Hi All, has anyone else read the article by one Mr. Garner on the Rotary position of the Norton factory at present? It does a really good job of slagging off Brian without acyually saying his name and also he states the OLD 588cc engine as 'dirty' and nothing more than a rip off of the Sachs engine. Is he just trying to annoy everyone and show how wonderfully clever he is or am I taking him all wrong becasue at present I REALLY dont like this man or what he is saying.

How can you compare an engine from 30 years ago to new one from today, of course technology has moved on!!! Its the same as saying Rossi is hands down better and faster than Duke if you put them in the same field today on their retrospective machines.

I love my Rotary and the pleasure it brings to myself and others and I suggest Mr. Garners remembers his roots and also his prspective customers as without those you are nothing.

Comments anyone?

I totally agree he is doing a very good job of alienating the very people who understand and love rotary motorcycles .

Crumbs it's not often someone agree's with me, especially Richard he is normally along to tell me where I am going wrong as usual

Anyway I went out for a beautiful ride today across Watership Down on my Dirty Old Sach's based heap and totally enjoyed riding my WORKING bike and finding out the joys of Activ8

[quote="Interpol2471"]Crumbs it's not often someone agree's with me, especially Richard he is normally along to tell me where I am going wrong as usual

Don't flatter yourself, I've been feeling agreeable all day ! Something to do with garden-sun-deckchair-vino (Cheers, Steve).
I noticed later that the 'Roadholder' issue is March / April ; perhaps the article is along the lines of that recently discovered new species of animal, the Lirpa Loof.
R

I haven`t seen the new Roadholder but have felt for a long time that fresh eyes should be looking at ALL rotary development. In 2010 50% of the market in internal combustion power units should be Rotary, OR, are they a complete blind alley & no more time or resources should be wasted on them trying to get them working perfectly. A hell of a lot of money has been expended over 50 years trying to achieve what we all want. Norton got near it but the chassis/transmission/electrics made it an also ran. Over complication was the Achilles heel of the Suzuki. The Van Veen I understand was just left over Citreon engines which Citroen did not progress in there autos. The W2000 was the nearest I think to a cheap, simple motorcycle using Rotary power but was based around an industrial engine.
A single rotor 500 c.c. engine fitted into a spine/box frame with lightweight plastic weathershielding like the Japanese large capacity scooters would I feel find a market. Double it up for a long distance tourer & sports bike & most markets would be covered. Derek.

paul i would like to side with you about the wino but he has just done some marvelous work on the f1 steve. me im just paupering on cheap vodka .steve

ARRRGGHHHH I see it was as April fools Joke Dooh
Silly Me

Richard .... Wine... garden....agreeable.. sounds like you are almost ready to retire

I agree with comments so far. Well done Paul for starting us off.
To be honest, I didn't know whether to laugh or .
To totally redesign a Rotary from scratch has to be a Mammoth task. I'd like to know who the experts are that are spending so much time on the project and who is funding. It is strange how Richard retired and suddenly there are Rotary expects available to redesign and play with fancy metals. Anything Richard wants to tell us?
Will we see a 700cc racing Rotary?
Will we see a 700cc road bike?
The market for a Rotary engined bike seems to be dwindling and even if there is a 700cc race bike to race in an Unlimited race series, can you see the general public spending £25k on a Rotary roadbike that is so different, when you could probably buy 2 Japanese superbikes that are cleaner, faster and more reliable?
Oh dear, I have just talked myself out of buying one.

David

Well, having now read the article I found it very positive. To see new & I hope improved parts actually being manufactured to produce a new engine can only be a good thing. It may go nowhere but at least development of the Rotary is actually happening with new minds approaching the problems & trying to solve them. In another 10 years I am going to need a new rotary & I hope it will have the Norton name on it. As an aside, I went down to Fareham in Hampshire on Saturday. It was a round trip of 250 miles & bloody cold. I fought with the gearbox all the way there & back again. It would not change up, it would not change down, I could not get neutral. This ruined the ride. Oh well, strip the clutch & de-stick it yet again!!! Derek.

Yes you are right there are indeed positives in the article but I would suggest that the article could have been better written and the parts that required saying said and those that not best kept quiet.

Some of the statements really were not required and I think shows a lack of undestanding of the audience that the magazine serves.

If he developes a new rotary engine well fantastic and I am sure we would all want one but why sell out at the expense of the old historical Parent Company's successes like actually winning the TT with a Rotary that HIS modern techneques could not get to complete practice. He must have had faith in the old technology at the time or why else turn up to compete or go and do a land speed record on it? At present it's the dirty 588cc engine whatever he says that holds the records and I am proud of that I believe in being proud of your history and how you can develope from it, not belittle it to make yourself look bigger and better than you are.

I hope Pa is not spinning in his grave on his big four

Not having seen the artical I cant really comment.
But its difficult to know what is in the mind of another.
Ive seen friends on TV have there documentary on drifting turned in to a chav sport.
And equally a badly written artical is nothing remotely like expressed or dictated.

I would have thought that Stuart is proud of Nortons heritage as he has spent enough securing it, and the money he is throwing at the new rotary should also be evidence of that. He maybe developing a new engine but it will share similarities to the old, think of it as an update, something needed to be competitive with todays modern superbike, otherwise the rotary Norton is well and truely dead.

As said not read artical, but would like to think possitive until there is an outcome with the new bike/engine.