceships with $3000 gearboxes around a track while they award each other trophies and championships and then pat each others backs for it.

Click to expand...

So there must be some secret race society where these imaginary "snot-nosed kids" race, and then award each other trophies? Truely time for you to get the tin foil hat back on.

Again backing this up is like fetching that bucket of steam. Still not there yet? I did not think so.

Now you can get back to your busy schedule.

I think you could use a dog, as a friend and for consultation, since I believe you could learn quite a bit from a dog. By the way, are you not on good terms with the neighbors dog? What did you do? :lol:

The personal attack drivel goes on and on like a FORTRAN "do loop" with no purpose in life.

I have no problem with listening to the historical facts presented by you and others such as Brian Slark.

I am even keel about it and can navigate around what I consider others serious character flaws but I will call the personal attack BS when I see it, read it or hear it.

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

grandpaul said:

Yikes.

Definitely not the standard flavor of this forum.

Click to expand...

Never a good word to say about anything or anyone, if you look back over previous posts.
Or Commandos.......

Re: 100+ horsepower Norton 750???

Rohan said:

grandpaul said:

Yikes.

Definitely not the standard flavor of this forum.

Click to expand...

Never a good word to say about anything or anyone, if you look back over previous posts.
Or Commandos.......

Click to expand...

Commandos also! Down right pathological....