Hossack LC350 (#3)

Below are some details of my (Steves) pride and joy, Norman Hossacks third race bike.

Guilt and hindsight

I really wanted a Hossack back in the late 1980s when I raced singles. Norman gave me a great deal on a chassis for a single but I just couldn't afford it at the time (It was £1,200 and I earn't £3,600 a year!). I'd also only seen Vernon Glashiers bike (Hossack #1) and hadn't realised that things had progressed such a long way from that original design. It's a big regret for me that I didn't take that opportunity to support Norman (when he really needed it) with a design which I really felt was, and probably still is, the way forward.

If there had been another single cylinder Hossack to follow on from Vernons success (3 times National champion), with the easier to understand plate steel fork (many people incorrectly believe the tubular steel one on Vernons bike to be a development of the girder fork - which it isn't) , then maybe things would have been different. Sorry Norman. The fact that I was going to use the then new and under-developed (race wise) Rotax engine just makes me kick myself even harder......(Bloody hindsight!). Maybe now, with this bike, I can make amends.

#3 History

Norman designed this bike to house the abundant and popular TZ & LC 250/350 engine in 1983 to form a suitable platform for privateer riders to race in GP250, GP350, F2 and F3 classes at domestic and world level. This was his prototype/demonstrator and was fitted with a very mildly tuned road going LC350 engine so potential customers & the 'gentlemen of the press' could try it on practice days or at race meetings without the risk of engine problems detracting from the chassis experience.

Mat Oxley gave it it's first shake-down races at Brands Hatch where he scored two 3rd places and two 6ths, with a fastest lap of 54.8 seconds. Ray Knight later tested it for Motorcycle Sport (June 1984) and scored a 4th (behind 3 RG500s!) and 6th on the Brands GP circuit in an open 500cc race - having never raced a 2 stroke before. Alan Cathcart also tested it at Mallory Park and it appeared on BBC TV's 'Tomorrows World'.

It was due to recieve a higher spec' Roger Keen engine for the 1984 season which unfortunately never materialised. By 1985 the demand for replacement chassis for GP type machines had wained and this bike was sold to fund future projects. (As far as I know Norman was never building chassis full-time but fitting his projects in around his paying employment).

It was raced, and hill climbed, a couple of times over the next couple of years by Malolm Gallichan and then the engine was 'borrowed' for a hill climb sidecar outfit. The chassis spent the next 15 years taking pride of place in Malcolms living room in Jersey.

Back to the Future?

I persauded Malcolm to part with it this year (2000) with the intention of restoring it for use in Forgotten Era/Post Classic type racing. As the bike is in such good condition this should be a fairly quick job (famous last words.....). It will be great to race it against not only the TZ350s but also some of the other innovative designs of the 1980's such as the Saxon Armstrong 350, Bimota 350 GP bike, Tony Foale framed Yamahas, similar Waddons and the Exactweld.

This prototype used a mild steel box tube space frame and fabricated steel front and rear forks. It weighs just 104 kg (230 lbs) as opposed to the standard TZ350s weight of 125kg (276 lb). Vernon Glashiers Hossack Honda single, which also used mild steel tubing (which, incidently, was never intended to be a complete bike but still won 3 National championships 10 years after it was built!), weighed 99kg (218 lb) with heavy, by todays standards, Astralite wheels.  (We calculated that our contemporary Hossack/Rotax supermono racer, with a T45 tubular space frame, could have weighed 90kg without any exotic materials).

Is the design valid and does it have potential for the future? I think so. John Britten obviously proved the system works at the highest level and put the system in the worldwide global eye. BMW has softened up resistance to change with the Telelever/Saxon arrangement . Manufacturers must also be looking to get as much production cost back 'in-house' with the current demand for cheaper bikes. The cost of a pair of Ohlins forks, for example, must make up a fairly hefty percentage of a bikes production cost and if you can produce a cheaper alternative yourself that's got to be attractive. Predictions? I'd bet that we'll see this arrangement on a bike from a European manufacturer (the Japanese own the suspension companies after all.....) before too long. Aprilia bought up options on Claude Fiors double wishbone patents in the early 1990's and I understand that Pierre Terblanche (chief designer at Ducati) is a fan of Norman Hossacks work.

At the foot of this page there is a table which gives some details of interest to chassis enthusiasts, such as the weight of various components, weight distribution and CG height, but doesn't go as far as giving dimensions/angles for the wishbones etc as this wouldn't be very fair to Norman. I've put up some photos of the whole bike and its components in the hope that his ideas on chassis design as a whole (rather than just the front end) will be appreciated by as wide as possible an audience. That very stiff and light stub axle (with the chain adjusters on the swing arm pivot rather than the rear axle to reduce unsprung mass), for example, allows the engine to be run lower than with a conventional arrangement. The low overall CG height then has positive implications on the front ends dive/anti-dive characteristics and allows a short wheelbase without the bike trying to flip under braking and acceleration. Advanced thinking even for now, let alone 1983.

'#3' in the mid 1980's

The chassis in its current condition:

NORMAN HOSSACKS WEB SITE

Back to the front Page