classic motorcycle forum
Motorcycle Discussions => British Bikes => Topic started by: cardan on April 19, 2023, 03:48:13 AM
-
I thought Sparkbrook made the rather distinctive frame set that was used in lots of Villiers-engined bikes in the early 1920s, but I wonder if I'm wrong.
Bikes like Spark, Bownian, Warrior in the UK and Torpedo in Australia were all Villiers-engined bikes that are so similar I doubt they could be identified without a name on the tank. The front fork - very like early Triumphs - is called the "Gosport", and I would have called the whole thing "the Spark set" if I hadn't bumped into a c1922 Bownian (cheap bike made by Bown) catalogue page that says: "Frame set manufactured by Villiers Engineering Co. Ltd. All steel fittings."
Villiers made the frame set? True or false?
Has anyone seen an advert for the frame set?
Leon
-
Id be very surprised if the fitting were steel ....traditionally ,malleable iron castings were used for both bicycles and motorcycles .
-
Not sure - these things were quite cheap and the lugs may have been steel pressings, as used on some bicycles? Not the "proper" way to do things, but cheap and light.
Both Sparkbrook and Bown had "proper" motorcycles with Villiers engines, different from the Spark and Bownian, and these probably had "proper" lugs.
Leon
-
Nabiac has a Warrior
https://nationalmotorcyclemuseum.com.au/gallery/australian/Warrior-Ika-464.htm
https://nationalmotorcyclemuseum.com.au/gallery/australian/Warrior-PA043.htm
Someone could pedal over there and have a look ?
Steel fittings as such were quite uncommon in that era ??
What year(s) specifically are we dealing with here. ?
-
Yes I think steel fittings would have been unusual. Don't forget this was around the time we were getting interesting frames like the "built like a bridge" Francis Barnett, made from tubes with squashed ends all bolted together. You could get away with a lot on a lightweight.
I think these things were built from about 1920-21 in the UK. In Australia we were late, so C.S. Hay in Tasmania started bringing them in in 1923 when he called them "Villiers motorcycles". From 1924 he branded them Torpedo, and began building them up locally. They ran into 1926.
The Nabiac "Warrior, Made in Australia" is interesting, because Warriors were built in the UK! (Newport Pagnell, Northamptonshire, apparently.) Warriors were sold by Hinton Bros in Sydney in 1923, so the Nabiac bike could indeed be a Warrior. Or a Spark, or a Bownian, or a Villiers, or a Torpedo...
Leon
-
In fact steel in any form was way more expensive that an iron casting......One of the well known suppliers of cycle and motorcycle frame castings was Chater Lea,who supplied a vast variety of malleable castings.
-
OK. The new frame is described in detail in the Motor Cycle 27 Oct 1921 in relation to the new "Spark" by Sparkbrook. Lots of steel pressings - very modern. But also at the show were identical machines by Monopole, New Courier, Dayton, Bownian, Mohawk, Wolf and Victoria.
So I'm back to the original question: did Sparkbrook make the frame set, or Villiers? Leaning towards Villiers...
Leon
-
"Someone could pedal over there and have a look."
I plan to go there in the next month or so but I don't think I will 'pedal' over there. You do realise there are a couple of bumps between inland (Tamworth) and the coast?
-
In fact steel in any form was way more expensive that an iron casting......One of the well known suppliers of cycle and motorcycle frame castings was Chater Lea,who supplied a vast variety of malleable castings.
And by the time Chater Lea had conked out (?), M&B frame lugs had taken over this market share ?
M&B being Mason & Burns Ltd Pleck Rd Walsal, malleable iron castings to the motorcycle industry, pre WW1 even.
Many a maker used them - Norton, AJS Matchless etc etc, and marked M&B.
(I think Triumph and BSA each had their own foundries)
Small sample novelty item, v common.
(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ZZZLScvnVLw/V_lfvV3jY_I/AAAAAAAAvNI/84i1ClRfy4c6qe8c6gP7j85Tp2sDtAokgCLcB/s1600/M%2526B_small_anvil.jpg)
-
"Someone could pedal over there and have a look."
I'm wondering what (stamped ?) steel frame fittings would look like ?
The beauty of castings is that things can be made circular, and bored for a frame tube.
Stampings would have to be one sided ?
Would this be visible to a mere inspection ?
My ~1946 Waratah has one of the 1st (?) part welded frames in the business. (??)
Things like lugs for the engine are arc welded to the steel tubes, ditto a number of other bits,
like lugs for the seat and the rear axle..
Phil Irving mentions this welding development in his book "Motorcycle Engineering",
and refers to it as coming out of manufacturing developments during WW2.
Villiers sound like they may have (briefly ?) jumped the gun ...
-
There were some welded frames in the 1930s ,i have one ,an OEC Duplex ..its part oxy welded ,part brazed castings......a strange beast ,to be sure...........From what Ive surmised from various sources the problem with welding was the available tube ......tube meant for brazing had a high enough carbon content to be hardenable ,this wasnt a problem ....but weld this tube ,and the weld is brittle ..........by the way,welding was oxy acetylene ,not arc ...manual arc was considered the work of the devil in the motorcycle industry until WW2,when it was extensively used for airframes ,and workers experienced in arc welding and the equiptment became available post war.
-
There's a good chance that the items marked "Gosport" were actually made in the OEC factory prior to OEC becoming a maker in it's own right.
-
That's an excellent observation Rex. I checked it out and came up empty, but I've since got to the bottom of the whole thing.
Just as it says in the Bownian description (in the Bown catalogue, but seemingly nowhere else) the frame set was made by Villiers Engineering Co., Ltd.
The patents for the various interesting design features were applied for and granted to VEC in 1921/22. Specifically named as applicants were VEC, Frank Farrer, and Frank Pourtney, but the "inventor" field was left empty, presumably because the inventors were Villiers employees and had no rights to the designs.
The fork was not a Villiers thing, but originated with an Australian: John Percy MacLean who lived in Newcastle, NSW. He held about 23 patents over the years, including the one for the double-spring arrangement in the Triumph-like MacLean fork. In late 1919 the design was taken over by the Gosford Engineering Co., Gosport, Hants. They manufactured the fork as the Gosford, and presumably sold it (or licensed it) to VEC for their motorcycle.
So who knew? Villiers made (or had made) a complete motorcycle in the early 1920s. It was sold under various brands in the UK and Australia, including:
Beaufort
Bownian
Dayton
Mohawk
Monopole
New Courier (cheaper model of Olympic)
Olympic
Spark
Torpedo (Tasmania, Australia)
Warrior
Wolf
Victoria
Villiers (Tasmania, Australia)
I went through "The British Motorcycle Directory" by Bacon and Hallworth, looking at the above brands. Fair to say that the authors didn't appear know that these makes used "the VEC frame set". I don't have Jack Sizer's book on Villiers, but in his various writings online I can't find any mention of the Villiers motorcycle. It looks like history has skipped it over, which is a pity because there are many modern, clever designs in the frame and fittings, particularly the extensive use of pressed steel for the lugs and fittings, including the petrol tank.
(Or course Villiers could have outsourced the manufacture, perhaps to Gosford, or Sparkbrook, or someone else. Some expertise in and equipment for pressing complex shapes in sheet metal would be needed.)
On the AUstralian front, I now understand why Charlie Hay in Tasmania was claiming in 1923: 'The Villiers is one of England's best light-weight motor cycles."
For the record they were landed originally as complete motorcycles and sold (and registered) as "Villiers", but later they were "built" in house, no doubt from a kit of parts, and sold with the name "Torpedo" on the tank.
Cheers
Leon
-
Nice detective work there Leon.
Look forward to seeing it in ye book ?
there are many modern, clever designs in the frame and fittings, particularly the extensive use of pressed steel for the lugs and fittings, including the petrol tank.
Can we find a picture of any of these pressed steel fittings.
They should be quite distinctive ?
I note the 1946 Waratah has steel bits welded to the frame as engine mounts and seat mount tabs etc.
Quite different to the cast lugs of ye olde school all lugged frames.
-
The funny thing is that the "Villiers" thing is such a tiny part of the Australian story, but the story of "frame sets" is key. So many of the 600 or so Australian makes used and imported engine in an imported "frame set". It's a curiosity that the Villiers frame set was used by Charles Hay in Tasmania, but in other cities the Villiers-engined bikes (Elliott in Adelaide, Waratah in Sydney, etc.) used other frames: usually Sun, Excelsior, Walker & Sons, etc.
I'm fascinated by the frame - I look forward to seeing on close up. Here are some "close ups".
Leon
-
For comparison, here's an illustration of the pressed steel tank from one of the Villiers patents. The oiling system was also very clever: a separate tank inside the fuel tank, inflated by air with your bicycle pump, with a drip feed. You can see the air fitting on the oil tank lid in the Motor Cycle sketch.
Leon
-
And here's the distinctive Villiers rear stand, from a different 1921 patent.
-
And seven near-identical motorcycles, all launched at the Olympia Show at the end of 1921, all using the Villiers frame set and the Villiers 269cc Mk4 engine with flywheel magneto.
Leon
-
And number 7...
-
It appears the fuel tank was an important structural element ,bracing the light steering head .............Easily seen how the steering head was formed from sheet ,but I cant imagine it was very satisfactory in service...........Appears to me the steering head joints and frame tubes were united into one unit by brazing all at the same time.....which may well mean the whole frame was produced by Villiers to fit their motors
-
but I cant imagine it was very satisfactory in service....
I reckon it would work OK for a lightweight? Presumably most aspects of the design were aimed at keeping costs down. Lugs aside, there were other clever design elements. The two sides of the rear stays were symmetric, so the tubes for both sides were identical - cheaper to make and stock. Ditto the fork legs were the same on both sides. The double rear brake (in another Villiers Engineering Co. patent - see attached) may not have been a performance item, but it was legal (two independent brakes) and the positioning of the parts allowed all the various transmission configurations - direct belt drive (with or without a Villiers clutch on the engine shaft) or two- or three-speed gearbox with conventional clutch - to be fitted into exactly the same frame with exactly the same brake setup. Clever.
I really like this thing. I suspect Villiers could have sold these bikes in their thousands if they'd been a manufacturer and retailer of motorcycles, but their business was supplying other firms. And I guess firms were unhappy about their product being identical to the competitors' product.
Leon
-
I gather Villiers main output was always bicycle parts........the figure of 80,000 hubs a week is often quoted ........even during the depression the business was profitable enough to indulge the Marstons in costly archaelogy expeditions to the Middle East.....or dare I say eccentric science.
-
Freewheels were the big bicycle item for Villiers - they had a strong patent and freewheels were a massive improvement over fixed drive. For motorcycles pre-war, they also had a very popular clutch hub. And later there was lighting stuff to go with the flywheel magneto fitted with lighting coils.
But back to the Villiers motorcycles. They were also sold in some numbers for 1923, with the new 150, 250 or 350 cc Villiers engines. Bikes like Spark and Warrior looked much like the 1922 models, but the oil tank pressurised by a tyre pump didn't make it to 1923 - there was a Best and Lloyd pump with drip feed. Powell cheated and didn't used the Villiers tank, instead using a slab-sided tank that resembled their larger models. But all the other features were there: stand, twin brakes, loop frame, Gosport fork etc.
Not many UK customers in 1924 I suspect, but Chas Hay built them up in Tasmania into 1926.
Leon
-
So here are a couple of "Villiers" motorcycles photographed outside Chas Hay's Torpedo Cycle Works in Invermay Road, Launceston, Tasmania, c1924.
The bike in the middle was registered 15253 on 1 February 1924 as a "Villiers". It likely arrived from the UK complete, assembled, and branded Villiers. Only later did Hay start assembling the Villiers from a kit, and later still branding them "Torpedo".
I've done a survey of other Australian makers who used Villiers engines around this time, but Hay in Tasmania seems to be the only one using the "Villiers frame set". Even elsewhere in Tasmania, makers like Frank Beauchamp were using more conventional frame sets: his "Austral Villiers" seems to have been built with the Sun set (although pics are poor and there were a number of similar sets available). Not the Villiers set, anyway.
Finally a note of caution. A number of the makers I've listed above sold motorcycles built from the Villiers frame set in Australia in 1922-1925. So when you see a Villiers-set bike with "Torpedo" or "Warrior" or ... on the tank a fair question to the owner would be "How do you know what it was called when new?" Frame numbers might provide some guidance, but I doubt there are enough survivors to make sense of. As usual, unimpeachable provenance is the key.
Cheers
Leon
-
So, what would the decal on the tank say.
Just 'Villiers' ?
Can we find a pic of said decal.
And a bonus in that pic is the Invincible JAP - on the right.
Wonder what terms Chas Hay had them on.
(ie Manufactured by Turner Bros in Melbourne, so what did they peddle them to sub-dealers for ?)
Quite an innovative Dealer - great pic find Leon. And all round a great pic.
-
I don't know what the decal said - it would be great to find an original tank, or even a studio-quality photo, but alas... The bikes were certainly advertised as Villiers, and registered as Villiers, so presumably the tank said "Villiers". Did they arrive off the boat with a Villiers transfer on the tank? I don't know.
Turner Bros in Melbourne had an Australia-wide network of agents for the Invincible JAP, so Hay would have been the Tasmanian (or at least Launceston) agent. In all the research I've done the biggest missing piece is the detail of how retailers dealt with manufacturers - nothing in public so you'd have to find business correspondence, ledgers, or whatever.
Chas Hay's son Reg raced Torpedo motorcycles in about 1924-26: occasionally Torpedo Villiers but mostly Torpedo Blackburnes which used the very potent 750-ish cc ohv v-twin Blackburne engine. Reg also did some motor pacing on a "Torpedo JAP" which might have been an Invincible.
All good stuff.
Leon
-
I've done a survey of other Australian makers who used Villiers engines around this time, but Hay in Tasmania seems to be the only one using the "Villiers frame set". Even elsewhere in Tasmania, makers like Frank Beauchamp were using more conventional frame sets: his "Austral Villiers" seems to have been built with the Sun set (although pics are poor and there were a number of similar sets available). Not the Villiers set, anyway.
More looking. I found another contender for the "Villiers frame set" motorcycles in Tasmania - in Hobart this time. Jim King (unrelated to John King (Champion) and Sim King (Tasma) who were both in Launceston) had taken over the old G&B concern in 1918. He "landed" "Villiers Motor Cycles" in 1924 and 1925, and even described his business as "Agents for Triumph Junior and Villiers Motor-cycles". Based on the low price and the dates, King's Villiers were likely the Villiers set - no photos or drawings unfortunately. It doesn't seem King rebranded them.
It wouldn't surprise if other smaller shops elsewhere in Australia also sold the Villiers.
Leon
-
Are survivors of this type very common.
Seems to me they are surprisingly uncommon then, considering how many seem to have been/must have been sold ??
Or were they all ridden into the ground ? Being cheap and cheerful, and utility transport, they were expendable ...
Or perhaps owners forgot to pump up the oil tank !
There are a number of survivors of Waratah 1920s bikes - the next generation ??
Not so cheap and cheerful, perhaps.
-
There are a few survivors in Australia, usually called Warrior or Torpedo. At some stage the word was out that Warrior was an Australian brand (it wasn't), and of course it's popular to own an Australian motorcycle. I bumped into a recently-restored "Torpedo" in the internet - restored in Victoria from a bike bought in Queensland yet claimed to be a Torpedo built by Chas Hay in Tasmania. Not sure how it was identified as Torpedo...
The numbers we are talking about here are tiny. In the Tasmanian registration records (probably imperfect), there are 11 Torpedo Villiers machines listed, half of which had been previously registered. So in total Hay may have only sold 5-10 Torpedo Villiers motorcycles! Maybe he sold 10-20 Villiers machines before he started calling them Torpedo... By contrast many hundreds of Waratah Villiers in Sydney and Elliott Villiers in South Australia were sold.
The attached advert suggests the fate of many a "Villiers Motor Cycle"! The ad is from Hobart, but while it may refer to a "real" Villiers of the type we are discussing here, "Villiers Motor Cycle" can also mean "Motor cycle fitted with Villiers engine" - the brand was pretty unimportant on the secondhand market.
In addition to the Australian connection, there are a few survivors in the UK, like this "brand new" Spark: https://www.bonhams.com/auction/18294/lot/311/1923-sparkbrook-2hp-the-spark-frame-no-10138-engine-no-c7770/
We know it to be a 1922 model, because it has the "pump the oil tank up with your bicycle pump" system. This had to be a bad idea...
Leon
-
Where is 33d6 in all this. ?
His comments on all things Villiers are invaluable.
My father acquired a Duggie engine, from someone who wanted a dinghy motor.
And then decided they didn't want to pay for the freshly made fan.
So the motor was payment .
-
From my experience ,these lightweights had very poor wheel bearings ,generally loose balls ,cup and cone .....the outer race was always the expanded and flanged out hub ,and the bearings quickly developed big lumps and bumps ,as the case hardening went thru...........the thin frame tubes broke and forks had no replaceable bushings,just steel on steel....... a lot more of the Villiers motors survived than the bikes.......Australia was a tough place for bikes ,dirt roads ,dust,sand ,long distances ,and zero maintenance .
-
I've kept very quiet through all this as to me it is an entirely new area of Villiers Engineering Co that I knew nothing about. I just looked and learned.
Villiers were not just engine makers. They started off in the bicycle business and like any active company were always looking for areas to expand into, particularly as they had spare production capacity. Not everything was successful nor did everything made have a long production life. For example their combined clutch/engine pulley arrangemet was quickly rendered obsolete by small proprietary gearboxes. It came and went very quickly. As did their 125cc version of the early 147cc engines and the 350cc twin of 1927 or so. Few have heard of their 1930ish ohv 500cc vertical twin prototypes (think Turner Triumph but ten years earlier), killed by the Great Depression before it even got off the ground. By all accounts their MD was not happy to drop that to instead produce the first 98cc Midget. But they could survive making the Midget so Midget it was.
I think they were wise to drop the frame set idea. It's not good business to compete with your customers. Possibly Villiers realised this when they dipped their toes into frame making.
Anyway, it's been very interesting to read about it all even if they aren't very exciting bikes. Just remember they were better than the alternatives, walking or a push bike. Or public transport if there was any.
-
Ah yes, the clutch in the pulley... that was another of the suite of patents filed in 1921 and granted in 1922, so it was probably envisaged as part of the Villiers motor cycle. Many of the brands offered transmission options of direct drive, direct drive with the clutch in the pulley, then the various two- and three-speed gearboxes. As I noted above, the different transmission all fitted into the frame with no change at all to the brake or footrest arrangement. Very clever.
I had a look through the offerings at the Show at the end of 1924, so 1925 models [edit: not 1923-24 as I first typed]. Some of the the makes that used the Villiers set in 1922 and 1923 still used bits and pieces of it (the rear stand, for example) but there seemed to be no complete bikes. Perhaps the shipped the leftovers to King in Hobart and and Hay in Launceston. Tasmania is close to as far from the UK as you can get.
Leon
-
Off topic, but inspired by 33d6's mention of the Villiers four-stroke 500cc twin, is my entry for "weird Villiers things I didn't previously know about": the unit construction power plant built by Jardine that coupled a 172cc Villiers two-stoke flywheel-magneto engine with a Jardine three-speed gearbox in a compact unit. It was fitted to a Ray motorcycle (W.H. Raven &co. Ltd, Leicester) offered for 1925. It had a long hand gear change lever, just like the 8D/9D of later years.
This was not the first unit construction Villiers power plant (presumably the ioe four stroke of about 1912 was the first), but maybe it was the second? Or maybe it doesn't count because the name on the unit was Jardine?
Leon
-
The steering head ,tank and probably the front frame seem to be Villiers ,too.......possibly the rear frame with an adjustments of tube lengths.
-
It would be fun to see one close up and get some answers, but I wonder if the Jardine/Villiers "unit" power plant ever made it into proper production. The pic of the Ray is the only one I've ever seen, but Jardine also took out an advert in the Show edition of the Motor Cycle for the "Jardine" power plant (they didn't mention Villiers). Did any other make use it?
Leon
-
As an offshoot from this discussion, I looked (in vain) for a pic of this Villiers 500cc 4 stroke twin.
But found this - from the Adelaide Hills Restorers Club, and Ron Wiley.
"In 1930 a very interesting prototype motorcycle engine was produced, it was a 500cc four stroke twin cylinder
engine identical the Triumph Speed Twin produced six years later. The timing cover is identical to the Triumph but
had Villiers cast in it.".
Now Val Page of Triumph is credited with this design, mid 1930s..
But did Villiers have a hand in it ??
https://ogden_images.s3.amazonaws.com/www.motorcycleclassics.com/images/2013/04/11090011/Triumph-1.jpg
We diverge ....
-
The Page designed Triumph twin was different from the Speed Twin ,it had a single rear camshaft and exposed valves (typical of the time)..........Turners Speed Twin was supposedly a close copy of the top end of the Riley car engine ,with enclosed valves ,coupled to his own design of bottom end .
-
Yes I wondered which Triumph engine that quote was actually referring to.
Now we do need to find a pic of the Villiers twin. ?
-
Somewhere I have a photocopy of a photocopy of it but it’s not good. I’ll dig it out and see if I can anything with it. It came from Jack Sizer, the first and very keen VMCC Villiers marque specialist.
-
Enclosed exhaust valves wernt possible on air cooled OHV motorbike engines until the mid 1930s,when a new spring steel developed for airplane engines came on the market.
-
Found it plus an explanatory letter by Jack Sizer. I've made a scan of both. You'll see why I think the Turner Triumph follows down the same path.
Cheers,
-
Thankyou thankyou
You'll see why I think the Turner Triumph follows down the same path.
Very much so.
You'd have to say that Mr Turner must have seen this,
if indeed Villiers didn't even have a hand in it.
We wonder who in Villiers did the 1930 version ?
They hired a lot of capable people over the years.
-
Jack Sizer has had a potted version of his Villiers history online at
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~pattle/nacc/arc0596.htm
Only the earlier 4 stroke gets a mention though.
-
Oh. Are we sure that this particular engine dates from 1929-30. If so, it looks like it was plucked from a time machine. More likely 1950?
Leon
-
I got copies of several letters between Villiers and Monet Goyon. All dated around 1930-31. All mention the engine amongst other business matters. The last letter of 1931 advises M-G that Villiers weren’t proceeding with it as they were too busy making their new 98cc engine. The engine photos were included in this bundle.
I can’t see Villiers making this engine in 1950 without word of it getting out one way or another. There is absolutely no 1950ish whispers and plenty of info about the 1929-30 effort. I agree it looks modern for 1930 but Villiers had more engineering experience than we are usually willing to recognise. Check out the 1930 Motorcycle Show and see how many firms offered a Villiers powered machine in their line up.
-
We ponder if anyone put this engine into cycleparts, and tried it out ....
I perused the Monet Goyon images under google, to no avail.
My goodness they produced a range of bikes.
Not a make that gets much publicity, in the Anglais world anyway.
Now, would it have had dry sump lube, or drip feed.
More to ponder.
Another-what-might-have-been.
-
Oh. Are we sure that this particular engine dates from 1929-30. If so, it looks like it was plucked from a time machine. More likely 1950?
Nortons didn't proceed with their 1st design of parallel twin postwar.
It looked too much like a Triumph - and would have infringed too many patents ?
The question is - would Villiers have patented any of their twin design, for Triumph to infringe !!
We diverge from Villiers frames here, muchly.
-
According to the correspondence Villiers made three prototype engines and gave one each to S.O.S, one to BroughSuperior and one plus drawings to make more to Monet Goyon.
I’ve heard whispers over the years the Brough engine was merely a non running shell suitable only for fitting in a frame to ensure correct installation. I’ve also heard it is still floating around Brough circles somewhere. Your guess is as good as mine.
I know nothing of the S.O.S effort and only what the correspondence hints at about the Monet Goyon. Anyone have friends at the B-S club?
-
Appears to have a Lucas K2F magneto.........Id also hazard a guess it has chain timing ,by the shape of the case...........certainly looks to be later than 1930.........more like the kind of engines JAP was developing just pre WW2
-
Appears to have a Lucas K2F magneto.....
This was one of my thoughts, John. Not sure when the Lucas K2F came out, but the flange-mount BTH didn't appear until 1933.
Another thing - which you mentioned earlier - is the enclosed valves. Nothing at all like that in 1930?
Also I wonder when the script Villiers logo - with the top of the V forming an oval - was first used. Maybe on the primary cover of the 8D/9D in the mid 1930s? Was it around in Villiers literature in 1930?
Re patents: there was very little to patent about the parallel twin by the time Val Page then Turner did their work in the 1930s. Most engine configurations had been tried by this stage, parallel twins from the early 1900s, and if a design was already in the public domain there was no way to patent it.
My theory: This Villiers engine is not 1930. (Are we sure the 1930 Villiers 500cc twin was a four stroke, and not a 500cc version of the Pullman two-stroke twin rotated through 90 degrees?) Could be late 1930s, could be 1950. Could it be even later - some kind of universal engine for NVT? With a single Villiers carb, could it be for a non-motorcycle application? Maybe a military contract?
Cheers
Leon
-
Here we go. A series of patents for details of the engine, filed in 1944-1945 and granted 1946-47. Mostly Villiers Engineering Co. and Frank Anstey. There are four relevant patents, for operating the overhead valves, driving the magneto, driving the dynamo, and lubricating the valve rockers. Nothing specific to a twin, but the timing chest layout in the "driving the magneto" patent clearly shows "our" engine.
Leon
-
The operation of the valves, and the lubrication of the rockers. The latter patent is illustrated with "a convenient embodiment of the invention as applied to a twin cylinder engine..." So it all fits.
Leon
-
Nothing specific to a twin...
Actually, reading the patents through, there are a number of mentions along the lines of "for example on a two cylinder motorcycle", so it's really clear all the patents refer to the two cylinder four stroke Villiers engine.
Not sure how Triumph/Turner protected the Triumph design, but maybe the Villiers patents were new ways of doing things to avoid something Triumph had protected.
33d6: Do the 1930-31 Villiers/Monet Goyen letters specifically mention four stroke?
Leon
-
Not a make that gets much publicity, in the Anglais world anyway.
M-G weren't big exporters, and probably exported nothing at all to markets where British bikes were available.
I had a 1936 350 M-G, and the design was out-dated and the metallurgy pretty sh*tty for the era.
Not many survived Adolf's World Tour, and even less survived the post-war French "keep it going at all costs" concept.
-
The motor in the pics is definitely the same as the patent drawings,with the exception being the pics seem to have a somewhat Royal Enfield twin appearance for the head and rockers.
-
Fascinating stuff. I confess I’ve not studied this pile of Monet & Goyon stuff in great depth. Except for a few letters translated into English it’s all in French and my French is minimal. Nor am I that interested in the make to any degree anyway. The page with the engine photos was just stuffed in there as well with no explanation or identification of any sort so I just assumed the 500 twin in the correspondence was the twin in the photos. I’ll now go back and look a lot more carefully. I think Leon got it right.
I’m trying to remember where this pile of literature came from. I’ve had it for years but I can’t remember how it appeared. It was just given to me at some time and essentially I just kept it because Monet & Goyon/ Villers questions pop up at regular intervals.
Cheers,
-
The magneto drive has some sort of advance mechanism,which is about all that is novel ....the crossover for the valve gear has some similarities to BSA s plans to produce a hemi head Sunbeam S7/S8...........the hemi head Sunbeam was said to be very noisy in the top end ,and BSA dropped the idea ,claiming the worm drive couldnt take any extra powr.
-
Yes the Villiers patents are not too impressive; the extra rocker between the cam and the valve could only lead to clatter. The fourth patent was for a slip-drive for the dynamo, mounted in the "usual" front position. This might have been innovative c1945.
Re the Monet Goyon 500cc Villiers twin: I reckon be prepared for an up-sized Pullman two-stroke twin. George Brough tried two four-cylinder four-strokes in the late 1920s - the separate-cylinder V4 and the monoblock in-line - both with crankshafts in line with the frame, then bevel for chain. Maybe he liked the 350, but wanted a 500, thinking that a two-stroke twin might feel a bit like a four-stroke 4, and the inline crank seems to have been something that he liked.
Cheers
Leon
-
The Magdyno has a slip drive for the dynamo......and I cant see G.B. having anything to do with a two stroke in those days .
-
... and the Villiers "invention" looks exactly like the equivalent part of the Lucas Magdyno! One of the claims even covers that the drive gear F is made from fibre!!!! Perhaps patent assessment wasn't at its best between Nov 1943 (first application) and Oct 1945 (granted).
G.B. was getting fabulous four-stroke twins from JAP - not sure why he would want to evaluate an unproven four stroke twin from Villiers? I like the idea that he was evaluating a two-stroke twin, but it's just my fantasy. Surely someone knows about the Brough Superior Villiers? No mention in Rolls Royce of Motorcycles.
Leon
[Edit: Sorry, I see what you're saying - I didn't mean that the slip drive was innovative, rather that the mounting of the generator in front of the cylinder may have been innovative in 1945. I think the Speed Twin used a magdyno prewar? By the way, Edward Turner did file a patent in 1938 for the drive of the camshaft and magneto in the Speed Twin, but it was a bit weird, using the half time pinion to drive an internally cut gear on the inside of the lowest sprocket, which drove the cam and then magneto buy chain. I don't think that idea made it to production? I know little about Triumph twins...]
-
We wonder if Lucas paid Villiers a licence/patent fee ??
The sort of stuff we might not hear about.
A lot of auto makers shell out for all sorts of bits and ideas in cars.
A few cents here and there, but it all adds up.
One of the big agricultural firms paid out, a fair bit, when it turned out their contra-rotating seeding device was already patented.
Ignorance is no excuse for not paying ....
And while the patent is in force, regardless.
-
The slipping gear with a star shaped spring was on Magdyno s long before WW2......Id think Villiers claim was to do with mounting it on the camshaft ..........which is just plain dumb ,as a slipping drive would need the whole timing case dismantled ,just to replace the spring .........the Lucas spring was also adjustable ...In fact ,I see nothing of value in any of those patents..........Anyhoo,my favourite would be the Walter Moore patent of the pivoted gearbox mounting ........BSA refused to pay ,and went to great lengths to avoid the patent by all kinds of workarounds.
-
Nortons early dommie twins had the fibre gear thusly mounted on the camshaft.
If anything goes wrong in the drive dept, the timing cover has to come off.
If anything goes wrong with the fibre gear, the debris goes into the engine oil !!
In spite of which, it does work reasonably well.
(I always wonder if the genny is actually spinning )
And, the fibre gear is fractionally different (but almost identical) to the magdyno one.
Woe betide anyone who uses the wrong one, the tooth count (form ?) is not quite the same. ?
Dunno who's genius idea that one was ??
-
The slipping drive on the magdyno was claimed to protect the against a violent backfire .....generally restricted to sporty singles ........twins didnt have this problem .........the fibre gear was to reduce gear noise .......most twins had fibre mag drive gears ...........Incidentally,its not generally realized the fibre was very expensive ,and a steel or iron gear would be much cheaper .............i have a sheet of the fibre about 1m square X 1/2" thick ,that cost over $1000 ...(its a compressed and vulcanized bakelite resin and cloth material ...and some variations have the property of running heavily loaded lubricated only by water ....steel mill rolls.......its also use in ship stern tubes with alternating rubber and fibre strips which run in sea water.)