bikerpet

Today I let a young fella take my Evo 300 for a ride. I thought I should probably try to tame it a little to help keep both bike & rider in one piece. I knocked up a throttle stop for the Domino as I've done in the past. I haven't seen any details about this tactic despite lots of threads on taming 300's. It's not going to smooth the bike out like a flywheel weight or low compression head, but at least it does put a bit of a cap on just how out of hand things can get. Certainly limits the impact of whiskey throttle. Inside the Domino's there is a gap around the cable track that's big enough to fit a strip of plastic. That strip can be cut to any length to limit the throttle rotation to whatever you like. I make mine out of a bit of 40mm PVC waste pipe. Cut off a ring that's a fraction narrower than the cable track section of the throttle tube. Cut that ring into a segment then use a heat gun to soften it a little. Wrap it around the throttle tube and let it cool. Put the throttle back together and job's done. Just tweak the length of the strip to adjust the stop. Takes a few minutes to make, a couple of minutes to put in or remove and can be easily trimmed back progressively (scissors or tin snips) as the rider improves. It's surprising how little throttle rotation you need on a 300 for someone starting out!

I'm cheap & hate touching the chain more often than absolutely necessary, so my routine is based on longevity of both chain and lube. When I change gearbox oil (10-12 hours usually) I pull the drain out after the ride and let it drain. As it drains I remove the chain and drop it in a container of dirty old chain cleaning petrol to soak. Then I go do whatever the rest of the day lends itself to. Next day (or thereafter) I remove the chain from the petrol and rinse it in a little fresh (which then gets added to the dirty old stuff). Hang it up to dry. I have an electric frypan with Putoline Chain Wax in it. Plug that in and let it warm up (low simmer temp). Drop the chain in. While the chain soaks I refill the gearbox and replace the air filter (I rotate two or three filters). Pull out the chain and hang it to let it drain back into the frypan. When it's cooled enough to touch, wipe off the remaining excess with a bit of old towel. Refit chain and ride for another 10-12 hours without looking at it. My current bike has 120 hours on it and I've moved the adjuster about 1 click (it's a TRS so a turn or so on the adjuster). I flip the front sprocket when it shows signs of developing slight hooking, then replace it when that face starts to show signs of wear. The rear sprocket usually lasts 1.5 - 2 front sprockets. I know this sounds like a bit of a rigamarole, but in reality it's very quick & painless. So much less time consuming and less of a nuisance than stupid spray cans that go everywhere except into the inside of the chain. I'd never go back to spray cans, and all the oils I've tried in the past were messy and like magnets to grit. The overnight soak completely dissolves the old wax so a quick slosh in clean solvent gets it sparkly clean. To my thinking getting the chain clean is at least as important as adding more lube - seems pointless to me to add clean lube to a gritty chain. A squirt from a spray can, even a big squirt, just doesn't seem to me to be an effective clean. At worst it makes the outside a bit cleaner, lulling you into a false sense of security that the moving parts are clean when they aren't. The time spent letting the wax heat, soak & cool is about the time it takes to fill the oil & swap the filter, so it's virtually no time cost. Removing and fitting the chain takes under a minute. The Putoline wax is a great lubricant (WD40 was never intended as a real lubricant), lasts ages and doesn't fly off. The key is buying an old electric frypan from the Op/Thrift/Secondhand shop, I think I paid $1 for mine some years ago. And having a process that allows for letting the chain soak - you can clean it quicker by agitating it, but that's time wasted for me. A tin of wax lasts a very long time - I think I'm halfway through my second tin in maybe 6-700 hours riding. Maybe my third tin? Not sure. I will add that I also like the Putoline N-Tech Trans GP oil too - it's cheaper than almost everything else comparable except ATF, and I find shifts start to feel pretty ordinary with ATF by the end of 10-12 hours whereas the Putoline still feels good as new. It's specs are significantly better than most ATF for our use too - low viscosity, pretty high VI, and the acid test is that the clutch feels smooth & predictable with hardly any drag.

Another +1 to the clutch vs throttle. Think of throttle as "available power" and clutch as "applied power". It's no problem to have an overabundance of available power if you just don't apply it. If you speed up the throttle you'll be in a world of trouble when traction is poor, unless your clutch finger is really, really good. With the massive flywheel trials bikes have, the motor can only accelerate at relatively leisurely rate. Snap your throttle wide open and hold it for a couple of seconds and note how the motor just keeps winding up, then note how long it takes to wind back down again. Compare that response to any of your racing bikes - chalk and cheese. So you're never going to get faster acceleration than that even with a quicker throttle, and it's not really that snappy at all. A 300 trials bike is anaemic on all out power compared to a 300 just-about-anything-else, but torque is available and pretty consistent from idle on up. They're a tractor compared to a sports car. Go and try and get exciting performance out of a tractor by twiddling the throttle, not going to happen! But ease out the clutch on that tractor with a serious load behind it and things can get exciting as it proceeds to rotate about the rear axle. Similar for a trials bike in some ways - they'll never accelerate off throttle like an enduro bike for instance, but feed out some clutch with some RPM on and something's going to start rotating - the wheel if it can, the bike if the wheel's hooked up. That can certainly get exciting! Once you get the idea of using clutch to control power you'll start thinking every throttle is sluggish! Clutch response can go from zero to 100% in milliseconds, faster than you could even think about twisting a throttle.

Nod did I say you did. But you did say: which does imply that full throttle is going to give Max. traction. Great, carry on using it. But bikes & technique have moved on a bit over the past 50 years so possibly there's better ways to tackle some things. I get it if you're happy with what you're doing & it works, you've obviously had a long time to refine it. But just because you're an engineer & your technique works for you doesn't mean there may not be another potentially correct analysis. In fact claiming "engineer" status does little to support your assertion - civil, software, electronic, structural; there's a lot of engineering disciplines with little or no relevance to suspension function. You may well have all the knowledge & experience to truly analyse this, but I've seen so many people say "I'm an engineer" only to discover their engineering is in a totally irrelevant field, or that they call themselves an engineer because they work in an engineering machine shop. Yes, I'm naturally sceptical.

Sorry, no gentle way to say it, but you are absolutely, totally wrong with this. Watch & listen to some good riders tackling big obstacles. Its abundantly obvious that the throttle is closed or dramatically reduced during most of the climb. You'll hear big rpm as they set up, then as they launch the noise falls away dramatically. At the top there is often an increase in rpm again as they ensure they've got power on hand to fine tune the last bit of the climb. If you can watch & listen in slow motion you can hear individual ignitions of the engine and you'll really understand what happens. Forget about about your squat/anti-squat ideas, that's going to take you nowhere in trials. What keeps the tyre on the obstacle is the rider. If you can find a good trials coach, spend some money and save yourself years. There's a lot of pretty ordinary coaches out there (plenty who can ride, but can't teach), so do your research. If there's no one near you, take a look at neilprice.com its far the best online coaching I know of.

I'd suggest you work on altering that approach. Get off the throttle as the back wheel hits the obstacle. You destroy traction when you drive up things on engine power, the slightest skid & the tyre quickly spins up and you stop. If you drive up on a trailing or closed throttle the tyre will never spin up. It might still lose traction, but it won't spin. This is where riding on throttle alone is a dead end. You have to learn to ride on the clutch in order to be able to adjust power & acceleration quickly enough. If you ride in to an obstacle slowly (as is common) then you simply can't build enough inertia to climb a larger obstacle power-off with throttle alone. But if you learn to build plenty of RPM & then control the power to the wheel with clutch then it's easy to have ample inertia in the flywheel to get you up big steps even with throttle closed. Throttle = available power Clutch = applied power Oh, and chain tension squats the bike more, not anti-squat.

Oh well, sounds like I just get used to it then. I rode about 300 hours last year so that's around 150L extra fuel from what I've seen so far - nearly $300 extra in fuel costs and 360kg extra CO2 emission. The first black mark against TRS I've found so far. I might block off the overflow and see if I can notice the difference.

I find my 300 RR uses fuel noticeably faster than my previous Beta 300. The Beta was a bit over a liter an hour for my normal riding. The TRS is closer to 2L an hour, although I've not yet done a really accurate test over 10-12 liters. There's usually some overflow, but I had what appears similar spillage on the Beta too. I had the carb out for clean a little while ago and the floats closed at what looked right from past experience, but I didn't measure as I had no reason to at that time. Anyone else find them a bit thirsty? Or should I be searching for a cause?

I'm fairly new onto TRS after GG, Sherco & Beta. Nicely built, everything "just works", great traction ... what more can I ask? The "sketchy front" thing I believe is just that it feels different to, say, a Beta. It maybe doesn't feel quite as solid at the front as some other bikes, a lighter front end probably, but if you just ride it with half decent technique it does exactly what it should. It's only when I get a bit out of shape that it heads off line, and every bike I've owned did that. Maybe it's a little less forgiving of poor turning technique, but that's offset by how easily it gets rear wheel traction. I vastly prefer the build quality to what the Sherco was like, personally I'll never buy another. The GasGas for some reason always felt a bit fragile - kick start quadrant failure, shift selector failure requiring full split to repair (older model), exposed radiator (again older model). Beta is well built and reliable, but the TRS suspension is so much better. The TRS feels snappier than the Beta, but not as good at tractoring along. I can see TRS & I having a long future together.

Looks like the 2023 RR gets a new bash plate that extends over the peg area more. The R retains the old one - maybe running out old stock before they change all models to the new plate? '23 RR part no. 01038TR100 Skid plate ONE II Others part no. 01031TR100 - there seem to be a couple of versions of the same part number, one with "grooves" (longitudinal ribs) on later models and one without.

I've read that grease or anti-seize should go onto the chain adjusters asap to prevent seizures. I've found my boots rub the left side of the airbox badly, I've tried "helicopter tape" but it wore through quickly. I've now taped 1.5mm rubber sheet over it. The ridges on the top of the rear guard proved a bit vulnerable - I've heli taped them now. The scrivets holding the back of the guard fell out fairly quickly so I've now put thin cables tie retainers through them. The Australian importer suggests 91 octane rather than our crappy 98, and a 4 plug instead of the standard 6. Certainly the 6 fouled quickly, haven't had the 4 in it long enough to know how much better it is.

Good choice I reckon. The 250 should be a ripper. The 300 has well more than enough power!

As an aging mid grade male rider I enjoy the predominant trials media - the Trial GP, Bou, Raga, X-trial - but I actually learn much more from watching the top women. Sadly there is just a tiny fraction of the coverage given to them. I find the women ride just as skilfully, but without the pure strength and without the high level of risk. That's much more akin to what I might strive for rather than the antics of the top men! I can actually learn useful technique from them. So I think the sport is doing a big disservice not giving better, dedicated coverage to women. And that's not even considering the equity, growth opportunity etc. It's similar in 125cc class too, I wish more people videod those classes - so much more relevant to most of us. So if anyone knows of good women's trial media, please point us at it!

put a crate or something either side of the bike so you don't have to step up, step down, step up, step down. Makes it heaps easier to keep at it when you're starting out. rest the front tyre on something to the side. Can start with a wall and progress to just a little pebble. It's surprising how something quite small can make a big difference. A bit of 2x1 timber can be a lifesaver, or a brick. Turn onto it to get your balance, then turn the wheel off it. Don't focus on how long you can balance, get balanced then do something from which you have to recover - turn the bars the other way, close your eyes, anything. Balancing for minutes is pretty useless in a trial, but recovering your balance is essential. Focus on balancing with turning movements of the wheel, not so much rocking the bike. Both are useful but turning the bars is more fundamental. Weight forward gives corrections more "impact", weight back is more stable once you've actually got balanced. Play with it. For a long time. A really long time.

I just responded to a similar thread with this comment: avoid the yellow & blue Sherco with rear tank from around 2013. Absolute piece of rubbish. Frames crack, steering stops don't so the frame tubes get crushed, various parts were made in the local handyman's back garage (or so it appears) ..... Just don't.

Great to hear you're getting back to it, you'll love it - it's a sport that gets better as you age. Or so I'll maintain. Don't buy a yellow and blue Sherco with the rear fuel tank - what a dreadful piece of machinery that was! Cracking frames, steering stops that didn't so the frame tubes got crushed, QA the Chinese would be proud of. There was almost nothing nicely made on them. Rode Ok when it was running. They were around 2013. Totally put me off Sherco frankly, I plan on never owning another. The Betas are really solid. Well made, very few serial issues although just check the particular year you're interested in. Great turning circle, somewhat mellow engine response compared to some bikes which is probably going to be helpful. I've had a couple and couldn't really fault them. They just work, and keep on working. Rear mudguards are expensive and some people find them fragile. I replaced the steel bolts with nylon bolts or cable ties and never damaged a guard in around 700 hours of crashing. The front mudguards have a plastic bridge which is guaranteed to fail but a GasGas guard & bridge fits. GasGas are a bit of a perennial favourite for a lot of people, but I've always been a bit nervous as they age. The gearboxes are very elegant, but tend toward a little delicate as far as I'm concerned. Lovely clutches though, and the rest of the bike seems good. I was always a little nervous about the relatively exposed radiator - I could see myself chucking it onto something hard and destroying it. Most other brands moved to a radiator protected within the frame some time ago. Last one I had was a 2007 so pretty out of date info perhaps. I've just moved from Beta to TRS and am very impressed with both the build and the ride, but they are getting a bit too recent for your aim. With the exception of the yellow peril I'd probably just say go with the lowest hour bike you can find. They all have some "personality" but the number of hours on the bike is the biggest differentiator in my opinion.

Is that the front bolt you're talking about? Do you put anything in the back holes that come with plastic Scrivets? And is it proven to pop off when crashed? Thanks.

Ah the cynicism. Ride a good MTB from just a few years ago then hop on a current model and you'll find there's more than gimmickry involved. Yes, almost every company selling something resorts to gimmickry, trials is no exception. But that doesn't preclude real technical development.

Any info on the flywheel proto kit? Self-made? Purchased? Pictures? It's something I'd be interested in trying.

I've been setting up my newly acquired 2021 TRS One RR 300 to my personal preferences and am left wondering about the rear mudguard and airbox. I've read a few threads where people have cracked airboxes after looping the bike. On most of my previous bikes I've modified the rear guard fitments so the rear guard can pop off the bike without breaking anything other than fasteners in a crash. I setup a Sherco with magnetic connectors which were pretty cool - the guard would just reseat itself after a crash and I'd carry on, sometimes without even realising it had popped off. On my Betas I taped the airbox cover closed so I could remove that bolt, replaced the mudguard bolts with nylon bolts (or cable ties at the rear) and trimmed the "hook" on the guard so it could pop off when the guard was distorted far enough (usually a bit after the rear bolts/cable-ties failed). Never damaged a Beta guard with these mods despite a good number of crashes onto the rear. I'm wondering if anyone has modified the "hook" on the TRS guard? How much needs to be removed, and where, to let it release before any damage to guard or airbox is done? It seems to be extremely secure the way it comes - too secure by the look of it and the reports of broken airboxes.

Well I'm now in a position to start answering my own question. I just acquired a 2021 One RR 300 with low hours. Only had one real ride with it so far, but I'll start with with that. The front definitely feels lighter. Makes it very noticeably easier to hop. Feels like there is considerably less rotating mass in the engine. It picks up RPM significantly quicker, and also loses it faster so doesn't carry up things unless you wind it up a bit more. The quick acceleration has seen me lose traction more often than I would on the Beta, but I'm pretty sure I'll adjust fairly quickly and that will go away. It's a strange thing, but the lighter front doesn't translate into a heavier rear. It actually feels a bit more sensitive to body weight to the rear to get traction. It makes me concentrate on better posture which could be good long term perhaps. EDIT: after a few hours on it I'll revise this - it's actually easier to find traction on the TRS. Suspension is a step up, although this is comparing an RR to a standard Evo so not entirely apples and apples. That said, my Beta has a TRP rear shock that was a significant step up from the standard shock. The TRS is big step up from the standard Beta rear. Brakes are considerably sharper than the Beta Grimeca. Taking a bit of getting used to as I didn't have a problem with the Beta brakes (except losing the rear on very long steep downhills - never did get that entirely solved). Clutch is nice. I need more time to really get the feel of it, but first sensations are that it is easier to work in the slip zone. I'm not sure that the lever movement is any bigger, but it just feels easier to modulate the slip. The body work is bulkier above the pegs, makes the bike feel fatter and a bit less movement across the bike. Don't notice it too much when riding but it's quite noticeable when I first get on. It's harder to kick than the 2020 Beta 300, similar to the 2017 Beta 300. Overall it feels more lively - hops easier, accelerates quicker, generally just feels a bit lighter and quicker to respond all round. I'd say that it's probably a bit less forgiving than the Beta. So far I'm very happy with the move to TRS. I like the feel of it and everything I've looked at (I spent about 6 hours prepping it before I rode) is nicely built. I'm looking forward to getting onto some loose stuff to see how I find that, and also to getting confident enough on it to tackle some of my hardest obstacles to see if it makes me look better 😄 EDIT: after 9 hours on it I'm starting to get comfortable with the TRS. And loving it! I'm riding noticeably better doing things on the back wheel, stationary zaps and hopping. The clutch is snappy but so consistent and easy to find the right amount of slip. It's definitely more responsive than the Beta which is good, but could be bad. I think the Beta is a bit more forgiving. The TRS could certainly get out of hand much faster if you're not on it. The Beta feels a bit more solid on the ground, but the TRS is easier to move about, hop, zap etc. I definitely feel like the Beta has more flywheel inertia, so it revs up a bit slower and tractors on up things more easily, it also tends to be more stall-resistant. That slightly slower response makes it less of a handful if you're a bit less than accurate on clutch and throttle. The TRS just feels more like a highly strung race horse. Remember this is a standard Beta EVO vs a TRS RR, I don't know how the RR would compare to the EVO Factory as I've never ridden one.

Just read the FIM rules again - that's it, only chin guards made by the manufacturer of the helmet in question may be used. So if the Euro ECE std. is acceptable (it is in Australia) then the Arai with chin bar is legal in trials. Tempting, but the minimal venting and additional weight over the Airoh put me off a bit.

I believe FIM rules outlaw the Arai chinguard - I remember reading something in there about "no removable chinguards" - I could well be wrong, I often am, but that's what I recall. Possibly Japan National comps run to their own somewhat modified rules, as many countries do, and this permits the removable Arai guard. This could explain why you don't see Arai chinguards on the top level Japanese riders who also want to ride FIM events? Personally I find the idea of an MTB DH helmet style chinguard very appealing. If you've ever put one on you'll be fully aware that the "vision" argument is a total non-starter! My main motivation is to avoid potential dental work - it doesn't take much of an impact to snap a tooth which becomes expensive and potentially a long term problem. I've often considered wearing an MTB helmet. I'm sure their protection is adequate for the sort of impacts I'm likely to experience. In fact I rather suspect that with MIPS they may well provide better protection in some crashes than most or even all MC helmets in the same situation. Certainly I think the bicycle standard is designed more around the speed and type of impacts we're likely to experience than the standard MC standards that are predominantly designed around high speed impacts onto hard surfaces. The issue that stops me is that I frequently travel on public land and I really don't need to add another potential reason for Mr Plod to decide to ping me with a fine rather than have a friendly chat. Also the MTB helmet wouldn't be legal for comps and I'd prefer to ride in the same lid in practice as I'll use at an event. I find it most amusing how some people get all of a fluster when there's even the vaguest possibility that their "individual rights" might be limited in some way. Yet as has been mentioned, when various limitations to their freedom to inflict unnecessary pain and suffering is actually imposed most people fairly quickly accept and even embrace it. Oh if only we could all still drive 1950's era cars with no seat belts, airbags, collapsible steering columns, crush zones, soft interior impact surfaces, stability control, ABS. Oh and of course I'd like them to have the modern levels of performance without all that unnecessary, legislated reduction on my individual rights. ROFL.

Nice thread. Thanks for taking the time and sharing your experience. When building bicycle wheels you definitely bring the spokes up to tension progressively, adjusting offset, lateral and radial trueness as you go. The few M/C wheels I've built I've done the same and had no issues. I had to replace a single Morad rear spoke today and struggled! I really didn't want to have to loosen everything up and have to adjust offset again so I just threaded the nipple onto the outer spoke until I could force the inner spoke into the end of the nipple. Then I backed off the nipple as far as I was brave enough too (hoping I wasn't damaging the inner end threads as they pressed into each other), then tightened it up. It worked, although the nipple is very close to bottoming out on the outer spoke threads. If anyone has a better way to reasonably quickly replace an outer spoke I'd be interested to hear it! I'm glad I didn't break the inner spoke, that must be a nightmare to replace!

I am happy with the Beta brakes mostly - no problem at all with the front, the back fails after long steep downhills but comes back quickly. No amount of bleeding seems to change that. No big deal as I'm aware of it. So I'll be intrigued to ride a bike with even sharper front brakes. Interesting you find the Beta easier to static balance, that's an area I need all the help I can get. I'd definitely recommend the TRP, they work extremely well. The difference was very significant from the stock shock and was plug-and-play. No more hard bottoming, more compliant feel ... Excellent value I reckon. Go easy fella! I'm not ready for an old-man button yet. :-) I'd seen the TRS thread and the water pump issues - that does bother me a little, but it seems some bikes have it some don't and it isn't a huge job to change seals so I guess I can live with it. The light front is interesting, I'd not heard that before. Air filter seems unnecessarily irritating, but I've seen the little plastic spring holder thingy which seems to make changes easier. When you say they stall, do you mean they stall easily at low rpm, or do they just stop for unknown reasons? I see they've made the flywheel heavier on the '23 model, maybe that's to help solve that issue? So if the TRS does most things better than a Beta why would you buy the Beta again? Is it just because of the light front? Or is it the sum of the light front, the water pump, the air filter & the stalling? The thing that most concerns me at present is that in the advrider thread there was a post showing a spilt front engine mount - right across the crankcase. There was a comment that was a known issue, which suggests it's not ridiculously uncommon although I haven't found another reference to the same issue. That does really concern me. I see the '22 (or was it '23?) they talked about improved crankcase manufacture and heat treatment, which supports the idea that there might have been a problem when the new cases where introduced on the '21. So far that's the only thing that really makes me nervous. It's hard to go past Beta for solid reliability and ease of maintenance - the EVO has been around long enough that all the gremlins have been worked out. Of course I'm sure some of the newer designs have improved on various areas (I hear TRS linkages are much easier to service, but I doubt it's a major time saver for a non-professional mechanic like me). But lots of people comment on the quality of TRS.