cleanorbust

Don't know about future prices but your figures prompted me to do a quick comparison of historical prices. In 1979 I bought a new 250 trials bike (Montesa Cota 247). I ride that very bike now, but that's another story. Applying the UK inflation rate between 1979 and the present day to the price I paid, that bike would cost £3479 today. Another way of looking at this is that the price of trials bikes has increased by a heck of a lot more than inflation. Or, modern bikes are so technically advanced that it's foolish to compare them with the stone age technology of the Cota 247 and as such are genuinely worth a price which represents inflation plus £2k.

I don't think that was seen as a disappointment. Rather, perhaps. as an inevitable consequence of the company's pricing policy and it's reported attitude towards potential customers.

As totalshell infers the sky's the limit when it comes to buying parts (some of them major, like wheels) to convert to trials trim. Really depends on what type of trials bike you're looking to create. If it's a reasonably competitive one, you'll be in for quite a lot of work and expense. If you just want a bike to ride for fun (though it might not provide much) you could just do a light conversion but end up with a bit of a lump and, sadly, spoil what might be a reasonably nice road bike by trying to turn it into something it's not.

I think there is another factor which plays into whether colour schemes are a factor in purchasing decisions. It seems to me that a high proportion of committed riders in my area, the type who compete every week and are in the top half of the results, tend to renew their bikes every year, or two at the most, and many of these people tend to be brand-loyal. As such the committed Beta rider, for example, will replace his steed with next year's model and whether the 2018 Beta is red, white or even turquoise is something of an irrelevance to him (or her). I can believe that the rider who is new to trials could be more influenced by colour scheme, especially if they have a background in, say, mountain biking where such things seem to be of crucial importance.

Thanks. I was at the Low North test day, waiting to see if Inch Perfect are planning another.

Thanks for that, very interesting, particularly your comments on Jotagas. Everyone who's reported on riding one seems to love them as a clubman friendly, well made bike but nobody seems to be buying them new. Could I ask where you got your test rides? (Dealer?). Sorry this has drifted a bit from the original question.

Entry form and regs are on the calendar on the ACU website. Event date 30th July.

And that, I'm afraid, is the crucial point. Until you do, you won't know. Best you can hope for is someone else telling you where to lay down several thousand pounds, without knowing in your own head, and that's without taking into account the differences between makes. You might, for example, prefer a 300 Beta over a 250, but find a 250 much more suitable than a 300 if you try a TRS (or whatever). Sorry if this is unhelpful, and it's true all the current bikes are great and cabby's point about 250s is a good one, but making the decision based on riding one yourself is always the way to finding the right answer for you.

It's probably true that the real experts are kind on their bikes, despite the brutal nature of the sections they're riding. They'll use a high-ish gear to ease through a section at low revs with plenty of clutch work, skimming the top of the rocks with seemingly light contact by the tyres only, where lesser lights crunch their way through. Even when the best have fives, they seem more able to hang onto the bike to stop it crashing back down the cliff they've just tried to ride up.

You can't. Or at least, I'm sure anyone who made a habit of criticising the performance of observers would have it pointed out that these are the people who give their time, standing out in all weathers so that we can have our fun, without whom there would be no trials. I dare say this would be offered along with the suggestion that if they think they can do a better job there's nothing to stop them volunteering. All of which would be true.

I take your point. However, in my opinion there is in reality a difficulty in defining "correct" observing. According to the rules, correct observing means 5 for a stop. In the minds of most observers, correct observing means applying a bit, or a lot, of leniency. I tend to accept this gratefully, though recall one instance where my "3" was such a blatant 5 I got it corrected after I'd picked the bike up and got it started. The observer, a highly experienced individual, explained that she hadn't given me a five because I seemed to have tried so hard.

I practice on tyres with cracked sidewalls, using an inner tube. No issues with loss of integrity of the sidewall or from the tyre collapsing, so go for it if you can effect an airtight seal (or use a tube). Would be a shame to bin a near-new tyre.

Thing is that 348s haven't, in my experience, caught on in the current twinshock scene. Good as they were in their day, relatively speaking they're a bit of a tank to ride now. As such, putting money into doing one up to sell for a profit could end painfully.

Would be interested to hear your opinion when you do get a go on one.

You'll need a defter touch than that with your throttle hand when you get into doing trials .

Doesn't Andy Metcalfe's at Guisborougn offer TRS test rides?

He knows the gamekeeper so hasn't got a problem with riding there.

Could we have more of a side view, to show how things are at the moment?

Thanks icon, very interesting.

Well, a bit of a history lesson from memory but I know at least one TC member who'll correct any mistakes: Any other 247 tank/seat units should be interchangeable as the frame didn't change from the original design. Not that you'd want to use a fibreglass unit if you could help it with today's petrol. It's unfortunate that your bike has the fibreglass unit, mine is a '79 bike and has the alloy undertank as standard: no issues with modern fuel. So, until 78/79 247s ran fibreglass tanks. Sammy Miller did an alloy tank seat unit for the 247 back in the day. I don't think the 348 or later units would sit properly on the 247 frame due the different top rail and rear loop which the unit rests on. Fibreglass tanks were banned for road use on new bikes in the UK but the Fantic polypropylene ones were permissible because they were tough enough not to disintegrate in an accident, as were, for example, the plastic tank units on the first TY 250 monoshock Yamahas. I'll wait to be shot down if my facts are wrong...

Definitely no - the 247c came with a black frame only, could be red undercoat/primer as you say but where the paint has worn on mine there's no sign of that, however the impression I have of Spanish quality control at the time is that whatever was handy/cheap/conveniently available from the back of a lorry would get used. Only Monts I know of with non-black frames were, I think, a 349 in the 1980s which had a sort of gunmetal grey finish, red-frame later models in the 80s, and some years of early 247s which had white frames.

Well, it is designed to be ridden at 5mph!

Don't worry, you will. Just give it some time.

Hi again - have checked mine and the clutch arm moves outwards to the same position as yours and starts to engage at the same point also, ie when the arm is level with the joint between the outer cover and the crankcase. I have had mine apart recently to change the gasket and the brass thrust bearing shows no sign of wear and the clutch works fine. So it appears you don't have a problem, thankfully.

I can check mine for comparison tomorrow evening and let you know.