But will it do 140mph?

They sold about 875 road bikes, of which 140 were F1's. Add the military
Interplod II's and the police prototype and it's over a thousand.
Spares are still available and people still race thenm competitively.

How many RE5's did Suzuki sell?
How many are still running?

 

(SteveH) wrote in

I've been talking about several models, as has Lozzo.

My first reply seems to be lost on usenet somewhere so apologies if it
turns up later and makes this look like a duplicate response.

http://www.morini-riders-club.com/photos/cadwell/2003/DSC00024.JPG is
what I had in mind when I mentioned a poor mans sportier version, except
with a water cooled engine in.

 

I was there for that, we were stood at the end of the back straight and
they just blitzed everybody down it. Think they brought a few people
through the gates as well.

 

That they do.

 

Andy Bonwick says...

PFCT

 

As you would expect from something functionally equivalent
to an 1800cc six-cylinder four stroke, competing in F1.

 

http://www.realclassic.co.uk/norton04092300.html

 

This particular F1 Sport will whisk you straight up to 145mph, making the
most of its well-matched 95-plus horsepower and 185kg dry weight.

LOL!

I guess that answers the thread subject nicely.

 

tallbloke says...

No it doesn't, the F1 is a rotary made in England, not a parallel twin
Commando made in the USA.

 

I know, but since no-one wanted to answer the posts I made earlier in this
thread, I thought I'd say something to stir it up a bit

 

Come on, explain how a 'six cylinder four stroke' works with 2 spark plugs
then.

I'm so sick of this old chestnut.

It might have chambers which work in a similar way to that in which two
stroke engines circulate the fuel/air mix around the crankcase before it
passes through the transfer port into the combustion chamber, but it still
only has the two combustion chambers and two spark plugs with a 'swept
volume' of 588cc.

1800cc - bollox.

 

tallbloke says...

I was discussing the Dreer Commando with a few ukrmers tonight, only one
of whom is the 'typical classic bike lover'. We all decided we'd like
one as a second or third bike in our respective stables. I think it's a
very well thought out, modernised version of a classic bike. Still not
sure if it will pull 140 though.

 

It's unfaired. how much does it matter if it does 130 or 140?
The thing I loved most about my '74 MK IIA 850 Roadster was the torque.
Slotting it down from 4th to 3rd at around 45mph and firing past a line of
cars as it wailed up to 85mph was simply a joy unmatched by any other bike
I've owned. It's hard to explain, but the crispness of the response
coupled with the induction hiss and the note from the reverse cone megas
just brought a rising feeling of elation in my gut every time.

My commando topped out at 125mph but it was the 0 to 95 which was the
really exciting territory.

I like the look of the new Dreer comando too. But I think I'd sooner find
4.5k for a good running original than 10 or 12k for one of those

 

You are sick of this chestnut because you find the truth unpalatable.

It is quite obviously a four-stroke, rather than a two-stroke.
You can identify the suck, squeeze, bang and blow phases of the cycle.

The three faces of a rotor contain completely separate charges of
fuel/air which do not interfere with each other.

For a single rotor of swept volume 300cc, in the time that one charge
(one face of the rotor) completes its cycle (four strokes), the two
other faces have also completed four strokes each, though these are
the end of one cycle and the start of the next.

So a single Norton rotor is equivalent to a rather inefficient 900cc
triple four-stroke. A complete engine is equivalent to an 1800cc six.

Any other rating, to get them into F1, is politics, support for local
industry, or Mr Ecclestone trying to fool us into thinking that small
things are better than big ones.

 

Nice visual here http://www.keveney.com/Wankel.html

"The drive shaft rotates once during every power stroke <for
each lobe> instead of twice as in the Otto cycle"

There are 3 lobes so for every rotation of a single rotor engine
there are 3 power strokes and so 6 in two rotations

Now in a 3 cylinder engine, as opposed to a 3 lobed rotor and
trying to compare like with like as far as possible, in two
rotations each cylinder gets to fire once so 3 power strokes

which for engines with the same swept volume suggests to me that
a single rotor engine should be classified as twice the volume
of a normal 3 cylinder.

 

SWMBOs car has a twin rotor engine of 1300cc which is treated by
insurance companies and the DVLA as 2600cc.

--
ColonelTupperware
spouting bollocks on Usenet since 1997
Usenet FAQ at
http://www.its.caltech.edu/its/services/internetapps/news/news2.shtml
UPCE FAQ at http://upce.org.uk/
UKRM FAQ at http://www.ukrm.net/faq/

 

This is an example of efficient design, not of a larger than life swept
volume.

Personally, I think that a motor which weighs less and occupies less
volume than other designs yet goes lots faster is something to be
applauded, rather than excluded from competition on dodgy arguments about
swept volumes. The Status quo won against a new development, but it's a
pyhrric victory.

 

Are you sure? I thought they just said 'Whatever you want, whatever
you need'...

 

Ba-boom Tish.