No announcement yet.

Triumph front wheel width?


Desktop Ad Forum Top


Mobile ad top forum

  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Triumph front wheel width?

    This is for a Harley, but I'd figure I'd ask you guys since it's a triumph part. Basically, I want to run a narrow front end with a triumph drum brake, like the one pictured below. I really dig the air vents and the overall look, but my worry is that its too wide. I'm leaning toward a mullins chain drive tripple tree set up which only allows for 4 inches of hub space. are these wheels too wide? I don't have one on hand so I was wondering if any of ya knew off the top of your heads or wouldn't mind taking a measuring tape to one. Thanks in advance
    Attached Files

  • #2
    I know your set on the triumph wheel, but I am just suggesting looking at the Honda xl 250, kinda narrow, and a conical hub also. Saw one on a Velocette once and it looked great. had to ask what it was off of cause it looked right, but the guy did kinda dejap it abit, grinding ect. 2 cents


    • #3
      perhaps a Triumph Tiger Cub; the hub laced to a Borrani rim... looks narrow, not sure on width

      Click image for larger version

Name:	Triumph Tiger Cub front brake hub laced to Borrani rim.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	34.9 KB
ID:	1322632

      Click image for larger version

Name:	Triumph Tiger Cub front brake hub laced to Borrani rim.brake side, 40 hole.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	57.7 KB
ID:	1322633


      • #4
        That might be a good route too, I mean drums have been around longer than disks so the options are endless. It does look good and hell I'm sure i can find it locally. My thought is if whatever its off is similar in weight and power I should be good. The motor is basically gonna perform like a KHK (at least that's the grind on my cams), so maybe 45 horse albeit optimistic lol?
        Attached Files


        • #5
          Damn, that is narrow. My internal ruler says that would fit lol


          • #6
            Norton Commando drums are sexy and upgrades like the stiffener plate exist.

            Some Norton porn:
            1969 Norton Commando Fastback ABOVE: 1969 Norton Commando Fastback MODEL DESIGNATIONS The 1969 Norton Commando came in one additional model for 1969, its second model year in production. The 1968 Norton Commando was available in one model only, and so was simply called ‘Norton Commando’, even though it had what was to become known as ‘Fastback’-styling. But, once new models were introduced for the 1969 season, it became necessary to differentiate the various Commandos. So, the standard model became known […]


            • #7
              Me likey! has everything im looking for, the air vent on those is pretty swell


              • #8
                Norton porn is always good.
                but I think the wheel would not squeeze in between your "mullins chain drive tripple tree set up which only allows for 4 inches of hub space"

                found this:
                Norton Featherbed frames used 3 types of yokes;
                (a) 7" stanchion centres, all 26 tpi
                (b) 7.3/8" stanchion centres, 26 tpi, introduced in 1964
                (c) 7.3/8" stanchion centres, 28 tpi, introduced in 1968
                As all the above can be interchanged the year of manufacture can only be used as a guide.
                2. Norton/Matchless hybrids of the mid '60's used longer 'Short Roadholder' forks. The main difference is the fork seal holder.
                3.1968-70 Commando models use featherbed type (c) yokes, 7.3/8”. These have the column nuts above the headstock, the later models have one nut under the bottom yoke."

                I've been looking for some early Roadholders to try on a pre-unit Triumph, and I just found these, and I'm trying to positively id them. I bought them as "1965 Triumph forks" but I know that's not the case. I'm not sure if they're Roadholders, but I'm pretty sure they are 1960's Norton forks for...

                and this for the Triumph:

                "...It was then likely an entirely separate decision sometime during 1968 - to increase the front axle length, as a consequence of increasing the centre-to-centre distance between Triumph fork legs from 6-1/2" to 6-3/4""

                "Still trying to figure out the measurement where folks are saying the 650s are 1/4" wider. Where are they 1/4" wider?
                A: The 1/4" is the additional width of the triple clamps...,they were widened an extra 1/4"centre to centre (fork tube hole to fork tube hole) from 69.
                Pre 69 are 6 1/2", 69 till change of fork, 6 3/4"

                Will the top triple tree (or fork yoke 'cause it's British) from a '69-'70 650 Triumph fit on '69-'70 BSA forks? They should be the same width, because they use the same front wheel. I'm wondering about the taper on the fork tubes, the offset, and the size where it clamps the top nut. (though that last one would be easy to get


                • #9
                  Since OP hasn't bought the Mullins, other alloy trees are an option as are different complete fork assemblies.

                  The wheel and rim are more visually critical than the triple clamps and cast iron clamps can be painted, plated or coated after polishing if desired.

                  Easy way is blend and polish a set of 39mm stock HD triple clamps (rubbermount Sportster top triple clamps don't use rubber bushings so they look cleaner, I use them because I hate the bushings), turn a set of stock 39mm fork sliders then weld on your drum mount of choice. If ya ever bend the forks or pit the tubes replacement is easy and when turned on a lathe they look like the classic "Cherry Annies" they imitate.

                  Rubbermount Sporty triple clamps also come in black but I prefer alloy on old style machines.

                  Here's a random top clamp:

                  It would be easy to blend the contours with flap abrasives and replace the Torx fasteners (which work fine) with whatever you prefer. Stainless washers can be had in narrow versions, worth remembering for use under screw heads. (I buy stainless via Ebay for the non-critical stuff it should be limited to unless it's high end like ARP.)


                  • #10
                    I say Mullins but at this point, whatever works. for sure I agree the clamps don't hit the eye in the same way the wheel and forks do. I think as long as my sliders are shaved it'll look good. I never thought about taking those sharp edges out and making a stock tree "look" older, running a stock part like that would be easier. Thanks for the ideas man!


                    • #11
                      Yea it "looks" like those won't fit and with those measurements, there's no way. I thinking about tossing the Mullins stuff and going just for a sporty setup. Still pretty narrow, and should allow for plenty of clearance.


                      • #12
                        found this:

                        "This is from a 2003 1200 custom.
                        Distance between fork centers is 7"
                        Distance between fork center and riser mount is 1"
                        Distance between fork center and stem hole is 2.5"
                        And the distance between riser mount center is 3.5"
                        I happen to have my tree off the bike so it was easy to measure but I just used a tape measure."

                        the Mullins is 5.6" centers


                        • #13
                          Yea I say ditch the Mullins, I don't want to go brakeless because I'm an inexperienced rider and it seems like 99% of the time people go brakeless with those. I've been looking at the Twinside triple trees on eBay and they have a 7" distance, plus they're completely smooth, unlike stock HD tress with all those divots and fins. wyt?


                          • #14
                            Front brakes that actually work are a good idea in modern traffic because physics does not care about kool.

                            The smooth triple clamps are reasonably priced vs smoothing a stock alloy casting unless one is already equipped to do that work.

                            Norton forums etc will have info on persuading Norton drums to work better.

                            Example thread:

                            Below is a Norton front drum brake upgrade available from Old Britts, as described on their website. I see the logic if you are going to arc your shoes as well. Has anyone done this, did it make a difference, can they recommend this? Stephen Hill Spindle Bushing Upgrade: The stock spindle...


                            • #15
                              neat! Good to know there are upgraded/new parts. I have an old Indian dirt bike I had to score "NOS" brake shoes for, wouldn't want to do that on an actual bike lol.


                              300 mobile ad bottom forum