woody

You can't really go wrong with one of these. My mate has recently bought one for his lad who is a beginner at trials. It is years since I last rode one and we all had a mess about on it at the end of a trial. I'd forgotten just how good that little 156cc motor is. Incredibly torquey but soft power delivery, totally linear with no lumpiness or power band. Reminded me of my TYZ in the way it builds revs. Depending on how tall you are and what modern bikes you've ridden you may find the footrest position high as it is typical 80s riding position. May or may not bother you. Can be had for very reasonable money and one of the best twinshocks out there. Spares shouldn't be a problem but as with anything old there may always be something that takes a bit of effort to find, but Bill Pye seems to have or be able to get most things. A good choice if you get one, best to try one first obviously but I can't see that you wouldn't like one.

I just love that... It epitomises what having a passion for something is all about. Go for it and sod the consequences Certainly an interesting and rare bike. Get it sorted and out in next year's ACU Classic and add a bit of colour and variety back into the series.

Yes, definitely. I agree with what John has said as per my previous post. I'm happy just to be able to get out and ride in some traditional type trials rather than multi-lappers and am making the most of it whilst we still can as I too fear the end for these events is not too far away. I shudder at the thought of the only trials we will have permission to run are indoor or 'urban' events. I'd rather hammer tacks into my eyes... The fact is that the twinshock class in the ACU Classic has never had any problems with eligibilty over the years. Bikes have always been modified for improvement or just personalised right from the begining, but no-one carped about it because it was all within acceptable boundaries - undefined boundaries granted, but it seemed everyone knew where to draw the line. It's only the last couple of years that the rumblings of discontent began with the appearance of discs and then converted monos. If those two elements are kept out of the Classic series there shouldn't be any problem. I wouldn't stop them riding but they lose any points they score and aren't eligible for the championship. Individual club events, it's up to the clubs themselves. If riders in a certain area or club aren't happy with someone riding a converted mono, as I know is the case, they should take it up with the club officials and find out what their views are instead of quietly grumbling about it week after week. The AMCA don't run a specific twinshock championship - although there was talk of one to 'better' the ACU Classic a couple of years ago which has come to nothing - so there is no AMCA ruling on the subject. AMCA Classic clubs running their own events are responsible for their own rules

Well it's fair to say that I do love and live for my off-roading so I've gathered a few over the years, but all cheap knackers on the whole which I will rebuild bit by bit as time and funds permit. I'm not into the concours thing, I'd like to rebuild them to good condition but ultimately want to ride them all at some stage, in different and suitable events, therefore they have to be 'riders' rather than 'lookers' so I'm not fussed about 100% originality. As time marches on I get more enjoyment out of riding the twinshocks than modern stuff so the 4RT will be going due to lack of use. I'll ride twinshock in most events, couldn't care less whether they have a twinshock class in them or not, but have my old TYZ if a modern bike is ever required. I'm also rebuilding a Birkett NBT framed TYZ that I bought and rode in the SSDT this year but unfortunately blew it up... but it had had a few years hard work before I got it. The 70s was my favoutire era for trials but I could neither afford a new bike back then or get to ride in many events at all. My favourite bikes are from that era which is why I enjoy riding them now and my aim is to have some nice examples of each, mainly the Spanish 'big 3' to ride as often as possible. Although I like my Majesty, I need to get the Ossa rebuilt for next years ACU Classic as I miss riding it. I'm currently messing with a Seeley which has a RS/RTL 250 motor like the 'works' bikes and as soon as that is finished I can get back to the imprtant one - the Ossa

I don't think it was an actual statement from the ACU T&E committee that the bikes would be checked at the Greensmith. It came about as a result of a protest made at the previous round and as a consequence someone from the Greensmith organisers siad that bikes would be checked at the Greensmith. Whether this was a specific statement or just a question of should they I don't know but word got around that they would be checked. As you say, they weren't, but that aside, how can you suddenly throw bikes out of a class at the penultimate round when they have been competing in that class all year. From the bikes that were there I would say the greater percentage would have been in the specials class if the rule had been enforced. Apart from the rigids, almost everything else had non standard something fitted. I still don't know what the answer is. At least there are 2 routes in the Miller series so the easier route is fine for the bigger bikes or standard smaller bikes so there is no reason owners of those bikes can't enjoy a good days trialling. If a better rider has a standard bike then they can always ride the harder route for a challenge. Perhaps the rules could state that modified bikes ride the hard route, that way they're not competing against unmodified bikes and forget about the specials class...?? The twinshock rule that states must be twinshock of original manufacture has been in since the series began back in the 80s. It was missed out of last year's handbook by mistake but is back in now.

Firstly, forget the Pre65 Scottish as it is not governed by the ACU. Pre65 eligibilty - too late, the horse has bolted, died and gone to heaven. It is too far down the line now to draw up any rules as there are too many modified bikes out there. We can't go back now and undo all that has been done. Where would a line be drawn anyway? If a modern replacement frame is used that is significantly lighter than the original should that be allowed? Electronic ignition, alloy rims, alloy hubs? What can or can't you use, the list is endless and an absolute minefield. Trying to get back to a starting point on this would be as easy as unpicking the Bayeaux Tapestry to its starting point, stitch by stitch..... If a new set of rules was introduced who would enforce them and who has the knowledge or will to do so? Clubs are free to set and enforce their own rules as far as I am aware. The ACU can set the rules for a National championship. In the Miller championship there is a specials class for non-standard or modified bikes but such bikes still compete in the ordinary British bike class. Organisers don't insist on the riders changing class and I would guess they are just happy to see a healthy entry and don't want to deter people from riding the event next year by telling them that they have to go in this or that class or remove this or that from their bike. Bottom line is that the best riders will still win whatever they are on so if they want to battle with each other over who has the deepest pockets or best engineering skills let them. It will make no difference to the lower order who have no chance of winning and are just out for a ride. Twinshocks - Rules already exist and have done since the advent of the original Sebac serieis. Must be twinshock of original manufacture and more recently added, no disc brakes. Straightforward enough and everyone knows what it means. No monoshock bikes with twin shocks fitted. As far as changing components, my own thoughts are; Suspension - can't see a problem with fitting a modern set of Sherco/Gas Gas or whatever front forks. It's been going on for a while and personally I don't think it offers any real advantage over a decently set up pair of Marzzochis. Frame - nothing wrong in altering head angles, suspension pick up points as it was all done at the time. Swingarms were lengthened and shortened so no problem with that now. Wheels - as long as they are drums, no problem. Allow discs and sections will tighten up just like they did when they came in - one of the reasons for this series in the first place, to get away from up your own a*** sections and back to no stop Engine - Ideally, engine should be from the twinshock era but difficult to govern as there are already Fantics with 301/303/305 engines fitted which look the same as a 240/300 at a glance. What do you do, have a reference chart with engine numbers for all makes/models? Exhausts - they were modified at the time so nothing wrong in them being modified now. As long as people play the game and don't take the p*ss with modifications there shouldn't be a problem. The only one I can see is that the rule of twinshock at original manufacture has a loophole which allows someone to build their own special. If a decent rider with a lot of money at their disposal pays someone to build such a bike out of unobtanium which is far superior to a 'conventional' twinshock and starts cleaning up, what happens next? Difficult call. It's nice to see specials but maybe they should have a class of their own. A pre85 class would solve it but that would rule out RTX (although why would you...) Cotswold Majesty should be allowed as it is a 1980s frame with a 1980s copy engine. As far as a pre72, pre77, post 78 class split is concerned there is then the added problem of checking that components from the wrong era haven't been fitted. First thing I'd like to see which may encourage riders on older twinshocks back into the ACU Classic series is for that series to be run over two routes again. Riders on older machines then have an easier route to ride on but can ride the harder route if they wish. A slimline Bult for example will still cope with the ACU Classic as it is now, it just has to be ridden a bit harder than say a Fantic over the sections, but the sections aren't beyond it. A TY175 has won one round this year...

Recommended oil quantity is 220cc per leg so I'd use that as a starting point and fine tune to your liking. Same with the oil weight - personal choice really. I've never heard of 34mm Marzzochis, if they're forks from a Fantic or SWM they should be 35mm. Some very early Fantics used 32mm. Later SWM used Betor

Not sure about the gearing but front forks are same type as 200 Fantic etc - 35mm Marzzochis, so any of the trials dealers should stock them. Or just match them up at your local bearing/seal company.

No contest - 350 Bult is a far better bike. Standard TY250 has nowhere near the grunt of the Bult and some bits and pieces are no longer available from Yamaha. Plus they sound bloody awful with the standard exhaust. Look at this little beauty - 1976 type 159 325cc. They can be had for very reasonable money and there have been a few on evil bay recently. And I would guess there is nothing you can't buy new for this bike apart from maybe that particular style petrol tank. The other side Or how about this Bling Bling Bulto (bit too much bling for me but strip some of it off and it would be a real looker)

Very nice job, lovely looking bike complete with period cow-horn bars... One of those was my first proper trials bike and I have one in the shed waiting to be rebuilt like that - one day...

There is only one 200 Fantic as far as I know. The later ones may have had different forks and yolks from the early ones, not sure. Someone with better Fantic knowledge will know.

One classic round left and it is this weekend at Sheffield organised by Hillsborough. One of the best and hardest rounds. One Miller round left also, next month down south somewhere, not sure of exact details as won't be riding it. Last Miller round, the Greensmith (good trial) had about 60 - 70 entries with a fair spread of machinery - british, twinshock, trail and a few sidecars. Wrong topic for that one - no-one on this thread is going to give a hoot about FIM rules

Ossa MAR or Gripper - Cheap to buy, nice to ride especially a well set up MAR. Spares situation can be a nightmare, hopefully improving slowly Montesa 247 to 330 - early 247 are nice to ride, later bikes such as 242 are most competitive. Also can be picked up quite cheap but spares situation like Ossas, can be tricky to find stuff. Bultacos - Generally command the higher prices of the 'Spanish 3' but still under a grand for a good example. Personal choice as to which model you think of as best - a nice Vesty rep, suit you sir. Spares situation such that you can virtually build a new bike from parts thanks to the efforts of some geezer darn sarf. Yamaha TY250 / Suzuki RL / Kawasaki KT - In standard form not as good as any of the Spanish bikes in terms of competitiveness. Spares for the TY not too bad although piston kits and rod kits getting scarcer. Parts for Suzuki and Kawasaki harder to find probably. Majesty Yam far more competitive although some 250 models only on a par power wise with the standard TY. Not all had reworked engines. 320 is a great engine and can be softly tuned. Beamish Suzuki better than standard bike but steering is slow and not to everyone's taste. 325 is a great motor. Honda TL - TL250 is a great heavy lump and unlikely you'll find one for sale in the UK anyway. TL125 can be overbored to 150o or 180 and can be made to go very well. Can be picked up for a very reasonable price. Sound nice too with the right pipe. Honda Seeley - rare and commanding higher prices than more competitive twinshocks. Nice handling chassis. Fantic 200/240/300 - Probably the most competitive twinshock in standard form and don't really need anything doing to make them any better. Good examples easily had for under a grand. Spares situation not too bad but plastics may be harder to source. 200 is a briliant bike considering it's only 156cc and is the best bet for an average rider. SWM/Gori - 240/320 models are good bikes which can be bought quite cheaply in good condition and Martin Matthews is able to source spares and is having plastics remade. Rotax motor is generally reliable. 350 Jumbo the daddy of them all but the one on ebay isn't selling - why does no-one want it? Armstrong 250/320 Hiro or 240 rotax (or 350 Jumbo?) Good bikes which handle well but feel a bit short with the riding position. Hiro spares situation is not good. Rotax engine spares much better. Again can be picked up for reaonable prices. Aprilia 320 - Rare, hardly ever come up for sale and Hiro engine spares a problem Cagiva 350 - Rare and wouldn't want to try and find spares for one. Honda TLR - as you've already said, they're overpriced for what they are, particularly when compared to a Fantic.

Doesn't matter what eligibilty rules are drawn up by the ACU, it still requires club officials to enforce them at every trial and I can never see that happening. The rules are pretty clear for the Miller series but the modified bikes still enter in the normal classes instead of the specials. Club officials are just glad to get entries into the trial they have worked hard to organise and can do without the confrontation of arguing with riders about which class their bike should be in I would guess. Things have gone too far now to reverse. Personally I'm not against the modified bikes, it never bothered me riding a bog standard Ossa MAR against modernised TLR Hondas in the ACU Classic. Generally it is the better riders who have the modified bikes in their efforts to win. Put them all on standard bikes and the same riders will still win. It makes no difference to a lesser rider that the top men are on modified bikes. I could ride my 4RT against Thorpey on his Cub in the Classic rounds and he'd still beat me even with that machine advantage (Thorpey I mean as his Cub is probably better than my 4RT... ) If there were pre76 and post77 classes there would still be modified bikes and as someone has already pointed out, who has the knowledge to say which mods belong in which era. It's an impossible task. The modifying issue aside though, the 2 classes and 2 routes may encourage other riders to bring out their twinshocks. I have a few mates who would ride some ACU Classic rounds on an easier route but they couldn't cope with the single route we have now. On a personal note, If things stay the same I'm still happy as I still get to ride in some good old fashioned no-stop trials, hopefully on the Ossa again if I can get it fixed

I'd made an assumption that most riders on the easier route would be on standardish bikes as most of the better pre65 riders have modernised bikes and would be on the hard route. 'Cheat' description used merely in the context that if someone was riding the easier route on a trick/modified/fiddle/modernised/call it what you will pre65 and winning, other riders on relatively standard bikes would probably moan that they are cheating riding it on the easier route and they should be on the harder route on such a bike. If there is no championship status to the easier route though, then no advantage is gained by having the better bike. They're riding for the enjoyment of taking part, not to win a championship. Where were you today - missed a good Miller round at the Greensmith. Mr Willmore was a bit of a hero riding his Matchless today and was going very well until the second half of the trial. It was a bit of a handful on some sections. Poor sod went over the bars 3 times when the beast bit back

that's the SSDT Missed section is usually 10 but maybe the rules are different for the Scott?

There's maybe two apsects to this class issue - Club events and championship events. For club events I can't see that it matters a toss whether there is a specific class to match a type of bike such as twinshock, pre65, aircooled mono etc. In previous debates, particularly about whether mono Yams converted to twinshocks should be allowed into a twinshock class (no in my opinion) one argument put forward by several people was that it is all about not taking things too seriously and people just enjoying themselves, bums on seats etc, so why not allow the bikes in. My thoughts on that are yes, we're all for more people being able to get out there and ride with their mates, but if it isn't too serious and just about having fun, then what does it matter what class you're riding in as long as you're enjoying yourself. So if you have an aircooled mono for example and your club doesn't have an aircooled mono class what's the big deal. You just pick the route (emphasis on route, not class) that you, or the combination of your ability and the bike that you are using on that particular day feel comfortable with, and ride that route. That means entering as an expert, clubman O/40, novice or whatever and riding that route. You're riding for fun, therefore so what if there is no aircooled mono class. For years back in the 90s I rode my Ossa MAR in club and centre trials and it never bothered me that there was no twinshock class. I just rode it on whichever route I thought applicable at the time, quite often the hard route for a good challenge... Also rode it a couple of times in the Loch Lomond and Lakes 2 day events. I never entered it as a twinshock or asked the organisers for a twinshock class. Just entered on the clubman route and rode against the other clubman. For me it was the enjoyment of riding the bike in those trials, that's all. Now if you're talking of a championship for a specific type of bike (either club or national) then yes, there have to be rules and the correct bikes ridden in the correct classes. The pre 82 (should it just be open as pre 82 rules out cotswold Majesty or RTX for example) and pre 76 classes are a good idea in theory but at the moment there is not enough support either in the ACU Classic, or the Sammy Miller series to warrant it. The ACU Classic has effectively become an O/40 and aircooled mono championship with pre65 and t/s as support, whilst the Miller series seems to be suffering from falling entries (why this should be was asked on another topic a while ago) I think if there was a dedicated championship for just pre65 and t/s run over two routes not one, as the old Sebac and Falcon series used to be, which could again attract an entry of around 100 regularly, then there may be a case for splitting the t/s class as suggested. The championship class could run on the hard route with a championship for pre65 british (including the specials) championship for pre76 t/s and championship for post 77 t/s. On the easier route, the same 3 classes participate but with no championship and if someone on this route is riding what is considered to be a trick pre65 it doesn't matter as there isn't a championship to be won or lost by virtue of a 'cheat' bike. This would once again provide a national series which should cater for riders and bikes of all abilities with riders not feeling disadvantaged because their bike isn't competitive in the series (as happens now - people feel unless you have the latest t/s tackle or a trick pre65 the Classic series is too hard - correctly so as regards pre65 machines) The question is, is there a demand for this type of series again? There was once, but what about now. There are enough pre65 and t/s bikes being bought and they can't all be being bought as investments can they?Also, with the current Classic championship being so well established it would be a bold move by the ACU to break it up. Personally I have no wish to break up the format for the sake of it as a lot of mates have now become used to being able to ride together on the differing types of bikes they have in some good events, but at the same time, it isn't really a classic championship any more. Quite a few riders have jumped from the pre65 and t/s class into the aircooled mono or O/40 class. Maybe the aircooled monos and the O/40 and O/50 classes could transfer to ride an eased route at Novogar rounds and if the dates don't clash some of those riders could dig out there classics again and ride a true classic series as well with pre65, pre76 and post 77 t/s classes. At the moment, in a series that allows all types of bikes, riders take the easier option of riding the more competitive bike. This is why our local pre65 club won't allow twinshocks as the riders will take their twinshock in preference to their pre65 and the number pre65 bikes at the events will decline. Food for though or just not enough support anymore for a dedicated classic series?

Yes, I wasn't sure what he meant either. Is it 1) the best forks from post 1980 from a manufacturer that also made forks pre 1980 such as say Marzzochis of a 240/300 Fantic which look exactly the same as the Marzzochis fitted to say a late 70s SWM but probably work better. or 2) the best modern forks that you could get away with because they look similar in appearance to a set of pre 80 forks.

I've used semi synthetic in the clutch of my C15 with no problem. Full synthetic not good for clutches apparently. C15 has a seperate clutch and gearbox so not bothered what goes in the gearbox as long as it's wet.

Talon do sprockets for the Seeley and TLR so a phone call to them will establish whether they can do them in 428

Has anyone got an old TYZ mudguard with the Hamilton full length decal fitted that they don't want and would like to sell, or alternatively, would be willing to take a good photo of and e-mail it to me. I thought I had one spare myself but it must have been sold on one of my earlier bikes. These aren't available anymore and I'd like to get another made. We've had one go but it's not quite right so need an original pattern, or good photo of, to work from. Or, if anyone has a bike with one fitted and isn't really bothered whether they have the decal on their bike or not, I'd be happy to buy it off you for the cost of a replacement new guard. Picture attached of the decal in question, unfortunately. not good enough to use as a pattern

???? The project was cancelled by Yamaha after the story broke in the weeklies. It was a twinshock based around the XT500 motor. I saw a pic of in the story mentioned previously. Oops - mised out the bit about keen to be first to win the SSDT again on a 4 stroke since the 60s

Story is that with the introduction of the Hondas in the 70s, Mick was keen to be the first rider to win the SSDT on a 4 stroke so he was developing a bike with Yamaha. Not sure if the bit about winning the SSDT on a 4 stroke is correct, although one S H Miller was supposedly up for the challenge, but he was definitely developing a bike using his works twinshock frame modified to take the XT500 motor. His works frame was different from the production TY bikes as it was still based around the cantilever model. Don't think the bike ever got ridden in competition, if at all. Shame, as another factory special 4 stroke with the added rivalry with Honda would have created a lot of interest.

Mark, there isn't a 320 flywheel, they used the standard TY250 item so you already have one. Just remove the weight if you want the engine to pick up quicker.

It's not the same as an Ossa is it, where you have to centre the crank in the crankcases by tapping on the appropriate end of the crankshaft with a hide mallett. If the crank is too far to one side this may cause the rod to touch the crank itself. Just a guess as I've never had a 350 Mont apart but I've had the same problem on an Ossa. I had a 350 Montesa back in 1985/6. All red with a slimmer tank than the 349. It was brought out to capitalise on Gorgot's win in the SSDT on the prototype 330, the production version of which was running late. So they modified the 349 into the 350 until the 330 came out (I think that's right anyway...) Whatever, I loved it. Fantastic motor, pulled really well, loads of torque and grip. Awful clutch though. Wish I still had it now. Wonder where it is.