Quite correct. They claim that the front pot replaces it as a stressed member but knowing its not there is just wrong.
At least the Egli is meant to work that way.
Richard
Hummm would have to be the whole engine except the rear pot as a stressed member then as the frame is a cradle around the engine and the engine is bolted in as an integral part. Take out the front down tubes and you no longer have a frame, just a couple of top tubes on which to bolt a few things.
Remember back in the 80's Classic Bike printed a 2 parter on the history of the FBF, with loads of input from McCandles (may have been from previous interviews publications etc rather than "new") and he was shocked at peole cutting lumps out of the FBF, being as they no longer had a frame. He also did not like the bending in of the top rails to make the SLFBF being as he thought it compromised the integrity of the straight frame rails. They printed a pic of his answer to the width of the WLFBF, I think it may have even been a Triton, but may have been a Dommi engine, but he had laid the engine down at a 45 of so angle and ten dropped the top rails down to meet the swingarm gusset plate, predating the Rob North style frame and hints at the progression to modern beam frames. (I know there were plenty of similar frames about since the 1940's). The bike looked a real beauty - wish I still had the CB that it was in.
So I am not really sure if the JMC counts as a Norvin
R