woody

This is the last Sherpa with the alloy guards. All UK Sherpas from '75 to the blue '79 model had this shape tank http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Bultaco-Sherpa-350-T-1977-direct-from-a-US-museum-the-best-youre-ever-going-see-/321971214207?hash=item4af6fad77f:g:~IoAAOSwX~dWkRJ8

Which year model are you asking about. All UK Sherpas has alloy tanks after 1973. Up to the model 150/151 they were made in the UK by a company called Homelite and fitted by the importer. They were blue/silver and completely different from the red factory slimline fibreglass tank unit. These bikes in the UK had plastic white mudguards but from the factory they were alloy From the model 158/159 the new shape tank was introduced and was made from fibreglass, but the UK market bikes were supplied with an alloy tank. They were the same shape as the standard fibreglass tank. These were fitted up to the model 182/3 and they all had alloy guards. The 198/199 had red fibreglass tank which was changed to plastic and plastic red guards, then came the all blue 198/199a with a plastic tank. Both continued to be fitted with the alloy tank for the UK market. So in the UK, the models from '75 to '79 all had the same shape alloy tank, first red then blue. Finally, the 340 had the plastic tank but UK models had another UK made alloy tank as an option which was a slightly different shape from the plastic tank.

That just about sums up the stupidity of the rules if picture 1 (B&W) is banned and picture 2 (colour) is accepted. Yes there may be a difference but just how pedantic can it be! Pic 2 looks a lot more authentic and period than a pair of Nortons with welded on extensions and modern mudguard brace. Total farce. And as the trial is no longer Pre65 but Pre68, then they should be allowed anyway, along with all the other Villiers engined bikes mentioned above

Re: tensioner, that's how they were, the last model Beamish, which is the frame you were trying to fit your engine into, didn't have a tensioner, they didn't fit them on that model for some reason. They just had a roller fitted onto a bolt that was welded to the inside of the frame behind the footrest. You'll need to weld a bracket onto the arm if you want to run the original tensioner set up, or find another means of mounting one.

I did try burning the rubber before the drill, forgot to mention that method, but for whatever reason, the rubber in the bushes in my Beamish arm just wouldn't melt. It just seemed to glow red and get harder.... but it came nowhere near to melting so no idea what it was made of. I'd used burning successfully before on some 247 Cota bushes. Good tip about the discolouring as mine did discolour slightly on one side with the heat but it's hidden by the slipper pad that Jim from Beamish Owners Club sells, so not a problem

Thanks for the replies, I'll pass the info on

10 out of 10 for perseverance with DVLA - nice write up and explanation

I did mine a few months back - living hell... I don't think there is a way of pressing them out. I drilled through the rubber section, all around the inner steel tube of the bush on both sides until the inner was effectively separated from the outer case. We could then press the inner steel tube of one side through the swingarm and out the other side, pushing the other inner steel tube out with it, as well as the centre spacer. Now we had just the outer cases to remove. We heated them and very carefully used a very thin chisel to tap between the swingarm tube and the outer case (which is quite thin) and collapse it inwards, bit by bit and taking care not to score up the inner surface of the swingarm housing. Eventually the cases will collapse enough to just drop out. I replaced them with original type bushes again (from Jim at the Beamish owners club) as in it's next lifetime following its current resurrection it will never get enough use to wear them out, so I won't have to go through it again

Thanks Guys

Good question - I don't know... Well out of touch with modern bikes and forgot there were differences in the suspension, I'll have to find out

A couple of local lads bought a new 4RT each a few months back and are having issues with the fork seals. One bike sprung a leak on one leg and it was replaced under warranty. It has now blown the other seal and the other bike has also now got a leak from one seal Neither bike has had hard use as they are both novice standard and just go out and play on them, not ride trials. They've only been used half a dozen times. Another rider who had a new 4RT has said it's an issue and replacing the seals with new standard Montesa / Honda seals won't cure the problem, you have to use green seals. The dealer is miles away but will only provide standard replacements under warranty, if they want the green seals they have to pay for them and the price that they've been given (not by the dealer) is something like £60 a pair... Has anyone come across this problem with the latest 4RT and if so how was it fixed? Seems strange to me that Honda should have a problem with fork seals, but both bikes have suffered the same issue and it also happened to the bike belonging to the rider who mentioned the green seals as a fix. Anyone know what the green seals are, or any reliable replacements other than the standard seals if they are in fact giving problems?

Do you think it's worth anything near that much Stuart? Would even a restored bike put back to original or near original get that much? I've seen much better examples than that one go for a lot less. I guess it depends what someone would want it for, if you just wanted to get it good enough to ride you wouldn't have to spend too much on it, the engine sounds healthy enough, but you have still ended up paying a fair bit over 4k for something that isn't worth it If you want one to put back to catalogue spec to just look at and not ride, or treat as an investment, it is going to end up owing you around 6k with labour unless the owner does a lot of work themselves. At a quick glance the following would need to be done for catalogue,spec: Full exhaust and heat shield - £260 Frame repaint - £100 Sidepanels - £30 Rims are wrong, new rims and wheel build - £300, maybe more if new spokes needed Tank repair, lining and respray - £300 Original mudguards - £200 Polishing / Rechroming parts - £200 Seat - £160 Original style number board - £40 Original shocks - £150? On top of that you'd need original bars with welded levers, IRZ carb and speedo kit, no idea if any of these are available or how much, although I guess they are in Spain, but maybe another £2-300 needed? You end up with a bike owing you a lot of money which is fine if you don't mind spending it and it's what you want but risky if you ever expect to recover it one day. I've spent more on some of mine than I will ever get back (although nowhere near that much) I think it's way over priced, not sure I'd even want to give half of the opening bid price for it.

Although on a personal level I don't care what they do with the rules of this trial, Including the M10 is a strange decision at best, especially after all the fuss they make about bikes and components being of Pre-65 origin and appearance, but the rules and their application have always been a contradiction If they meant to clarify that 4 speed Bultacos manufactured before 1965 - ie: Sherpa N, are allowed to compete then they've screwed up completely choosing wording which simply states 'Bultaco - 4 speed models only', as that obviously includes the M10 - a bike which is not, however anyone may want to try and convince themselves or anyone else, a Pre-65 bike. That's enough to exclude it alone. Put it in the exclusions - No M10 Sherpa T models. Then there is the final eligibility statement: None of the above exclusions shall apply to any component of any machine which is, or proven to be, Pre ’65 original factory fitment to that machine. So the M10 shouldn't be allowed on that basis either, it's a bike that wasn't manufactured until 1965, therefore you can't prove that any component fitted to an M10 was fitted to that bike before 1965 as the bike did not exist before 1965. Add to that the forks, wheel, some engine components and not to mention the overall appearance of the bike differ noticeably from the 1964 components and bike and you have another reason. By accepting the M10 into the trial, does that mean they consider that the parts fitted to it are considered Pre-65. So why are Bultaco forks and hubs listed as an exclusion on British bikes? Does it work the other way around and the M10 must use an IRZ carb and not an Amal which wasn't fitted to 4 speed models by Bultaco? It just gets more and more bizarre every year...

Seems DVLA have changed the requirement for insurance and you only need insurance now if you're registering to an address in Northern Ireland.

What about the 4 speed Ossa and Montesa - why only the Bultaco I wonder?

Early M10 had round, later M10 had the flat bottom tank

Very true - whereas it would slaughter a genuine Pre-65 bike, the modernised versions are as good as a Fantic, so yes, you're quite right

The Seeley is very light on the front. I fitted an RTL engine in one I had a few years ago and the extra torque over the 200 motor made it difficult to keep weight on the front. On up hill camber turns it just ploughed on and if you tried to float turn it didn't want to come down. If you shut off the power and then came back on up a climb the front just wanted to lift, and if you came to a near stop up a muddy or loose climb and had to sit on it and push it was almost impossible to get any forward drive as it just wanted to climb around the back wheel. I put the standard motor back in, sold the bike and the RTL engine. Of the two bikes, I preferred a mate's TLR200 I had a ride on, it felt more planted and was a standard bike, just geared properly with lower footpegs.

I think they are a reasonably rare bike in Spain as most were exported. The Spanish classic trials are structured differently from ours in that they have classes defined by era, so the 4 speed Sherpa is in the Pre-72 class. With a rider as good as any other in the class, it can be a competitive bike. When I last rode the Pre65 in 2007 there were two Spanish bikes entered, a Montesa and a Sherpa. The Montesa was maybe entered as an Impala, don't know, which were available before 1965 but only as 175cc. The first trials model was 1967 followed soon after by the Cota MK1. The bike in the trial looked and sounded like a 250. The Sherpa should have been a Sherpa N to qualify and it was dressed like one except that it had a 5 speed motor...

Blue

So it's a Pre65 trial but the 4 speed Sherpa T ran from 1965 until 1967... It just says 4 speed, not that it must be a Sherpa N or Pre65 Sherpa or that the Sherpa T is excluded. The thought process behind these regs gets ever stranger... They can make those model 10 Sherpas go pretty well with mods, so they could actually be very competitive with the right rider.

Frame was silver - Ford Silver Fox is a very good match (1960/70s colour) You can get Haynes or Clymer manuals (always on ebay) or In Motion sell a manual that covers all 5 speed models

They push in from the outside If the rear top shock mounts are level with the bottom side panel mount it's a '76 MK3 MAR. If they're level with the top side panel mount it's a '77/78 TR77 black frame, green tank, or a '79 TR77 Verde, green frame. You can check with the engine/frame number (should be the same) here http://ossa.2y.net/ossa/reference/ossaref.html

Done, should be ok now

The bike has maybe been brought in from Europe as in some countries I think they were stamped with a second chassis number, not sure which country(s) though. Germany or Italy maybe? I'm sure I've seen this before. Forks are Marzocchi and wheel is Grimeca, maybe from an SWM looking at the fork caps. Rear wheel also Grimeca. The only issue with the forks is that they are longer than Bultaco forks and will sit the bike up at the front altering the handling. They need pushing through the yokes to get the correct height back at the front of the bike but the top yoke would need to have the lip inside removed as this stops the forks being pushed through. There isn't a photo with a full on side shot, so difficult to see how much the forks affect the way the bike sits. Rear shocks are Falcons which are as good as they get, so if not worn out, there is no issue with them, as long as they were set up for that bike originally. Kickstart just looks like one from the previous models and as you say, has been bent to clear the frame as on the A and B models the kickstart can hit the frame. Motor sounds ok but hard to tell really as the sound gets distorted through speakers. The bike looks unmolested which is a bonus and just seems like and honest used example. Some prices being asked for Bultacos are ridiculous and as expected, many remain unsold as no-one is willing to pay the high prices asked. Look on completed items on ebay to see what people are actually willing to pay (obviously there may be some ringers in there...) and also to see those with high prices which have no bids and are listed over and over. For this bike, I'd say around £900 would be a reasonable price, assuming it is mechanically sound. If so it looks like something you could take straight out and ride with little expenditure. Only issue is the front forks and how much they affect the handling, but that won't stop you riding it and is something that could be sorted later if necessary.