woody

No - take a look at the ages of some 'invited' riders and take a look at the bikes they are riding when you go. Many are brand new and don't even come close to being replicas of the original 50s/60s bikes they are 'based' on (not something I have an issue with personally) I don't think there are any people (or if there are, very few) who have any objection to ex-factory riders from yesteryear having an automatic or invited entry into the event. They are names and attract crowds and as you have said the event is viewed as prestigious and it should have these names in the entry, particularly as some of them can still ride a bit... However, there are other issues that people get disgruntled with and I think fairly so. A lack of transparency and double standards with rule application being at the head of the list but I've no intention of rambling on about them as firstly it's pointless and secondly I can't be bothered. What I will say is that I have no bone to pick with the organisers doing what they like with entry selection, it's their event and it's up to them, but there should be tansparency at least. Is it to be viewed as a serious competition or a 2-day riding social event? Most riders would consider it the former. So riders who compete regularly in their pre65 events all year round get a bit wound up when they hear of something along these lines - organisers contact rider (not an ex-factory rider or 'name' or even a regular competitor) to voice surprise they haven't put an entry in. Rider says I'm not really up to it anymore so didn't bother. Organisers say don't worry about that, just do one day if that's all you can manage.... How does that sit with someone who competes regularly, aspires to ride in Scotland where they feel they could get a good result, but despite entering on many occassions can't get a ride?

Generally, Yamaha don't sell piston kits, the components are sold individually so if it is a genuine Yamaha piston you shouldn't have any problem getting just a set of rings. As already mentioned try a Yam main dealer. Nigel Birkett should also be able to help if they are for a trials bike and may even have some in stock - he does for a 320 Majesty for example (you don't mention which bike)

I would say that is probably the case

I sort of half guessed at 1979 as my memory is useless but I have an old Which Bike magazine from that year with the new Majesty range on test. I thought they were introduced earlier than '79 but I let the test convince me otherwise but it isn't really conclusive I guess as they may have been testing them some time after they were introduced. Thinking about it, I'm sure I've seen 'S' reg Majesties over the years and 'S' reg was 77/78 so 1978 could well be the year they were introduced rather than 1979. Didn't see you at Clyro Bo, I don't think anyway, saw Andy but can largely only remember how bloody cold it was.... The KT is going quite well and I'm pretty pleased with it really, particularly impressed with the motor which is strong and will pull 3rd in sections no problem if I need it to. I'm enjoying riding it, only downside really is the front end, forks are typically Japanese and too soft and steering which is a bit slow, bit like an M49 Bultaco.

Does that relate to the OKO in general or just on a Fantic?

The Yam framed Majesties carried the original Yam frame number so they can be dated from that by Yamaha UK. There aren't any records (available) that show which frame numbers were converted to Majesties if that is what you mean unless Shirty kept any. First bikes appeared in '79 using the Yam frame and changed to Godden frame in '81 I think so Yam framed bikes will be dated between '79 - '81.

Well, the ballot gods were smiling on the Allan brothers then, with both of them successfull in being drawn out of the hat (first time of entering too ??) I never knew they were regular Pre65 trials competitors

I'm no BSA expert but for what it's worth I really wouldn't bother with that bike as a starting point for a Pre65 trials bike. The engine and gears may be totally unsuitable for trials use, the frame does look big and heavy (or heavier, the original C15 frame is no lightweight...) I think it would take a lot of modifying and a lot of what you buy would end up scrapped and replaced with more suitable components. First things that come to mind are: - Modifying the frame to increase the ground clearance which means raising the bottom frame tubes and the engine mounts - Lowering the rear subframe assembly by cutting off the seat frame tubes/rear loop, removing a couple of inches or so out of the uprights to the shocks and then welding the seat tubes/frame loop back on again in a lower position to get lowered seat height. The frame mods don't sound much but it takes a fair bit of work to do it, I've just done something similar with my C15 - Removing all unecessary lugs and brackets - Scrapping the big hubbed chrome rimmed wheels for something more suitable - Scrapping the forks which are rusty and no good anyway even if they weren't - Scrapping all the electrics and fitting a PVL - Scrapping the shocks for trials units - Scrapping the oil tank and seat for items suitable for trials Probably more that doesn't come immediately to mind. So assuming you get it for the starting price of

I really wouldn't bother Just another gimmick that riders are being sucked into thinking they need in order to improve the performance of their bikes and ultimately their results. I can't think of any classic trial with sections that would need this. The best and most challenging pre65 trials I've ridden were the Manx Classic this year and last year's inter-centre pre-65 team event. Neither needed a bike with variable ignition fitted. Seems to me that more and more 'necessities' are being marketed these days, all of which cost a fortune. I was looking at 2-stroke pre-65 bikes at last Sunday's classic trial that owe their owners thousands (as in >

Free advertising shouldn't be allowed, no argument. On what occassion though has he advertised anything? If I remember correctly he was warned about advertising when he hadn't made any attempt to advertise. His first posting was to respond to an inaccurate statement from another person about the Xispa importership and something about when the bikes would be available, what's wrong with that? It was simply a matter of fact reply with no advertising intent, much in the same vein as Atom Ant's response to Copemech as he felt something had been said that was incorrect. When he provided his email address it was in response to an enquiry from another member who wanted to know what it was, that's all - the whole point of a forum I thought. It was hardly an intended advertisement for the product. If any other member had provided the address no-one would have batted an eyelid and the post would not have been deleted. If he had started a new thread proclaiming 'Xispas are here, contact xxxxx if you want one' then yes, that would be a different matter. There is a difference between blatantly attempting to advertising your product and answering someone's question I feel. As regards Copemech's statement about deleting the post, why on earth does this warrant the threat of a ban.......!!?? I'd guess the use of 'you' was in respect of the group of people who form the moderators of the forum, of which you are one, therefore it was one of 'you' who deleted the post as opposed to a specific individual. Reasonable comment I'd have thought. And even if you did think he meant you Atom, it's hardly libelous, a simple 'it wasn't me' would have done. All this banning of users, there'll be no-one posting soon...

you think so? Steve Saunders and Bernie Schreiber may argue that point with you.

Yes, as is the middle box. It's a ****ty job but needs to be done. The Sherpa should purr quieltly if the exhaust is in good order, if it doesn't, chances are a repack is required. On the clubfoot the perforated tube only goes as far as where the silencer passes behind the shock. From there onwards and into the clubfoot itself there are a series of baffles and there is no point splitting the silencer open in this area unless the baffles have come loose. If you shake the silencer and can hear movement inside it doesn't necessarily mean baffles are loose. The perforated tube could have come loose or it could be big lumps of carbon welded wadding rattling around the tube. I split mine by grinding down the flanges on either side where it is roll or spot welded until you can see the split appear between the two sides. On the inside (tyre facing) side of the silencer I cut accross at the top and the bottom and lifted the section off to reveal the inside. The tube was that badly clogged I also had to cut that through at each end and remove it to clean it up. After removing any carbon/old wadding from the inside I then placed a bunch of packing (silent sport wool) in the silencer, replaced the tube on top of that and tacked it back in. I then replaced the removed section and tack welded it back on but on one side only. This let me lever it open like a door using the tack welds as hinges if you see what I mean. I then finished of putting more pcking in before 'closing the door' and welding it back up again. I did the same for the middle box. Bike ran so much better after that. Where to cut it exactly is difficult to explain and I can't post pictures. If you got hold of a scrap used one from ebay or somewhere you could cut that open and then you could see where to cut your own, that's what I did, tried it first on one that didn't matter.

Don't take this the wrong way (I'm no hopping expert but it's meant constructively) but if you're having to ask the question the problem doesn't lie with the bike. Yes a new bike is easier to flick around than a 307 Fantic but a 307 can still be hopped flicked and air turned easily. Just watch indoor and outdoor world events from that era. Or get one of your local expert 'hoppers' to prove it to you. A rider that can trick ride can do it on virtually any bike. We have a local lad who can hop my Ossa sideways with both wheels off the ground. If you can't hop your 307, you aren't going to magically start hopping a newer bike. Unless your going to have the ability to ride at top centre level I'd put hopping at the bottom of the list of things to learn.

This sort of thing is subjective really and comes down to personal choice. I've ridden a TLR250 before and after a steering mod. I never thought the steering had a problem in standard configuration so I wouldn't have bothered altering it. Having tried it afterwards I couldn't tell any difference so for me there was no improvement I've not noticed that the steering pushes other than when I was trying to clutch it around a turn. That I felt was due to the awful clutch action which grabs and judders when you're trying to slip it and as a consequence, instead of engaging smoothly, lurches in which would push the front instead of easing it round the turn. My 4RT was exactly the same. If I rode the bike on the throttle around turns it never pushed. Find a clutch that doesn't grab and lurch and you may find it doesn't push out in turns any more. The light front end is a TLR trait and I don't think it will go away with repositioning of the footrests in any direction. I'd say it is more to do with the weight bias of the bike and the fact that the motor pulls very strongly off idle, even if the power is softened on the cam timing or compression. I used one in a 2 day trial recently and found that if you back off the power up hill and then bring it back in, the front end wants to climb and you really have to get your weight positioning right to keep it from rising without losing grip as well. Once grip is lost, either on muddy or loose shale/rocky climbs, it's very difficult to recover and get it going again. I found riding faster than I normally do lessened the chances of breaking grip and lifting the front. As far as altering the head angle goes, you could do what someone else has suggested and lengthen the shocks to quicken the steering. If you have Falcons, there are different length mounting eyes available. Easier than cutting frames. As regards footrest position, persoanlly I wouldn;t want to move them forward. I'd lower them definitley because I'm tall and lower them on all my bikes. Not sure I'd bother going back with them though, but again it's personal. Lengthening the swingarm theoretically improves grip, again it's subjective and you don't really want to go beyong 53 inches wheelbase but so can properly working shocks and shock positioning improve grip. Can't see that shortening it will do the same, should in theory make it worse and also give the front an even bigger tendency to climb around the back wheel due to the shorter wheelbase. If you're using it in classic events I can't see that there are going to be any turns that are to tght for a TLR. I rode a type 49 Bultaco in a few championship rounds last year and there was nothing too tight for that - and if you think that a Honda needs a steering tuck you need to try one of those first.... If you're stopping and hopping in classic events you are going to get fived and rightly so - I just wish others that do it got them too

Rightly, without question - you can never have too much Spanish scrap in the shed. What are dreams for if you can't realise a few of them - even if they can turn into expensive friggin nightmares....

Yep, makes a heck of a difference to a Sherpa, once it has either blown its packing out or clogged up the perforated tube the performance is badly affected and can give symptoms similar to a worn carb. My Sherpa wouldn't rev out at all and wasn't smooth off idle, even with a new Mikuni on it. I tried several carbs, including one from a bike that ran well before succumbing to the inevitable and splitting open the silencers to clean and repack them. The middle one had no packing left at all, the rear was pretty clogged. Difference was very noticeable when done.

It has to be the Sherpa, not because it is the best, purely because you say it needs the least work and virtually everything is available off the shelf for it. It has a nice engine, steering is a bit slow although not a problem in classic events which aren't marked out particularly tight. Exhaust must be packed correctly otherwise they just don't run well at all. Pig of a job to cut open, clean and repack but essential if it's going to run properly (witness the rebuilt 199a in another post that runs really rough, very likely due to a choked exhaust, or one that has blown all its packing out) For shocks, it's subjective really but I've used Falcons and had slightly longer end caps fitted so that it jacks the rear up a little, to keep the muguard away from the tyre and help quicken the slow steering a little. The Gripper has much better suspension (assuming it has betors up front, I've no experience of the Telesco forks) particularly the rear. The Sherpa back end always feels a bit dead, or wooden compared to other bikes, even with decent shocks fitted. The Gripper steering is quicker, they find grip well and the 350 (actually 302cc) has a fair amount of power. The 250 can be made a bit more responsive if required if the heavy flywheel weight is removed from the crank on the clutch side and replaced with a MAR cushdrive. Ossa parts can be sourced but some may take time and they aren't as readily available off the shelf like the Sherpa. The 330 Mont is similar, maybe worse, than the Ossa as regards parts availability. I've had a quick try on a couple recently but neither was in the best of fettle so difficult to form accurate opnions. It did feel as though it will easily find grip in mud, even with a badly worn tyre and shocks. Steering was quite sharp, suspension felt as though it could be good if correctly set up, motor was soft in delivery and had lots of pull. Felt like it could be a nice bike when sorted. Has to be the Sherpa first, purely on the grounds of practicality - unless you're not in a hurry

Aa stated above, availability in the States no problem, you can still get Tarabusi originals or Wiseco replacements from Keith Lynas who trades as Ossa Planet. One of the specialists, Doug Elke, has Wisecos in his ebay shop dougelke ebay Not so easily available here, Miller used to stock patterns for 250 but not sure what if anything they have leftt. Steve Sell who trades as Marlimar has some pistons but maybe only 350. Haven't got a contact for him although someone on here might, but he will be at Telford I'd guess.

Whoops - that should have said the damping characteristics of the SHIMMING, not piston. Shims come with one or two holes for oil flow, one type was used on compression, the other on rebound but they can be used in any number or combination. Personal choice in the end. Never heard of DOT shocks, what are they?

If you search the forum you should find his number as I think someone asked for it recently - or use google and find his classic dirtbike show website at Telford, that's bound to have his number

Someone I know makes the components but has nothing to do with assembly or set up. That was down to Pete and now the new owner. No idea what the shimming was when Pete was building them but they weren't tailored to specific rider styles or weight. He used ATF rather than suspension fluid. Mine had 2 shims on compression and 3 on rebound. The piston damping characteristics are different for compression and rebound (ie; it has more holes for one than the other, can't remember which way round though) They are easy to work on if you like messing - much easier and quicker than Falcons to assemble/reassemble and you don't need gas. As I said before, they are well made and maintenance friendly, the top unscrews and you just pull the rod and piston assembly out. Changing the shims is a bit fiddly to get them positioned correctly when tightening the nut that holds the piston on, as the whole lot wants to turn and you have to keep the shims positioned correctly. If you buy additional pistons you can experiment with oil flow by altering the holes it passes through or just add/reduce the number of shims. Or change the oil viscosity. You can experiment in many different ways but obviously it all takes time and you need somewhere to try the bike rather than over a few bumps in the lawn to see if the changes have worked. Biggest problem for me when Pete was selling them was the spring rates, he just hadn't got any that were right for me, all were too soft. The damping was way too soft for me as well and I don't have the time or ground to sort stuff like that out. Obviously I can't comment on the set up from the current owner as I haven't got any. My personal choice is Falcon as I know what to ask for in terms of spring rate and damping and that's how they come. To get the rockshocks set up like that would take me far too much time.

The manufacturer of the components hasn't changed, I know who makes them and they are very well made. The only thing that has changed is the assembler/retailer. It's horses for courses as I have had a pair (from pete) and they didn't suit me at all

Just seen the cost of the Mitani exhaust - nearly

Hitchcocks, Surrey Cycles, Bultaco UK, Sammy Millers, you can take your pick really, they should all have the parts in stock.

I think the Ossa is a 160 and Sherpas were 150 although I doubt you'd notice any significant difference between the two. Without the manual I'm going from memory but I'm pretty sure. You may find the size if you search the twinshock forum as it has been posted before. I don't have the measurement for the needle without having one of each side by side and it will be a few days before I can do that, assuming I have a spare as my BSA is elsewhere at the moment. If you have to order the main jet anyway, Id just order a new needle and needle jet as well for peace of mind that you don't have wear in either of those two components, otherwise you may be putting a new needle into a worn jet. Pilot scew is personal preference really so I'd start off with one and half turns out.