Talk:Norton P11

Special Category for British Motorcycles

As part of the Motorcycling WikProject I am working though all the missing articles and stubs for British Bikes. To make things easier to sort out there is a special Category:British motorcycles Please add to any British motorcycle pages you find or create. It will also help to keep things organised if you use the Template:Infobox Motorcycle or add it where it is missing. I've linked the Category to the Commons Motorcycles of Britain so you could help with matching pics to articles or adding the missing images to the Commons. The people behind the bikes also bring it all to life - I've created the Category:British motorcycle pioneers so please have a look and see if you can add or expand any? Thanks Thruxton (talk) 18:01, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Articles should be categorized as per Wikipedia:Categorization. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:59, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

November 2010

Unsubstantiated claims: "it was eventually shortened to P11 and built at the former Associated Motor Cycles factory in Woolwich, London, largely from spare parts". Rubbish! As is the widely spread claim of the G15 series being "parts bin specials". In fact AMC (and later N-V) selected parts for these bikes carefully. There are a number of parts derived from other models (e.g. forks, hubs, frame) but they were modified to suit, thus they can no longer be termed part bin items. Furthermore, N-V built 2700 units of these bikes, and the idea that they could supply production by relying on spare part stock is very unlikely, bearing in mind that normal AMC batch sizes was 3-400 units and producing large stocks of items in advance and putting into storage is an extremely costly undertaking, a recipe for bankruptcy. No sensible management acts like this. So, what AMC and N-V did was producing parts for a few weeks ahead and ensuring that production went smoothly. Another issue to keep in mind is that being a competition model, models were continuously improved from one batch to another, so they couldn't rely on large stocks. The introduction of Commando items on P11 (e.g., engine barrels) indicate that stocks were in fact quite small, maybe a few hundred only. There are a few other statements in the article which should be elaborated. "The availability of spare parts at the Norton Villiers factory led to several changes of specification ....". Says who? Firstly, production is based on internal and external supply of parts, _not_ spare parts. Secondly, most design changes were results of development work, e.g., steel oil tanks were intruduced due to a splitting problem (fatigue) of the alloy tanks along with improved rubber mounting of same. The 3.6 gallon petrol tank was a particular P11 development as far as I know, while 2.2 gallon petrol tanks were used on G80CS and G15CS models as well. Why they changed to the smaller tank could be a merasure of rationalisation or more likely, to bring down centre of gravity in order to make the bike more tractable. Different handlebars were fitted to bikes destined for different markets (Europe, USA/Canada) and yes, maybe the design altered a little for P11A and 750 Ranger models. Forks? Yes, they softened the springs and damping for the 750 Ranger model due to its street-legal character. Frames? Except for some tabs and deletion of a head-stedy bore used on the G85 frame, I am not aware of any design changes. Two ignition systems? No, they kept the same coil ingnition throughout, except for a small modification to the advancing mechanism, improving the engine's docility. Yes, being a very complex and costly part, two different cylinder head castings were used at the factory, the latter casting being shared with the Commando as a matter of rationalisation. That's sensible I think; functionality and design in large was not affected whatsoever. So, with these comments I would like to counteract the misconception of the P11 being a product of an occasional development. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdt-son (talk • contribs) 16:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC)