All Activity

Personally I consider the 'New Commando' a near-miss at best. They really didn't capture any of the proportion or style of the original, and the engine just isn't knobby enough while still appearing dated. Meh.

At least we woud be prepeared to handle the ign lock, looks familiar to me. And the music , hearing the bike, much better. Cool bike, hope they succede. To many has been burned before, paying big down p, thats it, no bike. Cheers Tom.

Make sure you get everything as clos to 90degree angles and the same angle to get the best shift possible. A VERY old crane mechanic stressed the importance of this to me and I do it as much as possible.

I just had a wee look but not enough time to watch all of it... Think you might be right about the public school twat ha ha . Anyways I don't think they ( Norton ) got it right with the standard Commando,To me the pipes are wrong and the tail lights embedded in the rear cowling look ah crap. Having said this, I think they got it absolutely spot on with the Dominator version, but this was under the previous management. (or lack thereof). That version is one of the best looking bikes I've seen. Cheers Ps I also prefer v twins though.

I read they are restricting aero to some degree or at least setting parameters based on the max width allowed for the front of the bike.

Well, the bike is pretty. The film is mediocre. The camera person is an amateur, and they don't really have the audio sorted. Wind noise should not ever happen. And the bloke corresponds almost perfectly to the classic stereotype of a public school twat. Ok, that is not really fair, and perhaps says something about my personal predjudices, but still... But the bike really is pretty. Pity I don't like parallel twins.

The reduction in engine capacity should change the aerodynamic needs, but it won't make them go away. It will make the bikes harder to ride. It likely won't reduce speeds anymore then it did last time they tried smaller engine capacity. As to safety, the smaller engine capacity bikes were arguably less safe as they meant racers had to carry more speed through the corners as the bikes lacked the torque of the larger engine displacement. That tends to lead to more highsides. I am sad that they aren't banning aero, but okay with banning the ride height devices. But the reduction of engine capacity seems misguided, like they don't remember history. The worst thing about all this is we are at a place in time where everyone is so close, and a rules change like this will likely spread the field out as some teams / manufacturers will get it more right then others will.

The first thing that occurs to me is that all the teams will be able to see at all times where all of the bikes are on the track. And be able to calculate speed information out of that. Not entirely useless information, I would say.

The new MotoGP rules starting from 2027 have been announced: Engine Capacity reduced to 850 cc Tank capacity reduced from 22 liters to 20 liters, 11 liters for the short race Fuel will need to be 100% synthetic No ride height or hole shot devices allowed. (this was a really high contention point for Ducati) GPS data of all the riders available to all the teams Only one aerodynamic modification allowed for the rear of the bike. I don't know what the GPS data entails. I suppose it means that you will get the speed only. Not the bike sensor's output. The lesser capacity may resolve into less requirement for aerodynamics the way it is today. I forgot to say, every engine has to be four cylinders, and four cylinders only. Current MotoGP engines are around 300 bhp. I wonder what the reduction in capacity will equate to.

The Norton Commando has been trying to resurrect from its ashes several times now... Let's hope this time it will be real! I really like its looks and how it sounds.

Hi @ScuRoo are there any Aussie commentators like this you could recommend? I follow Matt Barrie (here he is on the Equity Mates show) and would be interested in others of a similar bent. I find it odd that people escape from UK to Oz, and yet the situation almost seems worse there (from the outside). cheers!

…will do just that, thank you @docc

At one South'n SpineRaid we measured the "standoff" of the threaded part of the pivot pins on six or eight spine frames. I had already taken great pains to set mine to center my tire contact patches to one another using a laser. The conclusion came down to : turn each pivot in equally until they bottom, then back each off very slightly to unload the inner bearing races.

Uh, is it too late to say "set them back to the same depths they were at before you removed the rear swing arm?

Hey guys, since I removed the rear wheel, I also removed the jack-shaft for proper lubing, successfully completed. To do so, I removed the swing arm pivot dowels. What is the realignment process, I cannot find it in the factory manual.

The reason I was considering these sizes, is because they didn't come in the OEM size. I didn't want sport bike tires because most of my riding is straight freeway. I wanted this particular model because they are longer lasting, due to better center compound. I'm sold on Kenda, many good experiences with them, both with street and dirt, they represent great value. I may just go with their sport bike tire model, KM1. They are available in the correct size.

Many thanks, @p6x! Before and after pics of the Kangol (before pic itself was after removal of Green Bay Packers patch and attempted but failed supergluing of larger patch). Cheers, Frey

Yeah, that's not so much the problem, although they do get a bit flat in the middle. It's more the front tyres. Not so much that the profile dissapears, but that you (can) get very uneven wear happening. In particular, what is known as "Sägezahnbildung" in German, i.e. "saw-tooth developement" more or less. That thing where the tread blocks wear more on the leading edges, and you get steps developing from one to the next. I've had front tyres that still had enough profile to be legal, but were really not good for the handling on the bike. Tyre pressure is critical. Too little pressure accelerates the process dramatically.

Are you sure those tires are radial tires? Pretty sure they aren't. Kenda does make a radial tire, the KM1. And it does come in the right sizes for a V11 Sport. Neither of those tires are the right size for a V11 Sport. And not being radials will probably mean less miles of use and not sure how they would handle on a bike made for radial tires.

Well my 40,000klms riding experience around Germany was 2 up on K100rs's fully loaded with panniers, tank bad and rear rack. Yes my Autobahn speeds were usually around the 120-140 mark. The rear tyres on both trips easily lasted without any thought of needing replacement and I was still riding on them at home when the bikes arrived back in Aus. Rear was only a 130 x 18 from memory as well in those good old days Phil

Please note shock absorbers shown in pictures are no longer included

Just installed Michelin Road 6’s 👍🏼, in stock short frame sizes 170/60ZR17 & 120/70ZR17

The Greenie's booked in for a new set of shoes on Friday! Went with another pair of Angel GT 2's as this set has seen it all (apart from snow and Ice) in the 18K and never once did they misbehave. This also includes 10k of usage before the suspension was sorted and serviced so I'm bloody impressed. Cheers Ps can't wait!

When it comes to alternate tire sizes, there's some leeway with the rear. Better handling, go 170. I guess you can go 160? I know 170 works really well. 200 is the max. I tried it. I didn't like it. You'd thin more of a contact patch would be better, but too much sidewall can get a little wabbly when pushing it. At least it did for me. As for the front, I wouldn't really deviate. You're certainly gonna feel it. I would think less sidewall would be better. As for Kenda.. Why? If it's budget, check out the Dunlop GPR300. I slapped them on my Scura because I had to register 4 motorcycles at the same time, so it was budget... And they're pretty friggin good. I've heard people getting 5-6k out of them, which isn't that bad. Not great, but not bad. And they don't get squirrelly. Even on hot desert asphalt. https://www.cyclegear.com/tires/dunlop-sportmax-gpr300-tires?gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjw3NyxBhBmEiwAyofDYXXG43QbbctgWl8zWOF9B2R5dT6091ZXcm7It6JaEIW3GGBMQMxenxoCOxMQAvD_BwE

I beg to differ. If you are constrained to the consevative 110 km/h that is allowed in Australia, yes. If you are really on an Autobahn, it depends entirely on how fast you are prepared to ride. My normal cruising speed on the GTR 1000 was about 150 - 160 km/h (average, mind you. Peak around 180 km/h. More than that, and I start getting nervous on public roads...). That, particularly on that heavy bike, is not exactly conducive to long tyre life, front or rear. And smooth B roads are only the norm in southern / western Germany. Here in the region around Leipzig, and in fact all of what was the DDR prior to 1989, you get everything from freshly made roads through "patches on the patches" to cobblestones. Makes a trip across country through unknown territory quite interesting. EDIT: having said that, even around Heilbronn, where I lived previous to Leipzig, there were some pretty shitful roads. That is in Baden-Württemberg, which is a pretty well-off state, but some of the back roads are still pretty ordinary.