Get the Detlev Louis DL-JM-8 jacket here: motobob.cc/u/detlevlouisdljm8 Or head to the Louis Moto homepage too see their entire product range: motobob.cc/u/louismoto
The Norton may still be a little rough round the edges, is expensive, less powerful than the Triumph but for me it exudes the spirit of a true British bike. A little more fettling and this bike will be a real rival to the Triumph. Riding into a carpark knee deep in Triumphs and REs and be the only one on a Norton? You bet. It's got a proper engine for a Brit bike, too. It's a parallel twin with a 360° crank. How a British twin should be. Made in England from the start, too. Can't be bad.😊
Are you sure about that 360 crank? I agree thats what it should have but I think its a 270 like the Triumph. My first road bike was a 1973 850 Commando at 15 years old. What a thrill that was let me tell you.
@@favoriteblueshirt Then, as I've said previously, I stand corrected. I'd still happily be on the Norton, for all its current, albeit minor, flaws than the rest of the sheep in the herd that ride Triumphs and, from some if the comments, appear to look down on this potentially fine British machine. How very encouraging of them, particularly those from Britain. Such patriotism. 😣
@@favoriteblueshirtThat's what I thought too. It should be though for "retro" sound. They could not replicate the original sound even if it was a 360 crank. The long stroke of the 850 commando gave it that "sound". Modern engines use short stroke big bore for more RPM and power. Harley still uses long stroke and sound the same as they always have. It is still an awesome though.
The Triumph Thruxton probably a better buy. Certainly cheaper and superb handling and spec. Norton are not good to own unless you live in the south of England as they don't have any dealerships up north and don't plan to have! Not good if you want to have it serviced!
There is no way that triumph looks better than the commando. Must be blind.. However, you compare it to the Thruxton and then its hard to choose. The Thruxton is an absolute beauty. So .. the commando should be compared to the thruxton
The Triumph is not a dream bike but it's a good looking one, all the lines are tied together. The Norton is a mish mash of lines & gaps, l don't like it much at all.
@@saltaireorangebicyclechopp8555 nicely said, i agree with you and i also own the speed twin. personally I prefer the 22 turning signals compared to the 23.
It's always going to be pretty subjective but I would go for the Norton. It may be not as powerful and be more vibey but it is just really beautiful. A proper classic already. I hope they do well.
I love Triumphs (and my prediction of a baby Bonnie a few years back came true 😊 )… but the Norton will be my next steed. Absolute Class! And the sound of air cooled is just the icing on the cake! Nice vid 👍🏻
my advice ride one first these blokes are wrong, my brother has one it [feels] like an old pushrod twin. bl**dy awful and my thruxton will blow it into the weeds. lets not forget triumph also do ohlins front and rear.
@@tommillar2821 How do you find your Thruxton on long rides? My dream bike for sure, but I need to be able to go long distances, which doesn't seem to be its strength
@@joeboonmusic4004 dont forget they are [cafe racers] there are others more suitable but if it was a choice between the two no contest the triumph, would i use one for two three thousand mile trips. no i'd get my 1200 tiger out.
@@tommillar2821 Appreciate the reply! If you HAD to use the Thruxton/it was your only bike... would you still feel comfortable using it on long trips? I can't afford two bikes at this stage :P
@@joeboonmusic4004 honestly, these days no i would not use one for distance, if it HAS to be that type of bike i would go for a 1200 speed twin a bit more comfort i am not in my twenties or even thirties anymore.
I'd buy my Speed Twin again. Why Norton chose hydraulic clutch is beyond me honestly. It does have some nice curves, but I have been convinced of Triumph reliability. I like the hot rod Bonneville look to be honest. For the overall package, Speed Twin. It needs suspension if you are over 170 lbs. though.
I prefer the Norton because I don't like water-cooled engines in motorbikes. I also like polished, shiny engines and not black ones. If I were to choose a Triumph, I would go for the Thruxton. It looks very cool. But again, I think the Commando is nicer. I myself ride a BSA A10 Super Rocket from 1961 and the sound is simply fantastic. Retro bikes can't have that idling sound because of the emission standards.
I rode the speed twin in the same baja orange this past weekend and you're right, immediate power with barely a difference between sport and road modes. I also enjoyed the smoothness of the engine. Recommended.
@@chriscarbaugh3936 what do you mean? In all modes? How would that then even make sense - 90% OF WHAT? If you mean the road mode, that goes some way to justify the mode above then Your comment is needlessly ambiguous. Maybe it could inform if you wrote better.
As an owner of classic Nortons and Triumphs (which I bought for cheap in North America in the 80's and 90's) I would love to have one of each on my garage if I could afford it. mostly I love to see that people are keeping these great machines alive and relevant today.
I test rode a Z900RS before buying my Speed Twin and found the build quality to be pretty poor in comparison, especially for the price. Good performance though.
Oh no. Interceptor is when have the muscle to push the weight and you don’t have false teeth or the 650 will vibrate them out of your mouth. And the quality 10 years later is so so.
@darrenhill6509. Exactly. In 6 years time, which WAS the better bike. Know anybody who bought a ‘best in test’ KTM ? Ask them 2 years down the line how that worked out. Enfield have got it right with nostalgia on the cheap, great for a potter about, and then get a Triumph street triple 765 ‘R’ to blast on. Both for the price of a Norton…..
I still really wish Triumph would do a Speed Twin RS. Especially with the demise of the Thruxton. Although I think I'll be holding onto my Thruxton R for a few years! Only mod left to do is adjustable clip ons for improved comfort! 😂
If I had the cash and the space, I'd have the Norton to compliment my 2019 Speed Twin. I wouldn't swap my Speed Twin in for the Norton, too many other issues like the power deficit, smoothness of the engine (Speed Twin is smoother) and the "small" issue of dealer network servicing and support. Triumph has a pretty good dealer network !
Fun test ! The commando has a nice legendy background. Both are outstanding bikes. My preference goes to the Norton, but as an everyday practical tool i would get a Triumph.
Norton is more exclusive and pulls on your heart strings. You would not look at the Norton if on a budget. Most the time on a budget you stick with Honda or Yamaha. Basic transportation without drama or adventure. Norton makes every ride an adventure to see around the next corner. You must look at it several times after finishing riding. Triumph are great to look at also. They are exclusive. I love their Trident. So many bikes to choose from nowadays.
Another area where Triumph cuts cost corners imo, and as a result spoils the overall appeal of the entire Bonneville family, is the lower seam of the fuel tank. Seeing the exposed seam is so ugly and, once seen, it can’t be unseen. Honda clocked this on their wonderful and sadly discontinued CB1100EX; the earlier models had a visible tank seam but the later ones it was hidden and looked much the better for that extra attention to detail.
45 years ago, I was faced with a similar if not identical choice. After riding both bikes (a '69 Norton & a '72 Bonnie), I went home with the Norton. I preferred it's looks, it felt more planted on the road & was a bit more "exclusive". I recently rode a few Triumphs & I was shocked & kind of disappointed how thoroughly modern they felt. I went home with a V7 Moto Guzzi. So, I think it goes without saying that, all these years later, I'd take the Norton over the Triumph for exactly the same reasons...
@@halohalomotomoto Let's put it this way - I've had it a month & since I brought it home, the only time I've sat on my Harley was to look at the Guzzi & the only time I've sat in my car was to move it to make it easier to get the Guzzi in & out...
@@viennapalace I totally understand. I don’t think I’ll ever get rid of mine. If I can’t ride it anymore, I might just park it somewhere in the house so I can look at it til I’m old. 😎
@@halohalomotomotohere’s my dilemma. I am already old ! Today I looked at a MotoGuzzi, and some Triumph’s. The triumphs were beautiful and in my opinion up to date with everything. The Guzzi also beautiful, just a little old school with everything you need and nothing you don’t. I live in a country that builds, Triumph’s, BMW’s, and Ducati’s, along with most of the Japanese makes, and has a 100% import tax. Sooooo, that makes a Guzzi V7 around $18,000 give or take. Can I justify that and just say it’s a piece of art. And to add to the dilemma, Guzzi just introduced the V7 Corsa, which is stunning.
@@raymondsmith4401 wow $18,000 is not worth paying for a V7. It is a beautiful bike. And like you said, it is old school which has everything you need. I had a 2013 Triumph Bonneville as my first bike for 10 years. I sold it two months ago after I got the Guzzi. I have to say, the Guzzi speaks to me more. I’m hooked. I’d say get whatever bike you can afford. There is nothing like being on two wheels. 😎 Cheers!
A line item on relative used sale values would have been interesting. I sat on a Norton 961 at the London Excel bike show this year and was rather surprised how far the rear master cylinder sticks out. So much so it hits your heel. I then sat on the Kawasaki Z900rs. The ergonomics were perfect. If a massed produced machine can get it right...
An interesting comparison would be to take the amount of money difference between the two bikes and add it to modifications that could be done to the Triumph and then make a comparison.
Speed Twin looks OK but that tail up always makes me pause - as it's styled with a straight tank to seat line that "should" be level. Triumph should accept they're just retro styled but a modern bike and give it a decent monoshock back end. More like the Kawa Z900RS
I loathed the Speed Twin riding position and bought a Thruxton R instead. That said, I found it too full on for the roads and traffic in rural Essex. I did use the sports riding mode, switching back to normal.fir heavy traffic but most of the modern features were irrelevant fir me. I'd be tempted by the Norton but would want to give them a year or two to re-establish themselves before handing over that much money
I'd want the looks of the Norton with the engine of the Triumph. So I've gone for the chrome Thruxton RS with the SC Project exhaust shown at 4:10. It's just about as good looking as the Norton (subjective, I know), slightly more power than the Speed Twin and has much better handling. The perfect bike, at least for me.
Back in the day, 1975, I had no idea my Commando had a 360° crank and couldn't of cared less. Nice bike to ride though. Today my Speed Twin 1200 has a 270° crank, again I really dont care and its also a great bike to ride.
Andy, over at the Missenden Flyer rode the Norton and he, frankly, was quite disappointed with it. Now I get the Norton, I'm old enough to remember the Norton Commandos. My friend had the one with the factory apes on it. Back in 1972 that was an awesome beautiful bike, and I'm delighted to see that you can once again buy one. But I tend to agree with Andy's consensus. If you're really comparing the Commando side by side with a modern bike, what it is is a golden memory from a time when we were young and free and (some) women found us attractive. I'd love to be magically transported back to those days, and if the Norton could do that for me, I'd happily spend a fortune on it.
The Commando is gorgeous in the black and gold livery! The Speed Twin is the Bonnie they should have released in 2016, but I understand they had to create a price gradient. I had one of the first T-120 Black Triumphs for 6 years from new and it was slick and I liked it well enough, but found the performance a bit ordinary. It was vastly improved by replacing the shocks with Bitubo front and rear which was a game-changer. It did have the gearbox issues which were fixed but then the right-hand engine/gearbox case cracked at the rear mounting point. This on a bike that had regular dealer service and ridden fairly conservatively. Triumph came to the party with all the parts even out of warranty but by then I was done with it. I suspect this was just an aberration. The Triumph is still good value and the Norton can’t be measured by the same standards due to small volume production. I’d happily own either. 👍🏻
So cool to see nortans again honestly a super hard choice between these two but I sure don't like chrome so something would have to be done about that.
They don't know what they are talking about . There is no chrome on the Norton. The wheels and spokes ,clocks and exhaust are polished stainless steel. The casings are polished metal . I should know I own one .
I liked your Honest Review.More buyers for a motorcycle brand is an basic factor for buying any motorcycle.The modern features loaded motorcycles are always preferred by anyone in this world.I prefer Triumph Motorcycles.
I think the 961 should be compared to the Thruxton. Both are good looking bikes, however, considering the pricing, build quality, and reliability, I would say the Thruxton wins easily
Obviously need both ! Or maybe the speed triple and the Norton. Personally I would compare the Thruxton to the Commando, not the Speed twin. Cheers Jef
Really nice comparison that sums it up well. I've ridden both and for me the Norton has something about it I can't quite describe, that seems to set it apart. It just feels special and unique. Yes the Triumph is absolutely lovely and is enormous fun, but back to back it feels a little bit sterile in comparison to the Norton. You have to work the Norton a bit harder and really make use of its outstanding stability. On paper and logically its an easy win for the Triumph or most cheaper modern classics on price and power, but try telling your emotions that once you've ridden both.The only comparison I can give is to early 80's Italian v Japanese bikes. There's no way on paper you could justify the substantial extra cost of an Italian bike over a Japanese machine, but ride both and emotion told you something different and thats how I'd describe the Norton v the Triumph: The logical performance fun choice is the Triumph hands down, but we don't buy bikes with cold accountant style logic do we? The Norton just tugs at you, hooks you in and is hard to walk away from. When I test rode the Norton, I really didn't want to hand it back and the factory tour sealed the deal as their workmanship and commitment to quality is seriously impressive. All I can say is book a factory visit and ride one, then see for yourself. Dealer wise, they seem to be growing the network and I have Crazy Horse just 19 miles away (I'm in Norfolk) and they're all set up with spares and trained support. I intend mine to be a daily rider, so will keep you posted ;)
Glad to hear that "they're all set up with spares..", when I spoke to them they had nothing and had no idea when and how they might ever have a single item to sell, apart from a whole bike that is.
@@favoriteblueshirt Valid points but let’s not forget even the mighty RE has had spares supply issues too, for one example many folk waiting on warranty repairs to their Classic 350 wonky speedo’s.
I suppose it depends on how long you spend in the saddle. A rider more so than a collector. I still think the Norton in the long-term the better investment.
iv'e owned three Triumphs, two Daytona's and a 2020 speed triple 1050, i love them, but, the Norton does look special, i think i would like the Norton thanks, i saw one ( a red white and blue anniversary commando ) as a kid and i have wanted one ever since, please deliver one to me here in Auckland, lol
I was looking at a speed twin in the showroom, thinking about maybe asking for a test ride. I sat on it and it felt way too small (I'm 5'11"). The ridiculously thin seat felt like a plank, I was uncomfortable just sitting still. I didn't bother riding it! I did test ride a Thruxton, which to me is better looking. Unfortunately it was the most uncomfortable bike I've ever ridden. The Norton to me just looks just beautiful. What a lot of people don't seem to get about the price is that you will always pay a premium for low volume, handbuilt, no matter what it is.
For me. I am biased because I used to race Commandos back in the 70's and road one on the street. That said, handling has always been important to me, and my experience with Ohlin Suspension tells me the Norton will handle much better. It would be the Norton for me even with the higher price.
I had this decision back in 2019 . That was under the Stuart Garner era of Norton. I went Speed Twin, so I'm with you Motobob rather than Tim (Rarified Road) Not buying a Norton in the Garner era, well I dodged a bullet on that one ! I assume that issue is now history under Norton's new ownership. The decision was mainly the price , Norton in 2019 looked like a "cottage industry", the extra ooomph of the Speed Twin engine, and Speed Twin was easily available from a reasonably large dealer network (so servicing and support is a lot better), and the Speed Twin appeared to be the product of a lot more Research and Development. (so hopefully more reliable) That all said, I love the look of the Norton, I do think it looks better than the Speed Twin. I get Tim's point of it being more "special" . But motorcycle ownership is more than just looks (as I list above !), and the Speed Twin looks pretty good to me. If I had a bucket load of spare cash, enough space, I'd have a Commando to compliment my Speed Twin. As an only bike, that I want working "all the time", and on a budget, well the Speed Twin still wins it for me ! A 1000 ish CC triple engined Speed Twin look-a-like could make me change bikes though ! (Yes , Triumph keep ignoring my pleas on their surveys for them to build one !)
The Norton looks good but specs are better for the Triumph, even though the Thruxton would have fit better in the comparison. If you factor in prices there’s no match at all.
I would go Commando. Much more style & sophistication rather than a run of the mill Triumph Speed Twin. I would however see if cast wheels were an option on the Norton as spoked wheels are an absolute pain in the arse to clean and maintain. The rear because they get covered in chain lube/oil etc & the front because it’s nigh on impossible to access because of the twin disks. Great to see Mr Rarefied Road aka Tim. I’ve missed his reviews. Please pass on my regards.
Norton’s more expensive but…. Sounds better, looks like an actual retro old motorcycle, has better suspension and high quality components. Rear end of the Norton looks great. Factor in a tail tidy, exhaust, maybe rear shocks for the Speed Twin, the gap in costs is actually a lot less. If you want retro retro, and don’t want to tinker with aftermarket parts and traditional genuine air cooling then there’s really no contest here. If you want a thoroughly modern motorcycle in an old posh frock then the Speed Twins the puppy for you.
I’ve always thought that the speed twin missed the mark a little on styling, the Thruxton 1200 is a much better looking retro bike from Triumph IMO, and I’d agree that the Norton looks better than the Speed twin, (apart from the gangly downpipes on the Norton, they look as though they were made for a different bike!), but that’s where it ends, the Norton is extremely expensive but has Mickey Mouse switchgear, the engine when first produced (I think in the states?) was generally regarded as a poor design, it still is, despite a few tweaks by TVS, it’s gutless and the vibration is harsh and just not acceptable by modern standards, I think you’ve been far too kind to Norton in this review, almost to the point of bias!, I can’t impress on viewers enough the need to test ride one of these Nortons prior to purchase, I’ve ridden 3 of them and I couldn’t get past the harsh vibration and low power output, if someone gave me one I’d sell it immediately, that’s how unimpressed I was by this machine.
I like orange but the design on the Speed Twin (stripes/badge) looks cheap. Nobody would buy the Norton based on a spec sheet or VFM but it looks fantastic and is a bike to be bought with your heart not your head.
Having ridden both back to back I would have to say the Norton looks and sounds by far the best, yet is not comfortable for any long distance........ So my vote for best retro would have to be......... the Kawasaki Z900RS Se
Triumph is at a disadvantage by different rules than the Norton because emission rules at higher production levels, my Thruxton R sounds better than both of these. I would have compared the Thruxton RS to the Norton for prices, spec and style. I don’t think if you had to ride both of these over any real distances most people you pick the Triumph for smoothness, power and reliability.
Norton looks better. In the past and also today. I had an 1975 850 command mk3 for over 10 yrs so i may be biased. Although i did own an 2006 Triumph Thruxton for a couple of years.
I would park the Norton in my garage eventually but it would be last invited to the party. The Triumph Thruxton would have better in terms of price and features for this comparison. I'd put the Kawasaki Z900RS SE, BMW R9T also in the same class. Norton doesn't have tp play the same rules on exhaust so it is hard to me give them credit. My Thruxton with a Meerkat exhaust sounds very good. So I own a Kawasaki Z900RS SE, owned a BMW R9T/5, and still have the Thruxton. I would buy a Norton but it would be last one out the group because what delivers in terms of performance to it's cost more than outweighs the Norton good looks.
Had a go on the Norton over the weekend on a half hour led test ride. Granted it was raining so that may have contributed to my thoughts but I did not like the bike at all. The lack of tech is noticeable (no traction control, no modes, no fuel gauge, I couldn't see a gear indicator, I suspect no slipper clutch too), they bill it as they wanted a "pure" experience but it's a £15k bike I want the modern features. The reviewer says it's "vibey" and chuckles slightly, that's presumably because it vibrates to the point it's off putting. Also annoyed me several times on the ride that the pegs whilst retractable are at the wrong angle and don't have a spring, so if you knock the back of your leg on it it will hurt before it retracts and then won't spring back meaning you look for a peg that isn't there (granted this is something you'd end up getting used to).
I guess I am lucky with a tweaked Speed Twin and a real Commando from 74 with a 920 kit. The wet sump issue kills me, hence I ride the Speed. Twin mostly
Sounds as if Triumph have taken a page out of KTM's book - orange and fun! I'd trust the Triumph over the Norton - Triumph have been building these retro models for a long time now.
Uncomparable. Norton is a retro bike. Triumph is a retro-style bike. You ride Norton on weekends, holidays, trips. Triumph you can easily ride daily. You buy Norton for Norton experience. You buy Triumph for everyday riding and retro looks. And the price difference is massive too.
