dan williams

This is one of those red herrings that gets thrown up from time to time. Ew bad image. The problem isn't one of easy vs. hard. For the lower classes a section can't be too easy. If a rider needs more challenge they can move up. The problem is consistency through a series. If the section difficulty is kept within a narrow range it's easy to pick the class that's right for you. If the section difficulty is too variable from event to event you get the Goldilocks and the three bears problem as riders shuffle back and forth trying to figure out where they belong based on their ability and penchant for abuse. This was a major problem in NETA when I was an officer and I made it a point to have someone I trusted, or myself, inspect and tweak section difficulty before each event. It was a pain in the ass but the end result was the classes settled down after a few years and there were very few gripes about section difficulty. The downside is the need for an experienced section designer who knows what to look for and the resultant wailing and gnashing of teeth by the trials masters insulted by your critique of their baby. But really, if ensuring a quality of experience for the membership isn't the function of a sanctioning body what is?

Back in the early days of importing cars into the US, Japanese manufacturers’ advertisements extoled the performance and quality of their cars with specifications and real data. They sold poorly. Being the clever fellows they are they took a step back and looked at the American advertisements and realized that only engineers like themselves actually looked at the numbers. The buying public was more into image, The Heartbeat of America! Chevy, Mopar and Ford weren’t engineering companies they were style merchants and tribal affiliations that just happened to build cars. You think the majority of Harley owners can tell you the torque peak of their engine or the iPhone user tell you his phone is a quad band GSM handset? Honda got the message early with their bikes. “You meet the nicest people on a Honda!” Toyota hit it exactly with the Prius. The jury is still out whether it is actually good or bad for the environment and it would probably go faster if it had pedals but people who buy one don’t care. They are part of the eco tribe with their neatly packaged image intensifier. Now I can read specifications and believe they are relevant to real world performance since writing data sheets is one of the ways I make my living but on a bike I can tell more in a minute of riding than an hour of geeking out on specs. I’m sure you can too. Most riders will never spend the time it takes to properly set up their bikes to get the stated performance anyway. For the manufacturers what’s the point. If BHP isn’t a major selling point why bother with the expense and time of measuring? I’ve ridden factory trials bikes. On paper they look awesome. For me, in a section they were suboptimal (read terrifying) and maybe that’s the real variable that makes bike data irrelevant, the variability of the rider.

Just don't start rioting.

:-)

Fill the reservoir then squeeze the hoses to purge the system of air.

One other mod worth its weight in gold was to ditch the '05 kick starter for the '99 aluminum piece.

How about the primary side. Can you see metal through the transmission oil sight glass?

When the '95 came out it was one of the first delortos with the two piece jet assembly. Jets were impossible to get and true to Beta practices they jetted the bottom very rich. Great for break-in but not so good for riding as the bike was sluggish off the bottom and suddenly hit once you got off the pilot circuit. It made timing obstacles "interesting". I dropped a Mikuni in, tuned it up and the bike ran like a champ. If you can get jets for the delorto now it's probably a good carb but the factory Beta's in '95 all had Mikunis. I know because my friend had one and it was a beast. That was an amazing engine.

If I remember correctly they were stuffed up in between the frame rails behind the gas tank on the Techno. I think there was a separate regulator that was bolted under the headstock but that was for the fan. I loved my '95 once I put a Mikuni on it. The '99 I tried had an even better engine so it sounds like a great bike once you get it sorted.

Yeah the bike might have an added electrical side flywheel weight and if its a 250 will have a primary side flywheel. The flywheel bikes are much smoother over the choppy bits but require a different technique. Essentially you use the clutch to modulate power. For instance a sharp climb with little run where on a fast revving bike you aim and pull the throttle with a heavy flywheel bike you build revs with the clutch in and drop the clutch to accelerate. At the top the fast rev bike requires you to ease off and feather the throttle or you risk a stall. With the flywheel bike you should be off the throttle when the front has cleared and engine inertia can carry you the rest of the way. Both engine styles work with a little adjustment.

I thought that about the teflon tape too. I used it on my '08 as a temporary fix but it held up for four years so I used it on my '13 with no problem so far. Teflon does coldflow but I think the upper and lower nuts on the stem give it nowhere to go so it just stays put and acts as a high viscosity shock absorber. The price is certainly right. It won't bind or score the aluminum and you can still loosen and tweak the forks if necessary.

I think I see the cause of the confusion. Beta shipped two engine options for the primary drive. Before 2007 the 270cc engine had the integral flywheel on the primary drive gear. The 250cc engine had the primary gear without the additional flywheel. In 2007 Beta flipped the script and the 250 got the flywheel primary and the 270 had the plain gear. The parts drawing appears to show a gear that can be separated from the flywheel. It can't. The flywheel gear is one piece, the non-flywheel gear is a different piece that replaces the flywheel gear. You cannot remove the flywheel from the gear without machining it off. To get it off the crank I think just a basic flywheel puller should do the trick with the correct screws for the two holes in the flywheel. I didn't think the primary was an interference fit but to be honest I never pulled one off my bikes.

It sounds like the flywheel/gear on the primary side, not the ignition side. I believe the gear is an integrel part of the flywheel.

Happens there too.

Very common. The bearing races tend to settle a little further into the aluminum headstock after a while. Glenn's correct. Loosen the fork pinch bolts and drop the front end, pull the nut off the top triple clamp and pull it off. Undo the nut that holds the stem bearing assy together. Pull the bearings and regrease. Reassemble the bearing stem assy. Be careful with the torque as it's all aluminum and very easy to strip. The bearing should turn freely without binding with no play. When you put the top triple clamp on the stem check for play between the stem and clamp. This is another fairly common issue with the Beta. I've had it on two. My fix is to build up the stem with teflon plumbers tape. It will deform to fill the space but stay trapped by the two stem nuts. It's also easy to remove and cheap. Once the top clamp is in position put the front end back into the triple clamps,line it all up then snug the top stem bolt and fork pinch bolts. I've done this with the forks on the bike on a stand but it usually shifts while working on it causing me to drop tools and parts as I lunge for the bike and end up in the undignified full stretch holding the bike with one hand, flailing with the other, while knocking stuff over garage comedy routine.

This panic looks familiar. Enjoy your air cooled bikes.

Great catch. Stupid Beta kill switches/wiring.

Here's who was on a Fantic in '89. The data from '90 doesn't have any mention of Fantic. 3 MANNIKO MARK FANTIC 4 WEBB KIP FANTIC 5 COMMO RON II FANTIC 10 CLARK STEVE FANTIC

Ron Commo was also riding Fantics in '89

I had a CMT310 with the Hiro motor. I could never get the thing to run properly. Different carb, the only spare cylinder in the US, months of engine noodling then one day when I was setting the ignition timing for the umpteenth time I noticed something odd. As I revved up the engine the timing retarded! This WTF moment was a real head scratcher. After reviewing my options I realized I only had one and swapped the two wires going to the CDI. From then on the thing purred like a kitten. That is a kitten that got traded in for a Rotax powered Can-Am (Armstrong) So try throwing a timing light on it just to make sure your advance is advancing.

What are you using for coolant?

I would normally agree but a ten+ year old bike could have sacked front springs especially if it was stored or often transported with the forks compressed. I'll tell you this, I went up to the higher rate front and rear springs on my EVO and the bike handles much better now.

I've found both Jitse and TRP made springs for your bike.

Possible it's missing a spacer. I seem to remember a 1.5 inch plastic spacer on the early forks but I could be mistaken. The springs could just be sacked out. Could try the old Bultaco trick of dropping an old chevy valve spring on top. I don't see any heavier springs listed for that year bike but that doesn't mean they don't exist. Try calling Saunders Extreme.

Steve, I checked day one in Vermont with a couple friends but we had to bag the second day as one of my friends has some health issues and was hypothermic after day one so we weren't going to risk it. Instead we went and visited Ron and Lana for a few hours. We didn't know they were moving the next week so it was the best visit. we told stories and laughed and got a little teary eyed. So yeah the Commo clan have always been much more than a dealer to me. I consider them family.