Aye but most of the mountain bike guys would not be seen dead with mudguards on the bike - how many trials riders would not use mudguards if the Regs permitted?
In the twinshock days I always used rubber gaiters (front and back) and it was no trouble to leave them loose between trials to ensure moisture evaporated. I, reluctantly, stopped using them when fork travel got to the point that the gaiter was fully compressed before the fork travel limit was reached - no point losing an inch or so of movement to keep the chrome nice.
Frankly (and I concede I don't ride in a predominantly muddy area) there seems to be no problem with the modern exposed stanchions in terms of wear due to being unprotected. I've never fancied the neoprene stuff for reasons mentioned above.
I did not pursue gaiters on the mountainbike, though I was inclined to, for the loss of travel reasons above. I've had no problems with wear based on just wiping after use though many mountainbike users of an American fork seem to suffer very severe wear under conditons nowhere near as bad as the average trials bike sees.
It depends how fussy you are about these things and how the bike rides. Personally, having paid for all that design expertise, I use the half link to keep the wheelbase as short as possible.
I once met a Yorkshireman at a Guzzi rally and he told me that when his wife's company car got an oil change he would promptly drain it and swap it in to his Guzzi.
Do the additives replacing lead cause more harm than the lead? This was known at the time of the change with many deeming the Benzine to be far worse on several fronts.
Breathing in fumes that have not been through a catalytic convertor - it takes about eight miles, I am told, for a cat to reach operating temperature. Up to that point the emissions are apparently worse than with no convertor. The average car journey in the UK is less than 4 miles so most never reach temperature except perhaps the day they go for the MoT test. Moral of the story? Worry more about what you're breathing in when you go to the shops than in a section queue.
It seems fully synthetics are not well regarded by many tech types as suitable as they do not offer such good protection when the bike is lying up for extended periods - something many trials bikes do a fair bit of.
I bought a TY200 last year that ran 40:1 but did a good impression of the Red Arrows. For trials Silkolene recommended a variety of ratios in their Comp 2 Premix (which I can easily get) ranging from 40:1 for deep sand up to a rather lean ratio which I can't remember (I have a print out of the e-mail somewhere) for lighter use. I settled on 50:1 which seems reasonable as my Fantics ran fine on that with far inferior oils 30 years ago. The Beta seems to run OK on this at the Beta recommended 70:1.
As we can't seem to edit now I've used quote.
As regards petrol quality, a pal recently sold a TY 250 twinshock that had not run for eight years and last had petrol put in 10 years ago. It started second kick. Petrol was petrol in them days.
Do the additives replacing lead cause more harm than the lead? This was known at the time of the change with many deeming the Benzine to be far worse on several fronts.
Breathing in fumes that have not been through a catalytic convertor - it takes about eight miles, I am told, for a cat to reach operating temperature. Up to that point the emissions are apparently worse than with no convertor. The average car journey in the UK is less than 4 miles so most never reach temperature except perhaps the day they go for the MoT test. Moral of the story? Worry more about what you're breathing in when you go to the shops than in a section queue.
It seems fully synthetics are not well regarded by many tech types as suitable as they do not offer such good protection when the bike is lying up for extended periods - something many trials bikes do a fair bit of.
I bought a TY200 last year that ran 40:1 but did a good impression of the Red Arrows. For trials Silkolene recommended a variety of ratios in their Comp 2 Premix (which I can easily get) ranging from 40:1 for deep sand up to a rather lean ratio which I can't remember (I have a print out of the e-mail somewhere) for lighter use. I settled on 50:1 which seems reasonable as my Fantics ran fine on that with far inferior oils 30 years ago. The Beta seems to run OK on this at the Beta recommended 70:1.
I had to persuade mine with careful use of a rubber hammer - it is quite a snug fit. Or you might be able to grip the black end cap in a vice and wiggle the main body.
The answer to your question is yes, and no, you won't damage the seals because you are putting much less pressure on them than when you use the brake and, as you may be fearing, you are not putting pressure on them "in the wrong direction" - pressure is equal throughout a fluid, which is the principle on which a hydraulic system works, so it's essentially the same as operating them but with the lower pressure mentioned.
Interesting that I didn't hear any criticism until riders were safely out of the organisers' earshot at the next week's trial so fair play to Tam for an opinion communicated to the Club.
I didn't find the Sunday any more difficult, indeed I did much better on the Sunday, lost nearly 200 overall on the A route but felt that I could have been cleaning almost every section (but then that's been the story of my trials career) so the fault was mine, not the section plotters'. Funnily enough my best rides were on the most difficult sections.
I didn't think the scores were ridiculous, in terms of indicating severe sections. Let's put things in to context.
By sheer chance I have recently uncovered issues of "Motorcycle Scot" from 1982. There is a report of a one-day Forfar trial (the venue is not stated, only identified as being loaned by the Perth club). The first three dropped 48, 58 and 65 with first class awards going up to 124 marks lost. Bikes aren't identified beyond the best schoolboy being on an Italjet but presumably all standard twinshock fare. Funnily enough the winner was reported as being one Alan Craik (sic).
There's another one-day event at Kilbirnie which venue is still in use I believe. Winner dropped 70, first class awards ranged from 107 to 141.
A few of the competitors in these trials are still riding, notably Ross Thomson, still on SWM.
Just make sure you ride it on wet grass so you find out how hard it is to get grip (I was at a test day where this was the going and the dealers trying to sell the thing said they don't find grip easily). Some sales pitch. And I have had good results on four strokes over the years so not prejudiced against them.
I've never followed the argument that the need to rev a 125 silly then slip the clutch (which to me is the way they need to be ridden for demanding sections, which is not using the power properly, as opposed to clutchless feeding in the power on a larger bike) makes you a better rider. Perhaps if you have World aspirations, but that's not who we're talking about. Surely if a 125 fails to get you up something that a bigger motor would have this can only increase the likelihood of injury?
Power outputs are still circa 20 bhp as they were decades ago so no need for a restriction on the amount of power. Style of power delivery perhaps but there's no way to enforce that.
Screw two nuts on to the stud, lock them together and turn the lower one to unscrew. If both move up the thread instead of turning the stud then you may have to keep them tightened together with a pair of spanners as you turn.
As far as I have ever known from tests etc the 200 is a UK only model - it was certainly developed due to demand from the UK - and has never had the extra flywheel weight (it being deemed not necessary). Doesn't mean a previous owner could not have fitted one of course but that would mean fitting the casing extension too.
I was impressed at Alvie when an observer fired up his Ossa and started doing all sorts on it without any apparent need to warm up so the injection must be doing something. However, I don't have a problem with having to warm a bike up before I use it and, given the number on here who seem to have problems getting their laptop to talk to their 4RT, I'm not convinced of the benefits. I've never had any difficulty getting the screwdriver to talk to the carburetor.
Neoprene Fork Gaiters...
in General Trials Talk
Posted
Aye but most of the mountain bike guys would not be seen dead with mudguards on the bike - how many trials riders would not use mudguards if the Regs permitted?
In the twinshock days I always used rubber gaiters (front and back) and it was no trouble to leave them loose between trials to ensure moisture evaporated. I, reluctantly, stopped using them when fork travel got to the point that the gaiter was fully compressed before the fork travel limit was reached - no point losing an inch or so of movement to keep the chrome nice.
Frankly (and I concede I don't ride in a predominantly muddy area) there seems to be no problem with the modern exposed stanchions in terms of wear due to being unprotected. I've never fancied the neoprene stuff for reasons mentioned above.
I did not pursue gaiters on the mountainbike, though I was inclined to, for the loss of travel reasons above. I've had no problems with wear based on just wiping after use though many mountainbike users of an American fork seem to suffer very severe wear under conditons nowhere near as bad as the average trials bike sees.