woody

Had a ride on an SY175 today after a trial, not in sections, just around the car park but enough to appreciate what a good little bike they are. I'm 17 stone and a bit and it pulled me no problem, as I knew it would. Not sure why people think they don't have enough power to pull anyone over 10 stone - put a pillion on any trials bike and it will pull both riders with ease... It is a perfect bike for an easy route and more than capable of tackling the clubman route in our traditional nationals. Good suspension and brakes, bullet proof engine as mentioned and can be had for very reasonable money. Being picky and assessing it for personal preference, I would have liked just a little more flywheel weight and it was slightly high geared but I've no idea if it was on standard gearing or not. I'd probably have gone 1 less on the front sprocket. The flywheel weight isn't really an issue with the bike, it plonks perfectly in bottom without using the clutch but in second I felt it may stall when trying to drop to tickover speed. Slipping the clutch obviously negates this but I prefer not to if possible and there was the high gearing issue to consider here also. This is however, personal preference, not a fault with the bike. As with anything you need to try before you buy but I don't think you would be dissapointed. A very competent and easy bike to ride.

Never had the chance to phone Sandifords in the end today as I was riding a trial today and ended up prepping all morning so I'll try on Monday and let you know. When I was working on the 247 motor I never even noticed the countersink. I must remember to wear my reading glasses now when working on bikes as my focus within the first 2 feet has gone and you don't realise you can't see, or rather don't notice, that things like that are there....

I doubt you'll ever get an honest test of a new trials bike - ever. TBM did an honest test of the Yamaha WR400 when it came out and they truthfully criticised the dreadful hot starting and the bulky ergonomics of the seat and tank which added size and weight compared to the YZ. The cardiac inducing hot starting was the biggest criticism however and having owned one, rightly so. Yamaha's response was to pull advertising and to withhold any further test bikes for a couple of years I believe. I remember someone I know well doing a test on one of the last twinshock trials bikes for a monthly dirt mag at the time and giving it a glowing report. When we next saw him we said you rate that bike highly then - it's a bag of ****e was his true opinion. But that wouldn't have pleased the importer, sponsor or dealer would it... Not sure I'd welcome a Clarkson type figure anywhere near off roading personally. For me, he has the ability to be a good journalist but just acts a juvenile pillock and does very little good for the motoring cause in the eyes of those above that watch our every move. I can just hear the comments about 'filling in ramblers' who venture into your path whilst out trail riding as a lesson that they should stay out of our way. It's true TMX has untapped potential but I guess they have no staff available to stretch or diversify from what they do now. With the increased interest in classic trials it would be nice to see them raid the archives and reprint some of the old twinshock tests that they did back then. The cost and manpower to do that would be minimal. Who cares if they aren't/weren't accurate, just nice to read about them and look at pictures.

Thanks for that, probably answers my last question in my previous post

Can't remember unfortunately whether it could have been the old O rings squashed and broken or silicon that was there as it was too long ago that it came apart. Probably withered O rings thinking about it. As you say, even if opinions differ, makes sense to fit some as I have to release all the bolts again anyway. I'll try the importer today to see if they have the original O rings. If they don't, as I'm not too hopeful, do they need to be a particular size? I have a box of O rings which include some of the right diameter or smaller that will fit over the bolts but I'm not sure about the thickness. They may be thicker than original, but I guess they will squash/compress ok. Are these O rings fitted to all twinshock Monts, right up to the 330?

Thanks for that - guess it will be ok without them then. Say thanks to Jeff for me - a very nice chap. I wish this meant I now didn't have to undo all the crankcase bolts but unfortunately I have. Being the first Montesa engine I've ever worked on, I didn't realise the importance of fitting the oil seal that sits behind the clutch on the selector shaft into its housing in the crankcase before the crank halves are bolted together. I've tried in vain to get it over the shaft and into the housing but it's having none of it. So I have to release all the bolts. open the crankcases a few millimitres to clear the end of the selector shaft, fit the seal and then close them up again. Lessons the hard way as usual....

Just assembling the crankcases on a '74 247 Cota and before I fit the clutch just want to make sure I haven't missed something. Do the crankcase bolts have O rings underneath the washers to stop air / oil escaping past the bolts? I can't recall seeing any when I took it apart although there were traces of silicon under the washers maybe, but I can't really remember, besides, there are usually traces of silicon sealer everywhere on old engines so doesn't necessarily mean anything. I'd never have thought myself but someone has mentioned there should perhaps be O rings fitted. Or is it just bolts, nuts and washers? I have a parts book but it only gives part numbers and not what they are and the clymer manual doesn't mention anything either. Anyone know?

No Ross, the chain oiler has been blanked off by a previous owner but for the reasons you state, I never bother with them anyway. One of those nice designer touches that looks good on the draftboard but has no practical use whatsoever. Whether it will ever reach any sort of status I don't know, and truthfully, not really bothered as the stuff I have is for my own enjoyment and not for what others think, but people probably don't bother with them as they are berated severely for being utterly uncompetitive, which, having now owned and ridden one, isn't really accurate. No they aren't the best but they aren't that far away. At least it meant I got mine cheap and is one of the best buys I've ever had, a real wash and go bike (I'm really going to regret this one weekend, in the middle of some moors, I just know it...) I have noticed on ebay though that the last 2 or 3 that were on fetched more than I thought they would, one went for twice what I paid for mine and it wasn't in as good condition, so who knows what they may start fetching. They seem to fetch less in the US as one or two recent nice examples didn't sell. Swiss rider Jack Aebi (who rides each year in th SSDT) rides a totally standard KT, even the shocks, in classic trials in France/Belgium etc and has won more than once on it against good riders on better bikes. They found it stored in a barn, totally original. Mattylad, take a look at this site as there are links from it with loads of pictures of KTs http://members.tripod.com/kawasakiKT/index-4.html I agree with your mate on the colour for his Gollner, the green/white looks better than the yellow.

I like it a lot, not because I think it is better than other bikes of it's era or because it's different, but purely because I liked the look of them when they came out. A local lad had one from new and it just left an impression that stayed. There was something about them, they just looked nice, I wanted one (no money - no chance) and have wanted one ever since. By the time I got to be able to ride trials regularly, their day had gone (if it ever came as they had a pretty bad press here) and it was all SWM, Beamish, Bultaco, Ossa, Montesa, first Fantics etc. All the KTs had been parked in sheds or suffered from being mated to sidecars. It was probably 20 odd years before I saw another. I had a quick ride on it and thought it wasn't too bad, never got to try a section on it but realised I still wanted one... Managed to get one last year which apart from being the wrong colour was in very good nick and benfitted from a full engine rebuild. I've ridden it in quite a few events now and I really enjoy riding it. The handling could be better, there are two things that let it down a bit but it is nowhere near as bad as I thought it would be given the general consensus of opinion about them. The steering is a little slow and is very similar to an M49 Sherpa, in overall handling also without feeling quite as cumbersome. However, even though it is slow steering the turning circle is very tight and it steers well around nadgery stuff. It's shortcoming is that if it goes off line up a rocky stream or gully it can't immediately be brought back on line, it needs feet rather than inches to reign back in. The other shortcoming is the front forks which have a nice action but like most Jap forks of the era are too softly sprung and damped - for my weight anyway. Uprated springs work well but the damping is still soft and they top out. Still trying to sort that out. As mentioned in previous post, the rear suspension works well and using the Falcons with superlight damping and 60lbs springs, it has a nice action with plenty of feel. Brakes are superb by drum standards and probably the best I've come across, no doubt - I use genuine Kwak shoes. Clutch is reasonably light although not really needed in sections but if it is necessary to clutch and brake the bike is very comfortable and stable doing so, unlike an Ossa or Bultaco of the same era which bends and twists underneath you in protest. The engine was the biggest surprise and is much more torquey and powerful than I expected - better than a TY250 which I was assured it wasn't but which I've always found flat. It has a big flywheel weight fitted and plonks reasonably well but feels like it could do with more weight still. It will pull 3rd gear no problem if required. It grips very well (again, relative to bikes of the era, not a GasGas...) and the motor will really rev. It has a slight powerband that you can feel 'come on the pipe' halfway up the rev range -if you want revs it's got them. Overall I'm very pleased with it, not the best twinshock by any means, if I get on my Majesty afterwards it's a world apart as you'd expect, but I enjoy riding it and although it's not important to me, it gets a lot of attention - A spectator at the first classic round wouldn't let me leave for the next section until he'd got photos of it. It's been 100% reliable (kiss of death) maintenance is minimal, nothing gets in the airbox or carb, haven't had to clean the filter once in over 20 rides, the brakes work even when wet and if they do fade through water ingress it only takes a 3 or 4 second ride with them on to get them back. It's a real shame Kawasaki didn't continue with it. The motor is quite light and performs well but the frame is seriously over engineered and heavy. If they had developed it further with quicker steering, lighter frame, better fork action it could have easily been on a par with the rest - and if only they'd put that works 330 into production.... I've never tried a Gollner, no doubt it must be an improvement but for some reason, they have no appeal to me over the original.

Yes, I got a blind bearing puller from MM too - useful on any gearbox with blind bearings but also quite handy for wheel bearings too, especially on those that you can't get any purchase on to drift out. Someone told me about the 'fire them out hydraulically' method many many years ago when I was doing my first Ossa gearbox. They have a blind bronze bush and they will not come out at all with heat, they are in far too tight. So, tried the hydraulic way and punched a very neat hole straight through the case behind the bush and got an eyeful of WD as well. So, damage already done I removed what was left of the case around the bush, drifted it straight through and then got the casing welded back up. So it worked - but not in the way I thought it should.... Never tried that one again. Also had a Bultaco years ago that only needed boiling water poured on the cases to release the bearings. Wish they were all that easy. I'd try the heat method first, if that doesn't work get a puller - they're always going to be useful. I've used mine a good few times now.

Not on a Gollner, but I'm using Falcons on a standard KT and they work very well. I've had them with a slightly longer top mounting (12mm approx) to help with the steering and also dropped the yokes about 25mm but Gollner may well have different steering so applying same mods to that may not work the same.

They do have them as I've bought some but they may not be shown in their listings. Same as a TY175 as far as I know. I haven't got the boxes any more so can't quote you the number but give them a ring and they will sort it out for you. I've always found them helpful.

Try Ellastone Offroad or Wakefield Offroad Dave Renham at Bultaco UK has some used Montesa parts. Trickytrials who posts on here has also broken Montesas.

Can't remember the sizes but Pyramid Parts have them in stock www.pyramid-parts.com

Yes, just checked and 30204 is correct

No different sizes, they are all the same on the MAR, Gripper too. 30204 sounds right as I'm pretty certain (although same memory cells that tried to remember the number...) that the ID is 20mm on the Ossas. I may have an old box in the shed, if I'm in there later I'll check.

No tool that I know of. I've always managed to drift out most of those I've done, using something that is bent at the end to push it into the bearing and has a sharp edge which just about gets some purchase on the edge of the cage. It does depend on how tightly in they are held though. One set wouldn't budge so I had to use the weld technique you've already mentioned. Only other way I can think of, if welding isn't an option, is to grind through it and collapse it but that is a really tedious method with the risk of making a mess of the headstock too. Don't know whether you know already, but if yours still has the original ball type taper bearing, you can get normal taper rollers as a direct replacement - 30205 if my memory is any good (probably not) but check first...

Yes, sorry, I forgot the question mark at the end as wasn't 100% sure which measurement you meant - I strobed mine with a timing gun the other day so am going to check out of interest to see how the distance between my timing marks compare with yours. Coincidently I run at 2.2 BTDC on the timing guage as I run mine retarded from standard (320 Majesty) hence my confusion

Talon used to do a rear disc conversion and so, I think, did Shirt. Otherwise it could be something a previous owner has done by using parts from just about anything. More likely to be one of the former. Early disc brakes weren't brilliant, particularly aftermarket jobs. As the rear brake doesn't do a lot of work, especially in the type of sections these bikes are ridden in today - nowhere near as hard as those of the era, therefore continually being able to stop dead is not so much as an issue - if getting it to work is going to cause you problems it may be worth going back to the original set up, assuming the chassis still allows it. A Mono rear wheel and parts should be available quite cheaply but watch out for the condition of the rim and spokes. Rims can corrode and if it needs replacing and new spokes it won't be cheap. After thought - I wonder if you could get a TYZ rear wheel and caliper to fit seeing as it has already been modified for a disc. A few of them have been broken for parts now and they have a good tubeless rim, no leaking air through the spokes

Yes, 349 motor feels to have more torque and bottom end pull than the Bult. The comments above about the 349 being too harsh or fierce have surprised me. I've never ridden an early 349 or white wonder but I had a Cota 350 when they were new and a mate of mine has a MH349 now. I've found them one of the smoothest and most forgiving motors I've ever experienced, loads of torque but very progressive off the throttle, especially in comparison to early 325 Bultacos (M159) which had very quick power delivery (again, at the time they were new as a mate had one) The 350 I had still rates with me as one of the best trials engines ever. Maybe the earlier models were different, never having tried one I don't know.

Typo - 2.2mm

Montesa Honda or MH349 is a re-badged Cota 349/4 which then became the Cota 350. 349/4 had grey mudguards, 350 had red mudguards and red plastic tank. The Cotas 349/4 and 350 were the last model in the 349 range and had a completely different frame and swingarm from the original 349 and the white tank 349 which is why you have differing wheelbase measurments. The MH349 is effectively a different bike from the original 349, they just share the same engine. The Cota 350 is I think, what Toni Gorgot won the '83?? SSDT on but with the prototype 330 engine fitted.

Damn, I won't, I'm too far behind with mine now, have to be the next one.

May be worth checking with Robin at Falcon Shocks as he services many types of shocks as well as building his own. Chances are he has done a Yam shock in the past.

Yes, 230cc is achieved with a longer stroke as well as the overbore, furthest an overbore takes them is 220cc as far as I know. A jap specialist used to do oversize engine kits so maybe it's one of those, they also did a full 250cc conversion for the 200. Certainly a very well presented bike, went over