woody

Can't tell you the actual size of the flywheel puller but you'll get one from Steve Goode/Sammy Miller etc without any problem. You need a clutch holding tool of some description to lock the clutch in order to undo the basket retaining nut. An old clutch plate that drives on the hub with a bar welded to it to locate through the fingers on the basket works. The cush drive on the crank is held on with an allen bolt which is an odd size but can't remember off the top of my head. Once that is removed you can remove the cush drive assembly and then the drive sprocket/chain/basket as one assembly. You are then left with the tapered sleeve on the crankshaft that the cush drive and sprocket sit on. This can only be removed with a puller as normally it is an extremely tight fit on the taper. Don't try to lever it off as you will fracture it as it is brittle or damage your casing - you won't budge it from the taper anyway unless you are extremely lucky. There is a special tool to remove this or you can make something. The groove towards the end of the sleeve is there to locate two semi-circular collars. A thick plate with a hole the same diameter as the sleeve can be pushed onto the sleeve, the collars are then fitted into the groove and the plate pulled forward until it butts up against the collars which prevent the plate from sliding off the sleeve. A conventional 2, 3 or 4 legged puller can then be used to pull against the plate to pull the sleeve off. As mentioned before, this sleeve can be very tight so if it doesn't budge you may have to put some tension on it, apply heat and tap it or tap the end of the puller to shock it free. Be careful as I have had them ping off and travel a few feet through the air when they let go, so stand to one side of it. Or it may just come off with a couple of turns on the puller if you're lucky. Once off, you can get to the kickstart spring. Clutch has to be removed to do the crank seal anyway.

If you run fully synthetic at 50:1 in the Mont it will be fine, no problems at all. That mixture is ok for old steel liners or modern plated liner. On plated liner you can go as weak as 70-80:1 on fully synthetic without a problem. Which brand oil is personal choice but Castrol TTS runs very clean, doesn't gum up piston rings or silencer like some other brands can do. I've used TTS at 50:1 in Yamaha TYZ, Bultaco Sherpa, Ossa and KTM 300. No problems with any of them.

The 198a is 250cc and the 199a is 325cc. Both are the all blue model.

At that price I think it's fair to say that it won't be ridden anyway and will just go into someone's collection. From what people who rode them at the time have said they were no match for their contemporary rivals from Spain at top level, but that is pretty obvious anyway. However, today's classic trials are nowhere near as tough as the nationals back then so if you really wanted to you could compete in the Miller or Traditional series on one. They'd take more input and effort from the rider to do well on but they'd make the sections. Juan Knight won the Isle of Man classic outright on his last year and that was riding at the front of the field too which was quite a disadvantage on slimey rocks. He's a very good rider yes, but the bike was up to it as long as the rider was good enough and it was nice to see it out there and being ridden. For me though, that would be one challenge too far I think....

Using 50:1 of Castrol TTS does not clog exhausts and does not affect throttle response. Even though I could run 70/80:1 on my TYZ I use 50:1 and that bike does not lack response and runs clean as a whistle. The reason I run 50:1 is because it suited any bike I had so I didn't have to worry about the wrong mix going in the wrong bike. That ratio suited the TYZ, KTM300 and the Bultaco and Ossa. Run a steel liner Bult or Ossa on 80:1 and it will more than likely seize, it's for plated bores and hard rings.

Yes Chris, I think the travel involved is possibly the strongest factor in riders entering these series. It's expensive these days (costs

Have you tried Nigel Birkett? He may have some TYZ wheels as when he did his frame kit for the TYZ he used GasGas type wheels. Wakefield Offroad also have used trials bike parts. Alternatively, dings in rims can be hammered straight (by someone who knows what they're doing, don't just attack it with a lump hammer...) and a wheel builder can true out buckles more than you would think possible.

Twinshocks in the Novogar... Right, seeing as how you keep talking out of your a*** this is how it is. Novogar Successful series - no need to change anything. It's one step down from British championship and gives the good riders on modern bikes a good test and a championship to contest. It's now just too much of a stretch for me these days and that is on a modern bike - if you think I want to ride a twinshock, no matter how good it is, in a Novogar, you are insane and you've obviously never been to one. Riders better than me dropping 50 - 60 marks on GasGas, Sherco etc. - I think both me and my twinshock would go home very bent and broken. Traditional Series No longer a classic series. As the name suggests it is a series based upon how trials used to be, one big lap or two laps of 20, with or without roadwork, for people who enjoy that type of trial. Works very well and is being well supported. Maybe not every round to my liking but that's just personal preference. Personally, I could do without the some of the sidecar rounds, but one or two are still very good events. Clubs have the option to put easier route over a certain percentage of sections for riders who don't fancy the championship route. The officials of the clubs themselves know whether they need to do this with their trial or not. There's nothing broken here so what are you trying to fix. Sammy Miller series Not a modern trials bike in sight. Specifically for twinshocks and Pre65, the easier route is fine for Pre65 bikes in more original spec including rigids. No 'modern bike' sections here, so this is the answer to your problem. No need to discuss the Traditional series any further. However, still doesn't get the support it deserves from twinshock or Pre65 bikes - why? You can't use you're familiar phrase - 'because it is a shambles and only caters for modern bikes' for this series. So why do you think this series isn't well supported? I'd be interested to know. Personally I would love to get back to the old Sebac/Falcon series of the 90s with 2 routes and classes for twinshocks, Pre65 unit and pre-unit. Maybe one day it will come round again. But there has to be a starting point. The Miller series offers a good starting point and from there, if riders on twinshocks and more modernised Pre65 want a further challenge, they can move up to the Traditional series. And then, if the numbers of twinshocks and Pre65 start to grow in this series, maybe, it could spawn a new series just for them - and the Miller series could revert to what it was originally introduced for - standard British Pre65 bikes. But for that to happen the entries of Pre65 and twinshocks needs to grow in one or the other of the current two series. There is not much sign of that. People own them but aren't getting out and riding them. If there were numerous riders clammering at the ACU doors baying for a championship to ride their old bikes in, then you may have a case for your ongoing argument. There aren't. So until that happens things will continue as they are. I'm just glad that there are trials, by virtue of the Miller and Traditional series, and many local modern events with a middle route, that allow me to enjoy doing what I enjoy most - riding old bikes in trials that are suited to them. Try it sometime.

No, not a chance mate, more important things in life to get frustrated over - like getting my Ossa to run properly.... Just trying to see whether someone can back up their repeated rantings with hard facts

You can practise at Shatterford, a venue used by the Stourbridge club. No need to pre-book, just turn up, pay

The problem we have with this topic Lee, is the fact that the person being most vocal and carping on about how badly organised and incorrectly formatted this championship is, doesn't actually ride in any of the events. Any comments made aren't from personal experience of riding the events themselves, so the comments about section severity and unsuitability for twinshocks are ill-informed, inaccurate and B*****ks. So come on Majestyman340, you ignored previous requests, so here's another opportunity to say which events you've competed in and which you thought were laid out for modern bikes Something you continually overlook is the fact that the Miller series doesn't have that many Pre65/twinshock entrants eiither - is that because those events are laid out for modern bikes too?

One of the advantages of owning a Pre65 in this area, and it doesn't have to be an expensive special, is that the BMCA club has a trial every week for Brit bikes from September through to April. Twinshocks aren't allowed. There are no twinshock clubs in this area, Pre65 has a much bigger following.

Harry Perry is Saturday 5th April Steve, I'm no expert on frame mods, but my C15 has standard length swingarm in standard C15 frame, rear shocks are positioned to quicken the steering, it has Ossa forks/Mont 247 yokes, it handles fine, don't think it would benefit from a longer swingarm. Not sure of the reasons for bracing the swan neck - It's useful for mounting a tank and lifting it higher away from the engine. I've no idea if there are other reasons for doing it so can't help there. On the Cubs, the bracing also acts as an oil tank, Millers do a kit for that.

Wish I did - it would give the bike a far easier time, but I haven't been in that territory since I was about 13 unfortunately.... You riding the Harry Perry next Saturday - still time to enter. Should be a good one. Plenty of rocks so you should feel at home and should be a healthy smattering of twinshocks. I'll be punishing myself on the Bult again.

What facts are you on about - Name the events YOU'VE competed in that have modern type sections

Personally, I don't think the TY Mono forks are any better than the Marzocchis fitted to 240/300 Fantics. Marzocchis from later aircooled bikes such as Stripey Betas, Fantic 301 are also so close in performance to the 240/300 forks or TY Mono forks that it really makes no difference. Forks from Yam TY twinshock and Honda TLR200/250 are pretty poor (all personal opinion obviously but that's mine) They are under-sprung and under-damped - they aren't as good as mid 70s Ossa/Bult/Mont forks. So, all that is being achieved by using Yam Mono or Marzocchi forks in a TY Yam or Honda is to put the front forks on a par with other bikes such as Fantic 240/300, Armstrong, Garelli, SWM etc. It is not cheating or fiddling (my opinion obviously) If you weigh around 10-12 stones the Yam or Honda forks are probably fine. If you are 17+ they aren't (which is why it's personal opinion) they bottom, top and generally do everything they shouldn't and nothing they should. Just out of interest, I had a Majesty 15 years ago fitted with Fantic forks (fitted by a previous owner) and no-one batted an eyelid. Now once you get past the aircooled mono years, bikes had upside down forks and no-one in their right mind would want to fit any of those. The next generation of right-way-up forks, as fitted to GasGas, Fantic, Beta watercoolers are superior and perhaps they should be made ineligible

Well. I'm not a bike builder so no expert on the subject, but that is what I'd be thinking about if I was starting off with a road bike. I know people have done it, but they're a lot cleverer than me when it comes to sorting bikes.

Best thing to do is go along to the next two BMCA trials and have a look at what they are riding and maybe the Harry Perry Sammy Miller round next Saturday. The bikes range from near standard right through to highly modified. In the BMCA most bikes are only lightly modified as the sections aren't too demanding but can be a bit nadgery, depends who's setting out. There are one or two with frame kits, modernised forks etc. It will be a lot of work to modify a road based C15 for trials as you will need to consider things like ground clearance (lifting the engine and bottom frame rails) widening the swingarm for mud clearance, moving the engine to the left to get chain alignment and removing all unwanted lugs/brackets. Wheels will be big heavy road items, forks will be unsuitable for trials - and more I can't think of. The frame mods may not be too bad if your handy and if you're riding BMCA you will be able to use Bultaco/Ossa/Fantic/Yamaha or whatever wheels, it's not encouraged but no-one will really look or care. Similarly, you can get away with a pair of Yam or Ossa forks as they are in-line, not leading axle, so at least have a period look about them, especially if painted black. MZ forks also look period and can be had cheaply. C15 engine is fine in road trim, you don't really need a trials gearbox, just lower the overall ratio with the crank sprocket and final drive sprockets. I had the standard gearbox in mine until I found a trials box and it was fine. You can still get a trials C15 piston for a lower compression ration but I think the standard road ratio is probably ok. Or you can use Triumph 500 or 650 pistons to overbore to between 260 - 280cc but not really necessary - just ensure they are not too high a compression ration if you do. Whatever the quoted CR is for the Triumph piston, it won't be the same fitted to the BSA due to different head combustion chamber. Road cam is ok also but chances of finding a trials item is next to zero. Standard road head with 7/8" inlet is fine with standard valves. Amal 22mm carb - they may get twitchy if you have a foreign carb fitted. Biggest cost for the engine will be a rebuild if it is required but that applies to anything. If it is an early engine it will benefit from an Alpha big end and main bearing roller conversion to replace the bushed items. Ignition, there are various options, PVL is most popular at around

As usual, you've not answered any questions asked of you and diregarded what has been said. The modern bikes are in because there aren't enough Pre65/twinshock bikes - we all know that. There may be numerous reasons for this but one reason it ISN'T is because the sections are put on for modern bikes. THEY AREN'T. I've got a good idea. Get your 340 Majesty out, if you've got one, go and enter some Sammy Miller rounds and Traditional rounds and make your own mind up after experiencing them for yourself instead of spouting ill-informed drivel.

Where do you get this opinion from???? How many traditional/classic events have you ridden over the last few years? How many events have you ridden on the continent to compare them to? The traditional/classic series, in most events, has sections that are ideal for classics. The only events that aren't up to scratch for a National championship in my view and the view of others, are the sidecar rounds where the sections don't give enough of a challenge to the solos. Not all of them, but most. That's another issue. Try organising a trial to National standard (ie; proper sections, not riding around some twigs in the ground) purely for twinshocks and Pre65, even have 2 routes to widen the audience, so that all abilities are catered for. See how many entries you get. 40 - 45 maybe, if you're lucky. Why? - who knows but until riders actually support the series by entering on twinshock and Pre65 bikes it can never again stand on its own as a series for those bikes only. Seems to me these days that people want to own twinshocks so they can say they have them, or treat them as some kind of investment, rather than ride the bloody things. It's up to riders to support the series. The problem is there is a lot of crap spouted on here from people who don't even ride the events, saying it is too hard and that the sections are put on for modern bikes - RUBBISH. The problem is, other people will read this, believe it and stay away. Yes, the sections are difficult technically and so they should be as it is a National championship, but they are NOT modern bike sections. As I've said many times before, look back over the results and see that the best twinshock has outperformed the best modern bike more than once. I rode a bog standard 1968 type 49 Bultaco at the last 2 rounds and although it was hard work on some sections, it was capable of cleaning every section in that trial - it was my fault it didn't. So how can they be called modern bike sections!!?? I can assure you that that bike wouldn't get more than a few feet into a proper modern bike section before failing it. If we're talking about a way forward for this series, I still believe the best format is to use events just for solos only, no sidecar rounds, go with two routes unless the venue will support one route like Lancs County and Bootle. Easier route is non-championship and will alow riders who find the championship route too hard to still have a ride out on their old bikes. Continue with the classes the way they are at the moment but if there is an increasing number of pre65/twinshock entries to the point where the events become over-subscribed, give preference to those classes. Eventually, if the numbers increase to a level that allows it, the series can once again be dedicated to those bikes only. What the series doesn't need is ill-informed comments as to how crap it is from people who don't ride in it, or comparisons to events on the continent, again, from people who have ridden neither. People read it, believe it, form the wrong opinion and stay away. Not really very constructive.

As it would if Tiff was in the Golf and Butler-Henderson was in the Scoob...

Good job it's not a Jumbo, otherwise the neighbour's house in the background would have gone too...

Just a mention on rules, seeing as this is what the topic is about. You can have all the rules you like as regards bike eligibility and they will still be flouted and still go unenforced. The most simple rule of all is the no-stop rule in any of the classic series or one-off events such as the classic experts. Everyone knows they are no-stop. Still, there are riders who will stop, hop the back, hop the front and make a straight line out of what should have been a testing turn over roots or whatever. The hazard is easy to clean this way whereas no-stop it requiers much more precision and a perfect line with no mistakes. They know it is no-stop but still they stop and hop. And they never ever get penalised for it. So what makes anyone think that having rules for bike eligibility will stop modifications or that there will be anyone willing to throw the riders with ineligible bikes out of the event. Same goes for Pre-72, Pre-77 classes. Are there any officials at events that could have these classes who would have the knowledge to differentiate between the models. Doubt it. It works in Spain as they appear to stay true to the class with the bikes they ride. Here, I just can't see it happening.

I just mean the twinshock, class B guys, riders like Phil, Nick, Steve Monk are all of the opinion that modern hybrids shouldn't be allowed and to the best of my knowledge have no interest in riding one anyway. I wasn't referring to British class