Hitchcocks Forum

I see a lovely truimph speed twin today and also a norton dominator.

Got me wandering seeing the two shining exhaust pipes patronising behind , does anyone have or what is the difference in the ride between the 500 truimph twin and the norton twin to the Enfield single .??

Reds

Should be patrouding behind one was a 500 and the norton a 750

The olde Dominator was 600cc (earliest version 500cc, and last 650cc). Some reckon the Dommie had a better, sweeter motor than the later Commando 750 (sloping cylinders). Dommie was replaced by 750cc Atlas (upright cyls, bad vibration). Given both bikes are elderly and their owners probably unwilling to thrash them, a modern Enfield will have no real performance deficit. Having ridden these, on bikes well past their best (rats), they tended to vibrate their nuts off. We used to collect bits of a mates's Daytona 500 as it scattered them along the road, on one occasion I carried his number plate. Vibration is not unique to RE.

Lots of British bikes ridden and road tested here - please feel free to take a look. Regards, Paul. https://www.youtube.com/my_videos?o=U

The fundamental difference is more about type than make; an Enfield twin will feel totally different to a Bullet for example. A twin will feel livelier though in practice it may not be. The vibration on a 360 degree twin without balance shafts will be buzzier and will get worse at higher revs. However it is not necessarily destructive or intrusive as anyone who has ridden an early Speed Twin will attest. The pre-war Speed Twin was a revelation after many years of big singles, which is why all the major manufacturers produced twins as fast as they could because most people wanted one after years of plodding around on a single, probably side valve. Problem was that the Americans always wanted bigger and bigger capacities, resulting in twins becoming excessivley vibratory (eg BSA A65 unit twins). Also, the more tuned they were the more they vibrated eg T100T Daytona, which also suffered from cracked cylinder heads. None of these issues is without solution. One of the few advantages of the RE twin was that the crankshaft was dynamically balanced at the factory. This of course can be done to any twin retrospectively. As for the Triumph/Norton the answer lies in the reason why so many Tritons were built - to marry the best frame and forks of the day with the best engine. FWIW my 1954 Tiger 100 is a lot quicker than my C5, though I don't ride it that way simply becuse the brakes are nowhere near up to the performance. I would advise anyone wanting an English twin to go for the single carb 500cc version or, if a Triumph, a 1969/70 TR6 Trophy, probably the best 650cc ever made.

Even better than the 500 (tiger 100, Daytona etc)is the 350 Tiger 90 (not the T21). The motor does not vibrate nearly as much as the bigger twins and can be revved hard to get the best performance. This little motor at high revs feels like a 2-stroke and goes like the brown stuff from a shovel. It is also happy to plod around at 30-40 mph and with the carb well set up is as economical as any modern royal oilfield single. As a lifelong Trumpet owner this is the only one i've kept because it is so good. Although mine is all standard factory spec, fitting later brakes are a good idea.

Yes, nice bikes are the Tiger 90s; there's not much wrong with the cooking 500s either. A friend of mine has a 3T. The engine is a bit different on that in that it doesn't have separate rocker boxes and the bottom end is different too. It goes really well....

Reds, should be PROTRUDING!

What is the RE CONSTELLATION 700 cc like ?