woody

Why not sell it and buy the one that's already been converted in Colchester which has been advertised on ebay several times now and is still unsold It's probably still unsold as no-one is interested in it as twinshock interest for most is about the bikes themselves, not about riding under the label of a class within a trial, or a t/s trial itself. Most people ride twinshocks as they have some sort of affinity with the bike they used to ride back in that era. Contrary to what you were told, it's not really a common conversion for that reason as no-one rode a TY Mono with twinshocks, plus they aren't elligible for 99% of twinshock events.They'll be allowed in probably but for no points if it's a championship or no award. Accepting that in your area they aren't fussy with rules, it's your bike and obviously up to you what you do with it, but as the seller in Colchester is finding out, a converted mono is likely to be an unwanted item should you ever have to sell it.

No choice - you just have the MILF on the Fantic...

Again, purely out of curiosity, how can a Mills frame be eligible for the Pre65 or Pre70 class at Yorks Classic? Their rules on replica frames state that it must be recognisable as the original and the Mills frame isn't a replica of anything. Neither do they allow the rear shock angle to be altered, even on an original frame It would have to be ridden as a special You've got to love the logic behind some of the rules that are out there. My old C15 had an original 1959 frame and 1962 engine. I lowered the rear subframe which is allowed but had to move the shock mounts as well to do it. I also changed the top mounts from the awful shrouded type to pegs the same as is standard on the swingarm so that the shocks were a more practical push on fit. I cut off the huge ugly rear mudguard loop because I hated it. All of these mods were achievable prior to 1965. But, even though it was an original (and bent and twisted) 1959 frame, those changes meant it was a special and it would have had to compete in the specials class against all sorts of modernised machinery. A brand new Cub with the 'correct' new components, with 290cc which wasn't achievable before 1965, and fitted with a brand new Dellorto carb, can compete in the normal unit class - but mine was a special...

purely out of curiosity, why not? Unit singles are genuine pre65

You're not going to get a definitive answer on a forum as there is only one way you will know and that is to send pictures to the secretary of the event and ask them. You'll get all sorts of opinion on a forum but only one counts. It shouldn't be eligible as the frame isn't a copy of a Pre65 BSA frame (and as far as I'm aware the Mills frame isn't eligible) But as we know, bikes that clearly don't meet entry criteria and shouldn't be accepted, sometimes are - maybe it depends on the rider.... If you're thinking of entering with it I'd send the email first. If you just send in an entry, if it is rejected on the grounds that it isn't eligible, by the time you find out it may be too late to enter on something that is

There may be an issue with the mainshaft diameter on the clutch side between the two gearboxes. If I recall correctly, the diameter changed but can't remember exactly which year. Also the M49 mainshaft locates the clutch hub by woodruff key, so if your M98 has the splined mainshaft you will have to use the M49 clutch hub and basket as well. There are differences in the length of the clutch hubs and in the thickness of the spacer that sits behind them so you have to get the right combination to keep the chain true to the crank sprocket

I've had it happen but usually because the exhaust middle box has got out of shape somehow, meaning that the silencer body touches the panel. If the exhaust is as it left the factory there should be sufficient clearance between it and the panel not to cause a problem. The two MARs I have now don't burn the panel. Take the panel off and put a straight edge across the brackets and see if it touches the exhaust or runs too close. If it does it is possibly because something has caused the angle in the pipe to close up (where the smaller diameter part of the pipe exits the middle silencer and bolts to the frame) which has the affect of pushing the silencer body outwards with the result that it either touches or is too close to the panel. I've had one that actually prevented the side panel sitting flush onto its brackets If this has happened you can open out the angle again so that the silencer body sits back inside the frame. It's possible to do this by tapping it hard with a hide mallet whilst still fitted to the bike and see if it will move back (I don't mean sledgehammer it...) Or, take it off and bend it back If the silencer has been cut open and repacked it's possible for it to distort when re-welding, depending how / where the cuts were made

The top and bottom yokes are what you see fixed to the headstock in the picture and what hold the fork stanchions. No idea what the letters on the headstock are, pictures may give some others on here a clue

I remember looking at Ossacels with a view to buying some Ossa parts a few years ago but came to the conclusion that if you were outside of Spain it would be a very difficult process, so I didn't try The situation for Ossa parts has improved a lot in recent years though and parts are more readily available from a number of suppliers - what is it that you meed

If the weather keeps to its promise of more rain, you'll have no problem with a soft landing... The venue is mainly banks, tree roots with a small stream, sections are mainly in and out of the stream (not a rock stream) and are a mix of short or long (depending on weather) climbs and cambers, with and without roots - quite slippery when wet.

Having difficulty posting this on the front page news for some reason We have a club trial at Manor Farm, Milwich, Staffs this Sunday, usual classes catered for: Expert, Inter, Novice, O/40, twinshock, Pre65, beginner Three routes, hard, medium, easy with an additional 50/50 route that will use a mix of hard and medium route sections Start time is 11.00am, enter on day.

I had a standard KT a few years ago, not a Gollner, and rode it for a couple of years in various trials including a good number of Miller rounds. I found the engine to be very good, torquey enough meaning 2nd and 3rd gears could be used in sections without problem. Much better than the TY engine. No detonation issues either in sections or on the road. The clutch worked well and wasn't too heavy. Suspension was comparable with most from that era but the front forks were not quite as good in their damping and spring rate as an Ossa. Rear suspension had Falcons and worked well with plenty of feel. Brakes were very good Chassis felt like an early 70s Sherpa with a long fork rake and slow steering but it felt more stable when trying to clutch/brake in tight stuff. I liked it a lot and it was perfectly capable of dealing with anything in most of today's classic events. In its era, with a little more development I'm sure they could have been a great bike

Unfortunately Larry, I missed the best trials era by a few years, I was 11 when the model 80 came out and it was another couple of years until I saw my first trials bike, a Bultaco, being ridden in our local quarry by one of the UK's offroad legends, Arthur Browning. It was like the series 2 M92 in my picture with the alloy UK tank unit except that it was all polished alloy, no colour. Looked absolutely fantastic to us. It was a 250 and I'd guess it was an M91. The fork braces on my M92 were standard fitment from about '74/75 I think. On this bike they don't help much with fork flex as I'm forever kicking the front wheel straight after riding a rock stream. It gets twisted very easily.

Hi Sparks, the big Bultaco decal on that poor model 80 was a Sammy Miller decal rather than a Bultaco one, it still has the SM prefix on it. If I remember correctly, the tank on that bike was still in its original gelcoat colour and hadn't ever been re-painted, you can still see what's left of the decal under the seat, presumably Bultaco as it's too small for kit campeon I wouldn't dispute your view on the kit campeon stuff as you have a few years on me so are better placed to know... Interesting comments on EOR, I'm not sure if it was a prototype either, I've seen it referred to as such but was never sure if it was correct or not. As for its 'existence' you'll have to enter the Ilkley Miller round again next year as you have me very curious now... Maybe I'll get the chance to ask him at the next round as he's usually out watching that one. Always mean to and always forget.

Hi Sparks, I'm making an assumption about the bigger Bultaco decal, just based upon catalogue photos and period photos I've seen from 1971 and then 1972 when the model 91/92 was introduced. I was just that bit too young to see any of these bikes in the flesh at the time of their release. For the kit campeon, I didn't realise it hadn't been released to the UK market and definitely wouldn't know whether Miller launched his here instead. I do remember his tanks being green or blue though with the 'car' style chrome filler cap (there was a bike with a green one at Telford this year, only one I've actually seen) His own 325 prototype EOR 2K looks to have a blue tank in photos (only ever seen black and white) Wonder where that bike is now as it doesn't appear to be at the museum. Ibhbul - sorry, as above, just that bit too young to see the bikes for real when they were released, so I don't recall the fork brace / stay If you like the pictures, here is a series 2 M92 I was rebuilding a few years ago but had to sell before completely finished, then there is the model 80 I bought which had been standing for nearly 20 years and then stood for another 10 as I didn't have time to do it. Obviously, wish I still had them both. Then there's the series 1 M92 I've been riding for the last couple of years following a complete rebuild.

I love pictures like that from back then, I was 15 when I had my model 80 (had a Greeves Challenger before that but it was a trials bike I wanted) We never once thought of the Bultaco, or Greeves come to that, as too heavy or tiring to ride or difficult to start, we just rode them for hours or until the petrol ran out. Imagine what people would say now if you suggested putting a kid on a bike like that. Too big, too heavy etc. I find it amusing these days to hear people describing some modern bikes as too heavy... You can also see from the period handlebars why the high footpeg position didn't matter back then. If they still sold bars like that we wouldn't have to take a hacksaw and welder to our bikes...

The NOVA staff are pretty good (in my experience) and understand that the process was never intended for older vehicles that had lost their registrations or never been registered. I provided the same information as you for two bikes and that was sufficient proof for them. Another two, model 49 and 92, were too old for any records to be provided (they pre-dated VAT anyway) I just sent a covering letter explaining this along with the proof of age and they accepted it

They all came with lights, the kit campeon was just the new slimline tank and down-turned exhaust that would be fitted to the model 80 when it was introduced. The factory riders, riding the previous model 49 were using the slimline tank unit and Bultaco made it an upgrade option for the model 49 in late 1970 / early 1971, not sure (presumably until they had sold them all?) before introducing the new model 80 with it fitted as standard

He's changed the way he rides it, he's been trying to make the bike work for the way he likes to ride with high corner speed and it didn't work. Now, he's changed the way he rides to adapt to the bike's strengths, hard braking, late turn in, slow mid corner and fire it out. Seemed to work well, looking forward to see if he can finish off the last two races with decent finishes now. Must have boosted his confidence. Shyted - the bike Rossi originally rode at the Valencia test was indeed the same spec as the bike Stoner raced the day before. No-one has ever claimed that it was a great bike, it had its flaws, mainly handicapped by the control tyres, and was difficult to get the best out of, but it was a bike capable of winning if ridden a certain way and only one rider was able to achieve that. Rossi couldn't adapt to it and admitted as much which is why they spent 2 years trying to turn it into an M1. As for his age of 35 why is it such an achievement just because it's Rossi? Why is everything that bloke does considered to be above everyone else? Capirossi was 34 when he was winning races on the Ducati against younger riders and probably would have had the title that year if he hadn't been wiped out by Gibernau mid-season. No-one made a big deal of his age then. Rossi is without doubt among the top Motogp riders but is no different from the rest in that if he hasn't a bike to his liking he struggles for podiums, let alone wins. Only one rider in recent times has been able to overcome a recalcitrant machine and that's Stoner. Marquez has a similar style to Stoner so he may be able to do it also, but we'll never know.

On ebay now is a parts catalogue from 1971 with a front cover picture of a slimline showing the bike as it would have left the factory. The tank has the kit campeon decal under the seat instead of the Bultaco decal so it's probably the model 49 rather than 80, but the only difference, I think, is that decal. In the current edition of Trial Classic-Magazine there are period photos of the bikes being used in competition in 1971, which again give a decent view of the lack of decals on the tank (I can't give the magazine it's proper title because of the **** filters in place but it's the one by John Hulme) The bigger, yellow Bultaco decal was introduced on the model 91/92 as far as I know. I prefer more decals, they're a bit plain for me without them.

The decals you've highlighted were for the model 49, the model 80 had little in the way of decals, just a Bultaco decal underneath the seat each side - number 47 on your parts list. The first numbers in the part serial number are the actual model number This place does Bultaco decals http://www.classictransfers.co.uk/pages/transfer-images/european-transfers/spanish/bultaco.php

Well, thing is A-G, back then you were having a peculiar rant and letting fly at everyone for some reason - but that was then and consigned to history My earlier comment was firmly tongue in cheek.Your reply I'll take in the same vein with good humour and no offence - made me chuckle actually

Yes, you could buy tank covers for the TY Mono but not sure about leather, usually PVC or suchlike Still available from In Motion in the UK.

It does look like one of Steve Wilson's swingarms, it's the same appearance, but whether they were longer than the original I don't know. It may appear longer as the shock bottom mount could be located further forwards, which gives the impression that it is longer. Hard to know but obviously measuring will prove it. I don't know whether he did just a swingarm as a straight replacement or whether it came as part of a complete frame kit and one has just found its way onto your bike. If it was just a replacement swingarm I'd expect it to be the same length, can't see any point in it being longer, otherwise it makes a longish bike even longer. If it was part of a complete frame kit, it could be longer as he could have reduced the head angle on his own frame. Which fraternity does that put me in....

24mm is too big when the inlet tract is only 22mm. Won't it disrupt gas flow when it hits the 'step' of the smaller inlet? May affect how well it runs at low revs. They work fine with a 22mm. Your bike and up to you what you fit obviously, but some clubs won't like a modern carb - depends where you ride. The 22mm Amal Premier concentric with the improved pilot circuit works very well, but a bit more than the price of a copy.