woody

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

Just SORN it before you sell it and you'll get a refund

The basic frame was probably unaltered right through production, the R models had less bracketry than the S or N models which came street legal with lights, indicators etc etc, the R had none of that First models had some issues with the rear of the engine casing breaking where the pivot ran through it, not sure if there may have been changes to sort that out, but that was very early on.

To be honest, you've more chance of getting accurate information on registering, licencing, or scrapping of vehicles from the Beano than you have DVLA Unless the law has changed I don't know why someone there has told you that. To register a bike for the road means it has to comply with the regulations for use of a vehicle on the road, which means it has to be taxed as you're registering it for road use. To tax it you have to have insurance, so how can they say you can register it without insurance...? it's an offence to have a taxed vehicle uninsured. I've spoken to them recently about the vehicle scrappage procedure and the two people I spoke to hadn't a clue about how it workled and who was responsible for notifying who of what. I lost the will to try a third person... For NOVA and newly imported vehicles, it's the responsibility of the person importing it to register it with NOVA and confirm duties have benn paid, so you'd expect an officially imported new trials bike to come with NOVA approval from the importer / dealer.

As per last post, that seems to be the best source of supply if you can find them. Can't verify about the Puma / Vazquez bikes but I don't think any of the liners fitted here use cast iron as no-one seems able to get it. Several of mine have been done with 'ordinary' steel (don't ask what grade etc. I've no idea and know nothing about metal grades) rather than cast and with modern brake shoe linings are perfectly acceptable in terms of efficiency most of the time - no drum will every be 100% consistent when full of muddy water and sludge (typical UK conditions)

The rear subframe / swingarm pivot were pushed further forward on the later models so you may find it's too long and the sidepanesl will overlap into the rear shocks

They can slip past each other if they aren't tightened fully, which can also happen on a MAR if the collet that retains and compresses the spring is sitting on top of the splines on the tapered sleeve instead of being seated in the splines, which means the spring isn't under enough tension. Can't remember the Gripper component arrangement exactly as it has the weight that the MAR doesn't. I had a slipping cush drive on one of my bikes once, due to the above

There is one on ebay which you can see below which is for later bikes from 1973 onwards. Yours look like the later fork legs, if so this is what you need. The top hat spacer goes inside the hub between bearing and brake plate, the longer spacer goes between fork leg and hub on opposite side from brake. Only thing that doesn't look normal on the bigger spacer on ebay is that it is stepped where it pushes into the bearing oil seal, normally they are same diameter all along, but can't see it would be an issue. The spindle pushes in from the side nearest the camera in your first photo. There is a bush in there that the head of the spindle pushes against and pushes it against the spacer when it is all locked up You can get all parts new from In Motion http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/bultaco-sherpa-front-wheel-spindle-/252082953910?hash=item3ab1509eb6

The spokes are made to fit the hub / rim combination so they're all different. Original spokes may still be available but the nipples aren't and all nipples made in the UK have different threads, so you need a matching spoke / nipple In Motion stock stainless spokes, not sure if they sell individual or just full sets. If you want cheaper, any wheel builder that rolls their own spokes will make you some from a pattern, galvanised being the cheapest option.

Incorrectly fitted return spring...? did I mention that...? Glad it turned out to be the easiest of the potential fixes Bondy - there is only one solution and that is to fit a new or a not worn stop. You may also need a new ratchet if the cam on yours is damaged as well. As soon as the hard edge has gone the two will just dig into each other and stick. Just measure it and ask In Motion if they have one,

Take care when you split the cases as the gears run on individual needle rollers. There are three sets, three in each, and each set are a different length but same diameter. If the gears and shafts spill out when you split the cases you'll have fun working out which needle rollers belong to which gear because it's not obvious and they will each fit on any shaft but the gears won't slide if they are in the wrong one. I think one of the manuals - clymer? - may give the correct lengths, but better to keep the box intact in the ignition half case when you split them. Also, the crankcase screws have O rings on them as they don't screw into blind holes like most but go straight through with a nut on the end. You may have to source new ones if they are too crushed to re-use (just in case you think someone may have fitted them for an odd reason and throw them away as they don't belong) Also watch out for shims on gear shafts and there are shims either side of the main bearings so note where they are fitted and how many either side. Get the big end properly checked as well as no point putting it back in if it's showing any wear - you only want to split a Montesa engine once... Remember all the threads are 7mm so don't lose any countersunk screws.. Crank sprocket is on a taper, so a bitch to remove - as can be the final drive sprocket, also tapered

Not a problem I've come across so no obvious answer. The kickstart ratchet is located on a spline and a spring sits behind it which pushes the gear along the shaft to engage with the kickstart gear when the kickstart shaft rotates. The ratchet has a shoulder around it's outside edge which runs at an angle. This shoulder locates behind a hook so that when the shaft rotates it allows the ratchet to slide towards the gear, pushed by the spring. When the kickstart is released and returns, this 'ramped' shoulder forces the ratchet to disengage with the kickstart gear and slide back down the shaft to its rest position. The 'hook' has a threaded end and this is what you can see next to the kickstart shaft where it exits the crankcase as the the nut that holds the kickstart spring is screwed onto this thread (there are two nuts, outer nut is kickstart spring retainer, inner holds the 'hook' in place) On the inside of the gearbox, the hook has a flat edge on one side of its shank which locates against a flat edge on the inside of the crankcase. If it isn't seated properly it's possible it's not pulling the ratchet back away from the gear enough to completely disengage it. Ckeck the nut to see if it is tight but don't undo it as the tension of the spring inside may pull the hook through into the gearbox with the nut loosened off. Alternatively, I've seen both the 'hook' mishapen which may also prevent the ratchet from returning fully, or the face of the 'ramped' shoulder could be damaged to the same effect. Only way to check that is an engine strip. Check to see if the kickstart is fully returning against its stop, if the return spring is weak, or incorrectly fitted, it may not be returning it far enough to disengage fully. Are you sure it's coming from inside the gearbox and it's not just the kickstart swivel vibrating because the top swivel joint is worn? If it is the ratchet, the noise will rise and fall with engine revs. If you rotate the kickstart to engage slightly when the engine running you'll hear what the ratchet sounds like

Depends on what you mean by chatter Do you mean loose on the spline so that it is vibrating, or that the swivel (that you put your foot on) is loose on the shaft and is vibrating / chattering. This is normal wear and tear If it's loose on the spline it can be because the bottom of the slot that pinches together has closed up so that when the bolt is tightened it doesn't clamp up properly. You can saw a piece out of the slot on the kickstart to cure that so that it clamps up tight again. If the swivel joint is worn it can be re-bushed. Or do you mean that the kickstart ratchet inside the gearbox is remaining partially engaged and chattering which you're stopping by pushing the kickstart return position fully home by applying pressure.

No, never have. I know others will have a different opinion from this but I've never had one come undone

The Frontera uses different plates from the Sherpa, they are thinner which is why there are more Be careful how much you back the nuts off as they run very close to the inside of the casing and can catch when the motor is running, even if they appear to have clearance when setting up. I reduce the depth of the adjuster nuts on my bikes to about half their original depth so that there is no issue with clearance when backing them off

It's just the recoil from the rebound of the superbly damped original forks after hitting that rock...

Although I know how the mechanism works, it's hard to imagine what's gone wrong, but from what you describe it sounds as though the ratchet isn't engaging to turn the gearbox mainshaft. I'm assuming that any part of the clutch isn't moving when you're rotating the kickstart. If not, it has to be inside the gearbox The ratchet is located onto the kickstart shaft on a spline, hard to imagine that's broken. The ratchet is forced along the shaft to engage with the kickstart gear as it has a cam, or ramp, on its outer edge which rides against a large headed screw that is screwed into the casing. As the shaft rotates, the 'ramp' rides along the screw head and forces the ratchet along the shaft to engage the gear. If the ratchet teeth aren't engaging with the gear teeth, either the ratchet isn't moving far enough (or at all - screw broken, fallen out?) or the ratchet teeth are broken. Only other thing I can think of that would stop the two meshing is that the large shim that sits between the clutch side crankcase and the kickstart gear is missing, which would allow the gear to sit too far to the left on the shaft and be out of reach of the ratchet as it is moved towards it. But if that was the case, you'd have been lucky to have ever started it. A possible test for that is to lay the bike on its right hand side which means the gear will slide towards the ratchet, then turn the kickstart slowly and see if it engages. Then repeat with the bike on its left side which would slide the gear away from the ratchet - if there is no shim (or the wrong shim?) If it doesn't engage then that's a possible cause Another possibility is that something on the gearbox mainshaft has broken but you don't say whether you could still use the bike - if you can, the mainshaft can't be broken Can't really think of anything else but from what you're describing, it's going to be internal so will need to be split. If you split it be careful to do it gently as there are shims everywhere on various shafts and selector drum and you need them to go back where they came from when reassembling. If they're all over the bench with the rest of the gearbox when the cases split you won't know where they came from. And they can stick to either the bearings or the ends of gears so you have to look hard.