Ron, very nice,Is there a shot of the engine, well done John, like to have a ride of her, is she going to Normandy, ur up and about early Ron, andrew.h.
Ref. the power of the Model X it has always puzzled me why the Army chose the Big 4 as a prime mover for the SWD outfits when at least three big twins were available that seemed more suited to the task...They even had a military BSA G14 outfit in production for the Dutch Army which would only have required the addition of the SWD.
Experience with the Big 4 confirmed the (unsurprising) lack of power and lead to the Sunbeam MX4 prototype.
It would appear quite obvious that would be the outcome...singles are not that good even with a lightweight sidecar and chassis ON the roads!!..Ian
The reason is Ian. Norton had read the writing on the wall and had developed the SWD long before the war had started, and had pushed for government contracts as early as 1938, and were therefore geared up to mass produce at a moments notice.
Yes Andy I'm always an early riser 5-6am. Have a look at the thread I started on April 25th titled 'Interesting Model X Matchless'. Ron
Royal Enfield and BSA also provided prototypes for evaluation alongside the Norton..all powered by single cylinder engines. That would infer it was not a 'done deal'...for instance the BSA might have been picked following trials if it had been the more successful model.
Norton had done some work beforehand through their connections with Baughns who originated the idea for trials use in the Thirties.
As all the submitted machines were singles that may be an indication of the general move away from twins (such as the J12) that was taking place at the time.
It is possible that due to this line of thinking the most logical choice was ignored...Ian
It would seem that the British quite specifically went for a sporting sort of outfit and the Big 4 owes much to the trials chairs of the day. It was not the intention to have a sort of three-wheeled car like the Harley outfit that was posted a few weeks back.
There was an emphasis on the three man crew being able to manhandle over or through any obstacle.
I'm very much aware from when Lex took me out in the Big 4 a few years ago that his was floating over soft ground and steering round ploughed up bends far better than the swd Cossack / Ural outfits which are descended from the German military combinations.
The Big 4 was not slow when compared with the other military vehicles of 1940. On the advance into Belgium, 4th Royal Northumberland Fusiliers reported "40 M.I.H." which ain't bad going !
It's certainly the case the Big 4 would be more easy to manhandle over an obstacle than a Model X or G14 powered outfit.(though still bloody hard work I should think!).
I'm guessing the 40 mph quoted was in fairly good conditions though..I should think when it came to off road work and hills a twin would certainly have the edge over a single in terms of sheer slogging power.
I know from personal experience the G14 will go nearly everywhere in top as a solo and was specifically marketed by BSA as a tug for heavy sidecar work...Ian
Yes but don't forget, the WO also had production cost and fuel economy issues to consider.
It's one of the reasons they knocked Velo's on the head. After all a Velocette probably cost £1 2s 4d more than an M20. Ron
Yes, Rik is right, the B4 is by no means slow, but on normal roads and motorways, it's too slow for normal traffic, if the offroad gearing is used, when the gearing is adapted for faster work, it can easily keep up with traffic, but is not good off-road.
(this is why I decided to have 2 of them, one for offroad and one for touring)
Then it can be easily manhandled by three able bodied soldiers, have many pictures of this, where it's being carried over 3-4 foot high obstacles, and also have some early pictures of a B4 being tested by the army, where it's doing wheelies!!! I don't see that happen with the heavier V twins, as they have a longer wheelbase too, and indeed the production costs must have been a lot higher .
But that Norton was all tooled up for the SWD combination certainly helped make the decicion for the War Office.
Ron, fuel economy on the B4 is bad!! take yours out for a day!!
Are you mad Lex? Next you'll be suggesting driving round in circles on the beach with the sidecar wheel in the air!!
I'm aware the the B4 is a thirsty beast! But a 1000cc V twin would be worse I think. Ron
Are you mad Lex? Next you'll be suggesting driving round in circles on the beach with the sidecar wheel in the air!!
I'm aware the the B4 is a thirsty beast! But a 1000cc V twin would be worse I think. Ron
Yes, I'm quite mad, and proud of it! but someone has to do it I guess.
Have some new footage of B4 offroading, will have to edit it a bit, will post it here later.
But you could start training with the chair in the air on a large parking lot (empty) preferably without any obstacles