woody

So when is someone going to discover EOR 2K

I've always liked the Spanish bikes but as to which is better, the SWM from yellow/black model is the better bike. Only thing that lets it down is the clutch but it can be sorted. Once you get to the Jumbo framed bikes, both 240 and 350, they left the Bultaco behind, as you'd expect. The Jumbo frame 240 is probably right at the top of the twinshock tree, the 350 has fantastic torque but needs someone who can make use of it, a novice bike it isn't...

Gear ratios are fine on the 5 speed, you're never ever going to use 4th for a section but it pulls no problem on tracks, it's not a big enough jump to make the motor bog when going from 3rd to 4th up hills. If you want a real jump in gear ratios, try going from 4th to 5th uphill on an Ossa...

Really, I can't see the point of initially allowing riders to spend money on a foreign carb and spend time getting their bikes set up to run well with it, then revoking the rule so that they have to spend another £150 on another new carb and spend more time trying to get the bike to run exactly as it did before. Just causes unnecessary time and expense for riders It's ok to have a Cub that looks nothing like period and bears absolutely no resemblance whatsoever to a 1964 machine in terms of appearance in either overall silhouette or individual components - which is contrary to the overall desire of maintaining period appearance - but you can't have a foreign carb because it doesn't look period. What is the point really after all this time using foreign carbs? Bring them into line with the Scottish? Why? If clubs want to run events for bikes using only genuine Pre65 parts and of Pre65 appearance why don't they just do that and put everything else in the specials class

Original price he wanted was £4k so yes, £3k over priced at that time. It's been gradually reduced throughout four attempts to sell. £2500 is still way over what it's worth. Ossas just don't make that sort of money. As a bike to use, it needs tyres and shocks which is £300 added to whatever the asking price. Add to that the fact that the mechanical state of the motor is unknown as the statement about a professional rebuild is worthless until the engine is tried and proven to be (I've heard some professional rebuilds before...) so there is the potential for more cost there. You have to wonder how well it would perform with that carb in actual competition as well. A tidy MAR ready to go can be bought for £1200 - £1500 so why would you want to pay £2500 for that one? Half a dozen trials and the look has been scuffed off and lost anyway, along with any 'value' those looks may have added. If it's just for the looks and not to ride, then they're wrong if you want to nit-pick it. Decals are MK2 and wrong shape and colour and the MK1, which is what that is, didn't have the alloy tank and decals, it had the fibreglass tank with broad green stripe painted on, as did the sidepanels. It doesn't even have the Mick Andrews decal... I'd guess the lug on the front fork that holds the brake plate is broken off as it has a heath robinson torque arm fitted which is not a MAR fitment. Guards should be alloy and hubs polished not black. All academic I know but if you're asking top money for a bike, it's only going to appeal to collectors, not someone who wants one to compete on, and a collector, if they know what they're about would expect it to be accurately restored. That isn't. If it didn't have the May connection, I'd wager people would be calling it over priced. To have one just to look at, you could buy a bike for around £700 and just do a cosmetic rebuild on it, not having to worry about mechanicals. It would look just as good or better than that and you'd still have change from £1500 total. Seller is just trying to make a killing using May's name

It's about the fourth time they've tried to sell it now. I've no idea why a bike sitting in James May's shed for 12 months adds about £3k to the price. No-one in their right mind would pay that for it. I read 'thinning my collection' as I bought this hoping to make a quick killing with it

They're made here http://www.tyoffroad.co.uk/

46 rear was standard on the MK1 MAR with, I think, 12 front, They went to 11 / 42 with the MK2. I've run 10 / 42 a few times over the years mainly for a low 1st for real nadgery stuff. To fit a 10 tooth you need to space the nut away from the sprocket as the chain can catch. There used to be a nut with a shoulder on one side to space it away from the sprocket but not sure if you can get them now.

Is it just the light from the other end, looks odd as the bearing spacer is tilted? MAR doesn't have those raised bits in the castings for the nut retainers and bearing housing looks different (from the photo at least)

I've had a 10 tooth but there are no manufacturer's markings so no idea who made it, but Talon don't do them off the shelf. They will make them to special order, and it's about £90 for the set up. With a 9 tooth the chain would probably foul the sprocket nut. In Motion here in the UK will have up to 48 tooth I think for a 528 chain - edit - I meant 520

That cost is to make the modification when they're first being built new, not to modify an existing pair, that will cost a lot more as it will be a strip and rebuild which will involve new seals, bushes etc as Robin won't re-assemble with the old components. They are also old Falcons looking at the design, colour etc so not sure they could be converted. I couldn't see your picture originally but can see it now - as someone else pointed out the rod should go on the inside. It should still bend around the inside of the shock ok. It's the same issue on all bikes now since all shocks became upside down

As someone else mentioned, it sounds very much like a blocked pilot jet or maybe the pilot circuit itself seeing as the bike has been standing for a few years. The pilot circuit can stop a bike running altogether if it is blocked. Crank seals wouldn't give the problem you have. Carb cleaner may not always penetrate a blockage, a sonic cleaner as you've mentioned should have more success. Also, a friend of mine has had success by gently warming a carb with a blow torch (obviously you need to be careful with how much heat) which has melted some sort of gooey deposit in the pilot circuit which his sonic cleaner didn't remove The Amal carb itself is fine unless it is worn (same as any carb) If it isn't blocked and it's not worn, with new jets and slide etc the bike will run fine. I'm using a MK2 Amal on a 1972 325 at the moment with no problems.

No you can't, they are made to work with the body at the top, they won't damp properly if you fit them with the body at the bottom. You should be able to bend the rod to clear the spring as it's the same issue on most bikes

2003 was a bad bike, mainly because of the engine's abrupt power delivery, the chassis was good. They had the engine sorted for 2004 before he ever swung a leg over it based on advice from Barros who had ridden the V5 Honda The 2004 bike was good, not as good as the Honda but still good, Rossi was just a better rider than the others at that time.

I never really understand what people mean when they refer to what he's brought to Motogp in terms of new supporters and that it would have collapsed without him. Many of the fans he's attracted aren't interested in the sport itself, just him, only him. They jeer and boo other riders on the podium, they cheer and scream when another rider crashes out when those riders are riders that can challenge and beat their hero. At Mugello in his first year on the Ducati there were high hopes of a win. When it became apparent during the race that it wasn't going to happen thousands left early, so many that the race commentators couldn't believe it - despite the fact that another Italian had a real chance of winning. Some fans of Motogp - When he's gone, they'll be gone. And despite what has been claimed about being a sponsor's magnet, Yamaha never did secure big money sponsorship when he returned. He has fantastic ability on a bike but the character (the real one beneath the media mask) leaves a lot to be desired

I'd be surprised if the crank from one of the other 250 5 speed models wouldn't fit, some were single, some double main bearing on the clutch side. If you're in the UK have you asked Bultaco UK

So do you condone Rossi's riding against Lorenzo in Motegi 2010, which was aggressive and could have brought them both down, when he wasn't in the fight for the championship - or would you criticise him for that behaviour the way Marquez is being criticised now?

Rossi was quite happy to interfere with Lorenzo's title challenge in 2010 when Rossi himself was way out of it. In Motegi he put some questionable moves on Lorenzo and they could easily have both gone down racing for third place. Why did he do that (to a team mate as well) instead of letting Lorenzo go? What's the difference? Personally I thought he was perfectly entitled to fight for 3rd place as every rider in the race is entitled to try and finish in the highest place possible. To say they shouldn't race a championship contender is rubbish. He also raced him in the following race at Sepang, in both races he took points from him. Marquez did nothing wrong in Sepang. Pedrosa was too fast for anyone, Lorenzo passed Rossi and Rossi couldn't get him back and then Lorenzo got Marquez when he went wide - which is how Rossi also got past him afterwards when Marquez made the same mistake. He was on the ragged edge fighting for that 3rd place so how that can be judged to be riding slower than he was capable fck knows and to say he bears a grudge against Rossi because of two previous races is just buying into Rossi's well practised PR spin. He's been a **** stirrer for years laying blame with others. No-one knows how Marquez feels about those two races apart from Marquez himself, so it's pure conjecture. Marquez had every chance in Sepang to bash fairings and really slow Rossi if he'd wanted to but he made every effort to avoid actual contact in the passes, even though a couple were close. You can see him sit the bike up in other passes when Rossi leans on him. He could easily put him off track and made it look a racing incident. Just like Rossi did to Gibernau (that's racing Sete was the quote remember) In PI, if Marquez had wanted to help Lorenzo why did he go flat out to win on that last lap with another braking maneouvre that could have gone wrong and taken them both out. Do people really think that Marquez who was third on the penultimate lap new he could win that race from where he was, that he was able to calculate his lap time, factoring in having to stay ahead of two other riders, to give himself enough time to catch Lorenzo and pass him on the last corner - which included factoring in the premonition that Lorenzo was going to make a mistake and be nearly half a second slower on his last lap. If Lorenzo hadn't run wide in that corner Marquez wouldn't have caught him. Iannone did as much damage to Rossi in that race as anyone by fighting with him when Lorenzo and Marquez were over a second ahead with Marquez in the lead. I agree it's a pity the stewards decision may influence the outcome but it's Rossi's own actions that are the cause, no-one else's. He lost his head and what he was thinking when he accused Marquez of lying about being a fan as a young boy, no-one except him will know, but talk about plumbing the depths to taint the image of another rider. Dismal. Marquez is no saint, but neither is Rossi. He's just the man who enjoys the battle, until he's on the losing side

Love the pictures of the frame conversion - that's a great idea for the jig you came up with

Don't know anything about that particular oil but if it's full or semi-synthetic then 50:1 is ok

Gearbox takes 600cc - any modern gear oil Clutch takes 300cc - if still using the original type steel plates use ATF. If fibre plates have been fitted you can use light gear oil or continue with ATF Forks take 180cc maximum per leg - weight is personal choice but 10W is a good base to start For 2-stroke oil, 747 is good oil but a bit overkill for a trials bike which isn't on constant high revs. It's really for high revving performance engines. The main issue with it is that it is castor based and if mixed with normal synthetic oil it can emulsify in the engine. I think some people have swapped between the two by draining all fuel from the tank and carb before adding premix with the other oil (ie: whether going to or from A747) and had no issues but it's probably not guaranteed. You also have to use it fairly quickly after mixing it as if you leave it in the tank afterwards it can absorb moisture. You can continue to use 747 at the mix suggested, it won't cause any harm - if you've any doubt speak to the Castrol helpline for their opinion. It's just a bit more expensive than their synthetic based oil TTS Power 1.

Why the lengthened swingarm out of interest, as they weren't lengthened on the Majesty

Last of the 349 models, either a Cota 349/4 or a 350 (same bike, different colour schemes) Not sure why he thinks it's a 4 stroke.... They were released in 1983, good bikes.

Sounds like a major exercise to restore the frame to original but a decent fabricator could do it with pictures. The chances of finding another model 10 frame are next to nil Or you could get a better bash plate made and bolt a bracket to that for the bottom mount, as they did with the Beamish Suzuki

The hubs are Elsinore CR125 not MT Elsinore which are very different. I'm prettty sure the CR and TL250 share the same hubs back and front. The front brake plate on the Seeley has the hideous looking torque arm because the Honda forks had a lug to fit into the slot to anchor it. The Seeley forks are Marzocchi, the same as Fantic 200, so need a torque arm. As far as I remember Seeley used the Honda spindle and I recall the spindle / spacer arrangement on mine was a real lash up to fit the Marzocchis. I think the forks had to be sleeved to take the smaller diameter spindle - but it was a few years ago I had one now. On the rear, the brake plate is turned almost 180 degrees and anchored differently on the Seeley in comparison to its original fitment on the TL, to avoid a torque arm I guess, resulting in the crazy positioning of the brake arm