Gazza , i bought some a few years back for a Fantic and i was very disappointed with them as well.I remember buying them as they were a lot cheaper than Falcons or Rock shock. I learnt my mistake when i got them. They were only good for the bin. In my opinion they are a cheap shock for peeps that wont to save dosh. In future i will fork out the extra and get some pricey ones.
I was thinking the same. They have the damping qualities I had on my MT50 moped shocks when I was 16. Now that was a bad bike !!!
I recall you have a choice of different damping rates with these shocks, standard and extra light, which did you order? and what did NJB say to your complaint?
I got mine from In motion. Just told them my weight. Didnt seem to be any option on the damping. Are you thinking of the trick shocks they do ? The 30 year old mont shocks i've got are way superior.
Well my Mont MH123 is finally up and running. I decided to fit NJB expert shocks and I am very dissapointed with them. I accept I'm a modern trials rider use to mono shock bikes but there just seems to be little damping and they just spring back. The rebound just seems rapid. The montesa shocks I took off were far smoother on the rebound but were too tatty to compliment the restoration. Am I expecting too much or have people had better experiences with these ?
I had a rev4T for 3 years. Took a little while to get used too and is very different to the 2T. Obviously I was riding it before the introduction of non stop and I feel it would have been even better to ride under such rules. The 250 was such soft useable power and sounded like a sewing machine. 100% reliable. I use to change the oil and filter about every 5 trials. Mine was fine to start hot or cold once you get used to it. When warm it just needed a tiny bit of throttle to start. Never used the hot start. It was about 5kg heavier than than the 2T. It had a diaphragm carb with a heavy throttle but you get used to that. Not having to do the premix was quite enjoyable though.
Hi there. Is it a mh200 or a cota 200 ? The boys at inmotion trials will be able to help you. If you ask them nicely and buy some stuff from them they often photo copy diagrams for you. They are very helpfull and stock everything.
Jimbo. Nice to help you for a change. It bolts on to the engine casing on the left hand side of the gear box sprocket. Mine is an m6 bolt. The spring that gives it tension presses up against the round housing of the sprocket drive housing. I don't know how to upload photos on this site sorry
No reason you can't use a slave style tank to your carb but to use the Hebo one you'd need to either somehow fit a tap to the bottom of it or fill it, then fit it upside down using the original air vent as your petrol feed and the syphon tube as the air vent.
These tanks work by the fuel being syphoned into the main tank as the fuel level drops, you may be able to get the syphon started with the tank the right way up by blowing into the air vent to push fuel over the outlet bend down to the carb but I'm not convinced. And they're £50 a pop by the time it arrives at your house.
You'd be better off getting a tank from a lawnmower or similar that already has a tap or outlet on the bottom of it.
Oh I see. I was hoping they had the same system as a strimmer / chainsaw tank.
Just in the process of having my Montesa MH123 tank unit sprayed to finish off the restoration. It's a fibre glass tank and has to be emptied when not in use and its a real pain, Due to recent injury sadly the bike will not be ridden by me but I do still like to start it up every week to keep everything as it should. I really don't want to be removing and draining the tank every time and risk chipping the fab spray job.I was wondering about a hebo number plate tank with a slight mod. Would the hebo tank work if I ran it straight onto the carb with a longer fuel pipe or does it have to go in through the tank breather thus defeating the object of the excercise. I could fit a little inline fuel tap if it would and maybe a Y piece connector above the carb so that the original tank and fuel line could stay in situ. Would it work ?
Hi there. Ive just gone through the powder coating phase with my Montesa. Ive had a few frames done in the past and I can safely say you get what you pay for. I used maldon shot blasting in essex on the montesa and they were amazing. I know you live in Glos but they do a postal service. The finish they achieve is incredible as they are automotive powder coaters and not industrial powder coaters who do a sideline in bike frames. I had the platinum finish which includes the blasting, rust reatment, priming, coating, and laquer finsih and it was about £160 including the swing arm. The finish is amazing as I am dead fussy. They even sent me colour swatches in the post so that I could be confident in the colour I wanted. The platinum finsish is gaurenteed for 15 years. I had a total of 16 parts coated and they never lost or damaged one. Give them a try.
If your using the same hub and spacers, the only thing that has changed is the dish of the wheel.
Front to rear alignment is meaningless unless you have the pre rebuild dimensions to compare.
Its the same hub and spacers. Only problem is that I started to strip the bike as soon as I bought it. Never rode it as I was on crutches when I bought it. So I never had the opportunity to see what position the cams were in. I'm only questiong the wheel due to the issues i had with the front wheel.
If you have the wheel in a position about the middle of the swing arm and the sprockets lining up (by string line or chain should be accurate enough) then you're fine but five notches does seem a lot. Try measuring the distance between the cam stops on the swing arm and the centre of the swingarm spindle to see if they are the same.
If the dishing was wrong then you would not be able to correct things by use of the snail cams. If you had the wheel centralised under such circumstances then it would not be pointing dead ahead.
Pete - I tried for ages to get a straight edge that would work on the road bike but the answer eventually came from Kevin Cameron's "Sportbike Performance Handbook" (not an appealing title but a really useful book full of his distilled knowledge) - two fluorescent tubes. Cheap ie free, guaranteed to be straight and set up like your device but measurements at the front are taken to the "front and back" if I can put it that way, of the discs. Allows very fine adjustment of alignment and "centre lining" of the rear wheel by tweaking spacers if necessary.
Thanks for that info. wheel builder just rang to say the front wheel is now ready and correct. So at least the front of my bike will go in the right direction. Im in no rush anyway as my I only had my knee reconstructed two months ago so no riding for me.
I don't think I ever had a bike in that era that was not like this. Spanish materials and build quality were not of the highest order so swingarms could twist or the frame be off true anyway. Rear wheels were sometimes set off-centre to allow the chain to clear the tire - bear in mind that the motors were basically designed for use in road bikes with much narrower tyres.
If the chain is running straight between the sprockets then your wheel is pointing "straight forward", assuming the motor is too (see above re build quality). If the rear wheel is a bit to one side of centre then that is not critical on a trials bike, indeed Sammy Miller once said that made it easier to balance the bike. Whether or not that was the case or just BS to cover for what was coming out the factory we'll never know.
Notwithstanding the above I would imagine that having the front rim central in the forks would be advantageous.
Thanks for that. No wonder the spanish economy is in a bad way. So it could simply be that maybe the lugs that the snail cams notch onto are not equal or maybe as you say there are other imperfections in the frame / swingarm.
If the wheel is out then the sprocket would not run true when the wheel is aligned.
Use a long straight edge from the back wheel to the front, then measure the distance from the straight edge to the front wheel rim. Do this both sides and adjust the cams until you will get the same measurement, the wheels will then be in a straight line. Now look at the sprocket and see if it is running true. If it is, then the chances are that the swinging arm is bent, if it isn't then it's probably the wheel out of true.
Hope this makes sense.
Pete
Hi pete
Yes that makes good sense. Sadly the front wheel has gone back to the wheel builders to be corrected so i can't do what you say. I ran a straight edge from the rear sprocket and it seemed to hit the front sproket true. This was at the same time as the tyre looked central at the front of the swingarm. But there is about 5 notches out on the snail cams. I'm only paranoid of the rear wheel as the spoker made such a botch of the front. Surely he couldnt have got two wrong ? Or maybe he jsut got his mesurements for each wheel the wrong way round.
If your swinging arm has a slight twist (like my bsa) you may need to compensate .
Hi B40RT. No i don't think it's that. The bike has never been trialed. Frame and swing arm look true. I've got a horrible feeling the wheel isnt right.
As some may know Im currently restoring and rebuilding a Mont MH123. I've had both wheels respoked. Turned out yesterday that the front wheel has been respoked at the wrong angle and had a bias to the left by about 4mm. Obviously I've started to panic whether the rear one is also spoked wrong but it is far harder to check. The wheel seems to line up straight but only when the snail cams are adjusted in a non symmetrical manner . The chain sounds and looks like it's running straight. But the adjusting cams on the rear spindle are not in symmetrical positions to achieve this and are a few notches different to each other. They are identical cams. On my beta the cams were allways in pretty much identical positions either side. Is it common for the positions of each of these cams to be so different or am i correct in thinking maybe the rear wheel has also been spoked incorrectly ?
There should be a spacer that the seal runs on between the bearing and speedo drive it looks to be about 10 mm thick.
Well I had a good fiddle and then it struck me. I understood what you meant by how you had advanced the thick part of the spindle to make up the gap where the spacer could or should be. The spacer wasnt therfor the issue in getting the wheel in the middle as the spindle could make up the gap itself. The problem is that when i had the wheel respoked the spoker for some dapht reason had set the angle wrong and had a bias of about 6mm towards the right fork leg. Thats why no matter what I did with the spacers the tyre was allways rubbing on the fork leg dust cap. Ive just spoken to the spoker and he's apologised and said he will sort it this week. Ive measured the bias so I know how much he has to bring it in. What a pain !! I thought I was turning stupid, had never thought it could be the spokes. Thanks for all your info Jimbo.
I have looked at a mh 200 front wheel I have it has no spacer between the brake plate and the fork it has a10mmish spacer between the bearing and the speedo drive and no other spacers The end of the wheel spindle does poke through the fork leg to get the forks parallel though about 4mm so Mabee it has lost the 4 mm spacer in time.
Thanks Jimbo. That's odd. My bike hasnt got any spacer between the bearing and speedo drive. Im going to have another fiddle now that ive had a few hours away from it.
Njb Expert Shock
in Montesa
Posted
I was thinking the same. They have the damping qualities I had on my MT50 moped shocks when I was 16. Now that was a bad bike !!!