Questions? Looking for parts? Parts for sale? or just for a chat,
The WD Motorcycle forum
Ian, Your enthusiasm for the SQ4 is making me think I should dump my prejudices and give them a chance, I'll try blag a ride. It is a pity they never got round to using the swinging arm frame for this model, I know examples have been built, and they seem to be well liked. I've never had a problem with plunger rear ends, particularly on Nortons, but they do seem to get a bad press. I just think the Anstey system is a complicated way of doing things.
Rik,
Tell him that you're actually a Gold Star collector, and that you need 5 of these tanks! I bet he will find them for you! :grinning:
email (option): wd.register@gmail.com
He's offered me a very rare bike;
Hello,
Just want to let you know that I have , OHV engine M20 , if you are interested, email me back for more details Thanks.
Best regards.
I might be interested in an OHV M20 :-)
email (option): horror@blueyonder.co.uk
He's got you sussed, Dave...the man with an OHV 16H must be in the market for a similarly special M20 ! :grinning:
...Tony, it's pure prejudice on my part....I'm inherently suspicious of anything that's popular and which attracts the sort of snob appeal that DBDs and Vincents have acquired. It's just so tiresome to hear constantly about 'ninety in first'. If we'd had a son, my wife wanted to name him 'Vincent' after her grandfather, but I refused as no kid of mine was going to be called after an ugly black bike with an oddly bouncing rear end.
I rather like the look of Broughs, but there are very few ugly pre-war V-twins.
[' It's just so tiresome to hear constantly about 'ninety in first'...']....
I'm not sure what's good about doing 90 in first, particularly when you're slipping the clutch for half of that...Forgetting the bullshit though, what's not to like about a 42 BHP single that goes better than many bigger twins?...
I had a friend who used to race a Vincent but after owning a few singles he said anything more than one cylinder was a waste of parts....I suspect that view could fuel a few heated clubhouse discussions....:laughing:....Ian
email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com
Cleary most have not experienced a Vincent or a Brough in its flesh and talk about something they don't have a single (like the single pun) clue about them , it's impossible to compare many vintage/classic bikes to a Vincent or Brought from the same era and in many cases much modern bikes . But what do I know....
email (option): chriscool@sky.com
Reminds me of an email I once received from Ghana, in which the king's son offered me a million dollars just like that, for free.
Of course I gave him my bank details and now I have a million dollars in my account.
I stopped working and I enjoy the pleasures of life.
Lucky me.
email (option): michasteinmann@gmail.com
I haven't owned a Vincent or a Brough though I have ridden both a Rapide and an SS80, so my comments aren't based entirely on here say or something 'I don't have a clue about'...Fortunately I have some friends who have allowed me to try their expensive motorcycles...
I would actually like to own a Rapide because of it's engine which has the characteristics I like...I'd put up with the other features I've expressed a view on, or seek to alter them....Many years back I had the chance to buy a Rapide but even then I could have had five or six A10s for the same money and didn't think the Rapide was worth it....I realise now that was probably the wrong decision...
One of my favourite bikes is the MK2 Ariel Square Four (which I have owned) and that bike illustrates the actual point that is being made here very well...The 'legendary' bikes, along with all other bikes, all have their faults and are far from perfect...
'Legendary' status seems to be accrued from a bizarre set of criteria and is usually applied by the press and various individuals who have chosen to ignore a particular machines faults entirely and generally exaggerate their advantages....
I've owned and/or ridden a number of the legends over the last 50 years and it only serves to illustrate that at least from my standpoint, the perfect bike has yet to be created.(and I suspect never will be)..
As a BSA enthusiast I can easily understand Riks initial comments about the DBD Gold Star....The focus is entirely on this late version of a model that had a 24 year development period and included other interesting machines which all contributed to the Gold Stars success but which are virtually ignored...From a riders point of view on everyday roads I'd say the DBD is probably the most hyped and least suitable of the lot and the endless road tests that exaggerate its virtues do indeed become 'tiresome'...Focusing on one or two features of a bike doesn't really provide a balanced overview at the end of the day.....As they say...'A legend in its own lunchbreak'....:laughing: ...Ian
email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com
OHV 16H, that'll be an ES2 then, OHV M20, an M33! These scammers need to do their homework before trying to con anyone on here, but the danger is that those with less experience may be taken in. I've never heard anyone claiming 90 in first on a Goldie or Vin. A friend with a Shadow used to boast of 90 in second, and when I rode it I attempted this and did get there, but it was not an enjoyable experience. I certainly would not have done this on a regular basis if it was my bike. My Goldie was a 70 in first one, and I used to enjoy the drama of slipping the clutch and building the revs to do this. It had a Norton clutch, not a BSA tin thing, and was in the 70s when this was expected! Last night I was at the local bike caff and a long term BSA enthusiast who has several of their singles and twins rolled up on his Clubman Goldie with its RRT2, GP carb etc and he reckons it is easy to start and ride, "will just plod along at 30 if you want it to" he says. His only mod was to ditch the clipons in favour of higher bars. We all like what we like and I've always been attracted to the unusual and quirky, even if it's not practical or reliable. My wife says I'm like a Magpie, going for the shiny flashy noisy and fast things, but I still love unrestored and oily rag machinery, and WD bikes of course!
At the outbreak of war, Norton assembled a quantity of Model 18 engines into WD16H rolling chassis bearing numbers that had been allocated to WD16H contracts...they referred to them as 'WD18' and Dave Horror has built a replica. I still reckon there is a case for saying it's an OHV 16H though :stuck_out_tongue: ...Norton were not consequent in their nomenclature...the WD16H is a high-ground clearance version of the civlian model...so really it ought to be a 16C (Colonial) according to Norton's earlier classification.
Ian, Just read your post after I'd finished mine, and must agree that a lot of bikes have achieved reputations that they don't deserve as a result of over hyped press reviews. I'd always lusted after a Jota, and a few years ago the chance to buy one for very little money came along. It needed some attention after a spell outside, ie. a battery, petrol, and the tyres blowing up. I took it up the road expecting it to be a mind blowing beast that wouldn't go round corners, but that was not the case at all. The suspension was hard and it had a power band that didn't start till over 3k, but it was nothing like as brutal as the road tests had made out. I used it for quite a while and loved it. Never got to 140 MPH though. I have never owned or ridden a Square Four, and to be honest have never really fancied one, they seem over weight and over complicated for the available performance, and have the dreaded Ainsty link suspension. If I was after a softly tuned tourer I'd prefer a Model X or SS 80. A friend has just done a fantastic rebuild on a two pipe SQ4 though so if I can blag a ride I may have a change of mind!
The Anstey link isn't a great design really...It wobbles about on fast bumpy bends much the same as a plunger A10 does....When rebushed etc. things are a little better but the assembly wears again quite quickly...I've done lots of miles on plunger model BSAs and had the Square Four for a few years as well during which I used it for the daily commute to work....The engine was docile but very smooth, topping out at just over the 'ton'..The only mod. I did was to fit an oil cooler...
Ariels claim of '10 to 100mph in top' was certainly true of the Mk2 and I liked that broad spread of the available power...It was the best bike I ever rode in snow due to its soft power delivery...
You soon get used to the rear end wobble of both makes, it's quite predictable and the limits are soon picked up...What I would like is the Ariel engine in another frame but unfortunately they aren't seen for sale these days...Ian
email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com
After WWII an Italian Company converted M20 bottom ends to an OHV Engine, and also the H16
This was Guppo velox. realynice loocking engines and in my oppinion a great engineering.
http://www.b50.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=8085
cheers Klaus
email (option): ajay2@gmx.de
['I just think the Anstey system is a complicated way of doing things...']
Indeed it was, but as well as having suspension Ariel were trying to address the Achilles heal of plunger suspension which was the extreme stretching of the rear chain as the plungers moved...The Anstey link sought to reduce that effect...Ian
Klaus...I rebuilt one of the Gruppo Velox M20 conversions for a friend...It had very nice castings and large ports but it was never going to go like a Gold Star...The long M20 conrod was retained along with the M20 flywheels (too heavy) and it had a very odd piston to maintain overall engine height within reasonable limits...A shorter rod, lightened flywheels, a cam change and a conventional piston would be the way to go IMO....Ian
email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com
Here's a previous post I made about the Gruppo Velox engine.....Ian
['There are a number of drawbacks with this kit..Firstly, as the M20 bottom end is retained in its entirety, the long and flexible M20 con rod is used. That would be a serious weak point if the engine was used in a high state of tune.
Also, the overly heavy M20 flywheels are retained...So, there's no chance of it revving out whatever cams etc. are fitted.
Secondly, to keep the overall height of the engine within a range that will fit into an M20 frame, yet providing enough space for the OHV cylinder head, the piston has to have very little material above the gudgeon pin...So, a very non standard piston is employed with two rings below the gudgeon pin...(and a pretty low compression ratio)
This could be addressed if the bottom end was being rebuilt as the M20 rod could be changed for a 'long' B31 rod thus providing the space for a more conventional piston...The M20 flywheels could also be lightened at the same time.
The third problem is that the kit appears to have been made to fit more than one engine type and as a consequence when fitted to an M20 the cam followers do not line up with the rocker arms in the ideal way. In other words, the cam followers are more 'outboard' of the centreline of the engine than the rocker arm ends....
That means the pushrods are operating at an angle to the cam followers, not an ideal situation for higher revs. This could be improved by having ball ended pushrods and cup type tappet heads....However, the basic misalignment would remain and may limit the engines rev range...On the plus side the valve and port sizes are well suited to improved performance...
In its standard form I would say that although the engine may look like a Gold Star I think it would struggle to match the performance of a B33...Ian..']
email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com
Hi Ian,
thank you for the Info.I have seen last week a Gruppo Velos M20, and indeed the barrel and head are verry long. Its hard to fit a carb without an ellbow because it comes close to the frame.
My last projekt was a conferted B31 case with a M21 flywheel and B33 barrel and modified B31 head I will fit in a M20 frame
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuDwz-PlzBg&t=18s
cheers Klaus
email (option): ajay2@gmx.de
Hi Klaus...Here's my (720cc) B33 which has modified M21 crank, short rod, 90.5mm bore and is running the B33 head...I'm currently building a more performance orientated engine with a one off crank and rod and modified 350 head at 640cc...Ian
email (option): ian@wright52.plus.com