Misc: Everything Else 1951 Comet Seat Conversion

[Philip Smith]

Hello, Has anyone tried to convert a Comet Series C with the standard seat, to a Series D type fully sprung seat ?

Any source for the parts required- the VOC shop ?

Thank you, Philip

 

[b'knighted]

It can be done. I believe that this is a D twin rear frame, modified to suit a Comet, then with a Craven carrier permanently attached.

 

[A Nut]

Hi Philip, If you are still intending to fully spring your Comet rear end I have a Series D rear seat frame that was either made specifically for a Comet or is an open Series D one (not sure which) I also have a Series D toolbox to fit. I acquired both when I was building my Comet but ended up making a Victor replica instead. The frame is in excellent condition with good paintwork but the toolbox will require a bit of refurbishment.
You can send me an email (b.werrett10@hotmail.co.uk) or ring my mobile 07780 9340960

 

[vibrac]

I suggest a full support like this on on my Comet its not rocket science a couple of brazed tubes and some ajustable ends

 

[A_HRD]

I suspect Vibrac is on the right track answering Philip's question(?). For a far more comfortable ride - fully sprung at the rear, just do as he said using the same seat, suspension, etc. No drama, huge improvement!
Peter B

 

[Oldhaven]

I note Vibrac’s use of an upgraded rear suspension unit which points out that suspending the seat may require some modification to a decades old and well used set of springs,springboxes and original damper.

By the way, and a bit off topic, while I recognize the advantage in stroke length of offsetting the rear of the coil over I can’t help but get twitches thinking about the bending vectors that may be present in the body and rod.

 

[Peter Holmes]

I note Vibrac’s use of an upgraded rear suspension unit which points out that suspending the seat may require some modification to a decades old and well used set of springs,springboxes and original damper.

By the way, and a bit off topic, while I recognize the advantage in stroke length of offsetting the rear of the coil over I can’t help but get twitches thinking about the bending vectors that may be present in the body and rod.

I had never really considered the point that you raise, but the lower eye on the standard Vincent damper does not push directly through the centre of the damper, does it?

I have been running an AVO rear shock with Petteford springs for at least 8 years now, without any problems, fingers crossed.

 

[Michael Vane-Hunt]

I have been using the Avo monoshock with a fully suspended RFM for several years. Mostly long rides fully loaded and have seen no damage to the Avo. I did however bend the mounting stud at the top by the petrol tank.

 

[oexing]

Still it is bad engineering to offset the damper eye. It puts (bending) side loads on piston rod and the tiny bushes and the piston inside. You can expect more wear on these components and I would not think this offset is so important to achieve that stroke of damper.

Vic

 

[vibrac]

I note Vibrac’s use of an upgraded rear suspension unit which points out that suspending the seat may require some modification to a decades old and well used set of springs,springboxes and original damper.

By the way, and a bit off topic, while I recognize the advantage in stroke length of offsetting the rear of the coil over I can’t help but get twitches thinking about the bending vectors that may be present in the body and rod.

I had the modified struts before the coil over so unconnected (I was thinking more of the seat frame). The coil over was just part of a suspension upgrade when I got my Bramptons back off the twin (and it saves weight) I have to say after Spain I never had a sweeter handling motorcycle (GS1100 excepted) let alone a better Vincent And Bens twin racer sports a coilover too
I guess the bending worry is a case of good old Vincent overthinking ... we all do it.