Hi Kjell,
You haven’t heard from me of a while and that requires an explanation, but for now can I just say I was invited to BMW in Germany for a very quick visit.
But the reason for this mail is what I thought you may like the transcript of an interview I did for Motorrad Magazine.
Norman Hossack
You all remember what we all said some month ago, why couldn't BMW invite Norman Hossack, the real inventor of the "HOSSACK-FORK", to their Factory and show him their deviate of his design....... Finally they did, Great just Great
..here is the Interview
MOTORRADMAGAZIN Interview NH 06/21/2004
Hi Norman,
Here's the questions:
- Are you happy with the new K 1200 S? Do you like it (also the looks and the technical details beside the "Duolever" front suspension)?
I think the K1200S looks great. The low C/G longer Wheelbase and 50/50 weight distribution are all going the right way.
The front end is ‘Orthodox’ Hossack and I am surprised how similar it is. I think the style team got to the Up-right though, I prefer the ‘look’ of mine.
- Are you angry with BMW as they didn't ask you and neither paid anything?
Yes. But I can’t blame them it’s a good system.
- Do you consider the Duolever-concept as "stolen" or are you just a bit sad, because you were not involved in the R&D?
I would have loved to be involved with this development. I like to see concepts evolve. I could only take it so far but they have finished the job.
- Are you proud about your idea being eventually realised?
Yes and I think it couldn’t have happened in better hands than BMW who are not mired in convention.
- Would you like to talk to the BMW engineers who brought it into
production, visit the plant in Munich/Berlin or even consider test-riding the "new K"?
Yes I have many questions. I would like to hear about their geometry testing and in particular, their tire selection. These were the areas I could never afford to play in.
Riding the new K would be fun though I haven’t ridden for a few years.
I have actually been to the BMW factory twice before many years ago. One of those visits was to show them my BMW K100RS/Hossack. That must have been back around 1988 before the Telelever came about and about the time I was going through TUV.
- What's your opinion on BMW-motorcycles in general? Ever owned one?
BMW bikes have always ‘danced to a different drum’ and I admire them for that. My first and only 'new' bike was a Ducati Mach 1 and maybe that’s where my heart is, first love and all that. I never did ride a boxer, I never could get my head around the cylinder head rubbing on the road.
I do own a K100RS/HOSSACK. It’s the first one I converted and I have done over 20,000 miles on it. Unfortunately it is rusting away in my garage in London and I can’t afford to get it here and fix it up.
It was crashed bike I bought as scrap, and built up best I could, it still bares the scars.
- Is it true that you've asked Triumph earlier if they might realize a
"Hossack-Bike"?
Yes. and Ducati and Hesketh and Armstrong. The Triumph was my last try
and a conversion I was pleased with. The engine mounts turned out to be in just about the right place for the lower wish-bone.
- Were you disappointed over all these years, because no one was "man
enough" to try building it in series?
Yes, I found the motorcycle industry stuck with traditions, and I don't recall seeing any thing novel from Japan. I tried the ministry of defense, The Metropolitan police , The Northern Ireland development group, The Wolfsan group at Manchester University. The Institute of Patentees and Inventors. The South West regional Development Board. The National research and development council, and my local member of parliament, to raise money, in the end the only thing I got out of the British system was a free subscription to "Eureka" magazine. I still have depts. over my head from the money I borrowed to build the chassis number 4 system.
- What would you tell someone who claims that a standard telescopic fork (or upside down) could do the same job or even better?
People are still going to say tellies are good. "You can't please all the people all the time." For my part I have never doubted my system is better, the numbers say so. In my personal experience the number pay off.
The Last cars witch had load carrying sliding tubes for their suspension went out of production in the early 1950's. So I guess that puts Bikes about 50 years behind.
Also its wrong to say I was trying to better tellies:- its actually the steering head I disliked and tried to eliminate.
- What do you think about the BMW Telelever that is used on most of the
other models?
The Telelever is still a telly. It's a sort of halfway house.
- The K 1200 S has a surprising flat steering angle (60,4 degrees). They've tried several angles up to 64,6 degrees, but they insist that this "Cruiser-type" of angle is best for the K 1200 S even though the wheelbase is extra-long 1571 mm! Could you figure out the true reasons for this angle?As you might know, sporty bikes in these days have up to 66 degrees. Could it be that the testriders recognized too much kickback with the 64,6-angle because the Duolever is very stiff (less torsion than telescopic fork)? Or maybe the steering itself was too hard?
The big question is Geometry. Why do you see this as a fault. I have said before that I do not have fixed geometry numbers. After all to start with fixed ideas about numbers is unscientific isn't it. I would simply double blind test until it worked the way I wanted. Which is what I believe BMW have done. They have not been swayed by 'Cathcartesq' numbers. 66 degrees was the holy grail for tellies but its not for this system. Its the stiffness that changes things. Tellies flex, just putting the bike on the ground can bend the forks never mind the riders weight and brake forces. So their numbers compensate. Just imagine putting the wheel where you want it and it staying there.
Thanks again, Norman!