RE: PH2: Norton To Take On 2012 TT
Discussion
srob said:
Nope, that's the rotary eninged bike from a couple of years back 
Steve Spray used to ride/race the wheels of the Norton Rotary bike, maybe that one went to IoM with some success, and am sure I saw it wound well up going up the hill at Goodwood FoS a few year ago, sure my memory ok on this one, but maybe someone knows better.
urquattro said:
Steve Spray used to ride/race the wheels of the Norton Rotary bike, maybe that one went to IoM with some success, and am sure I saw it wound well up going up the hill at Goodwood FoS a few year ago, sure my memory ok on this one, but maybe someone knows better.
The bike pictured is the 'new' F1 that was developed mid 2000's by Brian Crighton.The original F1's were raced by Trevor Nation and Steve Spray in the JPS colours in British Superbikes. They were eventually banned as it was deemed impossible to determine the exact capacity of them. In reality, they were just too fast!
I believe that the original JPS bikes are still being demonstrated by the original riders at stuff like Goodwood, and I don't think they hang about
Steve Hislop raced the F1 at the TT, I'm sure others did too
roadwolf said:
J B L said:
They're not doing much more than bolting shiny bits on an old concept to sell to rich old born again bikers.
Much the same as Harley Davidson and they seem to be doing OK.Kazlet said:
The capacity is very easy to define it was 1.8 litres being passed off as 588cc, thats why they were banned, quite rightly so.
How do you calculate/define the capacity? I know it's widely thought of as being a 588cc engine; the 'new' one in the picture is called an RCW588 so presumably still being labelled a 588cc? Are you saying that the single rotor F1 was 500cc bigger than the 1300cc twin rotor engine in the Mazda RX-8?
You may well be right, I'm purely going by memory and I was only about 9 when it was banned
VB said:
roadwolf said:
J B L said:
They're not doing much more than bolting shiny bits on an old concept to sell to rich old born again bikers.
Much the same as Harley Davidson and they seem to be doing OK.I am sure Norton can make something good. Just wondering if they've got their priorities right.
I hope the chassis FTR are developing is also something they will be able to use on a variety of sports and sports derived bikes that's all. Can't be cheap to have a third party developing a whole new platform which has to work with the engine too and God knows which stage that's at really.
Good luck to them. Hope Stu doesn't make such a good opportunity to revive and modernise an iconic brand disappear because of misplaced vanity. Hopefully that TT campaign will coincide with the launch of something interesting for Joe Public. Now that'll be good move.
srob said:
I believe that the original JPS bikes are still being demonstrated by the original riders at stuff like Goodwood, and I don't think they hang about
Yep. They have done occasionally. I saw Terry Rymer or Trevor Nation there on it a few years back. Sounds lovely & is QUICK. ! Hope it's there again this year -'cos I'm going 
srob said:
How do you calculate/define the capacity? I know it's widely thought of as being a 588cc engine; the 'new' one in the picture is called an RCW588 so presumably still being labelled a 588cc?
Are you saying that the single rotor F1 was 500cc bigger than the 1300cc twin rotor engine in the Mazda RX-8?
You may well be right, I'm purely going by memory and I was only about 9 when it was banned
It IS difficult to compare the capacity due to the errrmmm "trochoidal" (guessing at right word?) shape of the rotor, which effectively has, I think, 3 "chambers" when in the static position. Hence not exactly equivalent to the single swept volume calculation of a conventional 4stroke/2 stroke cylinder. That also is why they "estimate" the equivalent cubes as 3 x (the 588cc)Are you saying that the single rotor F1 was 500cc bigger than the 1300cc twin rotor engine in the Mazda RX-8?
You may well be right, I'm purely going by memory and I was only about 9 when it was banned
I shall now have to go & lie down in a darkened room with 2 paracetamol as this has been far more technical then I ever get on BB.
Edited by sprinter1050 on Thursday 16th June 17:05
timbo48 said:
"They tried to build a brand that was already there, when they were selling rebadged Rover 200/400 and 75's."
Disagree, all three MG Zs were different from their Rover relatives, better handling, better equipment, etc, etc. Golf GTi's are based around normal Golfs, as are all of the other manufacturers' hot hatches as far as I know. No different to MGRs. However, point taken, instead of throwing money at Le Mans, international rallying, touring cars and the SVR, they should probably have kept to something that was more relevant, touring cars maybe? Oh, and that 'bike does look nice but is it actually the'bike that the article is about?
Dont get me wrong, i liked the MG Z cars, i almost bought a ZS...(the one based on the rover 400 chassis??) was a msart looking motor.Disagree, all three MG Zs were different from their Rover relatives, better handling, better equipment, etc, etc. Golf GTi's are based around normal Golfs, as are all of the other manufacturers' hot hatches as far as I know. No different to MGRs. However, point taken, instead of throwing money at Le Mans, international rallying, touring cars and the SVR, they should probably have kept to something that was more relevant, touring cars maybe? Oh, and that 'bike does look nice but is it actually the'bike that the article is about?
problem was it was a smart looking motor 5 years before, thye did one major facelift, but it was needing a proper fresh replacment, instead they made a ridiculous V8 hypercar, and more MGF's!!
But we will see what China does with it, if they make that (Zero is it??) concept hot hatch a reality, i will be impressed.
srob said:
urquattro said:
Steve Spray used to ride/race the wheels of the Norton Rotary bike, maybe that one went to IoM with some success, and am sure I saw it wound well up going up the hill at Goodwood FoS a few year ago, sure my memory ok on this one, but maybe someone knows better.
The bike pictured is the 'new' F1 that was developed mid 2000's by Brian Crighton.The original F1's were raced by Trevor Nation and Steve Spray in the JPS colours in British Superbikes. They were eventually banned as it was deemed impossible to determine the exact capacity of them. In reality, they were just too fast!
I believe that the original JPS bikes are still being demonstrated by the original riders at stuff like Goodwood, and I don't think they hang about
Steve Hislop raced the F1 at the TT, I'm sure others did too
rhinochopig said:
Didn't Ron Haslam campaign one too at some point - my memory is hazy granted, but I'm sure he raced one in BSB too.
Correct.Frequently seen hauling in & passing the opposition down the straights due to the speed of the Norton. (lost out on twisty bits IIRC tho') Not sure if it was BSB as such then. Maybe Formula 1/F1 class or just british National Championships.
Im glad to see that someone is at least doing something with the Norton brand!!!
As already mentioned really, they need to make a more mass produced bike instead of a neiche market bike.
Scrap the parallel twin motor (theyre only good for commuters and classics), Build a easily adaptable multi 4, triple or V Twin engined bike, and build a mid cc engined sports bike........... follow triumphs model and focus all your efforts into ONE BIKE (675 daytona) and make it a dam good one. Price it competitively. Use your newly built adaptable engine and put in into a Commando type bike (street triple), Price it competitively (aka undercut the jap bikes by 500 quid or so). If you want to take your new bike to the TT, put it in the supersport class.
Supersport bikes have been the most bought bikes for a little while, capitalise on that!
Triumph have done very well with what they have had at their disposal, drip feeding the market and producing quality bikes that have shown bikers you dont HAVE to go jap to own a quality quick bike!
All we need now is for triumph to develop a 1095 triple superbike!
As already mentioned really, they need to make a more mass produced bike instead of a neiche market bike.
Scrap the parallel twin motor (theyre only good for commuters and classics), Build a easily adaptable multi 4, triple or V Twin engined bike, and build a mid cc engined sports bike........... follow triumphs model and focus all your efforts into ONE BIKE (675 daytona) and make it a dam good one. Price it competitively. Use your newly built adaptable engine and put in into a Commando type bike (street triple), Price it competitively (aka undercut the jap bikes by 500 quid or so). If you want to take your new bike to the TT, put it in the supersport class.
Supersport bikes have been the most bought bikes for a little while, capitalise on that!
Triumph have done very well with what they have had at their disposal, drip feeding the market and producing quality bikes that have shown bikers you dont HAVE to go jap to own a quality quick bike!
All we need now is for triumph to develop a 1095 triple superbike!
Edited by nickz32 on Thursday 16th June 17:49
rhinochopig said:
srob said:
urquattro said:
Steve Spray used to ride/race the wheels of the Norton Rotary bike, maybe that one went to IoM with some success, and am sure I saw it wound well up going up the hill at Goodwood FoS a few year ago, sure my memory ok on this one, but maybe someone knows better.
The bike pictured is the 'new' F1 that was developed mid 2000's by Brian Crighton.The original F1's were raced by Trevor Nation and Steve Spray in the JPS colours in British Superbikes. They were eventually banned as it was deemed impossible to determine the exact capacity of them. In reality, they were just too fast!
I believe that the original JPS bikes are still being demonstrated by the original riders at stuff like Goodwood, and I don't think they hang about
Steve Hislop raced the F1 at the TT, I'm sure others did too
Good on him trying to bring it back, but if it goes wrong and they aren't competitive then its doomed to failure.
Mavican said:
rhinochopig said:
srob said:
urquattro said:
Steve Spray used to ride/race the wheels of the Norton Rotary bike, maybe that one went to IoM with some success, and am sure I saw it wound well up going up the hill at Goodwood FoS a few year ago, sure my memory ok on this one, but maybe someone knows better.
The bike pictured is the 'new' F1 that was developed mid 2000's by Brian Crighton.The original F1's were raced by Trevor Nation and Steve Spray in the JPS colours in British Superbikes. They were eventually banned as it was deemed impossible to determine the exact capacity of them. In reality, they were just too fast!
I believe that the original JPS bikes are still being demonstrated by the original riders at stuff like Goodwood, and I don't think they hang about
Steve Hislop raced the F1 at the TT, I'm sure others did too
Good on him trying to bring it back, but if it goes wrong and they aren't competitive then its doomed to failure.
nickz32 said:
All we need now is for triumph to develop a 1095 triple superbike!
id love this to happen....if triumph dont do it then i dam well will, i know of a racey 675 with blown motor, and im sure our very own sprinter1050 wouldnt mnd me borrowing his motor for a bit...hmmmmmmmhartge bob said:
Race of Champions from Snett, just watch 37 seconds in 
Great little bit of video that.Jamie Whitham (on the Durex Suzuki :dirtygiggle: ) sadly failed towards the end. Broken Con-dom rod ?
Castrol Craig said:
im sure our very own sprinter1050 wouldnt mnd me borrowing his motor for a bit...hmmmmmmm
Well.... you can ask- just don't be offended by 
k offEdited by sprinter1050 on Thursday 16th June 17:08
Really good site here:
http://www.jpsnorton.com/start.asp
I'm still trying to get my head around the capacity thing. I can see that they have three chambers so could/should be compared to a triple four-stroke, but the rev's thing is twisting my melon. I'm sure there must be some kind of compensation one way or another for three bangs per rev as opposed to four rev's per bang.
And I always thought the Nortons were single rotor's, seems they're twin too. Every day's a school day
I managed to fluke a perfectly panned photo of the F1 following a Loctite Yamaha into Russells when I was a kid. It really was the mother of all flukes but the Norton had a flame about four feet out the back of it. Wish I could find it, it's probably lurking at a draw at Dad's house.
I'm off to scratch my head for a bit and have a think
http://www.jpsnorton.com/start.asp
I'm still trying to get my head around the capacity thing. I can see that they have three chambers so could/should be compared to a triple four-stroke, but the rev's thing is twisting my melon. I'm sure there must be some kind of compensation one way or another for three bangs per rev as opposed to four rev's per bang.
And I always thought the Nortons were single rotor's, seems they're twin too. Every day's a school day
I managed to fluke a perfectly panned photo of the F1 following a Loctite Yamaha into Russells when I was a kid. It really was the mother of all flukes but the Norton had a flame about four feet out the back of it. Wish I could find it, it's probably lurking at a draw at Dad's house.
I'm off to scratch my head for a bit and have a think
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff