Don't want these Ads? Why not sign up as a Trials Central Supporter.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About woody

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location
    Birmingham UK

Recent Profile Visitors

16,700 profile views
  1. Not sure about your spacers as the one on the L/H side doesn't look long enough and the one for behind the brake plate doesn't look like a top hat. The flange of the top hat is very thin as seen on the new spindle as it sits just proud of the bearing oil seal face whereas the tube part is a push fit into the seal The spacer on the L/H hand side also pushes into the bearing oil seal and is long enough that part of it sticks out and is visible. I don't have one loose so can't measure anything at the moment. Your looks too short maybe?
  2. L/H fork has the sleeve which as you note, extends from the inside of the leg. Then there is a spacer (just a straight tube, no top hat) R/H fork the brake plate sits against the fork leg but there is a top hat spacer inside the hub which sits between the brake plate and the bearing. The brake arm spring is located against the front of the brake plate inside the fork leg - it can only locate/work one way and it sounds as though it is correct on yours When the spindle is pulled through on the nut it will just about recess into the L/H fork leg up against the sleeve. The sleeve will only pull through as far as the spacer will let it. If you have no spacer the nut will continue to pull the spindle through as it is pushing the sleeve which has no spacer to locate against It's hard to tell from the picture of the new spindle but I'm guessing that the spacer shown next to the spindle head is the actual spacer and not the sleeve and that the sleeve isn't shown.
  3. You can buy the older airbox new from Spain for 159 to 191 models from here - I haven't seen them available outside of Spain. Interestingly they list the 158/159 box seperately from the rest, I thought they were all the same (apart from the sidepanels which are concave or convex fro 350 / 250)
  4. I hadn't actually looked on the front page, I was checking the club website but hadn't seen them so assumed they hadn't been finished at that point, then saw this post and thought I may have missed them on the club website. Checked again but still couldn't see them so got curious as to where they were which was when I posted the question - then immediately found them on the front page of TC... ( still can't see them on the club site though? ) Don't worry, wasn't complaining as I know what it's like having to do the results afterwards on top of everything else that goes into the trial.
  5. Where did you find the results? I can't see them on the website Edit - just seen them on the front page....
  6. 10/52..? Really or was that a typo for 10/42. I found 10/42 about as low as I would want to go, 10/52 would be far too low for me to even use first
  7. It was D.O.A that made them if I remember. Never had one but heard they were not good quality and would break. I made my own using a Beta kickstart and welding the Beta swivel onto the Sherpa knuckle. In the end though I preferred the action and look of the Bultaco kicker so sold it on.
  8. Yes, Fraser frame
  9. The Hi Boy frame sold by Miller was for the TL125 The Hi Boy 305 was a works bike and Miller's own development bike, not available to the public. The TL250 wasn't on sale in the UK through Honda so there was no market for a Hi Boy frame for the 250 Whether a 250 engine will fit the 125 frame I don't know, you'd have to offer it up and see. The 305 works bike was a long stroke which retained the 250 bore, it wasn't a big bore 250. Fraser did a frame for the TL250 which used a big bore for a 305 engine
  10. The Miller frames were for the TL125 but Whitlock did make a batch of Whitehawk frames for the TLR200/250 and the RS range a few years ago. There's not really anything wrong with the standard TLR frame, they're light, don't break and all they need if you want a more modern feel is lowered footpegs and tighter steering. Whitehawk is no lighter than a TLR frame.
  11. Yo don't say what you have on the rear. Original gearing on MK1 was 12 / 46 which became 11 / 42 from MK2 onwards. They're virtually the same ratio, 3.82 and 3.83 I've run 10 / 42 before which gives 4.20 ratio which gave a still useable low first. Using the 10 front puts it lower than you really need I think and the 10 also gives problems with the chain catching on the sprocket nut. There is a nut with a shoulder which faces against the sprocket to space the edge of the nut away from the sprocket to clear the chain and you need this for a 10 The dished sprocket from Spain that is reproduced now is 44 tooth and I find 11 / 44 low enough in bottom, ratio being 4.00
  12. Beamish Owners club do a replacement system if ever you need one
  13. Yes, but are you going to re-chrome an entire frame for a weld repair about 10mm long that you can barely see. I used it when I welded on new footrests brackets and it's not really noticeable unless you're right on it The weld has to be covered with something so I can't think of anything that will blend in better than the chrome paint. And in the end they're just trials bikes that get knocked to hell when ridden regularly
  14. Halfords chrome paint should also make a small repair almost invisible