My first Manx Norton head, which had come from Joe Potts' "lab" at Bellshill, had had twin plugs. The extra plug 'ole had later been welded up. Draw your own conclusions. There might be an advantage if the head is ill-designed, and leaves a pocket of unburned gas, but by the fifties the advantages of "swirl" were well accepted, and gas was "injected" into the periphery of the combustion chamber "at a tangent" past the plug, so that it would sweep right round a full circle, then exit via the exhaust port.
My single plug 86 bore Manx clocked 146 mph at Chimay. Since you ask, it was positively orgasmic.
Amazing how many 60 bhp (at the back wheel...) Manx Norton classic racing 90 or 92 bore rocket-ships, faster than mine (a measly 52 bhp atbw), DO NOT have twin plugs. Maybe the builders know something.
My single plug 86 bore Manx clocked 146 mph at Chimay. Since you ask, it was positively orgasmic.
Amazing how many 60 bhp (at the back wheel...) Manx Norton classic racing 90 or 92 bore rocket-ships, faster than mine (a measly 52 bhp atbw), DO NOT have twin plugs. Maybe the builders know something.
I do not think it will make a difference. I have had engines that produced more power on single plugs than twins for reasons unkown. A fellow member runs a Manx with a number one plate that did 150mph at Daytona and he runs a single plug. There are certainly benefits to twin plugs. The timing in the bike should be set acording to the speed of the burn. If the charge burns quickly you can time it close to TDC where the effective compression ratio is as high as possible. A quick burn should keep the heat exposure low which will increase the density of the charge. I am not an engineer so I will stop, but in a street engine I would not worry about it.
David
Last edited by a moderator: