It’s fair to argue that 1968 was a watershed year for the three remaining British and American motorcycle makers: Harley-Davidson, BSA-Triumph, and Norton-Villiers. Harley continued its then-11-year production run of Sportsters with steady improvement, while the Brits launched two new OHV 750s, the badge-engineered BSA Rocket 3 / Triumph Trident, and the vibration-quelling “Isolastic” Norton Commando.
But the jungle drums were also signaling that a revolutionary new contender would soon arrive from the east. Were the big three ready for a 750-class superbike showdown?
As Norton had discovered with the 1962 Atlas 750, stretching a parallel twin beyond 650cc led to unacceptable levels of engine vibration, and Norton’s planned replacement, the overhead cam P10 engine, proved no better than the Atlas. As a result, Norton developed the Isolastic engine mounting system, which absorbed engine vibes from the middle rev range up. This worked so well that the Commando was voted “machine of the year” five years in a row from 1968-72 by readers of the U.K.’s Motor Cycle News.
The advantage of a conservative approach to engineering changes meant that pre-existing machine tools and jigs could be reused, but this inevitably restricted engineering progress. BSA/Triumph opted for a more radical approach, designing and building a new 750cc 120-degree, three-cylinder engine, though still employing as much commonality as possible. The natural balance of the triple effectively eliminated primary vibration and also helped with oil-tightness by eliminating large variations in crankcase pressure.
However, the triples also carried over the external pushrod tube design of the Triumph twins, a frequent source of oil leaks, and the cases were still vertically split, but now three pieces. Harley also used external pushrod tubes, but made them a design feature. Norton’s parallel twins had always buried their pushrods in tunnels inside the cylinder barrels, reducing the potential for leaks — though the “oil bath” pressed steel primary chain case was notorious for leaving a trail of oil. Norton addressed this in the Commando with a new alloy chain-case and improved sealing.
Badge engineering or not, the 1968 BSA/Triumph triples arrived in two distinct though similar styles: the cylinders of the BSA were canted forward, while the Triumph’s were vertical; that aside, the siblings were effectively the same bike, down to the “breadbox” gas tank and ray-gun mufflers. The Commando’s barrels were also canted forward, a first for Norton.
It’s worth noting that neither the Commando nor the Trident/Rocket 3 had electric start when launched. This had to wait another seven years until the Commando Mk3 / Trident T160 of 1975. Meanwhile over at Juneau Avenue, the Sportster acquired the electric spinner on the XLH model in 1967. (The base model XL was dropped in 1959.)
So when the smooth-running Honda 750 Four was launched in 1969, it featured a number of innovations not available on the British or American-made bikes: a single overhead camshaft, an effective front wheel disc brake, and five-speed transmission. This last feature appeared in the Triumph Trident in 1972; the Sportster had to wait until 1991, while the Commando remained a four-speed until its 1976 demise.
How did the three-way contest work out? The BSA Group was effectively bust by 1972 and was acquired by Norton-Villiers as Norton-Villiers-Triumph. NVT lasted until 1975 when it went bust, too, and was acquired by the ever-opportunistic Dennis Poore, ex-boss of NVT… The Sportster soldiered on, bolstered by tradition and patriotism as well as steady, if slow, improvement, such as the 1973 replacement of the 883cc powerplant with a “61-inch” 1000cc unit — but with the cylinder head and barrels still cast in iron. Honda effectively created a new paradigm in the 750-four, as a pattern for the creation of the Universal Japanese Motorcycle.
1968−1972 Triumph 750cc Trident/BSA 750cc Rocket 3
The British triples could have landed in the mid-sixties if director Bert Hopwood’s and development engineer Doug Hele’s accounts are to be believed. Looking like a slightly chunkier Bonneville, a prototype triple, the P1 was built in 1964, and according to Hopwood, could have been in production in 1966. Instead, two years were lost while the triples were restyled by car guys Ogle Design. The result was the “Ugly Betty” Trident and Rocket 3 of 1968.
Dealer resistance to the clumsy styling led to a makeover in 1971, with the Trident reverting to more traditional Triumph styling, while the Rocket 3 was more flamboyant, wearing the company’s Dove Grey finish on the frame, a peanut gas tank, and metalflake paintwork. Unfortunately, at the same time, the TLS front brake from the Twins was replaced by a new all-alloy unit that was less effective and inadequate for the weight and performance of the triples. A more muted finish and more sensibly sized fuel tank arrived for 1973, but it was too late to save the Rocket 3 — the last one left the Small Heath factory just before it closed in April 1972.
During the 1971 model year, a five-speed gear set was fitted to 200 production Rocket 3s and Tridents to homologate the new transmission for racing. 1972 models would get the five-speed as standard — the Trident finally got a disc front brake in 1973 but remained kickstart only until the T160 of 1975.
And while the triples couldn’t match Honda on sophistication, finish, convenience, and styling, they won on performance and handling. Riding a kitted Honda CB750, Dick Mann won the Daytona 200 in 1970, but five Tridents and five Rocket 3s were entered in the 1971 Daytona 200, taking the top three places with Dick Mann first home. Almost half of the 1971 AMA Grand National races were won either by Triumph or BSA mounted riders.
Cycle World tested a Triumph Trident in October 1968, and while they were impressed by the overall power and performance, their tester found the lack of torque below 3,000rpm and the Trident weight something of a handful at low speeds. Likewise, in the twisties, the Trident felt “cumbersome and deliberate.” The brakes were “not up to the task of halting this 500-lb projectile in view of the speeds it can achieve.”
Summing up, Cycle World called the Trident “…a big fast ground shaker of a motorcycle. And there isn’t another one like it.”
Except maybe the BSA Rocket 3. Aside from the styling differences already noted, the Beezer used a completely different frame, with dual down-tubes and full welded construction, while the Trident continued the Triumph tradition of lug-and-braze structure, even retaining a bolt-on rear subframe. Overall, though, it didn’t make enough difference. Cycle World‘s tester wrote that “Everything about the bike [Rocket 3] speaks of long distance… All a rider can think of when he sets out is ‘just wait until I get out of town.'”
1968−73 Norton 750 Commando
The Commando raised many eyebrows when first announced. Norton had discarded what was still accepted as the best motorcycle frame — the “Featherbed” — yet retained the Atlas‘s dated parallel twin engine for its new model, the Commando.
As is often the case, expediency was the driver. Norton-Villiers owner Dennis Poore needed a flagship model to replace the slow-selling 750 Atlas, and with the failure of its intended replacement, the OHC P10 project, the superannuated 750cc engine had to be used. Poore hired Doctor Stefan Bauer as chief engineer in January 1967 and tagged development engineers Bernard Hooper and Bob Trigg to have the new motorcycle ready for the Earls Court London Motorcycle Show that September. Vibration was the core issue to be addressed. A new subframe carried the engine, primary drive, transmission, and rear wheel, which was attached to the spine-tube frame by three rubber bushings. These were aligned to the frame using shims that prevented lateral movement while still absorbing linear vibration. The Commando was duly launched at Earls Court in September 1967.
Its styling was as controversial as the Trident / Rocket 3: the launch model, called the Fastback, made extensive use of fiberglass — the carbon fiber of its day — in the svelte bodywork, seat pan, gas tank, and “boat tail” rear fender. It retained the Atlas’s 750cc parallel twin engine, four-speed transmission, Roadholder fork, eight inch drum brakes and Amal Concentric carbs. The clutch, however, was new: a multiplate item with diaphragm spring inside a new alloy chaincase.
For 1969, there were two new models: the “R” and “S”. The R would evolve into the Roadster, while the outrageous S-type featured lots of metalflake paint, upswept “peashooter” mufflers, and chrome heatshields. An important feature of the Commando was the interchangeability of body parts: with little modification apart from swapping parts, a Roadster could become a Hi-Rider, S, or Fastback.
In 1972, the Commando got a front disc brake, a new engine tune for the Roadster, and added the Interstate models. The 750 Combat engine produced north of 60hp at the risk of bearing damage due to crankshaft flexing. New “Superblend” main bearings solved the problem — at the expense of a full engine teardown.
Cycle World tested the Commando in September 1968. Their tester noted that the motorcycle still shook at idle, but between 1,800 and 7,000rpm, “the roughness disappears and in its place is an uncanny smoothness.” However, using the Commando’s pace when cornering caused “the side-
and center-stands to ground easily, especially with the pillion seat occupied…a potentially dangerous fault….”
Wrote Cycle World, “The Commando is simply a sports roadster that offers a sensational blend of shattering performance, well-mannered tractability, race bred handling, and fierce, sure stopping power.”
1967−72 Harley-Davidson XLH/XLCH 883 Sportster
OK, so the 1967−72 Sportster displaced 883cc not 750, but its stance and performance fits it right in with the sample here. Largely based on the 750cc Model K and 888cc Model KHK flatheads, the first Sportster, the Model XL, was introduced in 1957 with iron cylinders and heads in the famous 45-degree V-twin format with “knife and fork” big end. A bore and stroke of 3.00″ x 3.80″ produced 883cc. The Sportster retained the K model four-camshaft valve action but replaced the followers with pushrods running in external tubes to the new rocker boxes and overhead valves. The engine drove a multiplate clutch by triplex chain to a four-speed gearbox with output to the rear wheel, also by chain but uncommonly on the right side of the motorcycle.
Most of the rest of the inaugural Sportster was borrowed from the K range. The launch bike model XL for 1957 looked a lot like the previous year’s Model K, though the rocker boxes and pushrod tubes shouted OHV. Within a year, it was joined by three more iterations: the one-year-only XLC with larger valves and higher compression without mufflers or speedometer for off-road work; the XLH with higher performance; and the XLCH “competition hot” with domed pistons and a claimed output of 55hp; and the very limited production XLR-TT designed for TT racing. The base XL had disappeared from the lineup by 1960, leaving just the street XLH and XLCH.
By 1967, the XLH had acquired an electric starter, joined by the XLCH in 1972. The now-classic styling of peanut gas tank, stacked headers, shorty mufflers and the ham can air filter was also available as an option. For 1968 only, the XLH came with both electric and kick start. The big news in 1969 was the acquisition of the Motor Company by American Machine and Foundry. A 12-volt battery/coil ignition replaced the XLCH’s magneto in 1970, and the formerly dry clutch went wet in 1971.
The 883cc engine was retired (temporarily…) in 1972 with the introduction of the 1000cc “61-inch” iron-head Sportster.
In a 1968 review, Cycle World‘s tester heaped praise on the XLH, even finding the positive when the test bike got stuck in top gear just before a drag strip run. The scribe noted that “bottom end torque is readily available” for starting in 4th gear while recording a 19.9s standing quarter at 82mph. “This phenomenal run,” wrote the tester, but arguably, it would have counted for more if all four gears had been available….
The brakes garnered faint praise, noting that they “respond well in moderate speed situations,” but “lose their effectiveness as heat builds up,” and that H-D “could put some design engineers to work” to create a braking system that “demonstrated some additional effectiveness under duress.”
What this “short haul” superbike does best, wrote Cycle World, “is to carry a knowledgeable rider over a road course as rapidly as possible for an hour, little more, for the delight of the man and his powerful means of transport.” MC
