Which head steady is your favourite?

Which head steady have you found to be the best?

  • Total voters
    46
cliffa said:
Is the Andover Norton one listed as Norvil?

andover-norton.co.uk

Motorcycle parts and spares for Norton motorbikes - Genuine Andover Norton Spare Parts - Andover Norton Motorcycles Parts - Original Andover Norton Parts

Motorcycle parts and spares for Andover Norton motorbikes: Andover Norton manufactures and supplies all Genuine Factory Spare Parts for Norton motorcycles built before 2002.
andover-norton.co.uk
Click to expand...
Those do look like they would work well too.

Space under the tank is an important. I have a memory that these ones can give clearance issues. Does anyone know ?

I had no clearance problems getting the Dave Taylor with spring to fit under my original 1974 Roadster tank. But I did need to move the wiring about.

Having said that even with original Roadster tanks the tunnel clearance does vary. I could not fit a Don Pender dual pull throttle unit because of clearance issues. I know my tank is an original because I have owned it since the 70s.
 
Last edited:
johnm said:
Those do look like they would work well too.

Space under the tank is an important. I have a memory that these ones can give clearance issues. Does anyone know ?

I had no clearance problems getting the Dave Taylor with spring to fit under my original 1974 Roadster tank. But I did need to move the wiring about.

Having said that even with original Roadster tanks the tunnel clearance does vary. I could not fit a Don Pender dual pull throttle unit because of clearance issues. I know my tank is an original because I have owned it since the 70s.
Click to expand...
I bought this one off Les. E over 30 years ago dont have the gussets as the Andover one pictured above...it had no tank clash issues just caused a few extra vibes and a bit of on going maintenance and needs a other set of rubbers...happy as with the Comstock CNW model...smooth as
 

Attachments

  • Which head steady is your favourite?
    20230308_174514.webp
    317.6 KB · Views: 123
johnm said:
Those do look like they would work well too.

Space under the tank is an important. I have a memory that these ones can give clearance issues. Does anyone know ?

I had no clearance problems getting the Dave Taylor with spring to fit under my original 1974 Roadster tank. But I did need to move the wiring about.

Having said that even with original Roadster tanks the tunnel clearance does vary. I could not fit a Don Pender dual pull throttle unit because of clearance issues. I know my tank is an original because I have owned it since the 70s.
Click to expand...
A post by Joe Siefert in 2019…

Aftermarket head steadys

I know this has been asked before, but what are everyone,s thoughts on aftermarket head steadys ? Looks to me that CNW has about the best idea. 2 or 3 Dave Taylor's ? I would like to hear from those that have used any of these
www.accessnorton.com www.accessnorton.com
 
acotrel said:
If you fitted an hydraulic steering damper in place of the head steady on a Commando, the bike might handle better.
Click to expand...
I can recomend both but if the head steady is sorted then the steering damper is mostly superfluous. In my experience.
 
acotrel said:
If you fitted an hydraulic steering damper in place of the head steady on a Commando, the bike might handle better.
Click to expand...
Go on Al… please expand on this and explain how a steering damper can replace the functionality of a head steady?

Remember… we are talking about isolastic Commandos here… not Seeleys or 500cc Tritons or etc…
 
For me, the rose joint type is the one. They allow unhindered up and down movement, thus allowing the ISOs to work correctly, whilst also allowing zero side to side movement, thus performing the desired function of the head steady in this application. Ludwigs does too.

I prefer the cNw / Comnoz one over the Dave Taylor one as it uses the stock frame mounts, doesn’t need a beer can shim on metric frames, and has bigger, more robust, ball joints.

The downside the the cNw / Comnoz one is that it’s more expensive and not always instantly available.
 
My Seeley has four rose joints, two on top of the head and two others back a bit on the insides of the top frame tubes. They are joined at each side by one short tube. THe bolts on top of the head are shoulder bolts which I made out of round headed Allen bolts. The top of the motor cannot move backwards or forwards, but it might be able to twist slightly. It is able to move up and down, and the tube I use in front of the motor, has a bend in it, so it can spring and not break.

If I was going to use isolastics. I would fit a teflon bush in place of the rubber in the rear one, and force the cradle to rotate around it. The head steady would be difficult. You need something which moves and allows rotation in only one direction. Otherwise the rear wheel contact patch would not register with your brain.
 
My only experiences are the standard Norton head steadies so had to vote for the later type with spring.
I am intrigued by the Mentions of the Ludwig design. I have searched but all his photos seem to have gone. Can someone post a picture or a link to his design instructions? Apologies if it’s my inadequate IT skills!
 
I have Luwig's text if anyone wants it - can be found on this site - not photos though - gone with PhotoBucket
Let me know if you'd like it @SteveC
 
Last edited:
acotrel said:
If you fitted an hydraulic steering damper in place of the head steady on a Commando, the bike might handle better.
Click to expand...
Al wrong information like this could get somebody hurt or killed
You obviously get some sort of kick out of this constant commando frame design slagging
The bare minimum you could do is remove this comment incase someone tries it
 
acotrel said:
If you fitted an hydraulic steering damper in place of the head steady on a Commando, the bike might handle better.
Click to expand...
A hydraulic steering damper will never make a bike handle better - full stop - it is only insurance against a tank-slapper.
You don't know this?

...and this is from someone who has a hydraulic damper fitted (my 850 Commando)

A head steady is absolutely essential for a bike with lower isolastics to eliminate excessive side-side movement of the upper engine/swingarm assembly, which the rubbers would allow.
 
Last edited:
acotrel said:
My Seeley has four rose joints, two on top of the head and two others back a bit on the insides of the top frame tubes. They are joined at each side by one short tube. THe bolts on top of the head are shoulder bolts which I made out of round headed Allen bolts. The top of the motor cannot move backwards or forwards, but it might be able to twist slightly. It is able to move up and down, and the tube I use in front of the motor, has a bend in it, so it can spring and not break.

If I was going to use isolastics. I would fit a teflon bush in place of the rubber in the rear one, and force the cradle to rotate around it. The head steady would be difficult. You need something which moves and allows rotation in only one direction. Otherwise the rear wheel contact patch would not register with your brain.
Click to expand...

Why does EVERY topic have to revolve around "MySeeley" :rolleyes:

Totally irrelevant... and WRONG
 
The only way a steering dampner "might" improve handling is if the machine was handing like absolute SHIT...and/or damaged to start with....the shakes come from the head
 
acotrel said:
My Seeley has four rose joints, two on top of the head and two others back a bit on the insides of the top frame tubes. They are joined at each side by one short tube. THe bolts on top of the head are shoulder bolts which I made out of round headed Allen bolts. The top of the motor cannot move backwards or forwards, but it might be able to twist slightly. It is able to move up and down, and the tube I use in front of the motor, has a bend in it, so it can spring and not break.

If I was going to use isolastics. I would fit a teflon bush in place of the rubber in the rear one, and force the cradle to rotate around it. The head steady would be difficult. You need something which moves and allows rotation in only one direction. Otherwise the rear wheel contact patch would not register with your brain.
Click to expand...
Al I do not understand why you need 4 rose joints on the head of a solidly mounted motor… especially on a motor that is supposed to be a structural member of the frame.

Can you post pictures?
 
Fast Eddie said:
Al I do not understand why you need 4 rose joints on the head of a solidly mounted motor… especially on a motor that is supposed to be a structural member of the frame.

Can you post pictures?
Click to expand...
Probably the same reason he has the rear caliper torque arm mounted to the frame rather than the swinging arm
With a non floating caliper mount
 
Back
Top