- This topic has 3 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
961 Commando SE
The 961 Commando SE represents a new beginning for Norton Motorcycles. Designed and built from the ground up, this bike continues the Norton legacy of defined style and performance.This modern roadster reflects the soul of the original machine. Classic sculptural forms are combined with raw functionalism, laying beautiful shapes over a structural frame and muscular motor; resulting in a visual language that is both sensual and purposeful. With a very narrow waist and curves in just the right places, the 961 is a bike that feels as good as it looks.
The Commando 961 SE Spec
» Spec Sheet
» Engine
» Chassis
» Gauges & Controls» The Commando 961 SE Spec
» FAQ’s Simple and direct engineering solutions are employed to create a motor that is visually and mechanically elegant; efficiently assembled in production, and easily maintained or upgraded in the owner’s garage.» Click here if you are interested in buying the commando
FRAME
Frame : Steel tubular cradle with integral oil tank
Swing arm: steel construction
Wheelbase: 1420mm
Rake: 24.5 degrees
Trail: 99mm
Front suspension: 43mm Ohlins RWU – Adjustable preload, compression, and rebound damping.
Rear suspension: Ohlins reservoir-style twin shocks – Adjustable ride height, preload, compression, and rebound damping.
Front wheel: 3.50 X 17″ BST Carbon Fibre
Rear wheel: 5.50 X 17″ BST Carbon Fibre
Front tyre: 120/70 X 17″
Rear tyre: 180/55 X 17″
Front wheel travel: 115mm
Rear wheel travel: 100mm
BRAKES & HYDRAULICSBrembo 320mm semi-floating hi carbon stainless steel front discs
Brembo 220mm rear disc
Brembo 4 piston “Gold Line” axially mounted front callipers
Brembo 2 piston “Gold Line” rear calliper
Brembo “Gold line” front brake master cylinder
Brembo “Gold line” hydraulic clutch master cylinder
Brembo rear brake master cylinder
Brembo hydraulic clutch actuation slave cylinder
POWER ASSEMBLYEngine type: Parallel twin with push-rod valve actuation, dry sump
Displacement: 961 cc
Cooling system: Air
Valve Actuation: Push rod, hydraulic lifter, two valves per cylinder
Bore x stroke: 88 mm X 79 mm
Compression ratio: 10.1:1
Power: 80PS @ 6500RPM
Torque: 90Nm @ 5200RPM
Exhaust:1 3/4″ header system with merged collector and twin silencers with catalytic converters.
Ignition: Crank fired electronic
Euro 3 compliant with electronic fuel injection and multiple 3 way catalytic converters
CARBON PACK
Front mudguard
Chain guard
Rear wheel hugger
Rear number plate hanger
Headlight mounting
Front wheel
Rear wheel
TRANSMISSIONGearbox: constant mesh 5 speed
Final drive: 525 “O” ring chain
Wet clutch
Electric start
ELECTRONICS & CONTROLSCharging system: 300 watt hi-output charging system
Instrumentation: Norton electronic analogue speedo and tachometer with dual trip meters and ‘hidden until lit’ warning lights
MISCELLANEOUSFuel tank capacity: 17l
Dry weight: 188kg
Seat height: 813mm
Billet machined upper yoke
Billet machined lower yoke
Tapered anodised aluminium handle barsits a bit heavy for just 80 bhp, but pretty torquey. Looks lovely imo
but doubt I’d consider one until the name proves its self and hangs about for a few years. Strange they choose this economic time to rekindle the name tho????My prediction: they will fail.
Why? Well…
After the first flock of Nortonophiles who will buy it?
It will have a premium price but the company behind it has no track record.
It is over-weight.
It has a mediocre frame design.
It will vibrate.
Max torque is produced close to max power revs and hence unlikely to capitalise on twin cylinder advantages(i.e. good pulling power in a high gear at low revs).
It has an air-cooled engine and hence needs to run greater clearances meaning: higher oil consumption, lower max power (per cc), and higher clatter noise.
They appear to have no dealer network(?).
They appear to have no long term business plan.
They have just one model.
Putting a bike into series production is very costly, and no ammount of enthusiasm can overcome losses.
The millionare behind the project may be happy to lose money, which is the only way the actual bike will ever become ‘successfull’.
They are blindly trying to revive the Commando engine / styling image and in the process ignoring the one thing that would almost guarantee vast sales of a modern watercooled multi-cylinder bike… the brand name!!!
Norton is a fabulous name and if they got their act together and designed a properly specified and costed RANGE of modern bikes they could take on the world and hopefully break even in less than ten years. But as it is… well, I wish them luck… but they will fail.quote:
Originally posted by GordyMy prediction: they will fail.
Why? Well…
After the first flock of Nortonophiles who will buy it?
It will have a premium price but the company behind it has no track record.
It is over-weight.
It has a mediocre frame design.
It will vibrate.
Max torque is produced close to max power revs and hence unlikely to capitalise on twin cylinder advantages(i.e. good pulling power in a high gear at low revs).
It has an air-cooled engine and hence needs to run greater clearances meaning: higher oil consumption, lower max power (per cc), and higher clatter noise.
They appear to have no dealer network(?).
They appear to have no long term business plan.
They have just one model.
Putting a bike into series production is very costly, and no ammount of enthusiasm can overcome losses.
The millionare behind the project may be happy to lose money, which is the only way the actual bike will ever become ‘successfull’.
They are blindly trying to revive the Commando engine / styling image and in the process ignoring the one thing that would almost guarantee vast sales of a modern watercooled multi-cylinder bike… the brand name!!!
Norton is a fabulous name and if they got their act together and designed a properly specified and costed RANGE of modern bikes they could take on the world and hopefully break even in less than ten years. But as it is… well, I wish them luck… but they will fail.Sadly I fear you may well be right
I really do wish them luck. It’s just that I get quite annoyed when, based upon umpteen years in the automotive engineering industry, and many years as a motorcycle enthusiast, I can see exactly where they are going wrong and they seem completely oblivious to it. I want them to throw money at doing the right thing right, not the wrong thing wrong. Why can’t they see it? Are they blind, stupid, or blind stupid???
Maybe I am being overly critical and missing something? Maybe, maybe not. Time will tell.
Perhaps they will get their act together and be successful; let’s hope so.
End of rant, and time for a beer.
: )
but doubt I’d consider one until the name proves its self and hangs about for a few years. Strange they choose this economic time to rekindle the name tho????
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.