Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Oggers

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7
76
British Bikes / Re: 1949 Norton model 7
« on: October 06, 2018, 07:03:14 PM »
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.

 




77
British Bikes / Re: 1949 Norton model 7
« on: October 05, 2018, 02:17:59 PM »
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   

78
British Bikes / Re: 1949 Norton model 7
« on: October 05, 2018, 01:12:10 PM »
Rex

Quote
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!   

79
British Bikes / Re: 1949 Norton model 7
« on: October 05, 2018, 10:26:50 AM »
I quite like the aesthetically pleasing look of it...

Quote
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? 

80
British Bikes / 1949 Norton model 7
« 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

81
British Bikes / Re: oil tanks
« on: October 04, 2018, 11:28:51 AM »
Rex - could be - and in addition who is to say the original poster was correct in his premise. I don't honestly know, just curious to understand the reasoning behind the assertion. Coincidentally I have just changed the oil, cleaned the filters and drained the sump. Needs a run now, but somewhat cool up here in the Tundra at present!   

82
British Bikes / Re: oil tanks
« on: October 03, 2018, 08:29:30 PM »
Quote
The return is pressurised by the pump and gravity doesn't come into it.
The restriction (to force oil down the rocker line) comes from the top of the tank return pipe having only a small hole for oil to come out of rather than a hole the dia of the return pipe.
The scavenge may be intermittent at tick over but rev the engine and the flow is continuous

Agreed, but still does not answer why a tee at the base of the tank is considered an improvement over a tee at the top!

83
British Bikes / Re: oil tanks
« on: October 02, 2018, 11:25:21 AM »
Quote
The twins that have pressure feed from the motor nearly all suffered from oil flooding of the head........IMHO,the oil tank takeoff feed dosent work by any pressure at the tank,but oil is drawn into the engine by crankcase depression....Twin heads are generally lower than the tank,but the system also works on singles,where the rockers are higher than the oil tank

On the Bonneville the tee to the rockers is on the scavenge plunger return line - which is pressurized by the plunger itself on the oil pump. 

84
British Bikes / Re: oil tanks
« on: October 01, 2018, 12:01:14 PM »
Quote
At a guess, insufficient oil supply?

I don't see that. It is essentially the same pipe from the scavenge, only the tee for the rocker feed is higher up. Any restriction is at the rocker feed pipe - which is the same for either arrangement.

85
British Bikes / Re: oil tanks
« on: September 28, 2018, 08:08:16 PM »
Looked on my 66 Bonnie, and the rocker feed is as you say. Feed is opposite the the metered chain lubrication coming from the top of the discharge pipe from the scavenger pump. I am curious to undertand why is it considered unacceptable?

86
British Bikes / Re: 66 Bonneville
« on: September 13, 2018, 03:20:15 PM »
Since asked, he thinks not.

Internet? I read books or manuals, I skim the internet.

87
British Bikes / Re: 66 Bonneville
« on: September 13, 2018, 11:45:49 AM »
Quote
you seem to have missed the point, same casting would do a 9 or 10 stud barrel just drilling as necessary.

If their is any other difference its probably internal

No, since reading around somewhat you are correct in that the same casting appears to have been used for both. 10th hole cast-plugged for the then 120, drilled open for the 140. What I was getting at is that this head is different to the head used for a 66 120 - slightly larger exhaust vv head, stellite tipped vvs and possibly slightly different compression. Considering I have what appears to be the correct barrel, does this give rise to concern? I would have thought not...... 

No leaks anywhere, and I have no issues with the guy who did the rebuild. 

88
British Bikes / Re: 66 Bonneville
« on: September 12, 2018, 08:52:30 PM »
Quote
No mystery, common enough if casting was meant to do two different years, probably a later replacement.Personally I don't like the sound of your engine, but that's just my cynical mind; if it was up to me the engine would be on the bench in bits being checked out now

Ok so is it a T140 head or a T120?

Engine rebuild documentation is fully comprehensive and work was undertaken by Peter Palmer - of some repute I believe in the Triumph world. No issues there I feel.


89
British Bikes / Re: 66 Bonneville
« on: September 12, 2018, 07:15:35 PM »
Clarifying further - hopefully....Barrel is stamped E6305. and some old pistons which I have since found, and for which I have been assured went within said barrel are @70mm diameter.  Thus it appears I have a 650 barrel - though it is squared off at the RH front of the flange.

Head - One stud and nut only between the two rocker covers, but where the other should be about an inch rearward, there is a circular blank off in the casting itself. Definitely only one oval shaped finned rocker cover for both exhaust ports and similar for inlet ports. I know the head of a 140 should have 10 studs, but clearly the barrel being a 650 would have only had the 9. That said, why does the head not have the hole for the 10th stud rather than a cast blank off....all very odd!

90
British Bikes / Re: 66 Bonneville
« on: September 12, 2018, 04:31:11 PM »
Well, all I can say is that I was told it was a T140 head....and from the rocker box covers, it looks like one.

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7