I've been waiting for someone/anyone to chime in with all the answers, but it hasn't happened, so here goes.........
In response to your original query, it appears from the pics. that these are the correct standard Sherpa hubs and original Akront alloy rims.
My 199 parts book lists :-
Fr. wheel spokes 18x left hand side 241mm. long
9x right hand side 225mm. long (inners)
9x 227mm. long (outers)
36x nipples (alum. alloy, barrel 6.8mm. dia.)
R. wheel spokes 18x right hand side 196mm. long
18x left hand side 176mm. long
I've checked some of the genuine Bultaco spokes I have for mod. 159 and mod. 199 wheels and they all conform to these measurements.
From the pics. it looks also that the nipples used on your wheels may be undersize - maybe you can confirm the barrel dia. of these ?
If you are having a problem with (apparently) short spokes, have you considered that the spokes may be correct, but laced to an incorrect
pattern ? How are you measuring your spokes ?
Using the above lengths of spokes I don't recall having the problem that you are experiencing but (from memory) none of my wheels are laced like yours; I'm unable to get to any of them at the moment to verify.
"Right" and "left" hand above refer to sides of the machine as seen from the rider's view, by the way.
Rear rim offset : I've always measured this from the spocket flange on the hub to the outermost edge of the (standard Akront) wheel rim and notes I made for the last three mod. 199 rear wheels I stripped indicate 1 9/16", 1 17/32", and 1 5/8" - take your pick!
Front rim offset I can't find at the moment, but would probably be academic, anyway. I usually just centre the rim to the steering axis, as close as poss.
Caveat : I'm NOT a wheelbuilder or any sort of expert - someone who is may care to rubbish any or all of the above.
Your bike is a model 92, which is a Sherpa T 325. This is essentially a "big-bore" version of the Sherpa 250 (model 91) available at the same time. To avoid confusion (in the UK, anyway) Sherpa 350 usually refers to later models/versions.
Assuming that your bike was originally supplied through the UK concessionaires, engine and frame serial nos. are
probably original, even though they don't match; to avoid purchase tax at the time, bikes were supplied as a "kit" for assembly by the purchaser.
Although the bike would have left the factory with matching nos. It would seem that the UK importers were not very particular about serial number matching when it came to selling in this country. My own model 92 has a frame no. quite
close to yours, and a non-matching engine no. very close; this bike was supplied new and road-registered in April 73. I have owned it since Jul.75.
The tank/seat unit is a Sammy Miller aftermarket replacement for the "Slimline/Kit Campeon" unit supplied as original
equipment by the factory. A number of other parts are not original - hardly suprising on a machine this old, but not really
a concern where usability is concerned. (With the glaring exception of that open bellmouth on the carb. - you need good air filtration on an off-road bike)
Here's an idea of what it looked like 40-odd years ago.......
If you need a wiring diagram for any old bike, a good place to start looking is in the maufacturer's OWN literature (if this available), rather than aftermarket manuals which in the interests of sales appeal try to cover a whole range of different models/years/markets, etc. - a task at which they are inevitably doomed to fail..
I've made a scan of the wiring diagram in the original OE instruction manual supplied with UK-market Alpina 85 bikes. There you go :-
Incidentally, an identical diagram also appears in Sherpa 91/92 instruction book; it may be of use to UK owners of those models.
The spacer is #39 in this parts book illustration - the trouble is, if you don't know it's there you remove the top bolt and before you realise it, the spacer rolls away down its custom-made chute (the frame bracket) - never to be seen again.......
The part no. is 138.10-119 and it's described as a bush.
I go along with the general consensus that the outer part of the driveside flywheel has been machined down, although I don't know what a model 188 flywheel should look like, either.
However, I don't think the holes drilled in it will balance anything - least of all a plain circle flywheel that shouldn't need balancing anyway (i.e. it's not a crankshaft flywheel with bobweights, etc.) - surely the holes are for lockwiring the crank end nut.?.....
As already pointed out, the two parts of this flywheel were originally welded together - I have a number of driveside weights in the shed (including a Sherpa 325 item that has what looks suspiciously like a crack through most of the weld); don't recall any signs of balancing on any of them.
Disclaimer : my memory's not what it used to be !!
Derek - I looked at the pic. of the bike BEFORE STRIPDOWN. I saw that the brake was originally on the LEFT.
I looked at the pics. of the bike being rebuilt and saw that the wheel had been turned round and the brake was now on the RIGHT. At this point I asked the OP "why?"
I looked at the archive picture you supplied. I saw the brake is also on the LEFT, suggesting that this is the correct orientation (and supporting my original question).
Don't wanna give you banana skins to slip on, but you sure ? - doesn't sound right to me.......
198 std. front wheel is spoked to a " X3" pattern, i.e. each outer spoke crosses over three inner spokes on the same side
of the hub. This applies to both left and right sides of the wheel - long and short spokes alike. As in Woody's second image...
Not sure about pattern spokes, but OEM Bultaco spokes came as 18 long spokes (inner and outer) left , 9 short spokes (inner) & 9 short spokes (outer) right , meaning different lengths, by the way.
Another thought is that if you want to make the change to right foot braking, you can still use the nice RH shifter. No probs doing both jobs with the same foot and nothing to get in the way of the kickstart. I know of a few people riding late model Sherpa Ts set up like this
+1 for this suggestion - I've also heard in the past of Sherpas using this set-up, although I never got to see one.......
Yes, you can change to l/h shift, if that's your preference - it's a through-shaft, and you should find splines under that cap (hopefully undamaged if the gear lever has always been on the other side).
You will need a different/cranked l/h. lever to clear the chain.
Less straightforward will be the brake control change to r/h. Later models with r/h. brake have a crossover "Bowden" cable whose outer is anchored between a frame bracket above the pedal and a bracket on the upper face of the swing arm gusset close to the pivot. If your bike doesn't already have these you will need to fabricate your own, or scheme some other way. An existing unused hole in the r/h. frame footrest plate can be used for a bolt-on pedal pivot, and most owners seem to use a steel fabricated pedal in preference to an o.e. style alloy item.
My own view is that from a design standpoint this crossover cable is less than ideal - **many riders complain of loss of feel, etc. and this is further aggravated by the use of pattern cables, the o.e. Bultaco item being no longer available.**
**Pure hearsay on my part - all my Bults have r/h. shift, but I do also have road bikes...... with l/h.
:banana:
199b 340 Exhaust front pipe.
in Bultaco
Posted · Edited by lorenzo
typo
Chappo -
Tried to PM you, but am told you cannot accept messages ?