woody

Here are 2 adverts for twinshocks from one of the web sites - the Cota is a new ad, the Fantic has been sold. Both are under

Just had the entry list for Saturday's Normandale round and Peter isn't on it surprisingly so I guessed incorrectly on that one.

He has a look on this forum occasionally so I'll get him to answer you.

Don't know whether to find it sad or funny really that a genuine 1965 bike with REH forks (which are 1966 maybe? but totally inefficient against modern cartridge type) isn't elligible, but a 2010 spec James/Franny B/Cub/Ariel is perfectly acceptable. In all honesty I think you have little chance of an entry on the Sprite as they don't seem to want them there.

It will more likely be at the Normandale rounds this weekend

That's one of the most frequently quoted inaccuracies on this forum Take two riders, capable of performing a few tricks, one on a 1968 Sherpa, the other on a Yam mono converted to twinshock Now take one of our national championship twinshock rounds which have some quite difficult sections. In some of those sections a clean can be achieved by using clutch/brake technique and flicking the front and rear wheels to get a better line (including stopping and flicking which is against the rules but usually goes unpenalised ) Without the flicking to get the better line, a ride through the section is going to need a dab or two to pull the bike straight as it is impossible to steer round the muddy turns without the front wheel washing or the rear sliding away. So out of the two riders, who is going to fair better in that section, the rider on the Yam or the rider on the old Bulto which doesn't have the clutch/suspension/brakes/geometry to perform the tricks. If both riders were on the Bulto the better rider would do it for a dab instead of a 2 or a 3. If both were on the Yam, they'd both clean it with the stop/hop style. Add in a big muddy climb after one of the turns and the Yam can do the section in 3rd or 4th gear and burn up the climb as you can still perform the stop/hop in those gears. The Sherpa could use 2nd at most which wouldn't be enough to get you up the climb as it wouldn't fire off the clutch in any higher gears. So after three-ing your way around the turns on the Sherpa you then 5 the climb whilst the Yam goes clean. Still think the bike offers no advantage? I think there is nothing wrong with people modifying bikes how they want including adding 2 shocks to a mono if that's what they want to do - but to then ride it as a twinshock is absurd and missing the point of why people ride older bikes. I've never understood the thinking behind 'I want to do twinshock trials' or 'I want to ride aircooled mono class'. Surely it is 'I like Bultacos (or Ossas, or Stripey Betas for argument's sake) so I want to own and ride one'. You then ride the bike in any event that has a course/route/sections that you think you can compete on with that bike. They may be twinshock speciific trials or modern events with a route that suits the bike - whichever, you get to ride the bike of your choice. It is about wanting to ride a bike you enjoy riding, in the case of twinshocks or aircooled monos, usually the make of bike that you rode when they were new because you really liked it. People are too hung up on this 'there is no class for my bike so I can't ride it' attitude. Rubbish - you just go and ride it and enjoy it. Doesn't bother me if I am the only twinshock out of 80 riders at one of our modern events.

Too easy? Too hard? set out for sidecars, not solos? - what was the problem?

Yes Jim, it could certainly be the CDI as Colin has had one or two TLR Hondas, both 200 and 250 with with failed CDI. Might be worth giving him a call to see if he has a resolution for the problem. I think the chances of getting a new replacement are zero.

On the clutch side, the pivot mount sits right up against the clutch case, just above the selector shaft. I'd assume from the way it is done that the engine has to go in after the swingarm is fitted and the engine has to come out to remove the swingarm.

On the Reynolds bike (I'm assuming the last one before they stopped modifying) the swingarm mount, as mentioned before, is right behind the gearbox sprocket, or, in a vertical line, directly under the carb with no through spindle, just located either side to the frame plates. The front frame tube from swingarm up to seat was bent forward as it descends to move the pivot forwards. The rear engine mount has some large bracket work to hold it but can't see exactly how it's done in the photo I have (can't post photos) It must be fixed to the frame somewhere. I see what you mean about the Vesty bike having scalloped rear crankcases now - I thought you meant the crankcases themselves which isn't possible due to the internals, hence my earlier comment, but it is the engine mounting boss that is scalloped away, it doesn't go into the actual crankcase which is what I thought was meant originally.

From my own experience, I've never had a problem with stainless spokes. All wheels I've ever had rebuilt with new spokes have been stainless. The oldest set were done in about 1993 by Central Wheel on an Ossa and that bike has taken a real beating over the years but I've never had to even retension one spoke. I've definitely never broken one (we all know what's going to happen now though, don't we....) Aren't Ossa and some Bultaco spokes stainless as standard fitment?

Have you considered Electrex for the ignition. They come with weights, a friend of mine has one on his MK2 Sprite and it runs perfectly. The advance curve lets it plonk to virtually nothing, pick up softly and then rev out cleanly as the curve advances. Works well. As regards Scotland, you have two problems, one being the Sprite, second being REH forks as I don't think either is considered Pre65. Who you contact about it on the committee though, I have no idea. As has been said elsewhere though, you can try and make a bike eligible for that trial which can cost time and money, just for one event which you may not even get in to. There are plenty more trials throughout the year to enjoy where you don't have to be so finicky with the bike's spec and making it how you want it can be achieved a whole lot easier and cheaper. Forgot to mention - the Vintage Motorcycle club in Burton on Trent can provide dating certificates that are acceptable to DVLA. Give them a try, they have a website.

It's done to enable quick/easy draining of the float bowl, particularly on events like SSDT where time is short. Much quicker to take the bung out of the hose and empty the float bowl than to try and wrestle the carb off, which isn't a quick job on the TYZ. You can't get to the float bowl drain plug with the carb in situ. If the bike has done the SSDT the paint will have the rider number scratched into it. The throttle cable goes under the brake master cylinder, not over the top.

Being realistic, no-one is going to be able to answer that question apart from the comittee themselves although I've no idea which one in particular. You never know, the frame may be acceptable, it has bottom frame tubes and oil in frame for a C15/B40 now seems ok whereas before it wasn't.

Ah, ok - I missed that when I was crawling all over the bike a few years ago, looked like they were untouched - Apologies Tim, you were correct.

There was a later bike done for John Reynolds which had the pivot moved even further up. On this bike it looked as though the pivot went through the rear of the cases but the swingarm was actually bolted to the side plates either side so there was no spindle. Don't think there is any room in the cases to allow a pivot to pass through, without reworking the internals that is.

Stop hop and reverse was in full use where necessary at this time. Today's twinshock trials are run no-stop but back then, anything went, no-stop had gone by about 1981/2. I agree though, I prefer to see the no-stop style on the twinshocks. Interesting to see how easy the sections look but as with any top rider, they make it look easy and the camera flattens the perspective. Lejeune was the Toni Bou of that time and we all know how easy Bou makes the impossible look today.

Cases aren't modified, the swingarm pivot is just moved up right behind them

No website - Mick Mills had stopped making the frames a long while ago due to his ill health. Those made are available through Bonkey Bowers, I think they are genuine, not the copies. Cost is around

Absolutely no reason why it should, it's not a new frame or components, it's still a 26 year old 320 Armstrong under the new 'skin'. It was actually done about 15 years ago by another of our mates, but never finished. Colin bought it of him recently and they finished it off. Hopefully be making its debut at the first Miller round.

320 Armstrong with altered frame, fabricated exhaust, airbox, tank, seat unit, swingarm. Garelli top end.

The original cantilever conversions were modified Ossa frames if I remember correctly so not chromed, later frames were purpose built and chromed There is no reason really why it can't compete in twinshock class as it was a twinshock at original manufacture and it competed against twinshocks in it's era, so it wouldn't be unfair to compete against the same bikes in twinshock classes today. It's still 1975 technology and probably wasn't much of an improvement over standard, even Yamaha went back to twinshocks. It's still no match for more modern twinshocks. There is no way it could compete against modern aircooled monos as it would be absolutely and comprehensively outclassed and slaughtered - it's from a different era. One for the collecter really, or just to ride and enjoy in club trials without worrying about classes.

As above Paul - the 240 Fantic is more than enough in standard trim. They were good enough to win British Championship events back in their day and those trials were way harder than anything you'll ride it in today. If it's in good order it has more than enough power as a 240 and the chassis is fine as it is. A lot is said of today's 'tight' classic sections - this is B*****ks as they are nowhere near as tight as the sections of the early 80s when you had to hop round them. All these mods that are being done to the 240 aren't necessary, they are a personal preference by the owners. You don't need a 240 with a 300 engine to compete with, but if you just want one, that's a different issue. As regards getting one, Twinshock shop had some for sale I think, you could ask Lee Harris and try and persuade him to sell one of his, wait for one to be advertised or throw loads of money at Classictrial and have one built. A lot of work for little gain over the standard bike though.

Have you tried Wakefield Offroad, they have broken lots of bikes over the years. There are some for a 348 on ebay, no idea if they'll do the job but you could get the seller to measure them up for you.

Contact Jim who runs the Beamish Owners Club. http://www.beamishownersclub.com/_sgg/f10000.htm He also posts on here so he may see your question anyway The silver engine was based on a TS engine so I'd guess the rods are the same. There are some on ebay USA.