Ah, reminds me of my old Norton...

http://venus.13x.com/roadracingworld/scripts/NewsInsert.asp?insert=7308

I want ONE!!!

I love the cafe style racers.  I also like the honda GB500, but they were only imported for one year 89090 i htink.

god theyare so cool.

jake

That is a good looking bike....

Triumph?  Probably costs $1500-$2000 more than it would need to.

Looks GREAT -- like a Norton Commando Fastback -- but only 69hp out of 900cc???  I mean that just ain't right.  Plus, if you get a Triumph, for G*d's sake man, get one of their triples ... best-sounding motorcycles on the planet, bar none.  Yes they're all water-cooled and that sucketh ass but check out the sound of one of those things on full boil and I think you will be absolutely stunned.

Quote from: Levellerit will accelerate faster than pretty much anything else on two wheels.

yeah, but can it turn?  

Actually, I doubt it will out accelerate the V-Rod, or the Gurney Alligator. The Alligator has the quicket 0 - 60 times of any bike I know of, which is impressive for a 50 hp single. All the sport bikes are really hampered by their high CG and short wheelbases.

I think it would smoke the hell out of a V-Rod in accelleration.  The V-Rod was only a hald second quicker in the 1/4 mile than the Honda Magna.  With 147 pounds of torque and a build that isn't prone to wheelies, it should take off like a rocket.

no passenger seat ? what's the fun in that

1/4 mile is a different thing. Stop light to stop light, 0 to 60 type stuff, the V-rod is quick. I think more torque and weight would just end up with more tire smoke, less go.

Edit: And the sport bikes will kill them all past 60 mph.

The Thruxton looks like it will be a cool bike.  Its MSRP is 7999 according to the Triumph site
http://www.triumph.co.uk/site/regional/models/model.cfm?ModelID=180

If you check out the new Cycle World with all the Harleys on the front, they have an article about a future Norton 952 Commando.  The bike looks absolutely awesome in the pics and so far they've dynoed the prototype bike at 73hp and 69 torque.  17" wheels with 120 front and 180 rear tires.  It says it has a 5 speed but a 6 speed will probably be an option.  There is going to be a 100 bike run in 2004 but I'm hoping they'll go into production for the future.  Its a sweet, classic look with new parts on it.
http://www.nortonmotorcycles.com/
I wonder what it will cost

Yep, I've been watching the Norton America bikes for years. The new one looks very nice.

My first bike was a '72 Commando that I rode across Canada several times, and down through Mexico. I had it for quite awhile. It was a great bike, and I still haven't ridden anything that was as smooth as it on the highway. That Isolastic engine suspension worked amazingly well. It was a fun bike in the twisties.

I suspect the Nortons will be $20k+ US. It's too expensive to build a bike in the US, plus there are so many people who will pay stupid prices for things. Why try to sell it for less? I wish it would be priced like the Triumph, but I sincerely doubt it.

In todays world I would hope a 900cc class bike could produce at least 69hp???

I know they want a retro looking bike but parallel twins of that size are goig to shake themselves to death.

Where did this myth about parallel twins shaking themselves to death come from? The balance is certainly no worse a problem than with Aprilia's strange angle V-twin, or KTM's 45 degree V-twin. No one worries about them "shaking themselves to death".

The Triumph Bonny engine didn't seem to have any issues that way, so I doubt making the displacememt a bit bigger will make much difference.

I must admit I don't understand why everyone needs 100+ hp motorcycles. I've managed to have a lot of fun, travel hundreds of thousands of miles, scare myself, and get my share of speeding tickets, with 40 to 60 hp bikes for 30 years. Guess I'm just old!

I'm with you Kevin, I'd rather have a 1000cc Vincent Black Shadow than a GSXR1000.

Yep, them water-cooled freak shows have to wear all that plastic to cover up their ugly, unfinished engines with those hideous radiators and all that plumbing.

Air-cooled bikes will always have way more displacement for a given hp level compared to a water-cooled bike. Personally, I like the engine to be the centerpeice of my bikes, and I'll take the extra displacement over those rads, hoses, and engines that look like lumps of aluminum.

Quote from: KevinCYep, them water-cooled freak shows have to wear all that plastic to cover up their ugly, unfinished engines with those hideous radiators and all that plumbing.

Air-cooled bikes will always have way more displacement for a given hp level compared to a water-cooled bike. Personally, I like the engine to be the centerpeice of my bikes, and I'll take the extra displacement over those rads, hoses, and engines that look like lumps of aluminum.

I was watching a hill climb competition the other day and all the bikes had like 750cc fours and 8 foot long swing arms.  1st and 6th place went to vintage triumph motored bikes.

Something to think about.........

Long-stroke motors produce more torque at lower rpms and put the power to ground, they don't just spin their tires. They're stump-pullers!
Going uphill is not a long-distance competition, so the torque-monsters can usually pull the ring-dingers. Torque produces acceleration, and you need that initial momentum to get up the hill in a controlled manner. High rpm produces a lot of horsepower, but it's no good if you're just spinnin' the tire.

I miss my Triumph.