woody

Come on g4321, you have to be a bit more realistic than that. You can't just say fitting those carbs is not in the spirit of Pre65 therefore he shouldn't do it. Why not? As I said before, define the 'spirit'. Visit any Pre65 trial in England/Wales (I obviously can't speak about Scottish rules/regs for individual clubs) and the vast majority of bikes are modified in one way or another. By definition, that means not too many people want to ride standard Pre65 bikes, therefore to my mind that defines the spirit. Should you also not fit modern shocks, handlebars, exhaust systems. Where do you draw the line? You're giving duckwizard the impression that the bike shouldn't be modified at all. He's going to take it to a trial and then wonder why most of the others have been, unless the regs and rules imposed by the Scottish clubs really are that strict. But then how is eligibilty policed? As t-shock 250 has already pointed out there are bunches of very clever people around making modern components look like Pre65 items. There is only a demand for this because people want it. They prefer to modify the components of their bikes to make them work better than the originals - or to work better than other peoples. And that is because they want to win or do as best as possible. Maybe that is the spirit - to win by whatever means it takes..... And I'm sorry duckwizard, but in spite of all this I still can't offer you any advice on the which is the best carb to use as I simply don't know.........

The spirit of Pre65? what is that exactly these days? I don't wish to start an argument on this as that is certainly not the intention, but from the bikes I see, the original concept of the spirit of Pre65 is long gone. Having owned a standard B40, if I tried to ride it on todays Pre65 sections it would put me in touch with the spirit world, I know that much.... The Sammy Miller series was intended to cater for standard, unmodified British bikes and the sections were to be of the nature of 50s and 60s sections. This year they have allowed Spanish bikes to participate so I did a local round on my Ossa, mainly to get some time on the bike after not being able to ride most of the year and as it was a nice ride around the Clee Hills. All of the Pre65 front to mid runners were on modified bikes. I tried a 500 Ariel afterwards and was genuinely shocked at how good it was. I could hop the back end for chrise sake..... It was as light as my MAR, steered better, front forks were better, brakes better and it put the power to the ground better. And it is eligible and has been ridden in the Pre65 Scottish. None of the top riders in the Pre65 Scottish ride unmodified bikes. Modern steering, modern fork internals in old casings, alloy hubs machined from billet, alloy rims, modern clutches, primary chain drives converted to belt drive, cubs and BSAs that perform better than standard TLR Hondas. Hundreds, and for 4-strokes, thousands, of pounds spent on the engines. You only had to watch Mick Grant go up pipeline last year on his cub. When did cubs ever go like that? I defy anyone to repeat that ride on a standard cub - I don't mean to clean it, i just mean the way the bike performed. So where does the spirit of Pre65 begin/stop? Damned if I know now, things have moved on too far. I don't understand how people can be enthusiastic about riding British Bikes, but only after they have modified them out of all recognition. If they are British bike fans why not ride them as standard and limit the mods to just carburettors and electronic iginitions. These are the weak areas that can stop a bike from running. Modernising those components makes them reliable and owners won't be pushing them everywhere due to worn out carbs and electrics, but riding them instead, which is after all the point. Leave the rest the same as the factory made it. Then it is a 'truer' Brit bike, suspension, steering weight etc. But they are awful to ride like that though aren't they. It's why Malcom Rathmell won't ride one again. Quote - they were crap then and they're crap now. Personally, I see putting a modern carburettor on the cub as a really minor issue. After all, the intention is only to make the engine carburate more effectively which means, most importantly, consistently and reliably. The old British carbs, worn out, dribbling and flooding just mean you are more likely to spend time pushing the bike than riding it and there is not much point or fun in that. The owner is more likely to give up on it and chuck it back in the shed. Yes the carb will improve performance slightly but not that much in isolation. Not as much as Honda internals........ Having said all this I am certainly not against the modified bikes. I don't think they should be banned as things have gone too far and I think the whole of the Pre65 scene, specifically what can or can't be modified, needs looking at as the 'spirit of Pre65' has changed now. I can't understand why the Otter BSA feaured elsewhere can't participate in the Pre65 Scottish. I know the oil in frame isn't Pre65 but neither are the fiddle forks, lightweight hubs, modern engine internals and so on of the bikes that are allowed to compete. As good as that BSA looks it is still no match for the 'regulars'. Finally, please don't think I am anti Pre65 as I'm most certainly not. I love anything to do with off-road and I love the ingenuity of the people that do the mods. Wish I had a halfpenny's worth of their ability. I'm just confused about the 'spirit' issue nowadays. There are some beautiful creations out there, It's nice to see them used, I've ridden a few and I want one (some..!!) ....

Yep - 4-stroke enduro bikes can also push the front end in certain conditions compared to a 2-stroke - ie; anything slippy. Down to the engine and the extra weight. Anyway, this test that you are going to run boys. Do you want me to bring my TYZ along so that you can judge the power characteristics of your bikes against the benchmark of what a REAL trials engine should perform like....... seamless torquey endless power. mmmmmmmm nice..... Oroit, Oi'll get me coat,

chuffed = happy

On the subject of bike tests, I think no matter how honest or objective a tester tried to be, even down to listing what they believe to be the bikes strong points or faults, it is ultimately just an opinion - their opinion. Whilst it's natural to value some people's opinion higher than others, due to their ability on a bike, as a development rider, their experience or whatever, it's possible that the characteristics of the bike that they feel and report may not be apparent to most club riders due to their lower level of ability, so is there any value to be taken from a test by Joe Clubman anyway. Personally I think not much as I still believe the only way is for riders to try the bikes themselves on 'proper sections' and under proper 'event conditions' in order to get a feel for whether a bike will actually suit them. One publication that does tend to try and 'tell it like it is' is TBM. I remember when the WR400 Yam came out and in addition to pointing out its virtues, they also criticised it heavily where they felt it was warranted - too heavy, tank too big, not easy to move around on and they really went to town on the cardiac inducing hot start routine and the lack of the leccy start. Result was a big fall-out with Yamaha UK who subsequently wouldn't provide anymore bikes for tests and I think withdrew advertising. A couple of years or so that lasted for I think before they 'made up'. But they stuck by their principles and have criticised bikes since, whatever the marque, whenever they think it is justified, including Yamaha again with the WR450 as being too heavy and too powerful. However, as informative as their tests are, it is still possible to try a bike that they have provided a very detailed write-up on and come to a different conclusion on some of the issues raised. Hence my opinion that the only way to know is to try it yourself. We know by now that the TMX or Dirtbike tests of trials bikes are only going to give a high level overview of the bike and that the only way to be sure is try before you buy. On the subject of importers/dealers withdrawing advertising it has happened before to TMX remember, when the grey import issue first surfaced 6 - 7 years ago. One of our local blokes was a prime instigator in this... The importers and some dealers withdrew their adverts from TMX in protest for a few weeks - I think because the 'grey' dealer was advertising in TMX also, but can't remember now. So there is a precedent for them to do it if they get upset by things they see or read that they don't like.....

Don't think there is anything wrong with the TYZ motor, it's penty good enough to keep the SY competitive for a while yet, but perhaps the question is how much longer can/will Yamaha supply it. It could be that issue that forces Scorpa down an all 4-strole route. (I have no idea obviously, just a possiblity)

If you ever get to ride a 4-stroke enduro bike down a snotty Welsh hill you may change your thoughts on that as the back overtakes the front....... In the dry it's useful, in the wet it is a clutch in and brakes job. I'm still of the opinion that you can't categorically state which is best for grip, 2 or 4-stroke. Regardless of the physics theory and mathematical equations it comes down to the type of engine and bike and the conditions being ridden. I've owned a YZ426 and a WR426 Yam. The YZ has such quick power off the throttle it was impossible to feed power in gently in slippy woods. It would just spin up and step the back out. The WR is more gentle so power can be fed in a bit slower with less spin. Still a handful though. Mates 2-stroke 300 KTM is very soft so doesn't spin up and finds grip much more easily. All three make about the same horsepower but the Yams have a much quicker delivery. Technically I can't even begin to explain how that works.......

Had my Ossa wheels built by Central Wheel about 12 years ago using stainless spokes. Bike has been used regularly in all sorts of events including Lakes and Loch Lomond 2 days and never had to even tighten one spoke in that time. Shame I can't say the same for the rest of the bike though but it has had a hammering. After that I've used stainless every time and they also stay bright and don't corrode. Galvanised don't corrode either but just look scabby (my opinion) Even the original Ossa stainless spokes have remained good in wheels I haven't rebuilt. The problem with them is the alloy nipples which corrode so you can't tighten loose spokes. As you can't get the nipples now it means the spokes are useless.

Charlie - I don't really think there were any specific mods of the kind you mention that were done to these bikes at the time. The works guys were always experimenting with stuff but those are the changes that probably found their way onto later models, but the later models were different bikes again. Settings/geometry from later bikes don't necessarily work on an older model. Why do you want to mod it (that's a genuine question, not a 'you shouldn't do it' statement) The bike is just as competitive as the Bults and Ossas of that era. Which one you rode was personal preference as they could all win events straight from the crate. There was nothing else to touch the Spanish three really until a few years later on. If you modify it you may not be able to compete against same era bikes - don't know what your rules are. If you want to make it more competitve, you may as well go for a later twinshock like the 330 (oooh yes please) as no matter what you do to the 247 the later bikes will destroy it performance wise - unless you change it beyond all recognition. I've been down this train of thought with my MAR. In the UK the national twinshock series is full of Fantics, TLR Hondas etc. My 74 MAR is by far the oldest bike that turns out on a regular basis. There is no pre75 class, twinshock is anything after 1965 and single route sections. If the sections get tough the MAR is outgunned. I've tried to think of ways of making it more competitive against the later bikes, but without radcally altering the chassis, re-engineering the clutch and fitting different wheels for better brakes it will never have the feel of the latest twinshocks. It just wasn't worth it and I don't have the skills anyway so I am now getting a Majesty ready for the 05 series. One day I might have another think about modernising the MAR but only because I have enough scraggy bits lying around that are in such a condition already I'm not going to ruin anything by trying. If I only had one MAR, I'd leave the mods to just personal changes like footrest position. If I were you with that 247, I'd rebuild it like the one in the picture that HondaRS posted. That is a stunning bike. If you could find a second one however, then go for it...

The auction for the Seeley was withdrawn before its end date. You will need to search under Motorcycles - Completed items - Seeley Or just search from home page under the item number which is 4510018278

There is a very nice looking Seeley on ebay at the moment and the bidding is just about to start launching skywards by the look of it (and I mean nice in appearance, not condition as that is hard to tell from photos) What you can see from the photos is the Ossa forks and front wheel....... Not quite original spec. then

Sorry Charlie - I can't help you out with the science of it. It baffles me too and I have no idea how it works the way it does. By all reaonable thinking, releasing the compression should make it go quicker you would have thought. If I pulled in the valve lifter on my 426 Yam whilst rolling down a hill in gear, throttle off, I am pretty sure it would accelerate. I not going to try it though as valves are expensive..... PS - it is a must have accessory for the discerning Spanish 70s classic owner. Period fitment..... or at least in the UK it was. It was definitely the only way to stop the buggers

Munch - it's still light outside, why aren't you still out on it. Or are you hiding from Dabster.....

It provides very effective engine braking when the engine is running. It will stall the engine on anything up to say three quarters throttle. Over that the engine will carry on running. Consequently, as long as the clutch lever is not pulled in.... and the ground offers enough traction it becomes a very effective rear brake on downhills. By slowing the engine down it also slows the back wheel, giving the braking effect. Once you get the feel for this you can use it as a brake without stalling the engine, juggling it on and off during a decent. It works pretty well. Of course, if the ground is too sippery to offer much traction, the decompressor will just stall the engine, as it would if the bike were in neutral, as the rear wheel has nothing to drive against to keep the engine turning. When I used to use my Ossa MAR on the road regularly back in the 70s, hooning around with my mates on their road bikes, not to mention the odd trip to school, in the absence of efective brakes the decompressor made a very good substitute. Makes a hell of a noise too if pulled in at speed. For those familiar with Monty Python, it must sound like Mr Creosote farting. Pedestrians would leap out of their skins when the decompressor was pulled at 50 - 60mph for some hard braking. Bus queues were always a good source of amusement too. If you brake using the clutch/brake method, the 'deek' is no use to you but if you use the engine it can be a very useful tool indeed. Also audibly warns other riders inspecting the section to get out of the way - Ossa with no brakes approaching rapidly... Oh yes - I almost forgot. That really is a cracking Monty. Beautiful looking bike - almost as nice as a MAR

Having owned a 400 Yam you are correct BUT remember how much more power the Yamaha has than the KTM - try comparing like for like - a 250 2st - say a CR Honda - this has a lot less traction than a 400 Yam - watch the start of a MX race - the 4strokes power away first. In addition the Yam can be made more user friendly by addition of a flywheel weight. The 200 KTM is a very soft engine by comparisson. I understand what you're saying there but the terrain and grip level at the start straight of a motocross track which is a flat out blast, differs a lot from the snotty, slippy going in a typical woods/forest based enduro, where careful throttle control is needed. Modern high revving short-stroke enduro/motox motors need good riders to overcome their willingness to break traction in those conditions. An XR400 and even an XR650 will be more forgiving powerwise in those conditions than a 400/426 Yam or CRF450 Honda, due to the engine characteristics. My mates 300 KTM 2 stroke, which is more on a par with the 426 power output, is still more forgiving and grips easier than my Yam as it is again quite soft lower down the revs. I just think, from my experience, that there is no definitive 2 stroke is better than 4 stroke, or vice-versa, in terms of the ability to grip, it's more down to how the engine delivers the power. And after the last 2 events I'm definitely on the lookout for a 2 stroke enduro...

Well, I haven't anything scientific to add to this but from my trials and enduro experience I have the following observations. A 2 stroke 200 KTM enduro will find grip and is a lot less prone to spinning up the back wheel than a 4 stroke 426 Yam. The KTM delivers its power in such a way that there is no instant reaction to the throttle low down in the rev range, the power is introduced gently. The 426 Yam on the other hand (which I have) delivers instant torque and power at the touch of the throttle and will spin up very easily if you aren't careful with the throttle - even if pulling a higher gear. They just react straight away. Out of the two, the KTM is easier to ride and finds grip more naturally. In trials, from participating in classic events which throw 2 and 4 strokes together, it is noticeable that the bigger Brit thumpers (which I am sure only fire once every 5 yards....) will find grip - in some conditions - more naturally than the 2 strokes. I am sure this is down to the way the power is delivered as the Brit thumpers deliver the power in a completely different manner from the 426 Yam. It is slower and less aggressive and so has a tendency to spin up less easily. The 2 strokes deliver the power a bit quicker from lower revs, so there is more chance of breaking traction. Unless it is a bog standard Pre65 2 stroke where you will wait about a week for any reaction to the throttle... they grip quite well.... I think whether it is 2 or 4 stroke the ability to grip is down to the way the engine delivers the power and how also well the rear suspension is working as that too can make a difference. Of course, as is sod's law, just to contrdict the suspension set-up theory I have regularly seen a rider on a rigid Bantam - so there is no rear suspension at all - drive up muddy banks like they are tarmac with no trouble at all, when other machines are spinning and struggling. Must be due to the fact that it hasn't enough power to spin the wheel on ice wearing a slick....

And there were also a couple of the black beta techno Dougie replicas imported directly around here when they came out. How did they go in the Midlands mud? let me think for a minute. Oh Yes, I remember. In the words of the old Dead or Alive record; You spin me right round baby right round..... Or as Murray Walker used to say SPIN SPIN SPIN

You're thinking back too far. The last couple of years has seen an improvement and there have been some good trials. One or two could still be a bit stiffer but that is the problem if it is a combined sidecar / classic round. However, no-one cleaned any of the trials. As you know Nigel Birkett rode them this year and if he didn't clean any they can't be too bad. The only one I am sceptical of for 2005 is the Doncaster Cup as that has been far too easy in the past on more than one occassion. Hopefully they will have taken notice and improved the standard this time. The Otter Vale round in October can also be a bit easy I'm told but it is one I've never done. Out of the remainer though you have Bootle, Welsh Trophy, Lancs County, Torridge, Hillsborough, all of which are good trials. New for this year are the Sutton Falcons, which should be good, and the Cambourne and Redruth which I assume Colin Dommett will have a hand in, so that too should be good.

Mark - the first round is in February as far as I know - the Mansell. link below http://www.trialscentral.com/cms/showartic...p?articleID=790 Also, this is the link to 2005 calender which shows other rounds http://www.trialscentral.com/cms/showartic...p?articleID=812 You will need proof of age to get an age related plate but Yamaha UK are usually very helpful in this respect and will send you confirmation. If it is a genuine UK bike they will do it free of charge, if it was an import they charge -

For the Classic series next year the power of a TY175 would actually be ok. There was only one trial where power could offer an advantage through mud and up big climbs - Colchester - but it isn't in next year. The TY would still cope there as you just use the lower gears and scream it till your ears bleed. You just have to be more precise as there is less margin for error on those types of sections with the smaller engine, as if you're in a big gear you can't back off and go again if you get in a mess. A real shame this round is omitted as there were some BIG sections where you could really get on the throttle stop. With the other rounds there aren't really any events where power will be an issue. Most are technical sections rather than power sappers so suspension set up is more important than power, along with the ability to clutch/brake where necessary. Some rounds, like Bootle, Torridge etc. may have just one or two sections where power may give an advantage but these are the exception rather than the rule and still nothing that the TY can't cope with. Vitually all of the bikes are standard in reality. Nigel Birkett's Suzuki is indeed his 70s works bike, with the exception of the frame, so it is a one-off and nothing like a regular Beamish. The only bikes to come in for some modification are generally TLR250s as they aren't that good as standard and need a few tweaks (they're not bad, before I upset all TLR owners, just need a few tweaks to improve a few areas) All of the other marques are just ridden as they are. Again, most important thing is that the suspension/clutch/brakes work correctly. It isn't like Pre65 where you have to spend thousands to make a bike work to be competitve with others that have done it. Most later twinshocks can't be improved on that much that it will give anyone a significant advantage, so it isn't as costly as Pre65 to be competitve and you can still get decent bikes for reasonable outlay. If you don't buy the bike you are going to look at, get in touch with me and I can put you in touch with someone who has a few TY175s for sale, as well as an immaculate Whitehawk 200 which has done virtually nothing from new if you wanted to stretch that far. Something unique for the series - no-one else is riding one. It still has the 'whiskers' on the original tyres I think. I've never ridden one though so can't tell you what they go like. As HondRS says, given your preference for Yams, a 250/320 Majesty is worth considering although the 320s can be a handful - depends how they've been tuned. Finding a good one is also a problem. Whichever bike you decide upon, you should enjoy the series as it is starting to pick up again these last couple of years. As long as you're not expecting a trail ride though as some can offer a good challenge. Nothing silly (some may argue that about Colchester....) just tradtional type sections, but remember it is a national championship. The Mansell is on the easier side compared to some others. As long as the bike functions as it should it will be ok. Go into it on something with plank like suspension and no brakes and you will struggle.

make that 100% Juan is the older brother. Both brilliant riders and all rounders. Juan also has a liking for classic trials bikes and can ride those a bit too.

Yes, I can understand him being reluctant to tell what he's done if he's spent a long time doing R & D on it. First thing is to get the bike running with the standard motor and take it from there. Don't want to do anything that means altering the standard frame on the Seeley.

Definitely be interested to talk to him if you have a number to find out what he's done to convert to 250 - be even nicer if it would go out to 270 or 280 or so - just to get a bit more punch and torque out of the motor. If it can be done with tiger cubs..... I'm saying this and I haven't even tried the stock bike for power yet, it might be perfectly ok - but I am a touch over 16 stone so then again....

Yes, his are the contact details I have misplaced. When I've found them I can ask him how it was done. I've never ridden a Seeley so don't know what to expect when I get it built but even if I don't like it to ride, I just love the look of them. Like you say, they were built as a smaller version of the 360 which was a nice looking bike - almost as nice as an Ossa MAR.... One more thing I'm not sure about. I thought engines in the TLR200 and the RS200 (which is the motor used in the Seeley) were different units. Are they the same unit then, do you know?