woody

There will always be contention with observing decisions whatever the rules. Personally I think there is more contention with FIM rules than with no stop because there are more of them. Riders aren't supposed to travel backwards are they? How many times do you see a bike move backwards relative to the section to gain a couple of feet whilst being jockeyed around, hopping front and back wheels. Technically it's a 5 but is never given. Same as when they weren't supposed to hop the front wheel sideways whilst not moving forwards but it happened and was 'allowed' without penalty under the guise of 'dynamic motion' whatever thet is... But to get back to the thread, the observing rules or section time limit have no bearing on riders dallying around and being outside of the overall event time limit. This is nothing new, it's happened for decades, famously in the mid 70s at the British Experts when most of the entry was out of time for spending too much time hanging around waiting for others to scrub the sections in. They arrived at the final group out of time and were excluded. The sole reason for riders hanging back is because they don't want to ride sections that will improve with the weather, passage of other riders or both. The only solution is to call riders to ride the sections by their rider number or award 10 for a non-attempt. I remember this happening at the Vic Brittain one year, early 80s, when the observer on section 1 had half the entry stacked up with no-one wanting to ride it first. Having had enough he started to call riders through or take the 10. It worked and got things moving. He took some abuse but was strong enough not to let it bother him. Not all are. Employed in the BC, it's going to penalise some riders perhaps, but if seeded riders are last away it's not going to affect the final result and give any particular rider a regular advantage through riding numbers. Harsh on the lesser lights having to scrub sections on the first lap but it happens anyway. This way just eliminates the time problem. The rule already exists so why not use it. Introducing more rules for time percentiles per lap is just complicating things further and unecessary. It still won't stop them hanging back for as long as possible on the first lap.

Well, a mate of mine bought the TLR250 on ebay and got it for

Fantastic effort by the organisers to run the trial, given how the ground conditions must have been leading up to it and as ever, a really good event. Shortened lap didn't compromise the quality of the trial at all and the sections were set just right for a national championship. Hard but nothing daft, plenty to go at and a 5 could be pulled back instead of ending your day. A large piece of rather solid Cumbrian rock ended my day when it wiped out a footrest on about section 6 or 7. Managed to finish the lap but a second lap wasn't possible. Still, disappointment aside, thoroughly enjoyed the 1 lap I did do - made working every evening after work for the last 2 weeks until about 11pm to put the bike back together worthwhile - not to mention the night before the trial too until 9.30pm. Then half an hour before the start to run it in. Is everyone else this well prepared... Top event, well done. Now, where's the welder, only 3 weeks to the next round.

If it is cancelled is there any possibility to run it later in the year?

Apparently, not all Majesty Yams had the forks revalved, more than likely just those used by sponsered riders, the rest had standard TY damping. So if you compare the two there is no difference. I have 3 pairs of Majesty forks and they are all standard. (I'm referring to the 250 bikes here) If you take the damper rods out of the forks you will notice that at the bottom of the rod there are 2 holes opposite each other which are about 6mm diameter. Near the top of the rod are 2 more, about 2mm diameter. These control the oil flow but what you need to determine is which are for compression and which are for rebound damping. After lots of careful studying over a glass of Tizer, I still couldn't work it out. So I thought I would employ the trusted trial and error method. As a starting point with mine I reduced the 6mm holes to 3mm but noticed no change in damping, they still collapsed and I could still top them out. I may have then tried them at 2mm, can't remember, but whatever it was, still no change. I then reduced the top holes from 2mm to 1mm. This seemed to slow up rebound damping (too much) but I don't know whether it was solely down to the reduction in the top holes or a combination of that and the already reduced bottom holes. I now had compression which still felt too soft and rebound that was now too slow. It was trial and error all right, but error was way ahead in the race. It was at this point that I turned to alcohol, lost all sense of reason and boomerang'd the forks accross three of England's finest counties and fitted the TY Mono front end. The twinshock forks can be made to work well as I have ridden a bike with the damping modded and it was very good. You just need someone who can work out how the oil flows and then reduce the size of the appropriate holes accordingly. Easy...

I agree with that, but with the exception of those Homelite blue/silver models. I can't ever recall seeing them with the alloy guards, even though they were slimlines with a different tank seat/unit. They must have had the alloy guards when they left the factory so were they changed to white over here (not Gonelli, some other type) The picture on the Haynes manual also shows the white guards - I think, I'm confusing myself now.... I'm curious now though..

The TY Mono uses the same size tapered roller bearings top and bottom in the headstock - can't recall the ID and OD size or depth off top of my head. Not too sure about the smaller Yams but the 250 Godden frame I have uses the standard TY250 Yam bearings which are the ball bearing type and different sizes top and bottom. Mono yokes won't fit in these bearings and Mono bearings won't fit the Godden headstock. Maybe there is enough meat in your yokes to bore them out to take the Mono forks, or if the 200 head bearings are the same as the 250 you could fit 250 yokes and bore them out to take the mono forks. I used the mono yokes as I had a new headstock made as I was altering the steering angle anyway. If I hadn't done that I would have bored out the original yokes.

Yes, standard TY t/s forks are a bit soft in the damping and also under-sprung. There is a mod to the damping rods which involves brazing over the holes and re-drilling with a smaller diameter to slow up the oil flow. I experimented with mine but couldn't get it just right so I went the mono fork route. I tried Craig Mawlam's bike with the modified standard forks and they work very well, with the stiffer damping the soft spring rate wasn't really evident. If you can get hold of him he might be able to describe exactly what to do to them (he was told how they did it by Shirty when he bought up the Majesty stuff)

One piece tank/seat unit would be original equipment on this model (I'm assuming it is the model that it is supposed to be...)

Andy, try Ellastone Offroad as they often have Mono parts available. What are you going to do about the front wheel though? Majesty wheel won't go straight in as the bearings are smaller than the mono and if you can overcome that problem you'd also need to make something to hold the brake plate. Majesty yokes will need boring out to take mono forks. Best bet is to fit the mono forks and wheel. Mono has a better brake and there is always the option of fitting the motocross brakeplate with the external arm, or even the one with twin arms if you can find one. Ellastone should be able to do you forks and a front wheel Then again, whilst I'm waffling away about all this, you may already have a mono front wheel... Just go mine back together today - cutting it fine for Bootle as it's not even run in yet. I seem to have been in this position before.....

Most of the Hondas, RS200, TLR, RTL etc seem to be based on the same centre crankcases so most engines have the same mounting points to the frame. I've fitted an RTL engine to a Seeley and it went straight in, no changes required. The positioning of the head-steady mount on the cam cover can differ, as can the way the carburettor is mounted, but that is about it I think but I'm no expert on Hondas. That TLR on ebay doesn't actually look that bad, it's shabby but it could all be cosmetic. A stuck valve isn't necessarily a disaster, both valves were stuck in my engine but a few sharp taps on the tappet freed them off and the engine is very healthy (I know I'm going to regret that...) they were just stuck from lack of use. The last one on ebay, a few weeks ago, sold for almost

Slimline Bultaco was red/silver fibreglass tank/seat unit. The 74/75 had the Homelite alloy tank/seat unit, unique to UK due to fibreglass being outlawed, painted in light blue and silver-grey. If this is the bike you mean there is one on ebay at the moment under item number 4619432087. The only decals they had were the Bultaco roundel badge on the tank and the yellow Bultaco decal. Originally they had white mudguards whereas the one on ebay has blue gonellis. This model is also pictured on the front of the Haynes manual

I've heard that those 4 speeds in good condition can fetch up to

Yes, but different ratios. Seeley has the RS200 motor which is purpose built for trials and close ratio gears. TLR200 has a wider span on the gears as more trail orientated.

No, not me. I'm about to put a MK2 MAR on ebay myself actually. Bought it to rebuild to original condition as it is a runner, pretty well unmolested but tatty, but just don't have the time as other matters are now pressing. I've got an entry into the Pre65 Scottish after years of trying so need to free up some time/cash to get the bike ready. 4RT is already on ebay, Ossa to follow and maybe something else. The C15 is going to need some serious attention to get it prepped but I'm so chuffed to finally get a ride it will be worth it I hope. That MAR really was a beaut. I'm doing one like it myself and would like to show it next year along with a Cota 247 and Sherpa from the same era, the 'big 3' of the early 70s, but it will take a miracle... I also fell over at the sight of the 74 Phantom that was on display - absolutely beautiful and contained some bits from the Phantom I sold to him a while back, so it was nice to see they enabled him to finish his own bike to such a stunning finish.

ACU Classic this year - bike must have been fitted with twinshocks as original manufacture and no disc brakes. For club and centre events it's up to organising clubs I guess but no-one seems bothered to specify any rules and anything appears to go - like the t/s TY mono down your way. Can't say I'm too bothered about club/centre events, as long as the National Classic championship sticks to the rules. If anyone turns up on a bike that doesn't conform, let them ride but no points awarded. Back to the show, I didn't think there was as much variety in the bikes on display as last year, but the Ossa MAR more than made up for it. Nicest trial bike there for me, but I am a bit biased...

303 with twin shocks. Nice looking bike, but..... a twinshock?? Not really

I'm confused - what pictures are you looking at as you can't see that sort of detail in the pictures in this thread?

The yellow on the swingarm of that bike looks to be near the yellow of the original Majesties

Aha - a man after my own heart....

Yeah Dabster, that's what I was thinking too but I've never ridden there, I was just going by the scores of riders I know from previous Bonanza trials, they always are very low. It needs to be of the standard of a decent Classic round really, at least. I'm not Bonanza bashing here though, just curious that's all. It doesn't clash with any of the Classic rounds so I'd like to give it a go. Aywaille doesn't clash either so I'm desperate to get out there. I've copied and pasted the dates of the rounds below as the link seems to take you directly to Todotrial home page now..?? EUROCUP CLASSIC TRIAL Date Place Country Classes 15-16/04 Aywaille Belgium Pre-65 and Twinshock 13-14/05 Casalborgone Italy Pre-65 and Twinshock 24/06 British Bike Bonanza Great Britain Pre-65, Twinshock, to sidecar 05-06/08 Ebenau Austria Pre-65, Twinshock, to sidecar 23-24/09 Arnhem Holland Pre-65, Twinshock, to sidecar 30-31/09 Gressenich Germany Pre-65, Twinshock, to sidecar

Beamish tank on ebay now ebay

I thought at first that they may have mounted the mudguard over the loop but it does appear that the loop has been cut off and extensions welded on to sit the mudguard higher. Now too high in my opinion and doesn't look right

Yup thats the one! They dont make them like that anymore - I wonder how many Gas Gas / Beta / Sherco bikes said gentleman would have gone through in the time he has owned that bike? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That will be Duncan Mitchell then. Rode around with him some of the time in 03 when I was on my TYZ and again a bit last year. He's a right character and was chuffed to bits when he was pictured on Todotrial last year. I remember how soft and smooth the motor sounded. It reminded me of how my '98 Z sounded after I'd had it ported by Nigel Birkett and I asked him if he'd had his done too. Och no he said, that's just half a dozen SSDTs have softened it a little, it's still on the original rings...

Hard to tell from the pictures but looks like a Godden Majesty that someone has converted. There weren't any Majesties that were mono as standard