jack_the_lad

Have the ports been messed with or the piston shortened. I have bored a large number of these but the lad I do most of then for does a lot of extra work on them.

What is the difference between a 1964 Sprite and a 1965 and what year did sprite produce the twin down tube model.

I was not disputing that just no body has mentioned model or backed with a photograph. If you had seen it there should be some results in the archives some where distant memories would not go far with the Scotish Mafia. Was the 64 model the same as the 65?

The reason I asked for the blood is because the thread seemed to be going down the line of eligibility and as far as I know there were different designs and the evidence appears to post 65, I stand to be corrected?

grade 300 is what i was recomended by supplier. Its not easy to sorce as most suppliers stock 250.

Thers been all this talk about 1964 sprits but have I missed some thing? There has been pictures of later bike so to back up the pre 65 claim lets see some evidence.

Well I wish I had not asked who Baldilocks was? He looks to have been well blessed with the ugly stick. (frightening)

Who's Baldilocks?

The thread size is 5/16 cycle 26TPI.

Just to throw some petrol on the fire. As I see it they may have built Sprits in 64 but what forks did the have on them. The ones on the Sprit in the pictures would not be aloud on a Tiger Cub in Yorkshire as they are post 65 (I think). Is this debate is about eligibility in Scotland. The way forward is not to speculate on this site but to put it in writing to the organisers and await there response. Jack

I think the sleeve is cast in and would need to be bored out and new sleeve fitted. I am just doing some 320 linners for a ty250. Jack

In old money .003 to .0037 ish You have to take to account what the engine is doing bore size and if its water or air cooled.some pistons also want more clearance due to type of alloy used. All in all I think down to the application.

I bore them to have .002 clearance.

They are back in production as well as the 320 one. I've been involved in the production.

If you get a bigger battery you use F1 technology and incorporate the KERS system.

Were these engines not alternator if they were why not fit a PVL type ignition.

Have bored quite a few of these to 270 but what know one has said is you need to shorten the barrelas well. The conversion uses a TY250 piston. The big end is built like a Brick sh** house.

Does it really mater whether it was made in 64 most clubs have moved the 2 stroke cut off date. If you

Well if it mainly comes down to the Scottish who runs one event, we all know that they have a set of rules; you enter the event knowing that. Part of the thread way back was to have trials with eased sections for beginners, Scotland as we know is a one route event and so it should be. Why is it at this time of the year we get the great debate about Scotland you enter knowing you may disappointed so why do so many gripe. So if we take Scotland out of the equation what are we left with that cannot be accommodated in the current set up.

Forgot to mention I have ridden at Border Classic and Aqueduct Classic and you get the whole spectrum of bikes from the real trick bikes to what you would call the British twinshock with MZ front ends etc. and it all seems to work in harmony. Just had a looked at what is required as far as regs at Dales Classic and the do not show any machine requirement, so does that mean that any thing goes, and Peak Classic appear to be the same. Some of these clubs put an easy beginner

Its just one of those anomalies that

The club I ride in and you have even quoted it, is Yorkshire Classic. If I want ride, let

Hi gave a rest yesterday to sit back and look? What seems to be coming out of all this is you what to run trials with easy sections some clubs do that now. The suggestion for eligibility is to use cheaper parts e.g. forks of Japanese bikes etc. But what