The info. you want (I think) was covered in an earlier topic listing. "199a running refurb. - new member cosmo" on Aug. 8th. last.
Sorry, tried to create link but lack i.t. skills........
I have a 1960 (road) Bullet - a long-term project for which I have struggled to find correct front fork parts......I am reliably informed theyv'e all been snapped up by the pre-65 Trialers !
Your chances of finding a complete and correct, ready-to-use gearbox assy. (or one in any sort of condition, come to that), I would estimate at zero or less - but what do I know..?
First port-of-call for anything Royal Enfield has to be Hitchcock's Motorcycles Ltd., although I suspect you already know this.
A picture speaks a 1000 words, it's said - any chance of seeing your bike and/or the present gearbox ?
Bondy - Check date of first post .......
Gentlemen - if we can get back to the original post, please..........!
The point I attempted to make in my response is that any alloy rim will corrode if neglected.
However, I think in the case of DC's bike I would be very disappointed to find that level of corrosion in just 5 years, particularly to a tubeless rim. (My understanding of these is that they should be particularly well-sealed against such deterioration, with the inflation valve the only weakness - or maybe I have that wrong.)
I should point out that the Bulto/Akront tubed rim in my pic. had worn its tyre undisturbed since 30 years ago, (when I bought the bike as a non-runner) and possibly up to 34 years (when the tyre was new) - and of course has many more holes to allow the ingress of moisture than a tubeless ........
Soap is by its very nature CAUSTIC.
Oxford dictionary defines soap as "a cleaning agent that is a compound of fatty acid", etc.
Proper tyre soap is NOT soap - more accurately tyre LUBE.
I am quite familiar with corrosion to rims - here's what I found on removing the rear tyre from my Bultaco Alpina long-term project :-
Ooh, sorry to hear that, Old man - now I feel your pain.......
Tsk, tsk, Old man - far too touchy.
You came here seeking advice - which was freely given. Everyone in this free world is entitled to his own opinion. No need to go off the deep end........
(This is from another old man with lots of Bultacos)
Removing the cylinder base sleeve nuts can often prove a task in itself if a p.o. has used an ill-fitting key and rounded-off the internal hexagons - you have
removed all the nuts, haven't you ? (Maybe, not obvious to someone unfamiliar with working on these engines......)
Jarring the barrel with a hammer and piece of wood to the exhaust port, or similar usually then does the trick.
Do not lever on the cooling fins or any joint face !
My mod. 159 has it - I think it's a standard fitting for a longer seat.
My mod. 85 and 92 both have a hole in the underside of the loop (lower side of the tube only) - any thoughts on that, anyone ?
(The 85 also has a vertical hole through the centre of the loop but I suspect that's non-standard)
Seems if the o.p. asked a silly question, there are plenty of people silly enough to answer it ..............!
To remove spoke cover disc, first remove sprocket. (Apologies if you've already done this).
If it's a Lobito 175, numbers will start M84, B84 .....??
Factory parts manual lists steering lock for mod. 91 ser. no. 00727 onwards, and for mod. 92 ser. no. 02387 onwards.
Presumably this denotes the start of the 2nd. series/Mk. 2 as these are also the change points for bottom yoke, etc.
(Parts book makes no mention anywhere of Mk.1, Mk.2 referring simply to serial numbers)
Homerlite tank/seat unit as offered by Mr. Miller in his 1973 catalogue :-
If you are still using the circlip fixing top and bottom, you also need to pay attention to the i.d. of the eye bushes.....
Do you really believe if the factory made a prototype they would make it heavier than standard ?
No way - much more likely the extra lugs were added by a previous owner for sidecar use. The early frames are very heavy anyway owing to the quality of tubing used. I've heard this referred to as "gas pipe" and the like by knockers, but it was all that was available to the factory at the time.
As others have already pointed out, it's a bitsa.
I can see parts from several different models there.........don't let that put you off, as it doesn't make it any less rideable or enjoyable.
However, if the serial no. stamped on the frame headstock is the same as the engine it's a re-stamp.......
Without a picture, a crystal ball would probably be more use than keen eyes !
Post the engine and frame nos. and I'm quite sure someone on here will be able to help.
What distinguishes this early crank from later ones ?
Would it be possible to use a later crank ?
Is your engine no. 21M.....followed by earlier/later than serial no. 1079 ? (I have an engine broken with that serial no. - this one had snapped its crankpin.......)
As your bike appears to be largely original spec. (surprisingly so, in fact) you may find this of interest :
Hope this helps.
May I suggest you don't try to start it without the mag. cover in place.........repeated kicking will probably bend the unsupported shaft.
borderbul - Glad to read that you did the sensible thing and contacted DVLA - please keep us posted with how you get on !
gasserguy - The reason for my post and the "complex advice" is that I've fallen foul of DVLA rules in the past.
Example :- I had no V5 doc. for a bike which I had owned and been the "registered keeper" of for 10+ years and for which I had both old tax discs and an old style logbook IN MY NAME. I was informed by DVLA that the reg. mark was no longer valid as it had not been transferrred to the computerised register, and that the bike would have to be allocated a new age-related number. Some time later, and after selling the bike, I learned that a subsequent owner found himself in the same boat, and the bike ended up being allocated a THIRD registration mark ....!
Furthermore, I've read that DVLA has progressively tightened up its procedures regarding old vehicles and retention of reg. marks and in view of this, I've since made quite sure that any (registered) bike I own has a V5 or V5C in my name !!
twinnshock - Thanks for pointing out the importer position "pre-Comerford's" - I'd forgotten about that. As a VMCC member, I am also aware that the club has had a vacancy for a Bultaco marque expert for quite some time.
The registration no. is W?? 991F ? Have you done a DVLA vehicle enquiry to check if this number is on their computer system ?
If it is, you need simply to apply for a reg. document (V5C), stating that one was not handed to you at the time of purchase.
If it isn't on the system you will need a certificate verifying date of manufacture/make/model/capacity etc. I believe Inmotion/Bultaco UK are a DVLA-approved authority for this. The machine will then probably be given an age-related (non-transferable) reg. mark. (The fact that it has (or had) a reg. mark originally is no guarantee that you will be able to retain it, unless you can prove that the machine is of significant historical interest - I don't think that applies in this case) .....All as I understand it, but you could try ringing the DVLA, of course.
Overall, should be quite straight forward.
Standard slide is #3 cutaway.
Of course, any carb. tuning (on this or any other bike) should be the last step in an overall tune-up - you must first ensure that everything else is OK..........
Mmmm.... that's interesting, and a timely subject for me, as I am currently trying to sort a piston/barrel for my mod. 85 Alpina.
The liner of the original cylinder has effectively been ruined by some PO idiot with a grinder. The best cylinder I have (from a mod. 124) is on STD. bore and Mahle piston, but this has the shortest rear skirt of any 250 piston that I have ....
(I have a few new Sherpa pistons on the shelf (Mahle and Dinamin) and I've also kept some of the old pistons I've replaced in the past, for the purposes of reference and comparison etc. in the future.)
All the 350 (83.2mm. & oversizes) pistons have front and rear skirts of equal length.
All the 250 (72.0mm. & oversizes) pistons have a rear skirt shorter than the front ; this also applies to the later 240 (71.0mm. & oversizes) pistons.
I think this explains the reason for Saddleback's question raised in his o.p.
I know that mod. 212 is a 250, but unfortunately I do not know what piston would have been fitted originally, although it seems likely it would have had a shortened rear skirt.
I think Sherpa325 meant to say RIGHT side case.........
Just one word - BRILLIANT !!
Let us know how it works.
(You've got me wondering about the switch for my mod. 85 Alpina now.............)