classic motorcycle forum
Motorcycle Discussions => British Bikes => Topic started by: Oggers on October 05, 2018, 09:16:27 AM
-
Gents
Thoughts on the above? One for sale locally, full resto for 5.5K. What say you?
Cheers
-
Photo?
dull but quite rare.
Could be a nice bike though.
-
IF the restoration has been well done that's a good price. But we all know how a shiny exterior can hide all sorts of horrors.
I paid slightly less than that for my similarly aged ES2 which was cosmetically tired but most of the mechanicals were in excellent order. I see restored early 50s Nortons at asking prices of £7,500+ although who knows what they actually fetch.
-
There is no sense in old bike prices these days, its getting silly;
this week on ebay a Pair of pre war Triumph girders sold for £2,950
a frame and gearbox for same £4,600
two wheels for same £3,582
all to the same buyer.
That makes the Model 7, look like a free gift if its been done right.
-
I quite like the aesthetically pleasing look of it...
IF the restoration has been well done that's a good price.
Well, easy to tell from the outside and it does look fine, but internally perhaps a different matter. Apart from the obvious smoke, rattles, horrible big end rumblings, oil condition, and a quick test ride - How do you tell whether engine/box is well done?
-
Use your earoles and experience. If you haven't got the experience, don't get involved.
-
How do you tell whether engine/box is well done?
Take it to bits and see for yourself.
If you can't do that, or assess for yourself is it the bike for you.?
I understand scooters are rather good these days. ;)
-
The early Norton twins had a name for blowups when rods broke.
-
Yes, but they were being thrashed....
A quick check for any Norton with the pressed steel chaincase is to pop the inspection cap off and look at the primary chain. It should have about 1/2" vertical play; should not be rusty, and should be slightly oily (not dripping). It's something that's often neglected as the primary chaincase is notorious for leaking and leaving the chain dry.
-
Nice bike, the Model 7 and one I would like one day.
Personally I wouldn't buy a restored bike. You pay a lot for shiny paint and chrome (and possibly sh*tty Taiwanese pattern parts!) without having a clue about the condition of the mechanicals.
Without generalising too much, amateur mechanics range from dumb to terrifying in their abilities, and what is totally spunked to you me and the next bloke might be perfectly OK to the seller...especially when he sees that a new part would cost £100.
Genuine "barn finds" are very popular and for good reason, ie no-one's had their Machine-Mart 100 piece Metrinch junior tool kit anywhere near it, and that's the way I like to buy them.
-
The trouble is that so many "barn finds" are actually totally knackered bikes that were shoved in corner for a reason. Or very early "restorations" leaving little of the original bike. Or even "distressed" machines that have been made to look weathered.
I don't believe there are many left in this country although there are probably a lot still in the USA.
-
I'm happy with "totally knackered" Ian as that's what restoration is all about. Buying a non-running seventy+ year old bike and expecting it to be useable is a bit optimistic!
I appreciate that the term "barn find" means a lot of things to different people; I was using it in the context of "a non-running but basically complete and unmolested" bike, rather than the Ebay "rusty hacked about old Honda being sold on by the ever-hopeful but hopeless Saturday mechanic because he's just broken off another head bolt while attempting to remove them" description. ;)
-
Rex
Nice bike, the Model 7 and one I would like one day.
Personally I wouldn't buy a restored bike. You pay a lot for shiny paint and chrome (and possibly sh*tty Taiwanese pattern parts!) without having a clue about the condition of the mechanicals.
Without generalising too much, amateur mechanics range from dumb to terrifying in their abilities, and what is totally spunked to you me and the next bloke might be perfectly OK to the seller...especially when he sees that a new part would cost £100.
Genuine "barn finds" are very popular and for good reason, ie no-one's had their Machine-Mart 100 piece Metrinch junior tool kit anywhere near it, and that's the way I like to buy them.
I would actually prefer a resto but a "non-running but basically complete and unmolested bike" is extremely difficult to find. I would shy away from "barn finds" as they tend to be total basket cases and beyond economic repair. I could take it to bits of and start from there - just to check it all out of course!
-
Is anything with Norton on the tank ever beyond economical repair? I suppose there's some desperate piles of shite that are only good for parts but if someone has the abilities to renovate and/or adapt stuff and enjoy doing it then why not?
Even Jubilees and Navigators are steadily increasing in price.... :-\
-
Why not? - simply because the cost of restoring aforementioned pile of rust - even with Norton on the tank - would be far more than the end result is worth. If you are doing it for pure enjoyment alone, then that is a different matter. Personally, I would favour a resto, provided it is wipes it face at the end of it. So if you would be good enough to find me a "non-running, but basically complete and unmolested" Vincent for under a grand, I would be most obliged..... ;D
-
A 100 piece toolkit would have been a blessing........Im one of the graduates of $10 bikes with all the big nuts worked over with a hammer and chisel.........I have several rusty knackered barn finds....(.I dont actually have a barn),....when I first got them were running bikes........And dont knock hammer and chisel...........a good hammer and chisel man can get a job anywhere ,and succeed at it.
-
I have a Vincent firefly you can have for £950 :o
-
Why not? - simply because the cost of restoring aforementioned pile of rust - even with Norton on the tank - would be far more than the end result is worth. If you are doing it for pure enjoyment alone, then that is a different matter. Personally, I would favour a resto, provided it is wipes it face at the end of it. So if you would be good enough to find me a "non-running, but basically complete and unmolested" Vincent for under a grand, I would be most obliged..... ;D
It's great if you can flog off a bike you've spent money on for what it cost (or more) but if bike restoration is your interest then not making a profit doesn't really come into it. You wouldn't expect to make a profit if you liked golf or playing in a band, would you?
That said, too many spend too much on Bantams and the like and can never hope to recoup much if sold. There must be a happy medium in there somewhere.
As for the Vin, if only you'd said you wanted one last week...
-
The early Norton twins had a name for blowups when rods broke.
The 500's don't easily break rods.
The Model 99 600's used the same rods, and that might be a different matter.
Buying an old bike is almost always a case of you exploring the insides and doing
it how you'd like it to be, folks always seem to take shortcuts somewhere ?
-
I don't believe there are many left in this country although there are probably a lot still in the USA.
A lot seem to have come out to Australia, since there was a widespread Norton dealer network there already.
Early ones could be rare in the USA ?, the Indian Sales Corp wasn't set up to distribute Nortons etc until the early 1950s ?
btw, its easy to spot a genuine early model dommie, the timing cover only has 11 screws.
All subsequent years had 12 screws (may have carried over into 1950 for a bit).
Expect a bit of work to make the timing cover oil tight....
-
Ive been "at it" for nearly sixty years ,and IMHO Norton twins wernt common.........mainly I suspect because Triumph s were.I seem to remember Nortons were always dearer than Triumphs and BSA s.....The early plunger Norton twins were also ugly bikes,and had tin chaincases ,something that just didnt sell in OZ...Pre 50 ,they also had the primitive outside linkage gearbox,which was also ugly.........Funny thing is the Norton SV singles were common in government fleets.....the Brisbane council had lots as mosquito sprayers and the rat gangs.....the PMG had them as linesmens outfits,....probably all Big 4s..............As an aside.....the the arrival of the rat gang on their thumping Big 4s was a major event when I was a kid.........Sidecars full of fox terriers..........the boss would stand up on the tank of one bike and read "The Prevention Of Plague Regulations 1907"......then give everyone to five minutes to round up cats ,chooks and guinea pigs.....Then the dogs would go to work......very exciting for a five year old.
-
I've had a bit to do with a few dommies, and know of lots of them.
You very rarely see them restored 'correctly' though,
info on them is tough to find, knowledgeable owners likewise.
You don't see them sitting around unsold, so someone must have bought them all up !
There is just nothing to starting them, unlike the rigmarole for a single....
The laydown box first appeared on the Model 7 for 1949, first year of them,
no external linkage boxes on them ever.
Model 7 online.
Few things not quite right, but not bad.
Handsome bike - and not a Triumph !
Getting them with all their correct tall domed bolt heads in satin chrome is quite a task.
And not a whole lot interchangeable with an ES2 etc either....
(http://www.classic-british-motorcycles.com/images/51Norton-Model7-RF.jpg)
-
Wrong kickstart. But you know that.....
I would not even try to replicate the satin chrome but stainless is an adequate substitute. Nortons always had beautiful fasteners.
-
Chaps
Update on this after speaking with seller.
It is a 1952 model
Frame/engine numbers match on documents but not in reality.
Much work done, many new parts, mainly from Norvil. Engine stripped - apparently fine - new rings fitted, I think he said new crank..... Monobloc carb, new rims, ss spokes, frame powder coated, new seat, tinware/tank paintwork all new, recon mag, new bars, headlamp. tail, rewire, electronic ignition - I think, not Boyer something else - forgotten, 6V, new unused battery, he has been riding it about without it. New primary chain, new final drive chain.
Still worth 5.5K? Very aware that the lack of matching numbers is a value concern - like it or not.
Thoughts again welcome.
-
The numbers not matching the documents might be a concern, you might
look into how that can be corrected before you take possession ?
Better that the frame matches. And where did the engine go ?
Isn't (or wasn't) there something similar on ebay, asking about twice that price.
That makes your one better value.
It sounds good - bearing in mind these are a moderate performance bike from yesteryear,
if you intend to keep up with motorway traffic then its not really suited for that.
-
There are still places around that can do satin chroming, its not a lost art.
They are not numerous though.
View a sample of their work compared to an original bolt, there are a variety of
possible finishes, it seems.
Andover Norton proudly state that some of their Commando replacement parts
are done in the correct satin chrome, which is helpful in keeping stuff 'as it was'.
So they know of at least one possible suitable electroplater.
-
The earlier 500s had an unusual tank,with a small oil pressure gauge in one side ....LHS from memory.....all the ones ive seen lately restored have an Indian chrome tank for a single..............but 1952 may have been a no chrome year.....it should have a 276 carb too,not a monobloc.
-
If the documents don't match the frame/engine numbers then they are not for this bike, and my suspicious mind thinks of stolen/rebirthing schemes. I would walk away unless the correct paperwork is found.
-
The frame number is the identity part.......engine number probably changed when the rods came out for a look around...The frame numbers on the early fifties Nortons were pretty roughly stamped,and sometimes hard to decipher......So the story goes,when a bike was finished and test ride OK,an old fellow called Pops would come down from the "counting house"and apply the frame number........he was said to always have a big bottle of strong smelling cough mixture with him,and was frequently tipsy...When Nortons went bust due to poor sales ,and racing expenditure,the comnpany was offered to the Birmingham makers,who declined...money man C.A.Vandervell died,and his son didnt like bikes.....Under a board of trade scheme,a subsidy was offered,and Charles Collier of AMC thought the price and subsidy were good enough.........AMC sent Jock West to Bracebridge St to sort things out.......Which included sacking Pop,and having Harold Daniell up before the beak for nicking stuff.......Daniell beat the rap....Jock West was not popular,and when he was made sales director for all AMC products,he got the big Yankee importers offside....including Sammy Cooper,who was selling about half of all Matchless output.
-
Nortons racing effort was funded entirely by the sponsors, so its a bit misleading to point the finger in that direction.
The tank on the Model 7 dommies was designed for it, with an oil pressure gauge for the plunger models and no gauge for the swingarm models - with more shape than other models. Some of the Indian parts makers do a pretty fair copy, and throw in all that chrome included in the deal, and free post Quality can apparently vary, from excellent to rejects, so do your research. The shape is not always accurate either, so check the pics carefully - and good luck to anyone that needs one.
(https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/fTUAAOSwJ7RYWABT/s-l640.jpg)
-
If the frame number (check very carefully for restamping) matches the V5 then I'd say go for it - but expect to do a fair amount of work. If they don't match then walk (or run) away.
The frame number should be stamped on the left hand side of the front tank support lug, and for a 1952 Model 7 should start with G(1952) 12 (Model 7).
-
Chaps
Update on this after speaking with seller.
It is a 1952 model
Frame/engine numbers match on documents but not in reality.
But does the frame number match the one in the V5C? If it doesn't then in the eyes of the law you don't have a valid registration, and informing the DVLA of that opens up a big old can of worms as I found out the hard way some years back.
-
.... I think that's what I just said......
-
Rum world.
I the 1960/70s I'd buy a van load of bike parts, this craze for numbers/orginality had not started back then. I'd build up a bike from whatever bits were there, sort out a logbook to suit and use that reg.
After a while I'd return the old buff logbook for a change to the engine number, back it came duly adjusted, them may be a year or so later ditto with frame number;sometime I'd be asked to bring it to County Hall for inspection,sometimes not. Bingo everything matched the book.
Not really dishonest, as the bikes were not intended for sale and half the time the bike got returned to my shed as parts.
There are a couple about though, one an AJS/Matchless allsorts had bit of BSA, Triumph and several different years of AMC. Engines went from iron to alloy and back again; Last I saw of it was in Bristol in the late 80s, the number I registered it under had been sold off and now lives on a yuppy mobil in Scotland.
Was it a fake? not really, it was a bike of my own creation, did many many miles on it including a trip to Spain. Only sold it due to changing circumstances. Joke was on me because circumstances changed for the better not the worse and I wish I had it now.
So all this feitish with numbers amuses me no end; did Norton actually have matching frame/engine numbers? AMC did not.
Engines get changed over 50 years, so I'd say if the numbers in the V5 match those on the bike, and you got the cash go for it, values are not fixed so who can advise on that? you may get a dog, you may get a gem. That's life.
Personally I think old Norton twins are fugly bikes and wouldn't give one shed room unless it was a freebie
-
I think the actual frame number does not match the V5. The seller seems to think this is a very long standing issue of 40 years plus years, and not deliberately dishonest. As you gents indicate, he has not informed DVLA as it would indeed open up a can of worms. The alternative is to keep quiet of course. From a purely engineering perspective, to me this is irrelevant, but clearly it surely affects value. i don't want to lose on it should I have to sell it at some point
-
Did you ever have serious intention of buying it in the first place? ;D
-
Nortons did have matching numbers (at least in this period). I would only consider buying this bike if it was REALLY cheap (£3K?) as it would be a nightmare with the DVLA. Unless the intention was to break it for parts......
-
If there are issues with DVLA as seller states, then WALK AWAY.
Seller maybe the most honest bloke to have lived, but DVLA can and will be a nightmare in the future, they have the power to recall the registration and issue a new one which may even be a Q plate; that makes it almost impossible to insure economically and a pig to resell.
DVLA consider the reg number permanently fixed to the frame, or chassis as they so ignorantly refer to it.
Plus to get that Q plate you''ll have o end of hassle and grief lugging it about to an inspection station.
-
Did you ever have serious intention of buying it in the first place
Yes, but clearly if subsequently something is not quite right, I am allowed to change my mind.
Ian - thanks for that. I am coming to a similar conclusion. I would buy it and keep quiet, but it needs to be far less than 5.5K. Seller has spent quite a bit, so I don't see that happening though.
-
If it was a really good bike and you got it for the right price the other option would be to apply for an age-related number using the existing frame number. Despite what the Net may say it's actually straightforward enough.
-
There are a lot of issuses with old bikes now......one major one being the desire of the authorities to crush the 1% ers and their choppers.........most of the draconian old bike legislation in Oz is aimed at the criminal biker gangs.....unfortunately everyone is swept up .........Another issue here is the availability of new made parts to build up complete "vintage :vehicles"...thus circumventing the design rules...........And the greens deciding "old vehicles" are escaping their cherished anti carbon emissions net.