classic motorcycle forum
Motorcycle Discussions => British Bikes => Topic started by: Tidyrob69 on February 07, 2018, 09:48:57 PM
-
Hi.
Would someone be able to identify if this gear lever is original. You have to lift your foot up and forward about 8 inches to change gear which doesn't seem right and is certainly uncomfortable. I've looked at photos of others and on some the nose of the gearlever droops towards the ground which makes sense.
-
Are we looking at a 4-speed box? Norton used such a thing 1933-34-ish for its sportier models before going to the dolls head, but I think the 16H went straight from hand change to dolls head in 1935. What year is the bike?
We could muck round here, but Simon and John over at http://www.vintagenorton.com/ are experts and would no doubt know what is going on here. If you give them the engine, gearbox and frame number they can likely tell you how it all left the factory.
Do report back!
Leon
-
That’s a very interesting foot change. It’s Sturmey Archers add on accessory positive stop foot change from the early 30’s period. It dates from when a positive stop foot change was an either/or option. The interesting thing isn’t that the change has what is now considered a long throw but that your bike has a foot change at all. For a short time until foot change became standard this was a rather exotic racing bike accessory.
Many bikes of the period had the rear brake on the right side and for a brief period you could have had both your fancy new foot change gear lever and the rear brake on the same side. It made for entertaining riding. This is why the British industry moved the rear brake to the left.
If I remember rightly there should be a limited adjustment option for the gear lever so you can have it sloping downwards but who knows what has been done over the lifetime of the bike.
Cheers,
-
Yes, what year is your bike ?
That could be correct for an early 30's bike.
But for a later bike, someone has fitted an earlier box and mechanism.
The footrest is on a splined fitting, so can be adjusted, within limits.
Whether more forwards and upwards or downwards and more within
reach of the gearlever and is still comfortable is another matter.
-
And, if that gearbox is correct for your year, and that footrest location is comfortable, you could probably have a local engineering co fabricate you up a new gearlever, with more of a downward slant. Its only a flat sheet of steel with some cuts and bends in it, then polished and chromed.
The later WD 16H levers on ebay sourced from India are now well over $100, so you probably could do just as well with locally made, although chroming will add to that.
Or, the existing one could be cut and rewelded shorter with a more downwards slant. Although the weld might look a bit ugly, unless polished and rechromed. Or welded in stainless.
-
I would go for making up another lever as what I can see of the bike is relatively unmolested and it would be a shame to hack about what is probably a rare original enhancement.
-
Thanks for all your replies.
Its a 1946 model so must have had an earlier box fitted. I'm not impartial to having a hand change gear lever if that's what would work better on that box but there doesn't seem to be any provisions for brackets or the like.
I'll take the lever off and see what lurks behind and i'll drop vintage norton a line.
Maybe i'm expecting too much of it though, i normally ride modern bikes and motocross so am not used to false neutrals and oddly placed gear levers.
I will update with my findings.
-
That's interesting that the footrests are splined, I assumed they were fixed. Looking at the photos if the footrest was rotated clockwise about 45 degrees it would help the situation a lot. I'll try this too. Thanks R
-
I have some more information if any one is interested.
John at vintage Norton said it's an early sturmey archer box 1931 to 34.
I've moved the footrest up which has helped but the throw on the lever seems too much, is the some way of limiting the outer limits. I sometimes get false neutrals up and down through the gears.
If this is normal then I'm happy to live with it but if there's a way of refining things then I'll persue it.
I've attached some more photos.
-
I think you'll get used to it - just remember on old bikes there's no hurry to change gear. In 1929 and 1930, the SA box had a lever that could be configured for either hand or foot use, but was most often used as a foot change. No positive stop! I rode a 1929 CJ (350cc "cricket bat" OHC) with this setup and it was fine - just had to "feel" the lever into the next gear.
Here's your box in a 1933 ES2. As I noted up the top, it was only used on the sporty Nortons.
Enjoy.
Leon
-
Yes it had to be a SA gearbox, Nortons introduced the "Dolls Head" box circa 1934 to improve and enclose the gearchange action, and also get away from the hand change era.
This was because Sturmey Archer stopped all motorcycle manufacturing then, and this included no longer supplying gearboxes to Nortons and others. Nortons bought the SA design, improved it and had it built for them elsewhere - by Burmans as it happens. (although there is nothing Burman about the design.)
The long lever throw is about how they came.
As said, you'll get used to it !!
You may be able to do an outright swap for a later dolls head box to suit your era of bike, early 1930s boxes aren't that common, and folks are probably looking for them. Whether this would include cash either way is another matter, may depend on the condition of each box, and yours sounds to be pretty good. Ex-WD boxes are often extremely worn, so watch for this if you go down this path.
-
Hi Tidyrob69 and All
Any wear in the clevis pins and linkages will make the gear change sloppy and cause missed gears
I can see a gap between pin and clevis in the photo's
Sort those out and the gear change will be as good as possible
John
-
The dolls head boxes still had quite a long throw, with that long gangly gearlever,
even with all play taken out of the linkages.
It was only the shorter lever of the laydown box that reduced the lever movement,
and the even shorter 5" lever of the AMC box further reduced the throw.
But the footrests need to be suitably positioned to be able to take advantage of this.
-
Thanks for all your input, it makes for an interesting read.
I wonder why it has a gearbox from a decade before fitted, maybe it's an early bike registered later or maybe simply the burman/SA box was the only one available at the time to replace a faulty dolls head or lay down or whatever box it had originally.
I think my course of action will be to look at replacing the worn linkages and see how I get on. I will also keep an eye out for a gearbox suited for the year, the dolls head and lay down boxes look different in pictures, which would be the better choice? Also I assume mounting plates etc will also be required.
-
The laydown box is later than your bike, and won't fit - the mountings are different.
So you are looking for a dolls head.
Ex-WD ones are fairly common, but make sure its in good condition.
Your present box is purely SturmeyArcher, as supplied for a Norton.
The Burman manufacturing connection is largely unknown to most, and not generally referred to in connection with any Norton gearbox. Burman boxes are different.
-
Yes, I only discovered that fairly recently. Although as you say Burman merely manufactured them and had no input into the design.
What is also maybe not well known is that the "AMC" box fitted to later Nortons and (oddly) AMC bikes has essentially the same internals as the lay-down and even the doll's head boxes - indeed, many parts from the earlier models still fit the latest ones.
Of course a gearbox designed for a 20-something bhp single was struggling with 50 or so from the 828 Commando especially when fitted with the larger gearbox sprocket.
I've always thought the Norton boxes of whatever era (except maybe the earlier ones with the external linkages) had the sweetest action of all the common makes.
-
Thankyou R.
I'll keep a look out for a dolls head box.
That's interesting iansoady, I guess it kept the cost down not having to tool up to make new design internals.
-
Be a little cautious about expecting/attempting to swap internals between early and late boxes ?
The tooth form changed somewhere along the line, so it was always recommended to change gears in pairs - and also not mix old with new. And the bushes went from solid bronze ones to sintered bronze, so the installation and running clearances are 2 separate instructions in the manuals.
There may not be a lot of difference, but if there is.....
-
Yes, caution is always worth while. I must admit I was thinking more of things like the camplate and plunger, bearings and selection mechanism rather than gears themselves. And of course mainshafts differed by application.
-
The Burman connection makes sense when you look at it. As with many other makes Norton were happily using Sturmey Archer gearboxes in the early 30's when Raleigh (owner of Sturmey Archer ) decided to get out of motorcycles all together and concentrate on their bicycles. One of the directors of Norton, Gilbert Smith was a director of other firms as well. I believe he was a director at Raleigh as well. He not only got the four speed Sturmey Archer box for Norton he also had the connections to get Burman to make it. Motorcycle gearboxes were but a small part of Burmans business their bread and butter business was steering box stuff for the car world.
Making gearboxes and gearcutting was a fairly small world back then and I suspect quite a few firms took in each others washing at various times.
Personally, I can never find out much about Albion Engineering although they made gearboxes for everything ranging from lathes, army tanks and ships to very small motorcycles. Somehow their history seems to have just disappeared.
Cheers,
-
Graces Guide has 2 or 3 lines about Albion Eng
https://www.gracesguide.co.uk/Albion_Engineering_Co
Name and address, a starting point ?
Would the motorcycling weaklies have ever covered them ?
We diverge...
-
Thanks for the advice. Can i not fit a complete dolls head box (inc casings) in place of the SA?
-
Of course you can fit a dolls head Norton box. That is what a 1946 16H is meant to have. We have just been distracted by the earlier box which just predates Raleigh stopping production.
If you really want to get your head around the subject I would suggest you buy a copy of "Norton Motorcycles 1928 to 1955" First published by Temple press in 1959. Bruce Main-Smith & Co later got a licence to reproduce it in the 1980's so there are a fair few copies floating about. You will learn a lot including how to look after the engine and front forks.
I had a quick look on abebooks.com and found two copies for sale, both in the UK.
Cheers,
-
Ah ok thanks 33d6, the talk of changing internals for matched parts confused me a bit. Yes i'll look for a dolls head box as it sounds more user friendly from a maintenance and riding point of view.
I'll get a copy of the book, thanks for the advice.
-
The postwar Norton SV s have certainly come in from the cold......Go back to the early 70s,and you could not give one away......literally...and I tried....As a teen ,I remember the local council had a fleet of big4s with the upright"tombstone" boxes.Horrible things ,with long gear pedals,and outside linkages...The "rat gang " had them ,sidecars filled with foxterriers waiting for the chase.And the mosquito spraying gangs also had them......Which brings us to the early SA gearbox......at that time,you could buy a new ex WD Norton gearbox for 2 quid.....So to fit a SA would be unusual,but maybe the owner didnt want to spend 2 quid,maybe he didnt have it......Back to the present and 2 has turned into 700,which is what I see asked for WD boxes now......but the SA box was also fitted to B/S bikes,so what is it worth now.......10% of what a B/S is worth.....Could be sitting on a goldmine.......Incidentally,the Norton boxes were made almost entirely by sub contractors during WW2,as Burmans were pressed making 1/4 million CPs,and also making the precision gearing for A/A sights,not to mention steering gears.
-
Would you happen to know who those sub-contractors might have been.
Or where this might have been mentioned ?
-
I'd have thought that early box would have a value in excess of a WD16H one?
-
Far in excess,if its the same as a Brough gearbox........add as many 0s as necessary.....I remember havin a S/A box for sale at a swap meet,a guy offered me some paltry sum.....he also had a SS100 on display there.......I said .....Your broungh is worth 30,000....that means this box is worth about 10% of that....3000.....take it or leave it.....The dearer the bike,the more miserable the owner.
-
Far in excess,if its the same as a Brough gearbox........add as many 0s as necessary.....I remember havin a S/A box for sale at a swap meet,a guy offered me some paltry sum.....he also had a SS100 on display there.......I said .....Your broungh is worth 30,000....that means this box is worth about 10% of that....3000.....take it or leave it.....The dearer the bike,the more miserable the owner.
Don't get me started on such a subject, I have several bottles worth of tales of that ilk; Certain Makes are notorious for their tight wad owners; Vincents at the top, Velocettes 2nd.
At jumbles Vincent spares need to be nailed down or they get nicked.
I did get my revenge on Vincent spares after I quit the trade, very sweet, too long for here and on Velocettes by exporting every OHC part I could lay my hands on to France where a guy took all I could send, no arguments.
Brough owners in the main deserve all they get, I was once conned out of 4 heavyweight SA boxes but count it as a lesson learned, I must have had around 6/7 Broughs through my hands when in the trade, a pain to sell in the 1970s and as for getting paid for work done........ one guy I asked to meet me at the Chelsea bridge tea stall, because if he didn't pay my bill I was going to heave his SS100 into the Thames, he paid.