woody

You should have a pushrod, then a ball bearing, then the mushroom. 10mm is too long to take the place of a missing ball bearing. There are two lengths for the pushrod. The later bikes with the slimmer timing case (the one with the thumb logo) have a shorter pushrod and kickstart shaft. I don't know the lengths off the top of my head but if you had the later pushrod fitted, it would be too short with the normal ball bearing, maybe why there is a 10mm piece instead. Or. someone has got the clutch adjusted incorrectly but I'm not sure it's possible to get it that far out.... You can check the length with Bultaco UK or someone on here may have one handy to measure. I don't at the moment. Edited because I forgot to say:- If you have bought new pushrod, ball and mushroom from Bultaco UK it will be the right one for the job, so if you can't adjust the clutch up as described in the other thread, something else is wrong. Check the number of clutch plates as the thickness of the pack will also affect adjustment.

You also have to know what the registration number is, as, even if they have it on their database post-'83, they won't tell you what it is from the chassis number. If you can't find the reg number yourself, you'll have to apply to re-register it which you can do on an age related plate at least.

They have all the seals for the Bultacos. The gear shaft seal is a very tight fit into the casing. I go around the edge of the seal housing with a stanley knife or suchlike to put a leading edge for the seal, plus plenty of grease

It is nothing to do with the woodruff key on the clutch as if that was sheared and the crank was spinning inside the clutch drive sprocket, you wouldn't be riding the bike either as it would have no drive from the crank through the clutch to the gearbox. As you've had a go at adjusting the clutch, you could have unknowingly made it worse, even though you turned the centre adjuster out. When you re-tighten the lock nut, you have to ensure that it doesn't turn the adjuster screw back in again - which it can and probably will do. If that happened you could have actually ended up with it screwed further in than when you started, which could be why your clutch slip is now worse than before. Ideally, what you need is a box spanner cut right down so that you can see to hold the slotted screw adjuster steady when you tighten the nut. Or, when you're used to doing it, you can finger tighten the nut and then just put the final turn on it with a spanner. It will still turn the centre adjuster but if you have set this slightly further out than you want it and can judge how much it will turn with the nut, it will tighten in the position you want. Box spanner is better though. Adjust the clutch again. See the previous post from P@ul250 but it's better to actually remove the cable both ends. Then move the clutch arm on the casing as far backwards as it will go (there should be some play in it, if it is solid and already as far back as it will go, it's definitely adjusted too much, so see latter part of this explanation) Assuming there is play, when you screw in the adjuster, watch the clutch arm. As soon as you see it move it means there is no slack between the adjuster, pushrod and arm. This is where Paul refers to it bottoming out. If you now try to move the clutch arm on the casing, you'll find it is solid. Now just back off the adjuster a little. Now try moving the clutch arm and there should be a few mm of play from fully backward position to where you feel it engage the pushrod. That's how it should be. Reconnect and adjust the cable.

Clutch plates from the 250 will fit your bike yes, they're the same. It's not unusual at all for the Bultaco clutch to slip on the kickstart. They can do it with brand new plates, so fitting a new clutch won't necessarily cure it. I have Barnett plates in mine which offer more bite than standard plates and it can still slip on the kickstart even with the clutch correctly adjusted - but never when riding. The kickstart gearing is high and the shaft is also high up on the engine. Also, the kickstart is angled quite a way forward because of the amount of rotation needed before it engages, so it generally means people stab and thrash at it when trying to start them. Once you're used to it, you'll find it doesn't slip nearly so often. Pull the clutch in and take the kickstart down to a position that your leg is comfortable with and so that you will be pushing straight down, rather than trying to move the kickstart backwards first. Let the clutch go and slowly push downwards until the piston gets to TDC which you can obviously feel by the compression. Now let the kickstart back up a couple of clicks on the ratchet, back to a position that feels as though you can just push straight down. Now just push firmly but don't thrash at it. It should turn the engine without slipping this way. If you just lash away at it, then it will slip, regardless of new plates and being correctly adjusted. The Sherpas can and often do, actually fire when your just fiddling for TDC, without actually trying to start it. Once you're used to it, you'll find it rarely slips.

Craig also runs Yamaha-Majesty.com so you only have to look on there for his contact number http://www.yamaha-majesty.com/index-4.html

Clarke cordless impact wrench from Machine Mart for about £90 Excellent for removing such nuts - one of the best tools I've ever bought.

Put it on the middle slot which is the normal position Top slot means the needle sits lower so lets less fuel through - weaker mixture in mid to high range Bottom slot means the needle sits higher so lets more fuel through - richer mixture in mid to high range You'll find that the needle clip being broken on an Amal is quite common but they still hold the needle when in situ

Hightown, I'm no engineer or gearing expert so the actual ratios people are quoting don't mean anything to me... 11/39 is standard for your bike so it isn't incorrectly geared, but as with most things it comes down to personal preference. Although it's standard gearing for my 199b as well, I find it a little high so sometimes use 1 or 2 more teeth on the rear, but, I only use the clutch when things go tits up or are very tight, so it's geared so I can ride most stuff without the clutch in bottom gear. That's about all I can tell you, it's down to you really, your riding style and the type of sections you ride in

'85 bikes were red. It was already 8 years old when the current owner got it, so it could have had the colour changed by a previous owner, unknown to the current one. Pink bikes weren't '85

The red model was from '85 and had drums The pink model was about '87/88 and had drums. The last model was '89 with the discs and had white tank with red/blue flash. The early bikes had a 4 spring clutch and this was changed at some point to a bigger 5 spring clutch with a different actuator in an attempt to improve the action. I can't remember if this came in on the pink bike or the disc model. The last bikes had different crankcases with a shallower sump

11 / 44 is what I have on my M92 and yes, it is too high. I didn't realise you could get them and I don't remember buying it, but I've just found a 10 tooth front sprocket in my box of bits so I've fitted that with the 44 rear. I've yet to try it, but I'd rather keep the rear sprocket a small as possible. 13 / 46 is much too high for trials riding. 12 / 46 wouldn't work well either in what I'd call proper trials sections. For reasons I don't understand, although 11 / 39 is standard for the last A model bikes, it would make my M92 unrideable in most sections as the gearing would be way too high. I don't understand why it doesn't feel like that on the 199a when the gears apart from 1st, are the same... ??

It's subjective. What one person finds ideal is too low or high for someone else. If you're fitting all new chain / sprockets just try the standard gearing which should give you a low enough 1st gear - 11 : 46 Unless you're riding a modern expert route, you're not going to come across a section that has turns too tight for the bike to go round without clutching in a club classic trial

Yes, the 250 models had the hub too which is what I was trying to say by adding series after the 350 model numbers I'd guess the fact they cracked in two saved people from hack sawing them into two... I'm pretty sure if you get it welded neatly by a competent welder, mount the tank on foam pipe insulator and put some sort of cushioning on the frame tubes under the seat pan to reduce vibration through the frame, it won't crack again.

This is how it came from the factory with what is referred to as the 'slimline' tank/seat unit http://www.ataq.qc.ca/galerie/showimg.php?file=/Mus%E9e/Bultaco/bultaco1975_sherpa250-350.jpg The tank/seat on your bike is what was fitted by the UK importers as the factory fibreglass unit was no longer legal to use on the road in the UK at that time, so although not how it left the factory, it is still a proper tank for the bike. For some reason the importers had them painted blue/silver instead of the usual Bultaco red/silver. The bike on the front of the Haynes model is the same as yours You can get a new tank seat unit from Shedworks if you want to go back to how it left the factory, but yours is correct for a UK bike of that period. They're made with ethanol proof resin and I have one on my M92 - can't put a picture up at the moment as my supporter subscription has run out and I didn't realise http://www.shedworks.net/index.html

Depends on what you want to know really. It was the last of the slimline models with the one piece fibreglass tank/seat unit - the alloy tank unit was a UK part due to fibreglass tanks being outlawed here the year before. It was the last of the 325 motors based upon the 250 crankcases. The next model - 159 - had new crankcases specifically for the 325 with a thicker liner and different stud spacing. Those engines can be taken out to 350cc. The early 325 up to the M151 can't. Essentially just an update of the original 325, the M92 and the M125 that followed that. The 125 and 151 series were the only model range to have that rear hub as well. Looks to be in nice original condition.

Don't know which email address you used but try this one as this is the one Anne uses to send out results etc. anne.trials@btinternet.com Normally on the Saturday of Remembrance weekend, although it may have been a week earlier last year, can't remember. I haven't heard from anywhere that it isn't on.

I'm no good with working out geometry or trail but I've ridden a few Yam framed Majesties with with TY Mono front ends and a couple of Godden framed too, and the steering was fine on all of them, with no alteration to head angle etc.

I found that dropping my newly painted homerlite tank unit proved quite efficient at removing the pop up cap... Unfortunately I can't help you with the correct way of doing it.

The bolts on the clutch side thread directly into the frame, they don't have nuts. As do the centre ones. The lug on the frame has a block welded to it that is threaded - over time, they may have stripped. The lug on the timing side uses a nut and bolt. The problem is the bashplate gets bent up in the middle over years of rock bashing which forces the rear downwards, which means it no longer fits properly. You can get them pressed back into shape if you have access to presses etc. Then the rear of the bashplate will once again mate up with the bottom of the frame. Not sure what happens to the fibreglass bashplate over time as I've never had one I only ever bolt it up from the ignition side, it's enough to hold it and they are much more accessible to get a nut and bolt through. I've also opened up the holes a bit to allow for mis-shapen bashplates to help the holes line up. If you manage to get a MAR engine out of, or into, the frame with a bashplate fitted, without a hacksaw or cutting disc, I'd like to see a video of it.....

And the throttle cable... Thanks for the info, most helpful

Could someone tell me what thread size the studs are that screw into the inlet port on a C15 head. I want to fit longer studs to move the carb backwards but I'm useless with British thread sizes. Secondly, does anyone know if they can be bought in longer sizes? If not I'll buy bolts and make studs out of them.

There is also a level plug to the lower front of the clutch case

ok, Can-am reference and tires threw me... Can-am is what they were called in the US. Here they were firstly CCM and then Armstrong. You can get parts for the engine. The cylinder has a plated bore so a rebuild has to factor in the possible cost of that. A full rebuild could be up to £500. The tank and side panels are one unit, they aren't seperate. There is a website here that has some info and pictures http://www.armstrong-trials.co.uk/ To give you an idea of prices, I've just sold a running bike that's road registered that needs a general tidy up and a gear selector problem sorting out for £650. It still works well enough to ride in a trial as it is. Then there is this one on ebay http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/VERY-RARE-CCM-ARMSTRONG-CAN-AM-310-NOT-FANTIC-BULTACO-TRIALS-TRAIL-1650-PX-/200940138494?pt=UK_Motorcycles&hash=item2ec8f72ffe

Bear in mind you'll have to find other main components such as a tank, airbox, exhaust - they could prove near impossible. Does the engine need a complete rebuild? Are there any forks? Probably not the best option for a rebuild in that state I'm assuming as it is badged a Can-am and your spelling of tires, you're in the US. You probably wouldn't want to give more than $300 for it as parts - whether you can make a bike out of it could prove a difficult task.