woody

Exactly - I keep reading how you have to do this, that and the other to a twinshock to make it competitive for today's classic trials which have 'modern' style sections. Where do you find a classic trial with sections like that? Come to think of it, I can't think of any 'B' routes in modern events with sections like that.

They are, one of our local riders bought one a couple of weeks ago and I saw it at a trial on Sunday - thought it was a Beta when he pulled up at a section... I was about to say I thought you'd bought a Jotogas.. Can't tell you anything about it other than he likes it.

The travel is 6" - 7" Overall fork length would be about 30"

I have a Delorto on my 340 with the following jets etc. Pilot 40 Main 98 Needled tube AV264 Needle X2 Slide 4.5 The transfer ports in the crankcase have been smoothed out and matched to the barrel (barrel not modified) and the rear sliencer has been altered to straight through pipe/packing, no baffles. Motoplat electronic ignition. Not sure how much these affect the jetting from if it was still standard (probably not at all as the chages are minor) but the bike runs very smoothly and revs high and clean.

There were last time I was there, a few people had bikes for sale.

Possibly the seller hasn't a clue about trials and may have no idea the front end is wrong. It probably does feel as though it rides ok round the yard. As for what it's worth, the bike itself looks in reasonably good condition but the only way you're going to know is by going to see it. If it is ok you still have to find a suitable front end, as mentioned, so that cost has to be factored in. Best look at what other TY250 trials have made in the completed ads and assess what you think it's worth from them. I wouldn't want to give more than £500 even if it was mechanically sound, purely because of the hassle of sorting it. The buy it now price is ridiculous and bidding is already past £700. Very good standard examples don't fetch much over £1000.

No - way too long. 360mm is all you need. You don't need to alter the shock position, just put decent shocks on it. I jave a pair of Magicals and Falcons for mine. Damping is the same but the Magicals spring rates are better due to multiple springs. You can steepen the head angle without it hitting the frame or exhaust, just depends how it's done. My 199b has been done but I think I prefer it how it was. It's now very skittish and hard to control in a straight line in rock streams especially. A s soon as my standard one is rebuilt I'm going to try them back to back for comparison. I'd leave it as it is. There is nothing in a classic trial that needs the Sherpa head angle altered. You need to plan your lines better. They may have a lot of rake but they still turn tight. It's perception. My old M92 turns just as tight as my modified 340. The head angle on them all is the same as far as I know. If it is any different it's not noticeable riding. There could be a few different reasons why your dad's 325 ploughs the front, it's nothing to do with Bultaco steering. The forks are probably set up incorrectly. You're probably perched a bit higher on the later bikes as well due to increased ground clearance which adds to the feeling of instability when trying to balance (Bultacos were never really designed for stop / start riding and there should be no need for it in classic events) Anoother way of reducing the 'rake' of the front forks is to fit parallel yokes from a Pursang or Alpina from about 1975 as they are parallel, they have no 'rake' like the trials yokes. This will pull the front wheel in but it will also affect the trail and I don't know how this would affect the steering/stability (maybe not at all - don't know) For now, I'd get decent 360mm shocks and magical fork springs (set up with 180cc of 10W oil to start) spend some time on set up and reasses it. If I had to recommend shocks I'd say Falcon as they are (to me) best value for money in terms of performance/cost (ie: they are cheaper but perform better than any of the others costing up to a £200 ceiling. Magicals are very good but I'd say the damping action is equal with Falcons, it's the springs that make the bigger difference. A lot more expensive though and subjective as to whether they're worth the extra cost if your not hammering the bike up big stuff (ie: Lakes 2 day type sections, not classic club trials)

Bugger, I've got mold growing on the doorstep, if they declare that a SSSI I won't be able to cross it to get out to enjoy anything. As for their statement, what a joke, it should have a disclaimer - as long as you're not a motorcyclist, rally driver, mountain biker etc etc etc.

One for the lunatic fringe of collectors at that price as you wouldn't want to ride it. Knock off a zero and you could get a really good Yam mono to ride if air-cooled monos are your thing, which was a much better bike, or a 3 series Fantic, Gas Gas or Beta stripey which were much better still. And you'd have plenty of change for a few good twinshocks as well... I'll never understand the obsession with these things, they weren't the best of the era by a long way.

And I'm willing to bet that we'd be equally amazed to find anything of any interest on many of them. We lost a really challenging part of an enduro track a few years ago. It's just scrubland and bogs on the top of a couple of hills. The farmer said there is nothing of any worth on it and it was barely of any use to graze sheep. Along came some white suited gents one day, totally out of the blue,and declared it a SSSI because of some (supposed) rare fungus. This place is in the middle of nowhere, there are no footpaths or byeways and it doesn't appear to have ever attracted walkers. So who would know what was there (if anything) beats me. They specifically said no motorcycles on that piece of land which led us to believe that someone had complained and this was a way to stop it. The problemis, there seems no right to challenge such a decision. This was the farmer's own land and he was being told what he could or couldn't do with it. No-one ever goes to look at this rare fungus though... There is no doubt that there are genuine SSSI but I'd wager many have nothing of any real interest or value to preserve. It's up there with nesting birds as a way to stop off-roading. The birds have nested and been unaffected by bikes for decades but all of a sudden the bikes pose a danger to them. Modern PC garbage. Back to topic, having ridden the 6 day a few times, I'm genuinely surprised that in all those vast areas of what look (to an outsider) as unuseable scrubland, that there aren't just a few legitimate places where riders can practise.

The one that you enjoy riding the most which isn't necessarily the most capable

I don't think you can get a definitive answer on this. The production 199 was red/silver, the production 199a was blue. But who knows whether Bultaco released a blue 199 for whatever reason and unless someone closely associated with the factory is still around to tell the tale, the question will go unanswered. Not sure about Oz, but in the UK many red Bultacos have been done blue, just as many 199a models now have white frames. As someone mentioned before, it is most likely a 199 that has been painted refinished in blue. Probably not as bad in your part of the world but here, at the end of a trial, most bikes are the same shade of brown / black....

If it was me, not worth the effort, I'd find another Sherpa motor - much better performance than the TY which is also a bigger and heavier lump. The TY exhaust port is central and will exit straight into the Sherpa down tube, so you also have to find a way of routing the exhaust around that.

Ample power, very smooth, revs out well and grips like buggery. But the 350 is more 'fashionable' so everyone wants those which is good as you can pick up a good 250 for reasonable money.

The frame is from the M92, the first 325cc bike from 1972/s, the engine is from the M91, the 250 version. The bashplate is a conversion as the M92 had a full cradle frame with tubes running under the engine Tank/seat unit as per original. See here for pictures of the various models http://www.ataq.qc.ca/galerie/index.php?folder=/Mus%E9e/Bultaco/

Couple of mates have received their start confirmation, they are sending out just the start times, not an entry list. There are two clubs, Golden Valley MCC who are the organisers of this event, and Golden Valley Classic who are AMCA. Golden Valley have no website.

There is enough to take them out to the 340 piston and oversizes

Me neither - air works fine

Yes, 325cc engine all have the same bore which didn't change until the 6 speed 340cc engine

You can tell the Jumbo engine straight away as the inlet port is conventional style into the back of the barrel, although it is actually part case reed induction too, as well as into the barrel. The 240 / 280 motors have the inlet cast into the clutch case due to the disc controlled induction. The very last 240 and 280 (the 280 is also called the 320...) models used the Jumbo chassis and again, this is easy to identify due to the lack of a forward facing frame tube from footrest to front of seat. The last bikes of the previous model (which had a blue frame as well, like the Jumbo) also had an aluminium swingarm, so just because it has an aluminium swingarm, it doesn't mean it is the Jumbo chassis. It's easy to mix them up if you're not familiar with them. Whichever model it is, either the Jumbo frame or the previous model, it will be a good bike. The Jumbo frame is the sharpest handling but the older version is perfectly adequate too. The 280/320 motor is very good, plenty of power and lots of torque. I've never tried the 280 Jumbo framed bike but having owned a 350 Jumbo and ridden a couple of 280 earlier models, I can see no reason why the 280 Jumbo framed bike would not be a very good tool for the job. Best take a look at this site and study the different models so you can be sure which bike it is that is for sale, should you go to take a look. http://www.motoswm.com/

Try here http://www.burtonbik...forkgaiters.htm They do springs too but not sure about trials or these http://www.btinterne...ycles/bsa1.html PS - when discussing measurements with a British Bike specialist, are you sure you're going to pass their eligibility criteria talking in metric...

Thinking again, does the 242 have the same type of bottom end as the old 200? If so clutch mechanism is on the opposite side to the bikes I'm used to like the 350, 247 etc. So it may differ slightly - but the principle should still be the same.

But generally the problem is that the internal actuator in the casing doesn't have sufficient throw on it to fully release the plates causing drag. If you adjust the clutch to remove the drag it then slips in higher gears or under abuse. Lengthening the internal arm gives a lighter action but can exagerrate the clearance problem. Best solution is the Aprilia casing with the external arm which has sufficient movement and resolves the problem. It does seem though that the problem (or tolerances) vary from bike to bike as I have ridden one with an unmodified clutch that worked pretty well - naturally enough, it wasn't mine...

You only have to take the clutch cover off to check the mechanism that Steve is talking about. The brass actuator is about the same size as the one on the end of the Ossa pushrod and similarly sits in the clutch casing although they can fall out when removing/replacing the cover. With the cover off you can also see if the clutch cover plate is cracked.

They are all very capable bikes but have their own characteristics and it's hard to compare directly as there were a few different models of the SWM spanning '78 to '83. They were all Rotax powered and the best of the lot has to be the 350 Jumbo although for lesser riders the smaller 240 engine in the Jumbo frame would be a very good bike. The last of the line, the Jumbo had a very nimble chassis with quick steering. However, clutches on the Rotax engine can be a pain in the neck to sort out. Armstrong ran from '81 to '84 and had the 250/310/320 Hiro engined bikes originally followed by the 240/350 Rotax engines. I think the 320 Armstrong was probably the best of them. Out of them all, a well set up 350 Jumbo would be the most competitive bike but they aren't for novices. Next to that I'd put the 320 Armstrong. But they'll all do the job easily on today's classic sections.