Sorry Russ - it's a tractor.
And - if you read Ken Kavanagh , an unreliable tractor, as it left Bracebridge Street!!
Plus - they never looked as bright and shiny as that . . . . . .
Larry, leaving aside Ken K., surely you can't possibly have ridden a Manx, no-one who has would ever refer to it as a tractor! I am fed up with this comparison with the G50 as well: unless you welded in the extra tubes from the swingarm area to the top tube, they writhed all over the place. I don't care if the G50/7R was 'prettier' than the Manx- though I would dispute that - a paint job did not make a racing bike.
A G50 or 7R did tend to be oil-tight, I'll admit that, they did offer a softer ride - if that matters - and they were quite a lot lighter than a Norton but they did not handle as well as a Norton. I would remind you that in the days when these bikes were current, a G50 never got a sniff of the TT fastest laps. I mean in the days of the real Manxes and G50s, not the present day CNC-engineered and titanium-framed versions which lap the current considerably improved and eased TT circuit.
AMC's models were a fine choice if you were setting off for a full Continental season - practically zero maintenance, adequate performance, smart looking bikes. However, if you were doing the British circuits and the occasional GPs and you wanted to be at the cutting edge, you chose Nortons.
In case you accuse me of bias, I admit it!
Edited by terryshep, 21 September 2010 - 17:34.