9 replies to this topic

[knickerbrook]

The Norton Rotaries were remarkably successful in their time - but what was the reason for their eventual demise? 

[tonyed]

I think the factory and the sponsors pulled the plug.

 

They were competitive against the 750 four strokes but with the introduction of 1000cc engines without increasing the engine capacity would have not been competitive I think.

 

What year were the1000cc four cylinder four strokes allowed?

 

There was always controversy about the equivalent volume of the rotary engine.

 

Brian Crighton carried on with the Roton after he left because of the internal politics in the camp.

 

Quite a good history @ http://www.nortonmot...tary Racing.htm

Edited by tonyed, 05 February 2016 - 06:09.

[GTPRacing]

A great read Tony!

I remember going to the last "Festival of 1000 Bikes" at Mallory, a couple of years ago, where Brian Crighton had on display a bigger engined version of the rotary, I think that it was 1000cc as opposed to 588 ( although with the controversial displacement measuring, it was probably around 2 litres)!

James Whitham rode it for a few demo laps and looked very quick. I spoke to Whit later that day and he confessed that it was a great bike and very fast but  had "scared him to death". He also made the point of where was it going to be ridden, as there certainly was no class that it could have competed in. Since then, I haven't heard any more about it!   

[knickerbrook]

Yeah, thanks Tony - all pretty much explained now !

[Robin127]

If you  read Colin Seeley's autobiography a more detailed account is given regarding the works bikes, his own team and the demise of the company.

[Paul Collins]

I was lucky enough to to get a brief ride on one of these at an airstrip many years ago, not a works bike but a near replica.

It was unlike anything else I've ever ridden, completely linear power delivery, amazingly light and fast, and on the overrun there was no engine braking at all, It didn't even feel like a two stroke, it felt like I'd pulled the clutch in.

I'm convinced that the concept had much more to come when the plug was pulled, hence why Brian Crighton continued to develop engines privately for many years in the hope that someone would finance another team.

[chunder27]

I think Seeley was a very influential figure in the 90's in bike racing, he was part of Forrm and was also a big hitter with sponsors.

 

He was not getting any funding from Norton and Crighton was happy to go and try and get the RC45 to work so I think their money simply ran out. He stopped running teams after this I think.

 

They won in 94 obviously but Seeley went to Honda in 95 and had a disastrous year though his team was sponsored by Groundwork South East in 95 and 94 I think, sound familiar?? GSE.

 

Simply put they were sort of cheating!  In 94 they could still run to F1 rules not Superbike rules and I think past 94 BSB basically put a stop to this and this meant manufacturers could come back in again and not be competing against a bike like a Suzuka RVF or YZF which the Norton basically was! Much lighter, much more powerful.

 

In theory it should have never been in any proper Superbike race, but in 93 Honda ran an RVF too, so it was fair enough, but no-one else was running F1 machinery and the Norton really had an unfair advantage, though it was very hard to ride fast and almost impossible in the wet!

[Paul Collins]

though it was very hard to ride fast and almost impossible in the wet!

Two things that I noticed on my short ride, there was an irritating brief hesitation/cough from the motor when first opening the throttle under load, and a tendency for the motor to run on for a split second when the throttle was closed, which made it push the front when braking and turning in, neither of which would be desirable on a wet track, and both of which I think were mentioned by other riders including Spray & Nation on their team bikes.

[GTPRacing]

Plus the fact that there was some debate over the actual engine capacity. Nominally, it was entered as a 588cc, but with the issue over exactly how to measure the rotary engine, this was generally recognised at the time as being 588 x 2, therefore 1176cc! Pair this with the fact that it was running under F1 rules against the others running Superbike rules, then it was no wonder that it was a winner.

Having said all that, it was an interesting project and the bikes where great to watch, particularly in the John Player livery.

Some great riders on board too!

I remember watching Robert Dunlop coming over Hilltop at Oulton, in the days before the Brittens & Hizzy chicanes, pulling a wheelie all the way to the Knickerbrook braking area.  

[chunder27]

I have all the old RPM's and Road Racers from that period so can sort of follow progress to a point, and when Jim Moodie was riding it he found all those issues too, it did run on a lot and was very tricky in the wet as the power was not progressive, it was like a two stroke, but totally linear, plus you had very little engine braking.

 

When Ian Simpson and Borley rode it in 94 it took them a while to get going, but they were totally dominant after that, admittedly with little opposition though, Whitham and Hizzie were gone, Moodie was the biggest  rival on the Yamaha and he lost his team mate Mark Farmer early on so praps development was tricky, and lets remember BSB was tiny back then, but guys like Rutter, Llewellyn were on Dukes that were not factory. The Norton had an easy time really, I think they would have struggled to beat Jim and Hizzie in 95 on works Dukes