Bultaco Sherpa 250 Sammy Miller Frame
Posted 11 June 2012 - 02:53 PM
Ads By Google
Posted 11 June 2012 - 09:02 PM
Better? It's subjective and impossible to answer without riding back to back with a well set up standard bike.
Modernising older bikes doesn't always work well. My 340 has a steepened head angle and there is a trade off. It steers quicker and is easier to manage in nadgery stuff but it's lost its stability and is very twitchy.
Posted 11 June 2012 - 09:19 PM
When I ride a Bultaco I ride a Bultaco not a Fantic. These bikes have some "personality" with some benefits and some drawbacks. You might reduce some of the drawbacks but this bike will never behave like a Fantic 240.
I think the biggest advantage is the bash plate, no impressed lower frame tubes which is a commen
issue, this is an advantage the rest is well ... a Bultaco.
Posted 12 June 2012 - 06:30 AM
Having said all that I sought out a Miller frame for my Bultaco out of respect for a rider, Sammy Miller who I remember being way ahead of the game in 1970. The frame is what should have been fitted to the model 80 and therefore makes it interesting and desirable. Sammy was also a businessman and who can deny him the opportunity to use his hard earned position to promote some 'products' - a commonplace situation these days.
I'm not sure changing the head angle and shock position is adding anything to the frame. It is not going to handle like a modern bike - its way to heavy for a start and built primararily for sections that don't exist any more. Its a design looking back to the era of the heavyweights rather than to the later, lighter twinshocks and mono's.
Posted 14 June 2012 - 04:11 PM
The earlier frames had a single pillar under the seat (picture below) much like the later model 49 and model 80 and was very similar to model 80.
Frame had a tendancy to break at the base of the headstock gusset
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users