woody

In 1986 Honda were pulling out of trials again at WTC level, Saunders went to Fantic for the 1987 season but Lejeune still had one year left on his contract so continued with the RTL for the 1987 season and went to Merlin in 1988

Andy, great trial today, rest assured all your hard work over the last few weeks and probably more, was well worth it. Really enjoyed it. Some really good sections, right level of severity, nothing daft and even the more difficult ones could be cleaned with a good ride and a bit of skill (as David Pye proved by going clean apparently - exceptional ride by a very good rider) It would have taken some effort to go around in single figures I reckon, never mind clean (twinshock I mean, not modern bike) Even the weather stayed nice and the ride around was very enjoyable too. Only hiccup was that some groups had minimal markers to direct from one section to another or the way out of the group which may have caused a few people problems with time, but that is the only constructive criticism, everything else was spot on. It would be a great pity if this wasn't a championship round again next year but therein lies a problem. Some riders rode last year when it ran as a 'feeler' to see if it could run as a championship this year. As it was non championship it had 2 routes on all (I think) sections. Riders who entered last year on the B route entered again this year but not being used to the Normandale series, didn't realise that only a small percentage of sections can have a B route, on the remainder they have to ride the championship route. Whereas the championship route was just about spot on, it was too hard for some as they didn't know what to expect. This isn't a failing of the trial, it's a failing of the standing regs for this series. This point probably needs another thread but the Normandale series is crying out for two routes, with the exception of a couple of events, one route is not sustainable. All that is going to happen is that the twinshock and Pre65 bikes are going to disappear from this series apart from a few diehards. It's becoming a modern bike championship for over 40/50/60. Run 2 routes, hard route for championship for all classes (I'm pretty sure that the class A championship contenders don't want to ride eased sections) The hard route can give the championship runners something to get stuck into. The severity of today's trial was right so I'm not talking about making the trials harder. However, running an eased route, on all sections if deemed necessary by the COC, for Pre65, t/s, aircooled mono and modern will open the trials up to other riders, particularly on classic bikes, who simply find the championship sections too hard. The riders most likely not to enter this event again next year under current regulations would be on twinshocks and Pre65 bikes. With an eased route they would ride again, no doubt. With numbers of classic entrants decreased, I can well understand the organisers of the event thinking bugger the championship next year, we'll just run as a non-championship Pre65 and twinshock trial. This would be a real shame and a loss to the championship. John Collins, if you're reading this, can we get this series back to dual routes next year and hopefully increase the numbers of classic bikes?

If you want this year's it's on the ACU website here

Beautiful bike Ben. I never liked the black frame and will do mine silver/grey or white when it gets a rebuild. Makes the whole bike look lighter. I've done the same mods to mine apart from bar position is standard and I have Fred's uprated fork springs. Rides pretty well.

If it is all original it sounds like you have a Cota 350 - I had one of those from (nearly) new. It was the last incarnation of the 349 and there are three versions of it, the 349/4 which had grey frame, grey mudguards and red tank, the 350 which had grey frame, red tank and guards and then the MH349. All are the same bike with different colour schemes. Although they use the 349 engine the frame is much modified from the original 349 model and it is a much better bike. The most obvious identifying feature is the swing arm which kicks up at the rear spindle mount. A bit dated by the time it came out compared to Fantic etc. but still a good bike with one of the gutsiest trials engines ever. There is also this site which has a picture of the Cota 350 which the Southwest site doesn't click here

And they've also taken on Husqvarna recently - to fill a future hole left by Montesa's departure?

Personally, I wouldn't go to the additional work of moving the rear shocks. To get any real benefit from that you may have to reposition other things such as the swingarm pivot etc, as on the Yamaha Majesty - it wasn't just a case of angling the rear shocks on those, the whole rear subframe including the pivot point was moved upwards. I find that with a good set of shocks, well set up, the rear of the KT works pretty well. I get a lot of feel from the rear suspension and it absorbs impacts quite well. Not sure that just angling the shocks would make much difference. It is certainly effective enough for anything found in most classic events over here and copes well whenever I ride it on the B route in modern trials. It grips pretty well in mud too. On mine I extended the the shock length by about 1" to help quicken the steering as it is a little slow. It has enough lock to steer around any section but I find that up rocky gullies, if it gets off line it isn't easy to quickly pull it back on line again, as it is with an Ossa or a later Bulto. I'd compare the steering to a model 49 or 80 Bultaco. The longer shocks don't make a huge difference but every little helps. The motor really surprised me, it is pretty torquey, much better than a TY and it will pull 2nd and 3rd gear in sections. It revs its balls off if needed. It has a flywheel weight fitted but still feels as though it could do with more. If I hadn't looked I wouldn't have thought it had one. Personal preference as to how much weight I guess. The clutch works well, I was going to extend the clutch arm slightly as there isn't much room but I've since got a KX cover to try. The brakes are brilliant for a 70s drum set up and I can clutch/brake it with little effort, it is very stable as it doesn't take much effort. I use genuine KT shoes and clutch plates. The biggest let down is the front fork action. Typically 70s Jap set up, too soft on spring and damping if your over about 12 stones (170 pounds) I have fitted a pair of uprated springs from Fred in New Zealand and they work well. Getting the damping close to right is difficult and I'm using SAE20 oil I think but they will still top out. The damping rate is wrong really and set up ends up being a compromise of one sort or another. The KT is definitely behind the Spanish bikes of the era but not as bad as it is made out to be, in my opnion that is. Lose some weight from the frame, the engine is light enough, sort the steering and front suspension and they would have had a dramatic improvement which would have put them closer to the Spanish bikes. It wouldn't have taken too much to have got it close and it is a shame they didn't continue with it - especially when you see what they did with the works 330.

It's called the Mick Andrews Book of Trials and was published in 1976 when Mick was with Yamaha. No idea if it is still available but copies come on ebay every now and again. It appears that Yamaha never finished the 4 stroke project.

Yamaha were working on a 500cc 4 stroke for Mick in late 70s. There's a picture of it in his book with the motor installed. It's big and the frame had a lot of work done to get it in. The pressed tube that extends into the toolbox is missing, the engine is tilted forward and the head sits right up in the angle of the top tube/downtube by the headstock.

It's on the fixture list as 6th December.

You'd be better off just contacting a Bultaco dealer/specialist such as Hugh's Bultaco as they may have one in stock, or a used one. You could probably have one before someone has looked up the part, measured it and you've chased around bearing stockists to see if they can get you one. From what I remember, there are no part numbers on that bearing.

What the **** is going on here - 'Modern twinshock' conversions.... Rubbish..!! There is no such thing, they are just monos with twinshocks stuck on. How have these got any relevance at all to a twinshock class, or just forget the class, any relevance to riding a twinshock bike. These are nothing bikes, they never existed, so how can anyone have an interest in them. At the risk of repeating myself and others, the whole point of riding a twinshock is because it is a bike you enjoyed riding once and still have some affinity for, or wanted but couldn't afford at the time. If you have to create something to ride in a 'twinshock' class then you're missing the point - or just building a cheat bike to gain an advantage. As for twinshocks costing in excess of

It is an air screw on the MK1 Amal. If you screw it in it shuts off the air, screw it out it lets more air through. Try 1.5 turns out for a starting point.

Rode it last year for first time but due to the weather they had to drastically re-route the course and set new sections, so I'm not sure what the usual trial is like. Therefore difficult to say how the usual sections compare with Nostalgia, although I'd say they probably aren't too different from how they were last year. Definitely more straightforward, not as twisty or tight as Nostalgia (which was a lot easier last year) It was very enjoyable, nothing silly but enough to make you think and study lines. I'd do it again this year but it clashes with the Inter Centre Pre65. Sections probably of similar severity to Alvie 2 day. Definitely worth a go.

Try Wakefield Offroad as they have broken a good number of trials bikes over the years. Number will be in TMX or google for it.

I've put a 28mm OKO on my 340 199b and it is straight out of the box, no jetting or needle changes were needed, just a small adjustment on the pilot screw. Runs fine. Doubt very much it is any different from how it would run with the original Bing in as new condition, but that wasn't the purpose of fitting it. Like yours, the Bing was worn out and I needed a replacement carb. The OKO cost

Not sure about vague - plain stupid and inconsistent I'd say - Yorkshire Classic for example will allow and overbored/stroked Cub (not possible pre 1965 with the pistons/parts they are using now) to use a Dellorto carburettor, something that is prohibited everywhere else. But you can't even move the shock shock position on a C15 - did no-one own a hacksaw and gas bottles pre 1965..... Why should Cubs be favoured for choice of carburettor? Pre65 Sottish puts a lot of emphasis on the silhouette approach - it has to look period. They don't allow tubeless rims/tyres even though the tyre is still black and round like a tubed type. Tubeless rims look the same as tube type unless you are closer than 5 feet, early ones actually look the same. You can however have 2009 nice light, shiny billet hubs which look just like their pre 1965 counterparts - big, made of steel, black or silver paint and heavy.... Whole thing is a nonsense. The best thing you can do is check with the clubs you are most likely to be riding with as attitudes change from lax to lenient to don't care. Most people are sensible at club level and don't turn up with a Cub/James/whatever with a Sherco front end. It's generally only the pre65 Scottish that causes real arguments. Manx Classic for example are far more pragmatic. The ACU don't govern all of the classic clubs so you won't really find rules on their website - a lot of them are AMCA. At club level the ACU leave it to individual clubs. They govern the two national series, Traditional and Miller and each of those has eligibility guidelines.

You need the continuous tone horn (bicycle will do) and a speedo, doesn't have to work as you say, they just enter 0 or not recorded or something like that for the mielage on the MOT. Chainguard I'm not sure about, I've never had one. That's it legally but, it will depend on your test station. There are one or two that won't do them without lights as they don't know the law. Some also insist on a rear reflector - what use that is in daylight hours is beyond me. Some don't like the 'not for road use in USA and Canada' wording on Michelin tyres and seem to think that it somehow applies to the UK. Some don't like not for road use on a tail pipe but a sticker takes care of that. Try to find a test station in your area that someone else has used for trials bikes (successfully that is....) Once you have the MOT you can get it registered and Bultaco UK, The Vintage Motorcycle Club or Sammy Miller will give you a dating certificate so you can get an age related plate. As it is not a kit or a new vehicle (or manufactured since the SVA regs came in) it is not subject to SVA and all that stuff.

This topic has gone the same way as every other topic on this subject. It ends up with a few balanced views, largely from people who don't care which set of rules is used as it makes no difference to them or the trials they ride in, therefore they can see pros and cons in either. Then there are the strong advocates of 'the rules must be those that I prefer' which inevitably end up in the kind of 'I'm right, you're wrong' posts we have now. Human nature, just like best bike, best football team, best tits... No different from any other forum, whatever the subject matter. To talk of closing the thread just because of this is ridiculous, a forum is to express the opinion of people, right or wrong, just the same as a pointless discussion down the pub after a few beers which is forgotten in the morning. Should people be thrown out of the pub for having a pointless discussion - licencing trade would collapse within a week. Moderaters closing topics is no different from the 'I'm right, you're wrong' opinion in some of the posts, it's effectively saying, my ball, play my way or I'll take it away. If posts get heavily abusive or littered with foul language, that's a different matter, but this one wasn't. This forum is already a lot quieter following the loss of a few characters, people just won't bother posting if heavy 'policing' is in force. There is never going to be a 100% sensible discussion on any topic, especially this one or best bike etc. If people think what is being posted is trolling or has no purpose just ignore the post. If enough feel that way the topic will fizzle out on its own. But people aren't like that are they - that's why we have forums.....

Rarity value and if you want something badly enough. There are very few Model 10 or 27 Sherpas in Spain as most were exported I believe - assuming it has gone to a Spanish buyer. Can't imagine a UK buyer paying that much as they aren't that sought after here. It was the bike that was responsible for the first big change in direction for trials, killing off the competitiveness of British bikes at a stroke, so I guess it is something of an icon in Spain - a bit like an Ariel HT5 here (except that a Model 10 Sherpa still looks like it did in its era....) I was told that there is a series just for Model 10 Sherpas in Spain. It's also the bike that was responsible for the 1965 cut-off for pre65 trials when they were introduced which I'd guess warrants its place in trials history and status as something of an icon.

200 Cota is a cracking bike - very underated and it seems, overlooked. Haven't seen one in a trial for many years

Why do people ride twinshocks? It's because, generally, they have some sort of affinity with the bikes. They are the bikes they rode when they were younger, or the bikes they would like to have ridden but couldn't afford. Or maybe just because they like the look of the older bikes and even if they weren't riding in that era, they would like to turn the clock back and enjoy trials as they were on the type of bikes that were used then. They ride a Bultaco, Ossa, Montesa etc. because they like them, not because they are the best twinshock available. If that was the case we'd all be on Fantics. So converting an air cooled mono to twinshocks has nothing to do with reliving years gone by and riding your favoured bike from that era. It can only be about creating something that is more competitive than a genuine twinshock - and there is only one reason for doing that - results. The bike never was and never will be a twinshock. As mentioned above the ACU rules for the Sammy Miller and Traditional series are that it has to be a twinshock of original manufacture (needs redifining really as unfortunately, even this has a loophole that people can exploit if they want) However it is up to individual clubs what they want to allow. If our club ran a twinshock championship or gave awards to best twinshock, no way would a converted mono be eligible. They could ride it in the event no problem, I don't care what people want to do to their bikes, but not as a twinshock elligible for awards/points. And yes they do give an advantage. The gap from a Yam mono to the twinshocks was huge. Even with twinshocks on, the chassis design, geometry, weight, engine are all far superior to any genuine twinshock so of course they give an advantage. And once you start throwing Beta TR34, Fantic 305/7 GasGas 330 into the equation where does it end. What chance does a 70s Bultaco or KT stand against those bikes. As for riding for fun, that's true to a point. We all ride for the enjoyment of it but we ride in competitions and everyone wants to do the best they can - on a level playing field and in the fairness and spirit of the class we ride in. If we only ride for fun, then take the scenario of an aircooled mono that has been converted because the original shock is knackered beyond repair. The owner should have no qualms about continuing to ride it in the aircooled mono class, the fact that they will be slightly disadvantaged now against the other monos won't matter - they are only riding for fun.... The cost issue of twinshock vs aircooled mono isn't really an issue either. There are plenty of twinshocks under

The rims with the flange like the Montesa and TYZ type rim, usually take the car type valves, so the valve is all rubber. Where it seats in the rim, similar to a gromment, it has a groove cut into it which sits in the hole in the rim and the lips either side of the groove seal against the inside/outside of the rim. The only thread is for the dust cap. The GasGas, Sherco type Morad rims use a different valve which is threaded along its entire length and has a rubber seal at the head. When the valve is pushed through from the inside and the nut is tightened it pulls the head and seal against the inside of the rim to seal it. The head sits relatively flush against the inside of the rim to allow the sealing rubber to fit into the well of the rim. Does sound like you have the wrong valve, the Montesa type sticks up inside the rim, not flush, as on the Montesa type rim there is no sealing rubber to seal the spokes as they fit externally on the flange.

look for someone that does vapour blasting in your are as it gives excellent results and is not expensive either. I had a barrell and head done for

Deep part at the back as that is where the scavenge tube is located