woody

You can't have rules like that. As an example, when I had a 1977 325 Bultaco (in 1979 as it was a couple of years old when I bought it) I found the forks much poorer than the Ossa I'd had before. If I could have afforded it I would have fitted some Marzocchis. There was no rule against this. Similarly, other people were fitting Yam or Suzuki wheels to Spanish bikes for the better brakes. Even Bultaco riders were fitting airboxes from earlier models to the later 199 model as it was considered better. People also altered the frame for head angle, suspension mounts to suit their own requirements. All perfectly acceptable I've been riding my 340 Sherpa regularly for the last 4 years or so in modern as well as classic events (far more modern than classic in fact) The forks are just as bad as they were when I had my old '77 model. So when I get the chance I am going to fit a Marzocchi fork and yoke set from an Armstrong or Fantic. I already have a Fantic front wheel in it as the chrome liner on the original is scrap. Your proposal would prevent me from doing this, or from making any of the mods mentioned in the previous paragraph, yet they are all period parts. Similarly, anyone with a Commerfords 340 couldn't ride it as the frame is not standard. I don't pretend to know what the answer is to try and stop twinshock development, if that is what will actually happen. I do know however, from experience in riding in many events, that whatever rules are in place, that there is a question of who is going to do the scrutineering, who knows the intricacies of each model, what part belongs on what bike? I've also seen zero scrutineering at many big events, regardless of what the regs say, so still bikes compete with inelgible parts, whether it is Pre65 or a mono converted to twinshock (very rare ocurrence) So far, twinshock mods in most events have been sensible, very few have gone 'over the line' and most riders seem to accept what is correct and what is not. Sure there are a few out there who will push it, but the current rules for the national championships state that the bike must have been twinshock at original manufacture and have drum brakes fitted. That alone should be enough to keep it in check. A lot has been said of fitting later Fantic engines with reed valves to 300 and 240 models, but Yams had reeds in 1974 and Ossa UK fitted reeds to their bikes in 1975 so if someone fits a 305 reed engine into their 240 instead of having their 240 cylinder converted (perfectly acceptable is it not as it is use of old technology), is there really any difference? Not that a 240 needs it, but that's a different matter.

Metisse - How big a problem is this fuel thing? I'm riding Santigosa as well and driving from Calais at midnight Thursday. I caught a bit of it on the BBC news tonight. Is it accross the whole country? There is no way my van will make Spain on one tank so I'm going to take a jerry can full as well just in case, but I didn't realise that there may be blockages at peages. Is that a reality? May have to look at other routes if it is - a van with UK plates won't have much success getting through any blockages I suspect.... OTF - I honestly wouldn't think of modified Spanish twinshocks as cheat bikes. They are a different concept altogether from the Pre65 scene here. I've ridden some Puma 340 Sherpas and a Vasquez 340 Sherpa. They are still Bultacos. Ported engines, reworked exhaust internals, modified fork internals, altered steering angles - yes, they have all these things but they are nothing that couldn't be done when the bikes were new (and probably were on some factory bikes) and nothing that individual owners who have the skills haven't done over the years. I can't comment on the mono to twinshock Aprilia TX300 as I haven't seen it but I'm surprised that it has been done as when I was in Robregordo last year it was a pleasant surprise to see how the modified bikes still look basically the same as the standard model (apart from the anodised parts and extra polishing and chroming) They are just 'tuned up'. They are just able to get optimum performance from original components with some clever mods and the bikes perform very impressively. Interestingly, there was one Bultaco that had a 38mm Paioli front end in it (drum brake, not disc) and no-one I spoke to approved of it, it was considered a step too far.

The MH349 tank is the plastic one, not fibreglass

Not a Majesty, engine hasn't been lifted. Shock mounts are in a different position from Majesty. Seller may genuinely believe it's a Majesty, I'm not suggesting someone is knowingly trying to pass off a copy as a proper one as I have no idea

Thank you

I have a set of forks from a 303 Fantic that aren't working very well and need setting up. I know that on later forks such as Fantic 305 or JCM Europa, the compression damping was controlled on one leg and the rebound on the other. I've no experience with 303 forks so don't know if they work in this way or have conventional damping with compression/rebound controlled on both legs like older forks. Any help appreciated.

Clutch cases are always available on ebay, the one on the 340 is no different from other models, any Sherpa since 1975 has that clutch case as well as Alpina and Pursang. The ignition cover would be harder to find. However, any competent welder can easily repair them with a TIG welder.

If they're talking about trials bikes it's rubbish. They're referring to tuned up motocross bikes I would guess as there are a couple of blokes in the US who can really tune them and make already fast bikes absolute flyers. Standard fitment to both trials and motocross was the same rod and it's accepted that it wasn't up to the job for really serious motocross use. The standard rod is fine for trials

I'm becoming a fan of Homebase 3 in 1 silicon/mastik sealant. No rim tape. They are an utter pain in the a*** to fit - just too wide to sit properley in the well, won't lie flat all the way around the rim and rarely seal

Clutch arm - it's in seriously small print in the title This is from memory but I think the arm should just pull out after it has been lifted as far as it will go, then turned as far as it will go then lifted again. Can't remember which way it turns. I think this is how it comes out, same as on a YZ engine (I think again) Memory is not so good but give that a try.

You will get different opinions on this but this is my experience My mate has a 240 Fantic that had the tank painted years ago and it is still fine, no paint has come off. I had my Bultaco tank painted about 4 years ago and it has been used regularly and taken a lot of abuse. Only in the last few months have a few bubbles appeared but what the cause of that is I can't say. It certainly didn't blister or lift everywhere as soon as petrol went in it. At the same time we had another Bultaco tank done, this one hasn't been used since and still looks brand new. Another mate had his 330 Cota tank painted a couple of years ago and no lifting/bubbles yet. Recently I bought what I thought was a red Cota 349/4 tank off ebay as it looked like the fibreglass tank from that model. When it came it turned out it was a plastic MH349 tank that had been painted. The paint finish made it look like the fibreglass tank. I've no idea how long the paint has been on it but the finish was good, no bubbles etc. However, it was the wrong red for my bike so this is now being repainted. The durability of this one will only be as good as the original prep work which is unknown. The tanks we've had painted were done by friends who are car painters by trade (except the Fantic as that was already done when he got it over 6 years ago) The tanks were prepped well, plastic primed with the flexi additives and whatever else they use and finished in 2-pack. I'm still convinced that most of the problems in the past with painting these tanks is because of poor prep and wrong paint. Done properly they seem to last well (based on above experience) but obviously this is not a 100% guarantee. However, if they last 4 or 5 years I can live with that and I'll just have it done again. Hope this helps Having just realised you said it was just the white flashes you wanted to tidy up, it probably doesn't.... I'm pretty sure that if you just brush painted on some Humbrol enamel as used in plastic model painting it would stick ok. If these tanks do 'breathe' there is plenty of surface area for it to do that if it is just the white flash that's painted.

Yes, the motor will fit no problem

Or there is this http://bps-eng.pagesperso-orange.fr/html/products.htm It's for a TL125 but again, no idea about the dimensional differences of the two. BPS is in France but is run by an English guy Stuart Brown who now lives there.

You will be incredibly lucky to find a tank/seat unit like that, a copy of the Honda works tank fitted to the 70's bikes. An option would be a Seeley tank/seat unit which is very close and could possibly be made to fit although I've no idea how they compare dimensionally with the TL. They consist of an aluminium tank which has the fibreglass tank/seat unit as a cover. The cover is available as a new reproduction item here in the UK but you would have to have a tank made, or adapt something else to fit underneath to hold the fuel. This is the website http://www.classictrial.co.uk/services.html scroll down the page and you will come to the Seeley tank

Hello Woody, Do you turn the backplate anti-clock to retard the ignition ? Thanks Hightown Yes

They have an O ring on the middle silencer where it fits inside the rear silencer. This has normally perished and the flange on the rear box can get distorted and the end flares out so it is no longer a tight fit. Just make sure the joint is a tight fit and use silicon sealer, regardless of whether you use an O ring again. They also have a spring to hold the joints together, you will see the spring mounts for where it goes if the spring is missing.

If you can't source any in your part of the world you can try here http://www.rotax.co.uk/

Fantastic event today - well done Andy and the team, all the hard work was well worth it and very much appreciated. Trial was superb, riders who didn't enter missed a great twinshock/Pre65 event with proper sections, challenging but rideable. It was up there with the best of the classic events in terms of section standard and enjoyment. Lots of rocky gullies and the new long double waterfall sub was a cracker. If this trial runs again next year get your entries in and support it BUT, if you enter Pre65 Expert, make sure you are comfortable with the capability of yourself and your bike. Some sections are testing and if you run a big bike or Cub/C15 etc that is only lightly modified, you may find them a bit on the hard side as they're on a par with the better Traditional/Normandale rounds. Clubman rote would be fine however. Here's hoping it does run again next year - 50 plus riders wasn't a bad entry but with the effort and organisation that goes into running it, the trial deserves more.

Found this on Youtube - arena type event from 80s Around 8 minutes in is priceless. Some of this wouldn't be allowed these days. Risk assement would demand frogmen on standby, riders must wear breathing apparatus, the pool must be drained, bikes must have airbags for buoyancy - and then health and safety would not allow it anyway as too dangerous to participants

Why Nicky? Stoner got straight on the Ducati in 2007 without any development work, destroyed Capirossi who had been helping develop it, won first time out on it, won 10 or 11 races in total and the championship - in his first year. Rossi has to better that before people can start jumping up and down about how brilliant he is because he gets on the podium in the first few races. Or will what Stoner did conveniently be forgotten by Rossi fans and the TV pundits. I am in no doubt how good Rossi is as a racer but I'd like to see him go to Ducati on his own and see what he can do with their current crew instead of taking Burgess and Co with him. Jerry Burgess had a proven winning record before Rossi came along, so how much of what has been achieved in bike development is Burgess. If he went on his own and turned it into a regular podium finisher that other riders could also put on the podium, then I'd have more belief in how much input he has had to the development and design of the Yamaha. For me, seeing Stoner wrestle the Ducati round has been the highlight of MotoGP for the last few years and I don't think MotoGP will seem the same without him on it. They've lost their way this year and I wonder how much that has to do with the fact that they were probably planning for Rossi's arrival next year. But in the previous 3 seasons, watching the way Stoner used to just bully the thing around tracks was jaw-dropping at times, it rarely had both wheels pointing in the same direction or on the ground at the same time - and the way he destroyed them all when he came back from illness last year was phenomenal. Rossi has a lot to live up to at Ducati

The change in position will be the problem. The more lean, the higher the spring rate. No idea what rates are available for your shocks but as a guide, on Falcons, more upright shocks like early Ossa MAR (in the conventional position, not moved up the swingarm like a Fantic or later twinshocks) would use 50lbs springs for an average weight rider, whereas a later MAR or Majesty with laid down shocks would use 60lbs. Try preloading them more or see if NJB do a higher rated spring.

This is a proper intro. Drum count in, couple of stabs on the synth, build with a couple of riffs off the lead and then finish off by smashing into the vocals with the bass. Relentless, aggressive and unstoppable.

Why are you worrying so much about what the timing is when fitted per the instructions. Just fit it and ride it and see how it performs. If it's too docile advance it, if it's too sharp retard it - just experiment until you get a setting that suits what you want. The original manufacturer recommendation is just that, the timing can be set anywhere between 1.5 to 4mm BTDC, just depends on the bike and how you want it to perform. That recommendation is also for the original points ignition with no built in advance. The modern electronic has a built in advance which means static timing can be more retarded for a soft delivery off tickover if desired with no loss of mid/top end power as the timing will advance as the revs build. I have electronic on my 340 Sherpa and have no idea what it is timed at, I just set it where I'm happy with it. You're worrying about nothing really, the only time to get the strobe out is if it won't run properly at all, regardless of how you position the stator.

The chances are that the internals are probably a little worn by now which won't help damping and Bulto forks were always a bit soft on springing and damping anyway. Most of the damping is controlled by the holes in the damper rod, the large hole at the bottom does compression and returns the oil on rebound, the two smaller holes at the top do rebound but also allow excess oil through on compression. There is also a 'shuttle valve' piston assembly (usually circular with either holes or slots in it, but square and solid on 199B) that also controls some of the oil flow on compression and rebound. If this is worn (I have no idea how to measure tolerances on this) then more oil will flow and the damping will be softer than intended. On my 199B I went up to 30W oil and gradually increased the quantity in an effort to stop the forks topping out repeatedly and also slow down compression damping. I got to the point where there was too much oil causing a hydraulic lock on compression but they still topped out on rebound (nothing to do with spring rate) I assumed that the shuttle valve was letting more oil through than intended due to wear. As there was nothing I could do about that I blocked off both rebound holes on one damper rod and one of the rebound holes on the other to reduce oil flow. The result is a much plusher fork using 7.5W oil - a bit lighter than normal due to the reduced flow rate. The bike has just had a good hammering in a 2 day National trial with plenty of big rocks, steps and waterfalls and the forks worked very well. Still a bit of experimentation to be done but as a starting point I was very pleased with the improvement. I have one longer uprated spring with no spacer in one leg and a standard spring with a 1" spacer in the other and the spring rate of the forks is just about right too (for me obviously) I have no idea how the valve in the fork caps is supposed to work but every Bulto I've ever had (and Ossa or Montesa) has successfully spewed air and oil out of these caps like a geyser. Whatever they are supposed to do they have never done it. Letting air out also makes the forks softer. I either block the hole or fit caps with no valve. The fact that the air doesn't come p***ing out also adds more resistance to the compression stroke. Never had a problem with blowing fork seals due to pressure build up in the forks.

If you get someone who is a really good painter and who knows how to prep it and use the right materials (plastic primer, flexi additive etc) it should stick ok and last a few years before (if) it starts coming off. I have a Bultaco tank that was done about 4 years ago and is just starting to bubble in one or two small areas. A mate has a painted Fantic 240 tank that was done years ago and has no bubbles. As Martin mentioned, cost of a good paint job will be the same as a new plastic tank at least. Only problem with the new plastic tank is you can't put decals on them so you are stuck with the decals they come with or the plain tank.