Norton 16H and Ariel 350 NH

Once clear of the A12 I was able to pull over. Pennny and Rebecca, my wife and daughter, had been flashing me to stop for the last half mile or so. Now, as I dismounted, the reason became clear. Vibrating on its hinges against a hot exhaust pipe, lay the open tool-box lid. The tool-box itself, of course, was empty. My small but essential collection of running repairs equipment had been scattered over the Colchester bound dual-carriageway and what with the endless stream of Sunday seaside traffic there was little chance of retrieving any of it.

My own fault...exceed 55mph for a sustained period of time and everything that was not split-pinned or Loctited into position on the old Norton liberated itself! As it happened, on this particular Sunday we were off to a rally at West Bergholt, where there would be, with luck, every chance of replenishing the lost tools. Nevertheless, I should've known better. I really had no business subjecting a venerable old friend to such sustained indignity.

My Norton 16H was born towards the end of 1945, according to the serial numbers, and must therefore have been one of the first to have been re-kitted in civilian clothes after years in army-drab. I say my Norton but it had actually been a restoration project of my dad's before it came to me.

I was running an Ariel NH at the time. The OHV 350 was a 1954 model but while there was less than ten years between them, the 500 sidevalve looked prehistoric by comparison. This is not a criticism, I actually preferred the minimal appearance of the Norton. Besides which, its power output was so low I don't really think it was disadvantaged on the road by having girder forks and a rigid rear end.

But the ride quality between the two machines was different. The Ariel was at least able to make a stab at absorbing the impacts of bumps and holes, whereas the Norton couldn't. As for pillion provision, Penny would tolerate the 350's dual saddle for as long as the trip lasted but when I took the Norton out, my wife took the car. For all that, the sidevalve's road manners were predictable. Navigating with care, studying the road surface ahead in detail (there is usually time for this kind of thing at 16H speeds), the wide sprung saddle gave a very comfortable ride.

To talk of performance in machines of this age and kind would be to miss the point of running them. Both moved with determination along the tarmac and conceded nothing to hills except for a slight falling off of pace. Of course, you could cheat and change down to third gear but I ask you where is the challenge in that? No, it's far more fun to play with the ignition/advance lever positioned thoughtfully close to your left hand, and stick it out in top.

I might have changed gear once or twice on the Ariel, going through villages, purely for the pose value guaranteed by a change of exhaust note but generally speaking it was a case of get into fourth as soon as possible and let the flywheel do the rest. This was especially the case with the Norton, which with the possible exception of making a hill start didn't need the first three ratios at all.

Given that neither machine moved very quickly by modern standards you may think they would be unsafe on today's roads. Well, rather lacklustre braking can in part be offset by the fact that everyone and everything will know that you are coming. I regularly used both machines for travelling to and from my workplace, nine miles away, and Penny was always able to tell Rebecca that I was coming long before I arrived!

On the other hand, only a real optimist would think of taking primitive six volt lighting systems on to the dark roads of the nineties. I was going through my authenticity phase in those days, stubbornly wouldn't entertain a conversion kit and so never rode at night unless fate intervened. I have never known such an impressively sized headlamp as the Norton sported shed such an embarrassingly little glimmer of light.

Another problem encountered by the rider of old Brit singles is the unusual amount of interest you generate in other road users. Firstly, as mentioned, there is the noise. In these sanitised days of whispering emissions, the flatulent boom of an old thumper stirs nostalgic impulses in the most unexpected quarters. You can expect one escort after another as cars flank your offside, the inmates giving you the thumbs up and chatting knowledgeably between themselves about the finer details of your mount. All of which would be very flattering had you not wanted to turn right a mile back.

The first time I took the Norton out, I was overtaken by a speeding black BMW on a narrow country lane. Having fought the handlebars to get the bike off the verge and back on to the road, I looked up and was amazed to see the car screech to a halt not twenty yards ahead. I squeezed and stood on the brakes and was eventually brought to a safe standstill by the BMW's back bumper. The driver already out of his car and depressing the aerial on his mobile, simply said,

'Lovely bike mate, how much do you want for it?'

To this day I don't know if the man was serious or not but he certainly knew something about human nature. We parted quite amicably.

I had no desire to sell either bike at that time. One of the truisms of owning old British bikes is that you spend so much time and money getting them fit for the road that the notion of parting with them seems an unspeakable treason. In the end, I finally sold the Ariel in order to pay for some essential Norton parts. Why keep the Norton rather than the Ariel? Well, sheer prejudice, I'm afraid. In all my youthful motorcycling years I had coveted other people's Nortons, never having the necessary cash to own one of my own. When at last the Fates smiled, even in the form of my humble sidevalver, I knew my duty. A more rational being may've taken the following into consideration before deciding which to run...

The OHV Ariel went further on both petrol and oil. I would usually top up the oil supply on the Norton with a half pint every 500 miles. A dry sump machine by design, the 16H had the far from endearing habit of acquiring a very wet sump if not fired up for more than a few days, resulting in clouds of white smoke. This is a common problem with old Nortons, as is a leaky primary drive chaincase cover. I tried replacing the seal with a new one (Russell Motors of Battersea are an excellent source of spares) but I never succeeded in curing the slow escape of oil.

None of this matters, of course, providing you remember that regular attention is necessary. A little pampering gives peace of minds and miles of carefree travelling. The Ariel sported a sensible alloy chaincase made leak-proof by a fibre gasket and many bolts. Perversely, the Norton's gearbox was oil tight whereas the Ariel's wasn't. Easily remedied by using a solution of mixed grease and oil.

Brakes, tyres, chains and sprockets are very slow to wear on this kind of machine, providing they are in good condition and set up properly to begin with, there being such little strain placed upon them by the available power. Fuel worked out at 45-50mpg for the Norton. The Ariel managed 55-60mpg. Top speed was 70mph on the newly restored Smith's chronometer on the Norton. The Ariel managed an indicated 74mph.

Just the once in each instance...Achieving these speeds required serious determination and once reached you are left with a horrible sense of guilt for having wilfully abused such pleasant old engines. For everyday use, the Norton felt absolutely sound and unstoppable at 45mph - up hill and down dale. It would find its own way to this terminal speed irrespective of my input...if slowed down, a few minutes later I'd find we were doing 45mph again. If I accelerated, a few minutes later a quick glance at the dial would show - 45mph! You get the picture.

The Ariel with its freer revving engine was a little more flexible but happiest at 50-55mph. Pushing these old bikes is disrespectful and only results in awful levels of vibration and discomfort...that does not end when dismounting. Let them find their own pace and the ride is a joy. Incidentally, if you acquire a bike with a faulty chrono be prepared for an expensive repair bill - they are built like watches used to be, very complex!

Perhaps one of nicest things about riding old Brits is not having to compete. There is nothing to prove. Leather clad gladiators on carbon clad bikes will nod respectfully to you at red lights, the swarm-like hum of their own motors eclipsed by the industrial plant impersonation of your own. For the same reason certain kinds of motorists who equate sound with power give lots of space, expecting you to roar past at any moment. Of course you don't... the only thing you will beat other vehicles at is making noise.

One reason to be very careful when passing horses! Give them lots and lots of space. I often found myself in deep conversations with both bikes; perhaps apologising profusely for doing something daft on the road or cheering them on enthusiastically as they grumbled up a particularly steep hill: on occasion, a consoling word during a workshop or roadside repair.

Once you've sorted out any running problems, and they are generally only small ones with such simple machines, you will be impressed with how tough and reliable these old four stroke singles are, even as everyday transport. Also no need to worry about thieves when shopping; chances are you will be the only one who knows how to start it...

Even the Norton has gone now! I sold it to a friend and neighbour for reasons that must've made more sense at the time than they do now. The upside of the transaction was that I knew the bike was going to a good home. The downside has been that I still see and hear the bike regularly...but I'm not on it!

Never mind, there will be more old singles in the future, of that I'm sure. I quite fancy a Panther. I run an MZ Silver Star at present, the Rotax powered 500 is a natural successor to the old British singles. It is light, robust and reasonably frugal. It has reliable 12 volt electrics and starter motor (not that either old Brit was difficult to start...once the knack was mastered and you'd had your three shredded wheats). The MZ has bags more power and sustainable speed, excellent brakes, a sensibly enclosed chain...need I go on? But (and I'm sure you are already way ahead of me) it's not the same.

Steve Hall