Skip to main content
English French German Italian Spanish

isolastics

Forums

Hello,

i've gone to website technical area. I dont see a section for isolastic. I have the older style iso's and dont know if i should change to the MK3 vernier adjustable type. I have two drive units on the bench so the upgrade is easy at this point, if warranted. i'd like to read some technical on it (pro's and con's). Is it here somewhere that i've missed?

Permalink

Previously wrote:

Hello,

i've gone to website technical area. I dont see a section for isolastic. I have the older style iso's and dont know if i should change to the MK3 vernier adjustable type. I have two drive units on the bench so the upgrade is easy at this point, if warranted. i'd like to read some technical on it (pro's and con's). Is it here somewhere that i've missed?

I just looked at Les Emery's tech talk page. It certainly seems like the way to go with his conversion set up. I'd still like to know why some say to leave as is and not do the upgrade. any thoughts appreciated

Permalink

It's worth it if you do a lot of miles or want to play around with clearances for best handling/min vibration etc. I have the Norvil front and back and while they are OK ignore the 1/2 turn instructions or you'll have the sloppiest Commando out there. Also the non adjustable end is a very loose fit on the through bolt (guess they found the nearest stock metric tube!).I only noticed this recently and shimmed the front with a piece of old feeler guage wrapped into a circle. Ideally it should run the whole length of the tube but we'll see how it survives. Haven't done the rear since that's major work. The alternative is the Mick Hemmings set-up which uses existing Isos and adjustable end caps.

Permalink

Previously wrote:

It's worth it if you do a lot of miles or want to play around with clearances for best handling/min vibration etc. I have the Norvil front and back and while they are OK ignore the 1/2 turn instructions or you'll have the sloppiest Commando out there. Also the non adjustable end is a very loose fit on the through bolt (guess they found the nearest stock metric tube!).I only noticed this recently and shimmed the front with a piece of old feeler guage wrapped into a circle. Ideally it should run the whole length of the tube but we'll see how it survives. Haven't done the rear since that's major work. The alternative is the Mick Hemmings set-up which uses existing Isos and adjustable end caps.

Thanks for that, sorry to hear that about the Norvil set up. perhaps the Mick is the way to go.

Permalink

Just a note to say that I installed the Mick Hemmings system last year and it seems to work very well. The old type shim system will last only for a finite amount of time - but then you have a problem!

Permalink

Just to confirm Peter's note, I have installed three Hemmings conversions are they are trouble free and simple to fit. To make the most of any isolastic set up you must follow the instructions to the letter.Therefore not have anytension on the engine cradle which means using a frame lifter to get the rear wheel just clear of the ground. I recently bought such a device at a show, and it is basically a scissor jack between two flat plates with adjustable forks which can slide across to fit any lower frame rails. Its a mini version of a chassis lift in a car workshop.

Speak to Angela Hemmings, she'll sort you out !!

Permalink

Previously wrote:

Hello,

i've gone to website technical area. I dont see a section for isolastic. I have the older style iso's and dont know if i should change to the MK3 vernier adjustable type. I have two drive units on the bench so the upgrade is easy at this point, if warranted. i'd like to read some technical on it (pro's and con's). Is it here somewhere that i've missed?

Hi,

Google 'worlds straightest commando'. An excellent article providing plenty of sound advice on setting up isolastics and more.Not surprised by the sloppy parts from norvil.

Good luck, Simon.

Permalink

Previously wrote:

Previously wrote:

Google 'worlds straightest commando'. An excellent article providing plenty of sound advice on setting up isolastics and more.Not surprised by the sloppy parts from norvil.

Good luck, Simon.

Yes - a great read. Did as much as I could but without redrilling the mounts. Mine had a blowup in 02and bent the LH frame railforward by 7mm. In addition to fixing that the article helped me find my front and rear ISOs had different offsets (0.25" rear and 0.31" front) and had to square them up and machine 060" off theRH and add washer to the LH. It cured the 75+ weave I'd always had. made sense really since the whole drive and wheel assy had been pointing left.

Permalink

Previously wrote:

Previously wrote:

Hello,

i've gone to website technical area. I dont see a section for isolastic. I have the older style iso's and dont know if i should change to the MK3 vernier adjustable type. I have two drive units on the bench so the upgrade is easy at this point, if warranted. i'd like to read some technical on it (pro's and con's). Is it here somewhere that i've missed?

Hi,

Google 'worlds straightest commando'. An excellent article providing plenty of sound advice on setting up isolastics and more.Not surprised by the sloppy parts from norvil.

Good luck, Simon.

Very informative article, makes me appreciate my Atlas all the more.

thanks for that,

steven

Permalink

Speaking of Isolastics. I have just fitted new adjustable isolastics from Mr Hemmings, the question is, on the rear, should the spindle that holds the isolastics to the frame, be a tight fit. I fitted the engine cradle into the frame yesterday and placed the spindle through to secure, but it is a sloppy fit and there is some movement on the shaft - is this normal?

Thanks

Jamie

Permalink

Probably, that was the issue on the non adjustable side with my Norvil parts. Not seen the MH items in the flesh but on Norvil items the clearance is set by the tube on the fixed side and on the adjuster by the adjuster diameter which is a better fit. I shimmed the front but have not touched the rear which is likely the same issue. It probably does not make too much difference because if you have the same slop front and rear and since the sloppy sides may be diagonally opposite (adjusters are diagonally opposite) it could even out. What I've done is fix one end and I should do the rear. If yours have the same slop side to side it is probably OK.

Permalink

Previously wrote:

Probably, that was the issue on the non adjustable side with my Norvil parts. Not seen the MH items in the flesh but on Norvil items the clearance is set by the tube on the fixed side and on the adjuster by the adjuster diameter which is a better fit. I shimmed the front but have not touched the rear which is likely the same issue. It probably does not make too much difference because if you have the same slop front and rear and since the sloppy sides may be diagonally opposite (adjusters are diagonally opposite) it could even out. What I've done is fix one end and I should do the rear. If yours have the same slop side to side it is probably OK.

trying to understand what you folks are speaking of being sloppy.

I put a micrometer on the shaft and also the bush, i found the old bush ID to be .003 to .005 larger than the shaft. Did either of you replace your rubber bush and buffers and if so is that the problem i.e. the new bush have greater ID? Or are you speaking of slop somewhere else?, the adjuster takes up the endplay doesnt it, isnt that what we are adjusting?

I have pretty much decidedi'll go with replacing the bush and buffers and then to order the hemmings adjuster but i should not like to have slop. please explain this better for me if possible.

thanks so much,

steven

Permalink

Ok maybe it wasn't well explained. On the Norvil Mk3 vernier conversion for non Mk3's the tube with molded rubbers and buffers is at least 025" larger bore than the bolt (I used an old 012" feeler cut to length and inserted inside thefixed end (360 deg) and still had clearance). The fixed end is a larger diameter than the adjustable end whichhas atighter ID for a good fit over the bolt. I'm guessing but I'd assume the actual Mk3 replacements have the same tube size as the conversion. Hope that helps.

Permalink

Keith, thanks for the numbers on that (.025) and clarifying that it is the bolt to buffer difference. My question actually was directed to Jamie who said he was using the Hemmings kit... And then also: did he replace the buffers? where did he get the buffers?

or is he using existing rubbers? perhaps the Norvil designrequires the extra clearance? I cant see how it could be any benefit. seems to me it must be a manufacturing error i.e. not built to specs.

i am glad i have the old ones for reference now. .025 is a long way from .003

 


Norton Owners Club Website by 2Toucans