woody

If you're riding the yellow route the white marker has no relevance. In effect it 'isn't there' for yellow route riders. Same applies vice-versa. There is no penalty for touching, flattening or knocking over markers from another route.

If they are tight they will stay tight and not free up with use. Either the outers will need reaming out or it may be possible to turn some off the inners. All depends on the the way they sit together. You need a competent machinist to look at them to decide which and to do it.

Grip from the Michelin Radial tubed rear is non-existant in mud. From experience - unless they have changed the construction/composition over the last couple of years. I fitted one not knowing their tubed tyre was no longer an X11 and using full hole in 3rd or 4th couldn't even get into the start gate of sections that were cleanable in bottom. A local rider was winning the local clubman series and for the last round fitted a Michelin Radial to his TLR. He finished almost last in the class after winning it for most of the year. No grip and spinning backwards down muddy banks. I rode the SWM owned by Dave Dawson a few months back fitted with a Michelin Radial and had to scream it in 4th and paddle it up a bank I'd just been cleaning in bottom on my own bike. He took it back to the dealer he was so p****d off with it and changed it for an IRC. If you're going to use a Michelin rear, use a tubeless X11, they'll work fine on the Sherpa with a tube in. If you're never going in mud the Radial will probably be ok. I'll never use one again.

Tyres are a personal choice so different riders will recommend different tyres. However, as regards what you can fit: If your bike still has the original Bultaco rear wheel (ie: with the Akront rim) you have a decent choice. That rim will accept a tubeless tyre with a tube in it as well as the standard tube type. I'll assume we are only dealing with the top grade tyres, not budget brands like Mitas, V Rubber etc. They are fine for trail riding or playing in fields but for proper trials use, stick to the established brands. For tube type rear tyres there are two choices, IRC and Michelin Radial. You can no longer get Michelin X11 tube type rears. If you ride in a lot of muddy sections avoid the Michelin Radial as it is about as effective as a car tyre in the mud. On rocks it is fine. The IRC will grip superbly in mud and as well as the Michelin on rocks but they can have a soft sidewall which can flex and may need a pound or so more pressure than normal to help overcome that, especially in warmer weather, or you are over average weight. If you're around 11 stones, not a problem. Some are better/worse than others. Tubeless - you have IRC, Michelin X11 or X-lite and Dunlop. The Dunlop doesn't work well with a tube in so avoid that one which leaves IRC and Michelin again. The tubeless IRC has stiffer sidewalls than the tubed version so you won't get the flex. They are excellent in mud and (unless you're very good and can tell the difference - I can't) as good as a Michelin X11 on rocks. I've never tried an X-lite but assume they are better than an X11. In my experience the IRC has a much better wear rate than Michelin and will continue to grip with the edge well scrubbed off meaning you go longer between tyres - I once did the SSDT on my TYZ with a tubelss IRC that had already done a few trials. It lasted the week, just, without being turned. If you use a tubeless type on the rear you will still need to use the security bolts as they will slip on a tube type rim without them. For the front, Michelin X11 tube type is probably the best option and works well in mud or rocks. I've never tried an IRC or Michelin X-lite front so can't comment

Well, I've definitely knocked my own balls up a few times trying to do pivot turns like that...

I incorporate at least one of those in every trial....

Two sets of rules because that's what riders/clubs want? There are those that like stop allowed and all the trickery that goes with it, there are those that prefer the more traditional no-stop and who can't bear being stuck in a queue at a section watching someone tossing about and waiting for them to get on with it. The range of abilities, riding styles, ages and bikes is too diverse now for one set of rules. No matter how much people advocate for sensible sections that can be ridden no-stop but whilst maintaining stop and hop rules, they are kidding themselves if they think that will suit everyone. If you can stop and hop competently you will p*** through a no-stop style section and it will be hard to offer a challenge for those that can do it well. They will just stop and hop and eradicate the intended hazard by riding lines that are impossible as no-stop. If they could stop and hop in the SSDT how many cleans do you think there would have been in this year's event. Stopping and breaking the sections down into sub-sections would have made them far easier for the better riders. The WTC went no-stop once and it was a joke, they were still stopping all over the place and it spawned the ridiculous phrase of 'dynamic movement' or whatever it was. You only have to look at the entry lists of certain trials each year to see what most riders want. The more traditional events are getting good entries and a few are oversubscribed. BTC - figures say it all. S3 not sure about as don't ride it but noticed from some of the scores of some very good riders at some rounds, it looked damn hard. Freedom of choice for clubs/centres seems the sensible way to go. Why there should be difficulty in applying either set of rules baffles me. Under stop allowed you have basically got to fall off to get fived. Going backwards by vitue of crafty sideways hopping seems acceptable. As for confusion over rules, what a load of B*****ks, if a rider doesn't know the rules of the event they've entered it's their own fault. It's not difficult. But then again, having observed quite a few events over the last 3 months, the fact that a lot of riders can't even work out how to navigate through the markers of a section, maybe understanding the rules is a step too far?

That defined pivot turn - bloody brilliant The place just erupts.

Yes, most if not all models use the same size.

There is a reason they are cheap... They are also tubeless, so if you are fitting to tubed rims you need to be sure they will seat ok. Some rims won't seat a tubeless tyre, they pop out ok when fitting with high pressure but as soon as it's let down to about 10psi a section drops off the rim. Akront (as fitted to Ossa Bultaco Fantic etc) seem ok. Japanese rims are inconsistent, some ok, some not. No idea about other types.

Either: Find someone with a press, press out the steering stem from the bottom yoke which will also remove the cup, then press it back in Or Use an angle grinder, or suchlike, and grind a section out of the cup which will release the tension and it will slide off easily. Just be careful not to grind into the dust cover or the steeing stem itself, although a small nick isn't going to hurt. Replace te bearings with taper rollers from Pyramid Parts as they do a taper roller that fits properly and without the need to modify the top nut.

I've been using IRC tubeless rears since 1996 and never had a problem like this. Although I no longer have a modern bike, I've fitted tubeless rims to my twinshocks and use IRC on them with no problem. New one on now been used 2 or 3 times and not lost any air. Previous one on for 14 months and not lost any air. It has to be something to do with the new rims. The tyre works fine on the older 36 spoke type and it's only in the last couple of years that the problem has arisen on the 32 spoke rims (first happened on the Beta Evo if I remember correctly) The tyres haven't changed, but the rims have. In which case using a Michelin or Dunlop would seem to be the only answer.

If you go too far down or back it can have a negative affect on steering by putting you too far back in the bike (we're only talking an inch or two too far to make a difference) The pegs on a Sherpa are quite low set as standard and not far above the bashplate/lower frame tubes on most bikes from Model 80. As a rule of thumb, when lowering pegs it isn't a good idea to go lower than the bashplate line as there is a risk of snagging them over obstacles/rocks/roots and it may take them lower than the line between the two spindles, considered a no-no and not good for handling. So on earlier bikes you can't lower them that much. However, the later bikes 199a and b have massive ground clearance so you can get away with setting the pegs slightly below the level of the bashplate (I know this is normally a no-no but you can get away with it sometimes - I have on my 199b) Unfortunately with the Bulto, because they are quite low on the front you are always going to feel a bit cramped if you're over 6'. Modifying the top yoke (or fitting different yokes) to take conventional clamps and bar risers can help the riding position

A cheaper alternative - if you're not bothered about altering the position. Buy a used pair of 90's motocross rests from a Yamaha, Honda, KTM etc. Cut off the mounting pivots and discard, leaving just the footrest section itself. Either using you own Sherpa rests, or a used pair from ebay, do the same - cut off the pivots leaving just the footrest section. This time however you want the pivot section so be careful how you cut it off. Then, weld the Sherpa pivots to the motocross footrests. Now you have wide modern style rests which will fit straight onto your frame. Example of suitable footrests here http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Yamaha-YZ-250-1999-Footpegs-Footrests-11461-13D-/110748554174?pt=UK_Motorcycle_Parts&hash=item19c920d3be

If this is what you decide to get, remember if you're buying used rests, chances are they will be bent, pivots worn, serations for your boot grip will be smoothed off and they'll probably droop when fitted.

Electric welding can wreck electronic ignition so if you are having any welding done on it, disconnect the stator from the CDI and the CDI from the HT coil to be on the safe side (or just the stator from the HT coil if the coil is combined CDI/coil. With points it doesn't matter. As regards footrests, yes it was a mod to fit Pursang rests back in the day but footrests have come on a long way since then. They are a bit longer but don't offer any more grip to your boot as they are identical to Sherpa rests. Being longer there is more chance to snag them too. The only advantage is that they are a straight swap. For modern rests, welding of some fashion will be required as they won't bolt straight on. Usually it involves cutting off the old mounts and welding on the new ones that go with whichever footrests you buy. Which, is personal choice - as is the positioning of them - same place or lower down level with the bashplate/frame tubes (you can't lower Bulto rests much anyway) Welding can be done by using MIG, TIG, ARC or brazing. Doesn't matter which.

Yes they can be welded by a competent welder (don't let just anybody near it) BUT the heat generation from alloy welding is incredible and it will distort the whole swingarm if the welder isn't careful. The arms can spread, widening the gap at the wheel spindle end. Same with the forklegs, can be welded and repaired. I've seen repairs to all these by someone who knew what they were doing and you'd never know they were damaged.

They have to be pure aluminium in order to anodise as anything with steel in it causes problems (can't remember what but I was told this by a friend who works at a plating factory - he can't take anything with steel in it for anodising) If so, as the hubs have steel liners you can't anodise them I'd guess the black finish is paint/powder coating - or anodised before the liner goes in.

For the M159 onwards, the liner is thick enough to use the 340 piston, so you have up to the 340 standard size of 85mm plus oversizes

What's wrong with the Peak and Dales Classic events? Or Sammy Miller rounds - 2 routes to choose from. There's no doubt they aren't up to the performance standard of Spanish bikes from the same era, but they are more than capable of being ridden in the above events.

Get away... much better than the 280/320. Takes a bit of effort to knock off the rough edges but once sorted, probably the best twinshock you can have.

Surprised with your comment about price as I'd have thought you'd have found a better TLR than a Seeley for the same money. Seeley is very light on the front and isn't as planted as the TLR in turns. Uphill turns and cambers will be eventful until you get used to it as the front rears up very easily. Similar story if you come to a halt uphill, getting going again without the front rearing up is difficult, although TLR is similar in that situation. I had a Seeley once and fitted an RTL motor but it was hopeless, the motor had too much torque for the light front end. Seeley front forks, being Marzocchi, are much better than the Honda forks which are soft in springing and damping, although depends how hard you are going to work it as to whether that matters. Rear end on the TLR probably works better than the Seeley. Engine performance is very similar really, TLR is maybe a little livelier as it doesn't have the extra crank weights that the Seeley has. Gear ratios as mentioned, are better on the Seeley but the TLR ratios are perfectly adequate with right spprocket combination, although you'd never go beyond 2nd in a section realistically. Personally I'd go with the TLR and you should be able to get a good one for less than the price of a good Seeley - they seem to hold the money more as a collector's bike than a rider.

No - Marzocchi is a much better fork. Later SWM were fitted with Betors, maybe they were a better financial deal than the Marzocchis?

First question is why? I've ridden two 300 Fantics recently, both standard with original footrests. I'm over 6' tall and found the 300 footrest height and positioning comfortable. Personally I wouldn't change it as the bike rides very well as it is. Change the actual footrests for modern yes, alter position, no. Personally I don't think you will gain anything in terms of performance and/or ride-ability, the bike is 'right' as it is. If you just want to do it for personal preference though, that's a different matter. In respect of getting it done, Jon Bliss is in your area and he's done work on Fantics (don't have his contact details though)