dadof2

If a wire on the outside has perished insulation its a fair bet the fine wire insulation inside the coil is on its way out as well. Borrowing a known good coil would be my first try. The output from the should be 25 V ac or more if you take the plug out of the bike and spin the engine with an electric drill, or push it swiftly in first gear. Resistor plugs are used to prevent electrical interference on TVs etc (+ other reasons) find out what you bike should have and fit that. The resistor in resistor plugs does age and wear out.

I am pretty certain BB would be on a 300 at a BTC trial as they are off road unlike the SSDT. I think Birks has several in stock.

Agreed regarding inlet duration, forgot that jumbo had a reed valve, my friend had an SWM a 1981 or 82, non reed valve 320 I think and it was that I had in mind. Comments regarding exhaust port still valid and unaffected by reed valve.

I was out with quite a few trials riders yesterday and there has been quite a few bike changes in the last 2 weeks. 2 had had sold their GGs giving the reasons as 70% reliability problems, 30% worry about future resale values and parts availability 1 Had sold a GG (only about 6 months old) reasons for sale worry about future resale value / parts availability A 3 had bought Betas Another rider (not GG) wanted to trade his bike for a Beta but it seems new Betas are getting hard to get hold of, no 250s in UK. Its an ill wind ------ as they say. Another GG rider was not selling, rebuilt his gearbox last year (just the top hat and selector "chain links" was happy with it and felt someone would keep supplying any parts he needed. Another GG rider happy with his oldish 250 took the same view.

May not run so well at low revs but will rev higher and produce more power at higher RPM. You need to calculate what the new inlet opening duration will be and look at a tuners handbook such as A G Bell to get a better idea of what the exact effect is likely to be. Also need to be sure the bottom edge of the exhaust port has adequate cover when piston is at at TDC

Up to 3.25 will give more torque just above idle. Nearer 2.5 will give smoother idle and less chance of stalling at low revs

Near certain the timing advance electronics will be in the CDI unit. As a general rule bikes with a timing trigger have any advance electronics in the CDI unit Bikes that use the change of polarity in the source coil as the timing trigger either have no advance or at times have the advance electronics in the HT coil.

I saw a rider drop a Beta on its exhaust side. Barely dinted the exhaust but must have pressed it in just a shade more against these hoses. He restarted it and was giving it a bit of revving to get it running again properly when there was a loud pop and clouds of steam. The hose blew out on the back of the exhaust, probably softened by the heat. If you have any doubt I would wrap your hoses with some 16 gauge copper wire, wind it on like a spring and this will keep the hoses just off your exhaust and conduct the heat away.

I was at a concert a while ago, The "problem"? started when the announcer (possibly the worse for drink) introduced the Londonderry air as the London Derrière. Some younger members at the front of the band started to smirk, then the conductor got the giggles, then a few more of the band got the joke and got the giggles. Every time the conductor raised his baton and the band raised their instruments the giggles spread. By now the conductor was really struggling and having to lean on his Lectern for support. After about 15 seconds to try to regain his composure he spluttered out "perhaps we should try the Dambusters" but his voice began to fail and he could not get the final word (march) out, He and the band got the giggles again then some joker near the Trombone section uttered "what for, war crimes?" which caused everyone who heard it to crack up with laughter, this included nearly all the band (30+) and a few at the front of the audience. Again quite a pause in the hope the conductor would recover, he was now huddled over his lectern and unable to look at anyone or say anything without getting the giggles. When he appeared to be recovering the announcer suggested, "perhaps we should try a dirge instead, to calm things down a bit" but before she had even finished speaking, the conductor, a fair bit of the band and several more members of the audience were beginning to laugh uncontrollability again, Then the announcer speaking to the conductor said (in an abrupt, exasperated tone intended to restore order) something like "what on earth is wrong now" The conductor barely able to stand or speak for laughing stuttered out " "the Dambusters is a dirge you ffing twit" At this the whole place with the exception of a few extremely dour churchgoing types erupted with laughter. Both the conductor and the announcer had lapel mikes on and although the were turned down, nigh on everyone heard it. One of the band, still struggling to speak, then got onto the lectern and said "have a break". Fortunately no one added either "have a kit cat" or "have a ****cat" or I reckon some could have choked or needed fresh underwear. Several of the band had to drain their instruments because of laughing into them and everyone was on tenterhooks for most of the second half in case it started again and there were quite a few missed notes and out of pitch playing. There are times when 2 or 3 hours on a hard chair can be a bit of a chore, but this was about the funniest thing as I have seen for years.

Less of the daft old duffer if you please 249, This daft old duffer is very much young at heart although the bodywork is a bit on the heavy side and not quite what it used to be. Steveo - the story continues after the bit you quoted, the bloke at the top of the drive was in fact one of the defendants, he had spent about 2 months tracking me down in the belief I had the allegedly forged letter, He wanted a copy with which to blackmail the Plaintiff. I won't pollute the post with any more off thread stuff at this stage, however as there is some interest I may eventually post a brief summary of the outcome. Back to the minimum weight limit, does anyone know why Thierry Michaud set it? I spoke to a person who has had some input into branches of 4 wheel motor sport regulation about minimum weights and he had a number of arguments for and against, the majority in favour of some level of minimum weight restriction. The question was not should there be a minimum weight, just at what level it should be set and how it was applied to vehicle & driver. One of the arguments in favour was "parts commonality" i.e. avoiding the need of specially developed lighter parts for different classes, an argument against was that occasionally this led to some classes being felt to be "under engined" and sluggish, resulting for calls to allow more engine tuning. One of the arguments in favour of adequate minimum weights, not at all applicable to trials was to prevent drivers or riders competing in events in a dehydrated state, possibly having used diuretics. In some categories ballast is banned or has to be in specific position, the most extreme being in F1 where the exact front / rear weight distribution is specified. Edit - I would not like to see ND or anyone else banned. His or anyone else misquoting or possibly deliberately misinterpreting me does irritate a bit as I feel I have to waste time correcting it, but the odd outburst??? I know several who have found some of the posts on this thread very amusing, its funny what some normally very reserved find amusing and so I don't pollute this post further see anything goes section.

I am not 100% sure but I think that the ignition system on your model of Beta should advance quite a bit at just over tickover and then fall back at higher revs. Check the ignition advance by marking the flywheel and using a strobe. Sometimes these ignitions fail by sticking at full retard (the starting setting) and if this happens it gives exactly the symptoms you describe. better to compare your bike with a known good Beta (no flywheel weight) than a GG.

Can some people on this forum not be critical without resorting to insults. I agree the 4rt works fine and I will seriously consider one as my next bike. Johnnyboxer, I do not dream this stuff up, look at nearly all the latest petrol cars, EFI, BATTERY, COP ignition. Many cars now have in excess of 30kV ignitions, far better at firing the fuel than the 6 to 15 kV of many trials bikes. Why are Bou and co messing about with twin plug head if the standard single plug is ideal, they are looking for the benefits of improved ignition. I am 99.99% certain Honda are considering what I have written before I wrote it. As for battery failure, sure the Boeing Dreamliner had some battery problems but look at what the use of new battery technology can achieve compared to conventional airliners. The capacitor storage solution was very clever at the time and is probably still ideal for small equipment like strimmers that pretty well run at fixed RPM. Many of these small industrial engines do not even have ignition advance, totally different to a trials engine. In suggesting battery I was not only considering the fact the 4Rts have EFI, they also need power for the ECU and ignition. One of the most common cause of ignition failure on trials bikes (though rare on a 4RT) is the failure of fine wire components such as CDI source coils and timing trigger coils. Using a battery means a fine wire source coil is not needed and the trigger coil can be replaced with a solid state component as can some of the ignition amplification. Solid state triggers can work off an ACG but they need quite a bit of additional electronics, and this is done on several 2T trials bikes. I did not say the present system is unreliable, I actually posted "In general the Honda system is pretty good and reliable but can be improved with newer technology" so its a bit rich to criticise me for what I did not say, when in fact I said pretty well the opposite. Sometimes I get criticised for being a heavy bike luddite, next thing I get criticised for suggesting technical advancement, you just can't win.

"Where should I go from here please" - stick to level ground or gentle slopes Getting the pistons to move again after being pushed fully back is often a problem particularly on 4 pot callipers, all pumping the lever does is flex the seals back and forth. Check pads and clips / pins are in good order, free to move and not bent, If the pad, clip or pin is bent or binding it can act like a spring keep pushing a piston back. There could still be some air in your hose, Make sure your master cylinder piston is retracting fully. Park the bike up for a few hours or overnight with the master cylinder hung so there are no up loops that could trap air in your hose. The bleed by the following method, pull the lever back to the bars, then briefly crack the bleed nipple open and closed. Release the lever, wait a few seconds then repeat several times, checking to see if pistons are starting to move. Once you are sure all air is out pull lever back to bars and pour boiling water over calliper until it and fluid inside is hot. Re bleed keeping calliper hot. If that fails pressure bleed. If that fails a detail strip down is advised.

Now then B40rt, no inappropriate content please Nigel, I am sorry if my cat sat on the mat post pushed you a bit far. Sometimes I have had a hard day and making a post like I did felt pretty innocuous. Yesterday I arrived home (about 19:30) to find a pretty irate and upset person at the top of my drive talking to my wife, who also looked far from happy. At first I thought the driver hand knocked her off her bike. In fact it was a serious issue involving property damage (maybe £30k), impending litigation, fraud, misrepresentation and theft and at least 2 breaches of the housing act. Although we have no involvement in the wrongdoing the outcome could have an adverse effect on 20 % of our business. Apart from my time on TC I spent the rest of the evening reading law. First thing this morning, one of the involved parties in a very bad and upset mood on the phone for a legal conversation having to watch every word. Spend next 3 hour writing legally correct letter to one of the accused parties. Afternoon spend more time on phone with defendant / counter claimant then visit alleged perpetrator of the damage who has also issued county court proceedings against 2 others involved, managed to get copy of an alleged forged document without him realising it would probably be used in evidence against him. Get home have tea them more legal work and phone calls including how to bring copy of the alleged forgery to the attention of someone who needs to see it without breaking the law, prejudicing the legal proceedings or upsetting someone who may turn out to be innocent. Just finished that then opened TC to post this. Apologies for being off thread but sometimes an explanation may explain questionable posting. Back to the original topic. In support of my argument that a higher minimum weight limit would increase parts interchangeability with other disciplines (and the benefits that brings) take a look at the recent Gaunt Suzuki post. I have ridden a standard B120, but never a trials variant. Transforming that engine with its near total lack of bottom end power is quite an achievement.

Why commenting on what a dealer said has to do with business school is beyond me. What the dealer meant was that of all the trials bike makes being sold he felt only 2 were a safe long term bet, as in continuing to be manufactured. When he made that statement he was probably aware that GG Spain and GG UK were about to issue the press releases they did. He did name the two makes he felt were safe but as I wrote previously I don't think he was even considering mont honda at all (as safe or unsafe). If he was including mont honda in the safe group his assessment of manufacturers futures is even graver than I took it to be. Very shortly afterwards I heard from another well in the know source whose thoughts were very similar. He went nearly as far as to suggest that another make may just about as well pack it in now. I am not prepared to name the makes or people as although I was not sworn to confidentiality the comments were made in private conversation.

Why have a battery as it adds extra weight - fair question. This is a bit difficult to explain as it is interlinked with other changes in but here goes. Battery technology has moved on greatly since Honda designed its capacitor based EFI system. They are now much lighter and more powerful. The Honda system is a solution for an earlier era. EFI needs a power supply that cannot come directly from an ACG, that is why Honda went to considerable lengths and complexity to design a capacitor based system to store electricity (as opposed to a battery). Fitting an electric water pump saves quite a bit of weight, mechanical parts, hoses etc but in needs more electric so the ACG has to be increased in capacity and extra rectification capacity. Some of what I am writing next about Hondas present system are my assumptions but I am near certain they are correct. On the present system the ignition requires a fine wire winding on the ACG (an additional expense and complexity) and this has to be at a certain point to give power prior to the time the ignition fires. It cannot provide optimum power over the entire timing range. There comes a point when it is better to simplify the alternator so it just has identical large diameter wire windings, have a single rectifier regulator, ditch the capacitors and run all the electrical equipment from a battery. Currently the ignition needs the fine wire coil, 2 sets of capacitors, a control unit and an HT coil. On a battery system there are no capacitors, no fine wire coil, the primary step up (ignition amplifier) can be incorporated into the control unit and the HT coil replaced with a compact, lightweight coil on plug. In general the Honda system is pretty good and reliable but can be improved with newer technology. An important advantage of battery ignition is optimum coil charging and spark energy at all revs and timing advances. It would for example be possible to programme the system to produce say 5 ignition sparks at a few millisecond intervals around TDC. at starting RPMs. This would provide a sustained plasma "fireball" at the plug which would make starting even more effortless than it is with no chance of kickback. Bou & Fuji were rumoured to be experimenting with twin plug heads, programmable spark duration may obviate the need for this. Ossa whose EFI was developed much more recently than Hondas found the solution (after trial and error) was to add a small battery but they might have been better to design a battery based system to start with. Please bear in mind what I have written is true as far as it goes / in general terms, but that is not to say there could not be a set of circumstances where it is not. The overall effect of these changes including addition of battery would be a reduction in weight, even better reliability, easier diagnostics, improved performance and fuel economy.

I guess the yam was developed for a different era (no stop) where the likely damage was likely to be caused by catching a rock or falling sideways onto one, whereas the Beta would be developed for the stop and land on the sump guard era. Perhaps best protection would be a Beta thickness pad inside a Yam type wrap round guard. We have quite a few Beta riders in this area, some oldies who had Yams and some youngsters who have only had recent bikes. In general the oldies found the Yams pretty tough but nearly all (possibly all) the oldies and younger riders have broken Beta water pump housings and in some instances the primary cases as well. I have welded up a couple of flywheel side crank cases where the rubber sump pad has punched the case up at the bottom where it joins the plastic outer case. I have also welded up some Yam crankcases where a derailed chain had ripped the top lug out of the gearbox.

I agree that the technology exists to make trials bikes could be quite a bit lighter, but in shedding weight costs would increase and / or they would become more fragile. It is your opinion that trials bikes are not too light, it is my opinion that they are now so light it has compromised reliability and increased costs to the point sales have fallen. Terry Michaud thinks a certain minimum weight limit is appropriate, others disagree.

B40rt may be right, the Vertigo may just be a serious hobby for MJ but they have displayed a lower spec model (Ice Hell?) that suggests they intend to go for more sales than just a few top spec bikes. ND Vertigo may never have used the term volume sales but my previous comment to B40rt suggests they do. Also some comments made by DL before we ever saw a bike suggest the eventual aim is to sell a fair number. MJ perhaps foresaw the demise of GG and felt there will be a worthwhile sales gap to fill. Very recently I head from a multi marque trials dealer that only two brands were safe. I don't think he was including Mont / Honda when he made that statement, but if MJ has come to the same conclusion he may feel a substantial market will open up as other marques disappear.

Glen, You seem to be getting a bit wound up over this. The fundamental difference between the mini/escort/trials bikes of the past and the Vertigo is their heritage. The Mini etc were designed and built as a road car for the masses, variants were then developed for competition, the degree of modification / variation depending on what was permitted by the category of competition they were used in. The Vertigo on the other hand was conceived from the very beginning as a competition trials bike. My point was despite this heritage and success at SSDT etc will it ever be a volume seller.

Agree to some extent as I (and plenty of others) holed the flywheel case on TYs but it was very thin, brittle magnesium. Unless its massive no sump guard can completely protect the sides of the engine but the older wrap around guards do a better job than any of the modern "flat" type. Balancing on sump now not allowed so that's not an issue. When I switched from riding Tys / TYZs to a GG (with wide flat sump guard) I found it caught rocks and the edges of ruts where my Yams did not, a definite disadvantage and mark looser at times. Tarres (who developed this model) and other WTC riders have / had a much more on the sump / on the back wheel riding style so no doubt the issues I found were not a problem for them. I note Chris Pearson's electric bike has a sump guard with some shaping at the sides.

My view is that the 4RT could do with a few changes Have a car type alternator (electrically) and car type ignition system with small battery and OBD II compatibility. Better side stand Larger fuel tank Replace mechanical water pump with electric pump and simplify the plumbing. Wrap round close fitting sump guard as per RTLs. Tidy up some of the brackets and lighten the fasteners. Point the exhaust exit down at the ground.

Anyone know if Chris will be riding it at the Allan S3 round? Electric vehicles can have benefits but I do wish the makers / suppliers would not make incorrect claims such as no pollution or no fire risk. The mining of battery and motor components produce some rather nasty pollutants and environmental damage, electricity does pollute, just not a the bike and electronics and motors do occasionally catch fire. My guess is the price is too high to make them popular and that replacement battery (costs) could be an issue. Most electric car manufacturers have resorted to leasing the batteries. No noise and smell will definitely be an advantage in some areas. Even though petrol engined trials bikes are not really a problem they are at times perceived as such. I wonder if they could be given a legally compliant power setting that enables them to be ridden on road by 16 year olds, same as 50cc scooters.

What is there for me to apologise for, it was you who misquoted what I wrote. There is a significant difference between what I wrote (and you have now acknowledged) and what you misquoted me as writing.