Has anyone seen one at a trial, or are they only bought out for the Classic off road show?
Bet it will be there again.Unfortunately,last year,whether it was the excitement of the occasion i dont know,but they seemed very selective who they wanted to speak to.
Somewhere in Youtube there's a clip from a round in, about, '82, in I think Austria. Sorry I've looked but haven't been able to find it. The difference in sections is huge.
The difference is huge.Sticky tyres were not round in 1975 but they were in 1982.
According to their website,as of May this year,they had orders for 24. However,at the launch, in Sammy Miller's car park last month,the fiqure quoted was 20.
If that's supposed to be a promotional video then it's the worst I've ever seen.
I don't think they warmed the bike up well but the carburation sounded awful. Fluffing and rich when revved.
Also I'm not sure if it was just the poor sound quality but I thought the engine sounded a bit rattley - like a 5 year old Gas Gas might sound after the Scott!
Your overall bottom gear ratio at the moment is 21.9:1 assuming you have a road box fitted with an internal bottom gear ratio of about 2.8:1.
Using a 17T engine sprocket instead will give an overall bottom gear ratio of 23.25:1
Assuming its a 350cc,you really need a ratio nearer 32:1- some may disagree it needs to be that low,but its certainly overgeared even with a 17T sprocket.
Calculating bottom gear ratio is quite easy- the drive train comprises 3 ratios, Primary,Gearbox internal and final drive. The overall ratio is arrived at by multiplying all 3 together.
In your case-40/18=2.22:1(primary)x 2.8 (g/box internal)x 60/17=3.53:1 (Final Drive)= 21.95:1Overall
With the above,you can substitute different teeth numbers,then re calculate to check the effect.
Its British'ish and deserves encouragement if it is better than the competition and is of a quality which befits its price tag,but take a look at this-
My guess is that it will endure another couple of days at the Telford classic show,amid plenty of back slapping and hand shaking,no doubt,then quietly disappear.
Its a road bike chassis.(It could be an HS scrambles frame,but v unlikely) The engine is a 1952 VHA 499cc,fitted with a later,post 1955 cyl head. The timing cover is an NH (350cc) item which has had the letter T added at a later date.
The bike sold on e bay a year or so ago. Then i saw it at an autojumble about 6 weeks ago. It could be a Parkinson barrel-looks very similar to the one on my Butler trials bike
Following a couple of conversations today, it seems that the clarity of the machine eligibility for the Sammy Miller Series has again thrown some question into the results.
Pete - I can only find last years results on the Stratford site now so I am guessing they have been removed whilst the issues are cleared up?
Essentially the issue as I see it is this.....
At the start of this year it was decided that the Pre-unit class would run on the easy route and that any riders wishing to ride the hard route would have to ride in the British Replica class. My own understanding is that the British Replica class is for British bikes that do not comply with the 'original British manufacture' rules for the respective 2 stroke and unit classes.
Although I am not certain, I assume that this class (like the British Specials class at most events) was designed to cater for this bikes running frames like McDonald Cubs, Mills BSA's etc or using foreign carbs in order to keep the main classes original and a level playing field.
I ride a Mills frames BSA and find it runs much better on a DelOrto carb, I therefore chose to leave the carb on and ride in the Brit Replicas class. I could have left the Amal carb on and rode in the Unit class and I doubt whether anyone would have made any comment (certainly my friend rode his Mills framed BSA with AMAL carb in the Unit class at the 1st round)
Now that's the logical thinking that seems to work, however the actual definition of eligibility states that the bikes should have 'All major components including frame, forks,
engines & gearboxes to be a silhouette of British manufactured parts' and this is where interpretation comes in as this weekend the organising club have decided that non original frames or are not a silhouette of a British manufactured part and therefore these bikes were placed in the twin shock class. No mention of carb's so that wouldn't have made any difference anyway.
As the precedent had been set to include these bikes in the first two rounds it seems counter intuitive to now remove them at round 3.
Whilst I understand the thinking here, I would then have to question what should actually be included in that British Replicas class if the definition is applied literally. Surely all the recently manufactured James or Francis Barnett frames should now be included in the Replicas class as they are not original yet are a silhouette of the original.
If I have to live with the decision to exclude my bike from this class and that of Martyn Wilmore (as we were lying 1st and 2nd in the class 9 championship before this weekend) then so be it, but surely we should also see the gang on the new James or Francis Barnett frames moved from the 2 stroke class to the Replicas class if we are being consistent in the application of the rules?
I now understand that this will be debated at a forthcoming ACU trials committee meeting and I wait with baited breath to see what the outcome of that discussion looks like
The new classes always were going to cause problems, and its a shame its come to a head at this event which,in my opinion is the best in the series. My guess is that before the start of the event,the club were probably not aware of the negative impact the changes would have,even though relatively few people are affected by them, now it is dominated by Trail bikes and Twinshocks.
If the rules remain,perhaps the club should consider continuing without help from the series sponsor in the future,reverting to classes which encourage the bikes that the event was started for in the first place.
More importantly,someone (or commitee if you want to share the blame) dreamt up the class changes,and despite my earlier post,nobody has responded,which to me has all the hallmarks of the ACU.
The changes were done for a reason, and the only one that comes to mind,was to discourage some of the pre unit entrants.
Pre-65 Scottish
in Classic Trials
Posted
I deleted my post Charlie