feetupfun

Those forks may be the ones with the very light springs that were meant to be used with a bit of air pressure (which was a short-lived fad in the late 1970s). One of my 348s came with those springs and caps. If yours are that type, the forks will work much better with normal weight springs (easily available) and no air pressure. If you want to give the air pressure a try, you will find they will only need a few psi to work as Montesa intended. I disagree with Chuck about the fork oil, suggesting you might try something heavier than 7wt fork oil, but fork action is a very personal thing and bear in mind that Chuck is a fair bit lighter than you. I'm 210 pounds and am currently using car engine oil (10W-50) and Bultaco Alpina fork springs in my 348 forks.

Black guards or grey guards look fine with a silver frame

black frames look terrible on Bultacos

get going on the leg exercises so you will be able to start it when required more seriously there is nothing in particular to look out for mechanically If it still has the original swingarm it will be a relatively long trials bike. Later model 349s and the 348s have a shorter swingarm and wheelbase. If it has the triple clamps that have the tubes very close together, it will be relatively easy to put a twist in the front end in small incidents, compared with other twinshock trials bikes You are lucky having that front wheel because the alternative front hub on 349s is fragile Unless you support the carby by using an airbox or some other way to hold it up, the rubber tube between the carby and cylinder will not last long

gig755 was there a weight saving with the WR200 lever?

Sorry to disagree bestrcpilot, but it looks very much like the first model 349 to me. The clues are the truncated frame tubes behind the seat, the muffler and the lack of frame tubes under the motor. The tank and seat appear correct for that model 349

It costs about $160 here plus postage for an exchange (sleeved) Bultaco hub

How about you post photos showing what backing plate you are using, and what the RH fork slider/axle mount looks like

I had exactly the same issue on my A model and yet there was nothing worn on my clutch cam, and there was not enough adjustment using the height of that cam to get the adjustment right. In my case the problem was the cable. It is a simple matter to find where the problem lies because if you can achieve a cable-to-arm angle of 90 degrees as the clutch pushrod starts getting loaded, then the problem is in the cable. If your cam/pushrod/ball/plates are fine, the cable problem can be fixed by fitting a spacer to the cable outer at the gearbox end cable retainer.

If you are asking about present-day popularity then yes, probably the small number of Whitehawks made is why there are not many seen nowadays. I think the reason why there were much fewer Whitehawks made is because there were no Whitehawks made for the 250 motor. If you look at the relative popularity of the smaller Majestys to the 250/320 Majesty back in the day, the 250/320 seems to have been way more popular than the 175 Majesty and 175 Mini Majesty. I think that this would have meant that Whitehawks, which were only made for the TY175 and TY80 motors, would not have been a popular choice for adults. As for one being better than the other, Whitehawk frames have a visual advantage, having nicely brazed joints, compared with the MIG welded Godden Majesty and the Yamaha-based frames. Then again, the three Majesty designs that use the TY175 motor all have longer rear wheel travel than the two Whitehawk designs that fit the TY175 motor.

Yes as JC says, I think the spacer that fits against the brake drum side wheel bearing is a different length. No big issue but watch out for it

If you mean the white wonder 349, it is quite a good bike and a better thing than the first model (red) 349, which I would have called the 1979 model, mainly due to the white wonder having a shorter wheelbase. Both 349s are quite different to ride when compared with a late model 325 Sherpa T and a lot of why people like one and hate the other can be attributed to personal taste. The Montesa has an absolute killer motor but to me feels like it takes more effort to ride (compared to the Bultaco, and the 348 Cota). A lot can be done to either bike to make it behave any way you want and so yes, to compare a standard 349 with a Puma Bultaco is not very fair. Seeing you asked specifically, I would say that as far as standard bikes go, the Bultaco 325 would be the easier to ride of the two, and a 250 (238) Bultaco is easier again to ride for an intermediate level rider.

the wheels are the same so yes a TY175 wheel will fit a TY250 swingarm The swingarms are different and are not interchangable. Probably the most important difference for interchangability is the difference in width at the pivot. They are also different lengths.

floppy gear shift action kickstart lever cracked at knuckle play in kickstart knuckle kickstart not returning kickstart not staying in retracted position hole in clutch case from kickstart spline clamp screw head impact holes in magneto cover frame damage - cracks, bends, twists rusty fuel tank internals damaged exhaust header rust pitted fork tubes

EP oil in the clutch case will reduce the friction available between the clutch plates, and not advised to use it in the gearbox either, in case some gearbox oil leaks into the clutch case

This is a B model bottom end. I looked at an A model as well and it looked very similar

http://bikepics.com/pictures/646837/

I bought a TY175 once that had a Gunnar Gasser twistgrip (huge cable pulley diameter) fitted which made it about 1/8th turn from closed to open on that carby. It worked fine. Maybe on a more zippy trials motor it might have been a problem. It's also possible that you can train your mind and body to ride with just about any setup.

if you can post up photos of the bike it may help with suggestions

It may also just be the spring is weak and the shaft needs relubing. Either way it is a 2 minute job and springs are readily available

I use a multimeter for this and watch for a voltage spike in the LT wire

what's an LT spark?

The two different 125 Scorpa four strokes sold here (concurrently) had different forks. One of them had the same forks as the SY250 while the other had something not quite as flash - non-adjustable perhaps. There was a difference in the seat department too, one had a seat the other not. Other things like alloy rear sprocket vs steel also spring to mind.

I know that some people modify their TY airbox by removing the lid and fitting a flat piece of foam across the top instead of the foam sock-on-core that is standard. One weakness with this is that the velocity (and pressure drop) of the air through the foam is increased by the reduction in surface area of the media. Another consideration is that the smaller a filter is, the quicker it becomes clogged with dust, in dry conditions (very important where I ride). The modern trials bike filter in Woody's Majesty photos is a basin shape which increases the surface area compared with a flat piece of foam

Patrik, there are some errors in your explanation. I noticed the following straight up and stopped checking the rest: 175cc is 0.175 litres, not 0.0175 litres 2.3 m/sec is 8.3 km/h, not 83 km/h I also think that the proof of the design of the TY175 airbox lies in the fact that the standard competition version of the TY175 has a wonderful free-revving characteristic. From what I understand of what you are saying about your bike, there is a rubber snorkel on the airbox. Please be aware that the standard competition TY175 as sold around the world as model 525-xxxxxxxx, did not come with that snorkel, but road-going Ty175 models such as the 1N4-xxxx did have the snorkel, and the snorkel probably does cause a bit of additional drag to the airstream.