bikerpet

Throughout this and other threads there are innumerable discussions about various techniques and manoeuvres that digress into discussion/argument about exactly what's what, sometimes degenerating into completely unnecessary vitriol, or sometimes just becoming a confusing mismatch of terminology. I haven't found any definitive "Trials Dictionary" either here or elsewhere online. Perhaps a sticky could be put here with broadly agreed definitions of eg. Roll-up Double Blip Zap Splatter etc Each should have all the commonly used terms worldwide (or at least in the english language as that's the default here) ie Zap, Jap Zap, Zap Zap are all used interchangeably in various parts of the world, similarly Splatter, Splat etc. If there are any areas that overlap then that can be explained in the Sticky - eg "Eastern Zulu Tribesmen refer to the Roll-up interchangeably with the Double Blip" If such a thing already exists perhaps a sticky linking to it would be all that's needed. Obviously we'd need to get agreed definitions, probably needs a bit of recognition that those with the most experience and the highest skills carry more weight than others, but no reason anyone couldn't participate. Suggestions should ideally include brief reasoning behind it - ie Double Blip does not use clutch, just two bursts of the throttle (ref Ryan Young https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yj48DkxZRaM) A sticky with that info could save a lot of pointless semantic argument and give beginners a clear place to start to get their terminology clear. Really it should be pretty straightforward to throw together. Just needs the key differences that delineate one technique/manoeuvre from others. I'd suggest starting with the roll-up and building from there, one definition at a time. Once there are these 4 or 5 definitions agreed then a Sticky goes up (whoever can do that). Any takers?

Great, thanks. I think we'll have to disagree on the definitions. I'll stick with my definition of: Double Blip - blip throttle to lift front wheel, when it hits obstacle second blip to drive the rear wheel in to the obstacle. Zap - Lift front wheel (either blip or a bit of clutch), when it hits obstacle clutch dump (combined with building revs prior) to snap the bike up and get extra rear wheel lift. Splat(ter) - Aggressive acceleration, usually with clutch dump but not necessarily, to launch the rear wheel directly into the obstacle. May involve a kicker or not. These fit a multitude of situations and have clear points of difference. Look at lineway's son in the photo he just posted - no kicker but assuming the front tyre never hit, that's a splatter by anyone's assessment surely? Plenty of the indoor trials obstacles require huge splat(ter)s off a smooth stadium floor, so there's certainly no requirement for a kicker of any sort. Some of the really big splatters happen at pretty high speed, so I doubt there's much if any clutch involved - that's not something I have any intention of finding out for myself! My personal analysis of the zap vs blip is that the zap gets so much more lift for two main reasons: The extremely fast acceleration of the bike from the clutch dump with the front wheel compressed against the obstacle causes it to very rapidly rotate which results in the forward mass (front wheel, forks, engine) accelerating almost vertically - this gives some good vertical momentum to help carry the bike that direction. With the throttle snapped closed, as soon as the rear wheel has accelerated to the speed of the flywheel the tension drops off the chain, allowing the rear suspension to extend and help spring the bike up (the front suspension is doing the same as the bike rotates up away from the obstacle). The blip uses the same compression of the front forks and resulting rotation of the bike, but without the fast acceleration it has much less result, and using engine acceleration to drive forward means the chain isn't going to drop tension so the rear suspension can't extend as freely. This also helps explain why you have to contact the obstacle below the top (something I know I'm not good at) - so the front of the bike gets forced up when it's driven forwards. Maybe if you drove into the obstacle quite fast you'd get a bigger lift as the bike rapidly rotated up - another thing I'm not sure I'll be doing any personal research on! A good discussion anyway.

Nice! Maybe when I get to his age I'll be doing that too. No, wait, that was decades ago. Oh well.?

Thanks for picking up that error in my writing - corrected. Perhaps I should have included roll-up's kissing the front in this video. I just wish I had the skills of Jimmy, Pat and the others who make such good teaching videos so I could actually demonstrate effectively. If they would only put cameras on their bars like this then I certainly wouldn't bother doing it myself! So often I watch the videos and just can't see accurately what's going on with throttle and clutch timing, and if you don't know what you're trying to do with throttle and clutch then what hope have you got? So much of it is about accurate timing of the weighting, unweighting, clutch & throttle, "almost right" is about as effective as "completely wrong" in my experience! I'm afraid that leaves me somewhat confused (more so than usual anyway). Jimmy's videos are excellent, certainly among the best series I've seen (and I've wasted way too much time on YouTube watching trials!). The trouble comes with some of the translations, as in this video. The first demo. says "Zap / Touch Front", the second says "Double Blip / Zap". They are clearly different, otherwise he wouldn't make two demo's, so why are they both labelled Zap? If we're going to have two different techniques with the same name we might as well just call everything "riding". I would call the first a Double Blip / Touch Front and the second a Zap as there is clearly use of the clutch to launch the bike after the front wheel hits. When we come to Splats I don't understand what you mean by, "Your splats are a zap without touching the obstacle."? My understanding is that if the front wheel doesn't touch, then it's not a Zap. In my demo there is a rock being used as a kicker, and the back wheel lands on the obstacle - so why is it not a Splat, albeit not a startlingly good one? I'd add that a kicker is not requirement for a splat as Jimmy shows in technique 4. You could Splat with or without the clutch, the key as I understand it is launching the rear tyre airborne directly into the obstacle without touching the front tyre. If there's a word or term, there's a definition. So what's your definition of Double Blip, Zap and Splat(ter)? That might help clear things up. I've asked Jimmy Ertzer if he'd mind setting up bar-cams and making videos - that would be an excellent outcome!

For a bit of fun I made a video of Double Blip, Zap & Splat on the same obstacle with the 2 bar-cams (throttle cam is a bit better since I rubber mounted it). I've posted the link to the video in new thread. If nothing else it should clarify my (mis?) understanding of the three. Definitely not something to watch to learn technique, but maybe it's useful as an explanation at least of what I understand (right or wrong).

After a bit of what I saw as misunderstanding around the differences between Double Blips & Zaps from my first couple of videos with bar-cams I thought I'd have a go at making a video with those two plus a Splat. I'm not pretending these are particularly good specimens of the technique (large understatement!) but maybe they give a fair idea of what I consider the differences. Double Blip doesn't use any clutch - just throttle, Zap uses rev and dump the clutch as both suspensions bottom & Splat uses rev & dump to launch the back wheel directly into the obstacle. Willing to be corrected, but this is my understanding. EDIT - corrected "Zap" to "Splat" thanks lineaway.

Thanks for the feedback - always trying different things to find out what works. Timing is certainly the key to these things, watching that video I actually wondered if the second blip was a bit early - you can see the throttle winding on well before the wheel actually hits. You could be right on the "too far forward". I think of it that the rider needs to accelerate their body forward to where the bike is about to be just a moment before the bike accelerates there, otherwise you get left behind as the bike can accelerate much faster than the rider can, or you have to hold onto the the bike to let it drag you forward which stops it from reacting quickly. Not sure I've explained that well ... Anyway, there's probably a fine line between getting forward too far / too early and getting left behind. I'm not sure I quite agree on the "landing on top" on this one, here's a still frame from that video as the wheel impacts. If it was much lower it would still be on the ground! , I also think there's a misunderstanding around "Double-Blip" vs "Zap". Rightly or wrongly this is the way I refer to them: Double-Blip - there is no clutch use at all. The Blip refers to using the throttle only. The clutch is out when you start riding toward the obstacle and stays there the entire time. Zap - the clutch is used in conjunction with throttle. So this video is about the Double Blip - no clutch use at all, the tiny bit of lever movement in my video is just the free play. This also applies to CptStarck's post above, Jan Peters is showing a Zap, not a Double Blip. Pat Smage & Ryan Young Double Blip video.

Part 3 in my micro series. Clutch and throttle cameras synced to maybe give a better idea about timing. Obviously not much going on with the clutch in a Double Blip. This clip I've tried to show the difference in reaction when the back wheel hits with throttle on and off - it's perhaps a bit subtle, but it should give the idea I think. Throttle on and the bike jumps much more, not as smooth rolling over. Don't take what I offer as reliable knowledge - I'm just a dabbler of little real skill!

Staying on the same Zap theme - I knocked up a short stationary zap video, this time with clutch and throttle cams. Unfortunately the throttle cam picks up a lot of engine vibration - I'll work on that. As before - keep in mind this could be the vision impaired leading the blind. I'm more than happy to receive constructive suggestions. I've filmed a basic double blip over the same log, trying to show the effect of throttle on and throttle off as the back wheel hits. I'll put that in a different thread on Blips when it's finished.

My riding and video skills are certainly nothing to write home about, but I'm happy to have a crack at making some more of these mini-clips - it's kind of fun doing it anyway. I find that the typical instructional video makers like Pat Smage and co. often leave out some of the vital timing and coordination detail that makes it all come together for me. Possibly they learnt this stuff so long ago that they don't even think about some aspects that we plonkers are still barely aware of. Can be frustrating. I remember when I first twigged on the right (more or less) clutch timing - it was revolutionary! Anything you're particularly interested in seeing? If I can, I'll see what I can put together. I was thinking a stationary zap or "stuff" maybe? Perhaps hopping for traction?, although I'm not sure how helpful my technique might be on that one. I'd like to do rear wheel hops, but sadly they're still not part of my repertoire really. Ideally I'd hook up with an expert rider and put cameras on their bike then take it home and edit it up. No experts near me though.

Great to hear it's of help! I only wish I had some other skills worthy of videoing. I played around with setting the clutch cam to also show the throttle better but couldn't make it really work. Getting off the throttle is definitely something I found important. I think the difficulty for most of us learning is that it's a bit challenging to wind up the revs before dropping the clutch, so we do a half hearted blend of throttle and clutch at almost the same time. My experience is that it just doesn't work. With throttle on the back wheel just sticks to the ground. Jimmy Ertzer's videos are really worth a watch, he's got some good progressive skill building exercises.

Thanks, that's somewhat reassuring. I'll give it a few more (frequent) oil changes and hope for the best. I hate it when something breaks for no apparent reason!

This is something I looked for when I was starting to learn zaps - I couldn't find anything. So now I can make some approximation of a zap I thought I'd have a go at syncing a closeup of the clutch with video of the maneuver. I'm no expert, that's for sure, but I think this gives some idea of when the clutch pop occurs. When I started I think I was always too early popping the clutch and the wheel just drove forward without getting much lift. Still lots to work on, watching this video has already given me a couple of things I want to try to correct. Timing is the hardest thing to get just right I find - it's not so hard to get the movements kind of working but it takes soooo long to get the coordination right - especially when you don't really know quite what you're aiming for! Zap clutch timing Any suggestions for improvement also happily received!

I bought new soles through Splatshop and had a local cobbler resole them for me. He said they were a bugger to get the soles off. The resole was OK, although it has peeled in a few places at the edges - I've just glued them back with Aquaseal or Seam Grip which has worked fine. The soles are starting to wear through again at the pegs - I just noticed that a couple of days ago. Not sure how many hours I'd have put on them since the resole - probably a hundred or so I'd guess. This time I'm not going to resole them, just rebuild the worn area with some Aquaseal, Shoe Goo or similar urethane product. Hopefully that will still grip the pegs OK, I reckon it should as there'll still be original rubber exposed as well as urethane I expect. If they last long enough for another resole I'll have to do a bit of grinding to get rid of the urethane, but the old soles had to be ground off anyway. I'd also forgotten - the stitching on the inside of the calf where the leather top joins to the synthetic lower wore through - I had that restitched. Now the other boot has come adrift too so I'll get that sewn up, it was a pretty cheap repair.

I was hoping to close this off with happy tales, but I'm not so sure about that. I replaced the worn washer and retaining ring, and also the second washer on the output shaft although it was only very slightly worn. Rings, cylinder, bearings etc all checked out nicely so back together it went. First ride I was a bit surprised by how easily the gears changed - better than new. So light and smooth changing that I was a little concerned it might jump out of gear. After a few hours it gradually went back to "like new" - a bit notchy. After 9 hours I dropped the oil (semi synthetic 10-50 which I've used happily all along) and found it dark and ugly, with quite a bit of fine debris on the magnet. Dirtier than I've ever seen it even after my longest 15 hour interval. ? Changed out the oil with ATF and rode an hour today then dropped that out to give it a flush - the ATF was looking fairly ordinary already, more like what I'd expect after 5-10 hours and there was fine debris on the magnet again. Could just be left overs from the previous oil, I'll ride again tomorrow and give it another change to see. So I'm a bit concerned that there is something going on in there that's wearing the new shim or something. I looked and looked and couldn't see anything else amiss in there, all the parts that should have been there were and nothing other than the shim washer and retaining ring appeared worn. The shift forks all indicated as straight and even as I could measure. Why the washer & ring wore so badly is a complete mystery to me! If anyone has any ideas what might be going on I'd appreciate hearing them. I'm not too excited about the prospect of pulling it down again, but if things don't clean up after the next oil change I'm not sure there'll be any other option.

Thought I might as well add my 2c on Sidi. I guess I've ridden a few hundred hours in mine and they still look amazingly good really. On MTB's I used Sidi shoes and found the synthetic they used way more durable than anything else I'd tried, seems similar in the Zero's. It's also fairly water resistant (I can walk in and out of creeks and not feel any leakage. I don't spend a huge amount of time in water though) and best of all I give them no care, unlike leather. I've replaced the sole once (Sherco pegs were hard on the soles compared to GasGas and Beta). Also had an extra rivet put in the corner of the shin guard as it tended to catch on the pegs. The soles are fairly grippy but don't have a very aggressive tread so aren't great in soft, muddy conditions. I've a high instep and wider forefoot - I went up a full size from my usual (that's what I did in Sidi bicycle shoes too). They are a trifle long but otherwise fit well with a better and thicker footbed in there (Sidi footbeds are pretty token). The top of the cuff is a bit loose, but I've got pretty slim calves. Bottom line - I'll buy them again.

I'd have used the rattle gun ... except ..... I've a 16 year old son who's become interested in fixing cars the rattle gun's gone missing. Coincidence? I've seen plenty of posts of people discussing how to get the clutch out - thought this was a suitably low-tech solution for those without air tools, you could build this in 10 minutes with a ruler and a hand drill. That it worked so well was a bit of a surprise really.

With the engine out I found I needed to remove the clutch. No holder of course. Inside the inner drum there are ribs with 5mm holes either side at the bottom. Quick drill into some scrap ply, 104.5mm pcd X 6, hole saw out the centre and some M5 bolts. Easy. I'd planned to just check the fit with this one, then make a steel version, but this worked perfectly.

I split the case just now. It was part 35 in the parts diagram, 27.73870.000 Splined Washer. No sign of any wear at all on the adjacent gear (Gear 4VS). The circlip however had considerable wear on the outer edge, presumably the edge facing the washer & gear but I can't say for sure (dropped it as it came off). Washer 32 (same part no.) also shows sign of some wear - I'll replace it too. Sadly I ordered two 73860, but only one 78370 - so wait another week or two for that to arrive from the UK.

I'm waiting on a flywheel puller to get into my case after a very similar small piece of metal came out on the plug magnet. I poked around with a magnet and retrieved a larger piece. This is on a 2017 300 with 170 hours on it, oil changed every 10-15 hours, with a good quality semi-synthetic MC oil. I'm having to get the washers in from the UK so I've ordered a full set not knowing which one is the problem Just wondering which particular washer it was in yours and if there was any sign of damage or wear on other parts?

Thanks. Now you've pointed me to it, I remember seeing that thread when it started. I'm sure that's the same part. Once I've got mine fixed I might try to find out which particular washer was involved in that case and see if it's the same one. Still waiting impatiently for a flywheel puller, and washers from the UK.

I'm already into the depths. Bits of steel floating around in the gearbox aren't a long term option for reliability! Not really interested in it potentially "developing" into a major & expensive rebuild. De-coked the head and piston, checked rings & water pump parts, waiting on a flywheel puller. Sheared off the titanium rear engine mount bolt undoing it - $50 to save a few grams! won't make much difference to my abilities. I'll take it as a good check up opportunity.

Thanks Dan & misscrabstick. The question of why it failed is what I'm wondering too, definitely has me a bit concerned there'll be more damage when I get in there. No doubt all will be revealed once I get in there. As far as shifting or noise - no difference I've noticed, and I ride it most days so expect I'd have been reasonably alert to changes. I'll take that as a positive sign! I'll post my findings. Sadly it looks like Beta Australia doesn't have stock of the washers - things seem to have taken a turn for the worse since Beta changed importers a couple of years ago. Might be a longer wait while I get some in from the UK.

I dropped the oil out of my EVO 300 today and found this hanging on the magnet. It's about 0.2mm thick and 1.4mm wide. The inside edge is fairly sharp as if it's worn through perhaps, and there's a sharp edged crease on one side near the narrower end that looks like it might have been from going through a gear. I looked through the parts list for the gearbox, kick start and shift mechanism but couldn't see anything that looked obvious for it, there's a spacer washer on the main shaft 20x30x0.5 which is a possibility but this is much wider, thicker and a larger dia than the piece I have, there's a shim 15x25x0.8 in the clutch release mechanism, again seems a bit bigger than this fragment suggests. Kind of wondered if it might be off a bearing cage perhaps? Or maybe the steel reinforcing from a bearing seal? I haven't had a Beta box apart before so not familiar with them. I probed around with a magnet inside the drain hole but didn't recover anything more, also pulled the clutch cover but found nothing. Any suggestions welcomed before I start pulling everything apart, not too excited about maybe having to split the case! EDIT: I just went back and had another pole around with the magnet, went higher up in the box and pulled out another bigger piece: That's starting to look like one of the splined washers. Looks like it might be time to go buying a flywheel puller and work out if I need any of the "special tools" mentioned in the engine service manual. Around 170-180 hours on the bike, new oil every 10-15 hours, nowhere near "expert" level rider so not giving it too hard a time. Was hoping for much more than that before getting to this level of repair!

I've had a small squeak in the rear end about half way into the stroke for a few hours so went to work on the linkages yesterday. Checked all bolts - found a loose top mount. Squeak still there. Pulled the linkages apart and re-greased, 50 hours since last re-grease. Found one rear dogbone bush that's case hardening has broken up, but other than that all good. Reassembled everything. Squeak still there. Very nearly decided to just ignore it and assume it was an overflow hose or something rubbing, but resisted and kept hunting. Tightened the bash plate bolts. Still there. Checked the rear engine mount - bolt was considerably loose. Tighten that and squeak is gone. Glad I didn't blow it off!