A timely reminder of what we, as a club, are all about.

Does that permit the asking of awkward questions?

What is the purpose of the NOC?

Surely it must be........Not One Clue!!!

Thats easy, as Douglass Adams said, its number 42

It's a shame that the club didn't define what a Norton is, or we could have a situation in the future where any charlatan could buy rights to the name and start marketing some piece of unreliable retro-styled tat badged as a Norton.

What would the panel think if the curly 'N' were to be licensed on Chinese 125s ? Would we be encouraged to use or conserve them ?

Previously richard_payne wrote:

It's a shame that the club didn't define what a Norton is, or we could have a situation in the future where any charlatan could buy rights to the name and start marketing some piece of unreliable retro-styled tat badged as a Norton.

What would the panel think if the curly 'N' were to be licensed on Chinese 125s ? Would we be encouraged to use or conserve them ?

Do you meen chinese 961s or 125 thingis with wheels at ether end , Brit iron is a thing of the past , but still has good has new, and the club was all about preserving Norton motorcycles of the past 30 years or so at the earliest, So the 961 and others sould have the own web site, then we can get on with looking after the Nortons from a far long eara with a pedigee behind them ,

Previously richard_payne wrote:

It's a shame that the club didn't define what a Norton is, or we could have a situation in the future where any charlatan could buy rights to the name and start marketing some piece of unreliable retro-styled tat badged as a Norton.

What would the panel think if the curly 'N' were to be licensed on Chinese 125s ? Would we be encouraged to use or conserve them ?

Thats a hypothetical question Rik.

For me the NOC is where, at rallies I made some dear and long friendships with very nice people that have extended far beyond the world of motorbikes. And thats the way I like it.

So, according to Anna, the 961 is not a Norton, and should have its own website. O.K., by that definition, the Norton marc ended with the A.M.C. takeover, therefore no later machine is a true Norton. All later machines, by her reasoning should be excluded (definitely including the Manxman!), somehow I don't think Dominator, Commando, or Rotorary owners would agree!

Previously peter_stowe wrote:

Previously richard_payne wrote:

It's a shame that the club didn't define what a Norton is, or we could have a situation in the future where any charlatan could buy rights to the name and start marketing some piece of unreliable retro-styled tat badged as a Norton.

What would the panel think if the curly 'N' were to be licensed on Chinese 125s ? Would we be encouraged to use or conserve them ?

Thats a hypothetical question Rik.

For me the NOC is where, at rallies I made some dear and long friendships with very nice people that have extended far beyond the world of motorbikes. And thats the way I like it.

Pete, I quite agree. it's a place to meet up with like-minded social misfits ! Are you doing the Begonia this year ?

So if the club was to say only pre AMC take over bikes count then surely a large part of the membership would be lost and the club be worse off for it both in the diversity of it's members as well as the financial side. I have a Commando but the fact that part of my membership fee go to help make hard to obtain parts for other Norton models an run this website which helps other members with questions none Commando models is fine by me as thats what the club is for surely.

961s are made in Britain giving jobs to British workers so that's fine two. If they where made abroad then that would be another mater but they are not so for the time being at least that part of the debate is a none issue.

Membership is not compulsory so if you are not happy either leave or better still voice your opinions and maybe others will agree leading to change. Stand for election at the AGM even.

The club should be for its members as without them and their continued support it would sooner or later fail to exist.

Previously richard_payne wrote:

Previously peter_stowe wrote:

Previously richard_payne wrote:

It's a shame that the club didn't define what a Norton is, or we could have a situation in the future where any charlatan could buy rights to the name and start marketing some piece of unreliable retro-styled tat badged as a Norton.

What would the panel think if the curly 'N' were to be licensed on Chinese 125s ? Would we be encouraged to use or conserve them ?

Thats a hypothetical question Rik.

For me the NOC is where, at rallies I made some dear and long friendships with very nice people that have extended far beyond the world of motorbikes. And thats the way I like it.

Pete, I quite agree. it's a place to meet up with like-minded social misfits ! Are you doing the Begonia this year ?

Rik, I am as big a misfit as the next man only wild tigers could keep me away, my boat is already booked. See you there.

Having returned to the 'mark' Norton after a 20 year layoff, I joined for the wealth of knowledge available from the membership. So far have not been disappointed. The attendance on Sunday will be interesting indicator of what members want. John

For me the original aim of the Club seems valid. We all have different thoughts on what a "true" Norton is. Let's keep it that way and keep on encourage each other in a positive manner.

For an example I have three Nortons. The 16H is restored to look like a civil bike, repainted and recromed. The Manx will be kept in the same condition as it was, when it left the racetrack in -68 after 9 yars of hard racing. The patina will hopefully stay forever. The 650SS will be set up as a true cafÃ? racer as I did with my Dommie in the sixties. All of them will be run, but for different purposes. I can live with all different kinds of Nortons (except maybe a Commando engine in a rigid frame chopper).

Mike

Sir(s)

As a relative 'newcomer' ; may I ask if the Peugeot engined 'bicycle that won a TT in 1907 is classed as a Norton? Perhaps it too should be consigned to obscurity .

It would appear a 'true' Norton vibrates, wet sumps, deposits oil in places where you wouldn't expect, needs inordinate amounts of attention and spare parts, most of which are NOT available on the High Street, and can soak up time and money better than the average female....

Have I left anyone out?

Previously charles_claxton wrote:

"needs inordinate amounts of attention and spare parts and can soak up time and money better than the average female....

I'vecalled mine a Norton Dominatrix for exactly that reason.

Previously John Shorter wrote:

So, according to Anna, the 961 is not a Norton, and should have its own website. O.K., by that definition, the Norton marc ended with the A.M.C. takeover, therefore no later machine is a true Norton. All later machines, by her reasoning should be excluded (definitely including the Manxman!), somehow I don't think Dominator, Commando, or Rotorary owners would agree!

Hello john now wheather or not the 961 is or is not a Norton is questionable has a man buys the name, and build some one elseis designs and hand assembled with mostley a mix of british and foreign part so Too me its a watered down Norton some what, or is it a Kenny Dreer!! And Norton under AMC did there own thing and it was the Norton Mark that kept AMC going, All AMC did was take money out of there acount of Norton for the shareholders and to keep Matchless and AJS and other small marks in funds, So the Norton machines from 1953 to 1965 are still has much pedigee has earlier Nortons , And has the Norton Manxman 650 is consurned it was the only machnie that the designer over looked from day one , his earlier machine the Model 7 he did not see the end resuilt has he had moved on to BSA buy then , and the later 650 machines in british format ended up being the Best of the Dominators and the best of all Norton twins Has Jay Leno says maybe he is right who knows its down to the indervidual And I been around the Noton Mark now for well over 50 years So there is not much anyone can tell me about them and has for building them I can build any of the twins in my sleep, there not rocket science !

Anna, you may have been around Nortons for over 50 years, although you would not have been old enough to ride one! I was riding a Dominator over 60 years ago, but, this does not give me the right (or anyone else) to rubbish attempts to keep the name alive. I don't own, or wish to own a 961, and although it has had problems, which the factory, in some cases, has seemed reluctant to remedy, it is a genuine attempt to revive the Norton image. Quite frankly I, and I believe many others, am getting tired of an ex marine engineer ( working on large diesel engines) claiming to know more than specialists on motorcycle engines. Well over half the posts on the 961, my own included, are by non owners. There are very few posts on rotarys o is this because they were so reliable, or that so few were made? In either case, no one disputes their right to be called Nortons. You have made your views clear, in vitriolic terms, time to give it a rest.

i also get fed up with the 961 put down . what about the new v4 and the new water cooled 650 will they be next .

Enough

Webmaster