woody

Is Texaco definitely ethanol free? Texaco sell ethanol free in the US but not sure they do here. I thought it was another European directive from those twats in Brussels that all unleaded petrol has to contain a content of ethanol up to a maximum of 5%. It's added at the UK refinieries. In 2013 that figure rises to 10%. Super unleaded will be allowed to remain at 5% in consideration of the harmful affects to older vehicles...

As mentioned by Tim, Caswell's is probably your best bet and they have a UK office so you can speak and check with them first, particularly about the preparation. Ethanol free fuel is very hard to get and I think it is only 4 star that you can guarantee has none. It's available if you can find a local supplier. I use Shell V Power as it has about the lowest ethanol content and never had a problem with the fibreglass tank on my Majesty, which was made before all this ethanol stuff surfaced. I never used to drain it either, it always had fuel in it. I think with V power and if you drain the tank after use, you may find your tank won't suffer - but I obviously can't guarantee that, just based on my Majesty tank. It would be interesting to know if or how they prepare the fibreglass tanks in Spain as many of them use the new reproduction fibreglass tanks, such as the Puma bikes, on the Bultacos and Montesas.

Electrics aren't my best subject (can't understand what I can't see, no moving parts etc...) but don't you have to disconnect the wire from the points when you use the buzzer/light technique, otherwise there is a constant circuit? I'm not sure where the leads from your tester connect though. However, you have the colours correct, black to coil, green to earth. As you can guess from my answer, I use the strip of paper between the points instead. Pull it taught and tension it whilst it is held with the points closed, rotate flywheel and as soon as the paper slides free, they're opening. A lot easier.

Out of interest, if you were a trials organiser whose club ran a BTC event, would you consider it worth the enormous effort to have less than 10 riders compete on the sections it has taken you days/weeks to plot, cut out and mark up (along with all the other paperwork involved of course) Forget the masters and expert routes (or whatever they are called)as they only exist due to the poor BTC proper entry. If that had 50 - 60 riders those classes wouldn't be there. Would you be happy to put in all that effort for less than 10 riders? If not how do you turn it around and increase the entries but still have sections that can take marks of Dabill and Brown etc without destroying the morale of the rest.

But would everyone who hasn't a specific interest or connection with BTC bother voting? And you'd also have people to whom the BTC has no relevance at all just voting for the rules they prefer, even though they would never be affected by them - so again, what would be the point? Whereas I prefer no-stop as it more reflects what trials is (was) supposed to be about, I have no preference or interest in what they actually decide for BTC and I'd have no interest in casting a vote. Obviously I will never ever ride another BTC, those days finished in early 90s and I will never watch one as I'd rather be out riding, so it makes no actual difference to me what rules they run, whether it dies out or whether it recovers to enjoying 100 entries again. But, as I love the sport of trials I think it is a great shame to see what the BTC has become. When I rode a few BTC events I remember watching the stars of the day clean sections that I had no real hope of cleaning but at least could have a go at and the trials were full of good centre riders as well as the usual national winners and champions. Today's younger riders will rarely experience riding in events like that, but as they don't know any different maybe they aren't bothered anyway. I suppose the real question is were clubs who stage the events happy to continue putting in the huge amount of work and effort to run a trial for less than 10 riders. If so, then should it have just continued as it was? Or have they just thought enough is enough, what's the point and along with the importers (who all seem in favour of no-stop) lobbied the ACU for the change? It would be interesting to know what the catalyst for this change was (purely out of personal interest)

Standard 250 bore is 70mm and max oversize is 72mm, so not sure what that piston is from. All of the YZ, DT etc share the same bore/stroke as the TY so it isn't from one of those. Could be a jet ski or snowmobile piston? The 270cc Majesty kits that are on sale are 72mm pistons which is only the same as max oversize which actually gives 260cc, not 270cc. The 74mm piston will give about 275cc.

standard 320 bore is 80mm

Achieving a clean with a non-stop ride is arguably more difficult as you only get one go, you have to plan a line and stick to it. Make a mistake and go off it and it will cost you marks. Allowed to stop, you can repeatedly correct mistakes by hopping back on line and achieve a clean. Which is why stop and hop sections have to more difficult in order to take marks - which is where the problem begins.

You're repeatedly missing the point - the 'talent' isn't there which is why the entries are diminishing. To take marks off the current champion means that the sections are so hard riders in 4th place or lower are generally taking 3 and 5 on the sections and finishing over 100 marks. It isn't working, no riders are coming through. The rules aren't changing so over 40 riders can relive their youth.

It's not well said because if you rode in trials in the UK you would know that it is unjustified and inaccurate as 1) it is generally 'old farts' who undertake the organisational roles, so if riders have better ideas to move BTC forward they need to do something about it, get more involved in club and centre meetings to make their feelings known and get more actively involved in running the sport. 2) There is no progress, the entries have steadily diminished in recent years. It's not 'old farts' who need to up their game, it is new riders who aspire to ride at BTC level - and they can't because the sport at that level is now too hard for all but a few. Trials at national level but not BTC are generally held under no-stop rules and the entry list is almost always full. No further comment needed on that. Whatever happens with BTC, those trials will be unaffected and riders will continue to enjoy them. This is why it matters not a bit to your average club rider (80% of riders?) what happens at BTC and makes no difference to their enjoyment whether that series is capable of 'grooming' future world champions or not, or whether we have a world champion. Does it lessen your enjoyment that there is no US world trials champion?

ok, I accept that, but whatever you meant, your sentence that I highlighted in bold said today's riders put in more effort than riders from that era, so that's how it was taken. As for old farts running the show, when are all the younger representitives going to step forward into organisational roles and steer the sport into better times and sustain it. Look at the average age of officials and observers. The recent meeting at Rugby was again lacking in representation from riders voicing the opinion of their clubs as to which direction they feel is best, but yet again they're all too ready to raise their voices in disaproval of the decision voted in by those that were there. The BTC and WTC are dead in the water and going nowhere under the current format. Going no-stop for the BTC will prove whether it is the right decision over the next couple of years with the number of entries received. If it works all well and good, if it doesn't what has been lost, it's petty well dead already.

It doesn't matter and it is an amateur sport. There have only ever been a handful of paid professional riders. What percentage of the current riders aspire to being world champion? 1, 2% perhaps. If manufacturers still sold their bikes I have no idea if they would care about a world championship or not. The bikes they parade there aren't what you buy anyway. But that isn't what I said. I said riders who turn out week after week to enjoy their club and centre events wouldn't care if the WTC died tomorrow - and they wouldn't. It would make no difference to what we do.

What an utterly disrespectful comment towards the professional and supported riders of that era who used to practise repeatedly to improve their riding. 'Normal' riders who make up 90% of the entries at trials never had the time to practise as they had day jobs, just as they do now. And Mick Andrews, Sammy Miller, Rathmell, Schreiber and co were not old farts when they were winning their championships, or did you think they were born as over 40s. If you think the clubman entry of a current national is made up of old farts who can't trick ride look again. There are plenty of younger riders who can't do it and never will be able to do it. Where are all these young riders to support the BTC - they're not there because it's too hard and they can't do it. If you call 6 - 8 entries for a BTC event or 8 - 10 for a WTC event progress, you have a strange interpretation of the word. I suggest you take a proper look at what's happening before laying the blame with 'old farts'.

The IRC is obviously a better tyre and at only $30 difference is the better choice. It will handle all the terrain you mention no problem. However, as you're just playing or trail riding and not riding events then an MT43 will be fine if you want the cheaper option. We used to use them in the 80s in all types of events, they weren't as good as a Michelin on rocks but they performed well enough. You wouldn't want one for serious competition these days as things have moved on, but for what you want, no problem.

But, if they don't support it so what, there will be others that will so you will still have a BTC and maybe better supported than it is now. If 3 or 4 of the best riders choose to ride elsewhere then 'so be it' is the attitude that I believe would prevail. Let's be honest, I don't think it is wide of the mark to say that say 70 - 80% of the UK's trials riders wouldn't give a toss if the WTC folded tomorrow. It won't stop the sport carrying on every weekend for club riders. Neither will it if the top 3 or 4 bugger off to Spain to ride so they can still contest the WTC. I really believe that most riders really won't care.

Maybe give it a couple of seasons to properly bed in? There are only a few BTC events so that isn't many in one year to get a good idea of how things are working. I still see the biggest problem will be riders trying to hop on the move to get better lines as this is what happened before when it was tried. Some seemed to think that as long as they were hopping they hadn't stopped... It spawned that ridiculous phrase 'dynamic movement'. They didn't accept that bouncing around was not the same as moving forwards.

The back end is the difficult bit. We've had a Majesty and standard frame next to each other and it is very difficult to see exactly how it was done, even with much measuring of dimensions. There was more than just shortening the rear tubes. Also, as the engine sits almost 2" higher, the frame behind the toolbox needs to be reshaped to accomodate the sparkplug, airbox rubber will no longer fit and needs shortening and the exhaust height needs reducing. As said, a hell of a lot of work. You don't really need that much ground clearance either. You'd be better off just angling the dampers, although big gains could be had by just fitting an efficient set of dampers to the standard frame.

And that is symptomatic of the thinking that doesn't understand the original concept of trials. When you are losing balance under no-stop you need a dab to get yourself sorted out and back on line, otherwise you either fall off or go out of the section unless it is very wide and you have room to recover whilst still feet up and going forwards. In other words you are penalised a mark or more for losing control of the bike, which is what you have done if only for a split second. Stopping to regain your balance takes away the necessity to plan your line and stick to it to attain a feet up ride. Under stop allowed, you're failing as you stop to regain balance you have lost - the difference is the rules allow you to fail unpenalised.

Do you honestly see what is happening now as progression? Diminishing entries in WTC, diminishing entries in BTC - reason: sections too hard for all but 5 or 6 riders. Most UK dual route nationals have a split of expert / clubman of something like 15% / 85% - reason: most find the expert sections way beyond their ability. Our centre championship rounds have expert / clubman split of 20% / 80% As you'd expect, the expert entries consist of mainly younger riders and some middle aged riders who can still perform. The clubman route consists of novices young and old, older riders who will never improve and riders with good ability but just below what is required to tackle the expert sections. It has been like this for many years now - so where are all the younger riders coming from to fill the expert entries and progress to BTC and then WTC level? It isn't happening and hasn't been for some time. Answer - there aren't anywhere near enough who have the skill level to do so. The sport at the top level is out of reach of 80% of riders. Do that 80% care? No. They enjoy what they do. Do they care if we don't have a system to 'groom' future WTC contenders? No, it makes no difference to their weekly enjoyment of the events they ride whether we have a champion or not. If the sport continues along its current path it will be dead in not so many years at championship level. If the governing bodies want to resurrect these flagging championships then something needs to be done. There is little else left that they can try now other than to give no stop another proper try. I remember when the SSDT went no stop and Lampkin, Hemmingways and others publicly criticised it and said they would never ride it. They missed the first couple of years but have been at it ever since...

Yes, don't disagree with that, just meant that there is no insurance requirement that they wear them.

There is nothing in their insurance that stipulates they have to wear helmets

Are you sure you bought the correct tensioner as on the earlier bikes like the M80, the spring sits on the outside and isn't able to come into contact with the chain. In appearance, they have 3 bolts holding the rubber pad to the arm and the pad is flat, it doesn't have the vertical sides that the chain runs in. See picture, you can just see it

With the softer sidewalls of a tubed IRC rear, you can feel the sidewalls flexing which translates as similar to having a puncture. As I mentioned before, the tubed IRC rears can be inconsistent, so some have the flex and some don't. Also it depends on your weight, if a rider isn't too heavy then the sidewalls aren't under as much pressure so they may not flex noticeably. It's generally noticeable under several conditions: - Turning uphill, as soon as power is applied the rear of the bike will step out as the tyre rolls on the sidewalls as you start the uphill cambered turn. - On cambers, the rear will try and roll down the hill. - Under hard acceleration, even in a straight line (say in the lead up to a climb / step) the rear can step out as the walls flex under the acceleration, putting you offline for the hazard. - Over rocks - if you try and ride over the points or tops of a series of rocks, like up a stream, the tyre can try and roll off the point down the side of a rock instead of holding firm and staying on top. What tends to happen is people put more air in to try and stop the flexing, but too much and you'll lose the footprint of the tyre and therefore grip. Generally you'd run a tubed IRC rear at 1psi more than other types, although more can be required. We've had one that rolled still with 7psi in it but that was an absolute one-off. A good idea if you're buying off the shelf rather than mail order, is to get the tyre and hold with each hand by the bead with the tread into your chest. Then, as hard as you can pull the sidewalls apart. If they open right up like Great White's mouth, the sidewalls are soft. If they only open out a little then the sidewalls are harder and that is the one to go for. Compare it with a tubeless one if there is one on the shelf. Like I said before, it isn't all tubed rears that are like this, but a percentage are, so it's best to bear this in mind when buying.

Doesn't matter, they keep on gripping for long after the edge has gone. They keep gripping when they look fit for only the skip.

I had no idea... Quite unworkable in some of the sections in our club trials where the whites are often right in the middle of the other routes.