|
Post by buttybach1932 on Nov 6, 2023 21:05:35 GMT
Hi John Glad to hear that you are making progress with the ML. Currently I am trying to help a chap who wants to build a 500cc Velocette engined Norton using a lightweight racing featherbed frame. My friend has owned a two Velton's, one was a racer and the other was a road bike. Both of his bikes used the Velocette clutch and gearbox so they were fairly straightforward to build. The chap I am helping wants to use an AMC clutch and gearbox, which makes life difficult because you have to offset the engine. The Velocette primary drive is inboard of the final drive and on the Norton / AMC it is outboard so the Velocette engine needs to be offset 2" to 2½". I think it is going to look a bit weird but it is his bike. Attached is a picture of my mate's racing Velton taken at Silverstone in the 1980s. It was the most uncomfortable bike I have ever ridden. It felt like your hip joints were being dislocated after a couple of laps. Please keep us updated. Regards Butty Bach
|
|
|
Post by nortonjohn on Nov 11, 2023 13:13:56 GMT
Butty, Things have slowed down here motorcycle wise. I had planned to take the parts from the ML to the sandblasters, but we got a bit of rain and that can slow things down. Had the dickens of a time getting the trees off of the frame. But got that done with the use of a small torch to warm things up a bit. The nice thing with having the second ML is that now I have the original spacers for the wheels and can now make the correct ones for the 47.
My good friend in NM has several Velo's and enjoys riding them. He prefers Velo singles and Norton twins when riding. He told me years ago that there is a modification where you can use the clutch plates out of a GM transmission as replacements for the stock ones. I'm sure that there are things that need to be replaces to make it work but I don't have a Velocette and I didn't pay that much attention.
Getting an estament on expanding my workshop next week. Then of course will come adding new LED lights and outlets and provisions for adding HVAC to the area.
Reports to follow. John
|
|
|
Post by nortonjohn on Dec 10, 2023 12:27:38 GMT
The frame is back from being powder painted and I picked up the parts I had chromed for both the ML James and the 56 Norton Domi 88. That will make your eyes water for how much it cost! Going to start putting the frame back together tomorrow. The guy who was supposed to come by and give me an estament was a no show. Cheers John
|
|
|
Post by buttybach1932 on Dec 12, 2023 13:01:25 GMT
Hi John
Pleased to hear that you are progressing with the rebuild of the ML. The problem with restoring most lightweight motorcycles is that it can cost more to restore them than they a worth when restored. But if you get several years of use and enjoyment out of them it makes it all worthwhile. Plus personally I get more enjoyment out of working on motorcycles than I do riding them.
I have got side-tracked over the last couple of weeks. An elderly friend had a problem with the steering on his Quingo mobility scooter. Its a peculiar device with three front wheels for stability. All three wheels steer, when you steer the main centre wheel and the outer stability wheel steer but the inner wheel is controlled by a tension spring. The tension springs return the stability wheels to the straight ahead position. On my friends scooter a track-rod end had seized, so the spring could not return the right hand stability wheel to the straight ahead position.
My Velocette mate has just brought a partially dismantled Velocette Valiant engine. It's a 200cc OHV flat twin with shaft drive like a mini BMW. The engine is based on the sidevalve watercooled LE. There has been speculation and debated about the camshafts fitted to the Valiant engines so I have taken the opportunity to clock the cams and produce a lift graph on Excel. Which can be overlaid on a LE Mk3 cam graph.
If it's not too cold over Christmas I can hopefully get back to working on my rigid framed 125cc BSA Bantam Sprint Special. I still have a few small parts to make and I still need some ½" × 12 gauge tubing to make some mudguard stays.
Have a great Christmas and a happy New Year.
Regards Butty Bach
|
|
|
Post by nortonjohn on Dec 14, 2023 13:39:03 GMT
Butty, and all BTSC members I wish you all a very Merry Christmas and a blessed New Year.
I agree with you that I already have far more into my ML James than it is worth. I enjoy working on it and other bikes. I have a couple of regular riders and the rest I take out as the mood suits me. I am currently working on both the ML and a 56 Norton Domi 88. The Norton is coming along quite nicely after getting the chrome back from the platers. As always there are slight differences on the bikes that you wouldn't think would be there. I'm planning on using POR15 paint on the small bits on both the James and the Norton. I will let you all know how that goes.
Cheers John
|
|
|
Post by buttybach1932 on Jan 1, 2024 17:14:17 GMT
Hi John Happy New Year. I was at 'Vintage Stony' today. It started out as a New Years Day event for 1920s and 30s Sports Cars, but it has grown enormously and there are sections for all types of collector cars and motorcycles. I was chatting to one of the Royal Enfield Owners Club members about a 150cc Ensign that he is restoring, as his pre-war 500cc Model J Bullets are getting too heavy for him. He also mentioned that he had a 150cc Royal Enfield Prince and we were discussing how rare they are when one pulled up next to us. The bike belonged to another Royal Enfield Owners Club member. He has owned the bike for 40 years and has finally got it back on the road. The speedometer was showing 56 miles since completing the rebuild. The Prince is based on the 150cc Ensign but has an updated engine and a swinging arm frame. They were manufactured from 1958 to 1962 but only sold in tiny numbers compared to the BSA Bantam. Attached is a photograph taken with my 'steam age era' Nokia mobile. Regards Butty Bach
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 2, 2024 18:06:37 GMT
What engine did it use?
|
|
|
Post by buttybach1932 on Jan 2, 2024 23:15:40 GMT
Hi Admin Royal Enfield used their own design of engine for the 126cc and 148cc two stroke models. The original 126cc Flying Flea engine was based on a pre-war 98cc DKW design. The story is that Royal Enfield were approached by the Dutch DKW importer and asked if they could supply them with a similar machine, because the new Nazi government in Germany would not allow DKW to supply a Jewish company. The capacity was increased from 98cc to 126cc because the Royal Enfield engine used a scavenging system designed to get around the DKW patents, by using two transfer ports and cutaways in the piston crown ( a semi deflector piston ). The extra engine capacity made up for the loss in efficiency. The engine was completely redesigned in 1951 for the 126cc RE2 model. The clutch was moved to the crankshaft to increase flywheel inertia and the crankcases looked egg shaped. A new version of the Miller flywheel generator was used with 'Energy Transfer' ignition. It gave the engine a lot more modern look. In 1953 a 148cc version of the engine was introduced for the Ensign model. It was virtually the same but had a larger bore and stroke dimensions. The new Ensign model was fitted with plunger rear suspension. For 1956 the 148cc Ensign 2 was introduced with a very similar engine but with more finning on the head and barrel so it looked rather different to the earlier engines. For 1958 there was a further engine update for the 148cc Prince. The revised engine looked the same but had a revised crankshaft with full circle flywheels instead of bob weight flywheels and other small internal improvements. The Prince model had new cycle parts with swinging arm rear suspension. Regards Butty Bach
|
|
|
Post by nortonjohn on Apr 5, 2024 13:44:37 GMT
Butty, and all BTSC members I wish you all a very Merry Christmas and a blessed New Year. I agree with you that I already have far more into my ML James than it is worth. I enjoy working on it and other bikes. I have a couple of regular riders and the rest I take out as the mood suits me. I am currently working on both the ML and a 56 Norton Domi 88. The Norton is coming along quite nicely after getting the chrome back from the platers. As always there are slight differences on the bikes that you wouldn't think would be there. I'm planning on using POR15 paint on the small bits on both the James and the Norton. I will let you all know how that goes. Cheers John Well, the POR 15 paint is a very good product, and it is very hard. I find that if you are doing a brush paint job you should stick to small irregular shaped parts like footpegs. A large area such as a outer primary shows the brush strokes. It can be sprayed but you have to have their special thinner for the paint and clean-up of the spray gun.
|
|
|
Post by nortonjohn on Apr 5, 2024 13:52:12 GMT
If you have been following the James ML project of mine you know the I was having difficulty with the rear wheel spacers. So, I decided to fit the engine and then align the rear wheel sprocket to the output sprocket of the transmission. Got the sprocket side spacer built and will do the brake side today. These pictures are from when I was trying to set up to measure for the spacers. Cheers John
|
|
|
Post by buttybach1932 on Apr 9, 2024 11:46:33 GMT
Hi John Glad to see that you are making progress with the James ML. I have done virtually nothing on my bikes over the winter but I have done a few jobs on friends bikes. Last week I had a look a a mates 1938 Matchless G3 that had died. Unfortunately the high tension coil in the Lucas magneto has gone open circuit so it needs a rewind and rebuild. We are trying to find someone who has a spare Lucas KN1-3 magneto that they can loan him whilst his magneto is rebuilt, as we have been quoted a six month turn around on rebuilds. I need to complete the manufacture of the special parts for the D1 Sprint Bantam that I am rebuilding. The first job is to get the steel tubing for the mudguard stays. Regards Butty Bach
|
|
|
Post by nortonjohn on May 4, 2024 14:09:06 GMT
View AttachmentView AttachmentIf you have been following the James ML project of mine you know the I was having difficulty with the rear wheel spacers. So, I decided to fit the engine and then align the rear wheel sprocket to the output sprocket of the transmission. Got the sprocket side spacer built and will do the brake side today. These pictures are from when I was trying to set up to measure for the spacers. Cheers John Well, I have figured out at least part of my issue with the rear wheel spacing. Whoever laced up the rear wheel did the obvious thing having the spokes alternate between inner and outer spokes on the brake side. I found a pair of wheels at the swap meet in Fredericksburg for a very reasonable price of $10 each. The seller had no idea what they were off of. Looking at those wheels I noted that all the spoke on the brake drum came from the outside with a cross 2 pattern. So, I get to unlace the wheel and re-do it. Linley in Nova Scotia needed a rear hub for his project ML125 James. So, I dismantled the wheel and sent him the hub he needed. There was yet another ML James at the show and swap meet in Fredericksburg. They keep turning up. John in Texas
|
|
|
Post by 1951superlux on May 6, 2024 8:09:04 GMT
Your wheel also has a 'pedal cycle' type spoke pattern ... probably because if has 'keyhole' spoke holes on the sprocket side. Usually motor cycle spoking has all the inner spokes (ie: on both sides) going in the same direction and all the outer spokes going the other way. Pedal cycles usually have the inner spokes on one side going in the opposite direction to those on the other side. Pedal cycle spoking make the wheel rigid earlier in the building process but can only be done with the long thin spokes used on pedal cycles - unless, as above, you have keyhole spoke holes. Mopeds are halfway and, for example, Raleigh mopeds (which were licence-built Mobylettes) were laced bicycle fashion, whereas the French-made Mobylettes were laced motor cycle fashion. The reason: Raleigh's origins were as a bicycle maker, Motobécane's as a motor cycle maker, and 'we always make them that way'.
|
|
|
Post by nortonjohn on May 16, 2024 20:13:50 GMT
Sometimes I'm left scratching my head. I pulled the sprocket side spokes off my rear wheel and the outer spokes off the brake side and reversed those. Refitted the sprocket side spokes and all looked good, but it was only a cross 1 pattern. Humm? I have another complete rear wheel the has a cross 3 pattern on the sprocket side. Again, humm? I measured the length of both spokes and there is a 1" difference between them. So, I know what the problem is, and I think the correct set up is the cross 3 spoke pattern. That is much stronger. It is a good thing I had to remove the rear tire. The PO used duct tape as a rim strip, will all the bumps and ripples. This being the case I will have to pull the front tire and check that too. It's an adventure. John in Texas
|
|
|
Post by 1951superlux on May 17, 2024 7:04:33 GMT
I think the correct set up is the cross 3 spoke pattern. That is much stronger. Not necessarily. More crosses make the wheel stronger torsionally, ie: better at transmitting braking and acceleration forces, but not so strong at resisting sideways forces. As far as maintaining the roundness of the wheel goes, the number of crosses makes hardly any difference. On the James, I wouldn't think either braking or acceleration will be vigorous enough to notice any difference between 1-cross & 3-cross.
|
|