woody

No, they aren't parrallell

Yes they are run to non-stop rules with 3 routes usually, but as you can see from the videos, a few riders take a few liberties with stopping and flick turning or stopping to regain control. When I rode in the Robregordo event, nearly all riders I saw seemed to abide by the rules and ride in the spirit of proper no-stop. Alfredo Gomez was riding a Puma Bultaco and with his ability he could easily have stopped and hopped his way out of trouble a few times, but he didn't, which was nice to see and it cost him dabs. The whole point of no-stop - get it wrong and you pay with marks. That Santigosa event looks a really good trial with good natural sections. Reminds me of the Hillsborough Classic event.

Yes, that's the Puma bike. His latest bikes seemed to have a much shorter exhaust whereas all the previous bikes had the longer front pipe crossing over the engine. Loved the bit in the video where he slapped his hand away. Wasn't sure if he was doing it to spare the man from pain or out of concern that it might wreck his ignition if it was fitted with electronic. After all that he then let go of the clutch with spectacular rsults. I reckon if he'd have popped that plug cap he'd have been launched higher than the Mont was....

There are 2 black Sherpas, the one in this video is the other one, definitely a Puma bike as it is one of the 3 that I tried Good video, 1:30 being the absolute highlight

The start is from the service station on the side of the motorway. Sections 1 to possibly 3 are within walking distance, from memory, to the south of the station, then the course starts out on a loop which passes to the north of the station just off the side of the road for more sections which had quite a few spectators but I'm not sure how long it would take to walk there. It took a few minutes to ride on the bike from there back to the station. From there the loop goes to the other side of the motorway for the remaining sections but they are not within walking distance as far as I remember. You wouldn't be able to walk around the entire course to see them all as it is too far. Javier will have better information on which sections are easier for spectators to see (Greeves on here)

315 or 4RT spokes won't work as they are the wrong length. As mentioned above try TYOffroad http://www.tyoffroad.webeden.co.uk/

I had a try on 3 Puma 340 Sherpas and I'd say they all had lightened flywheels. I'd guess (and that's all it is) that there is only minimal porting work done. I use a 250 ignition flywheel on my 340 and the pick up is similar to the Puma bikes. Main difference with them is they are carburated perfectly (Delortos) and that, along with the reworked exhaust (bigger volume middle box, straight through back box?) allows them to rev a little cleaner and higher than mine. The most impressive thing about all the Puma bikes I tried though was their lightness in feel. Every control is lightness itself in operation requiring minimal effort which means the bike isn't squirming around underneath you when you're using clutch/brakes etc. Brilliant set up and an absolute credit to the man. I wonder if the works bikes of the 70s were as good as these. The Cota 350 is a Puma bike, yes. It belongs to Mr Puma's friend but I ran out of time to blag a go on that one. The 350 Cota motor is a stonker anyway so I'd loved to have seen what that one went like. Mr Puma's own Cota 247 was also very impressive.

Yes, that's how I did mine - glad the info was of assistance.

That picture was taken at Robregordo this year, that's Chris Denney in the picture and I'm buried down by the Ossa back wheel looking at the swingarm which was from a 242 Montesa. I had a ride on the Ossa and it was a very capable bike, everything worked perfectly and felt very light to ride. Suspension set up was superb. The Bultaco was a bit overdone to be honest and other riders weren't happy with the Sherco forks and yokes - a step too far. All of the Puma bikes have original forks with reworked internals so they look correct. The front end on that bike looked out of place and is wrong in my opinion but in practise at least, I'm not sure it actually offers any advantage over a Puma fork set up which is excellent. I can't remember if it had a Puma engine or not but it did go well.

It wasn't Wrighty we were referring to Charlie, just one of our local riders. No animosity intended towards the person involved, just a bit of local banter.

But that isn't representative of the classic scene overall. Most classic club trials are on the gentle side and have 2 sometimes 3 routes, so there are plenty of events that would accomodate a bigger bike. Things only start to get difficult in the ACU Traditional series and very occasionally, the Miller series on the hard route, but there is always the easy route - and they are National Championsip events after all. The Manx Classic is a tougher event and a standardish big bike on the hard route would be a handful for a skilled rider but there is an easier route to opt for. Pre65 Scottish is fine for a big bike as proven by the number of rigids that take part. As far as which bike - impossible to answer really as if you don't have a favourite marque, or something you have a particular affinity for then the choice is huge. Most people gravitate to the type of bike they used when they first started riding, British from the 50s or 60s or Spanish or Jap from the 70s. If you don't fall into this niche then you have to really look at the combination of your ability, the type of events you will want to use it in and what is catered for in your area. Just because it is a 'classic' (hate that term) it doesn't mean you have to ride it in classic events, most modern trials have 3 routes these days so you can ride a twinshock or Pre65 on the middle or easy route. Choice all depends on what you want to ride and why really

Don't overlook the fact that to use a DT360 piston, you have to open out the cranklcase mouth to take the bigger sleeve, fit a spacer under the barrel to get the correct port timing as the DT piston is of different dimensions (pin to crown height) and machine the head out to match the new bore size (I have no idea what needs to be done to the head but they are definitley altered on a 320 Majesty, you can't use a standard 250 head) You also need to open out a 250 head gasket to fit as there is no 'off the shelf' head gasket for a 320 - assuming the DT gasket has a different stud pattern.

Cota 247 does have a vertical slot in the back of the piston and the earlier Cotas are 247cc using a 72.50 piston. Later models may have been sleeved down as were Bultacos and Ossa Grippers, but not the earlier models. Bultacos don't have a slot in the back of the piston, they have a couple of small holes at the top, but no slot.

In addition to the above, Beta twinshocks, TR32,TR33, Fantic early monos 301 etc, Armstrong, Aprilia all used Grimeca hubs. There may be slight differences between the various bikes and models in design, particularly with the brake plate, but I'd think most could be made to fit without much effort. They should all have the same spindle diameter. Watch out for the early SWM and maybe Gori hubs though, as they had a cush drive. Probably still fit but very heavy in comparison.

Hi Javier, no disappointment for me in not getting an entry as I didn't really expect to - 2 acceptances out of about 11 attempts, this one being the last I'll make. I can take it or leave it these days, there are plenty of other trials to ride in. Hope to see you in Robregordo again next year. Yes Simon, I can make a good guess.

You need to bear in mind as well that the modified Yam frame version of the Majesty (ie; the original Majesties) had a fair reworking of the entire rear subframe and engine cradle, not just a case of repositioning the top shock mounts. Whilst that alone will probably improve the TY suspension, it isn't going to put it on a par with a Majesty. The front frame downtubes were shortened by almost 2" and the rear of the frame altered to match. How they did this I don't know, I've had a Majesty Yam frame and standard TY frame side by side and although I can see the difference, I can't see how it was done. Very clever though as the rear suspension on the Majesty, with decent shocks of course, is close to the best twinshock rear suspension setup I've ever tried.

Yes, list of competitors must have been finalised as I've had my annual bugger off you're not riding letter

No, they are the early Fantics, not the same. The Jumbo is the same as a 303 Fantic though, odd size of 20x43x14 (maybe 15)

Anyone know the bearing number? I've put the old one down somewhere and can't find it at the moment to get the number. I have to go to the local bearing stockist tomorrow so if they have some in stock I can get some whilst I'm there.

Thanks Wayne

Any of you Montesa experts out there able to confirm the oil quantity for the gearbox on a 1973 247 Cota? I have a spec sheet which says 200cc but that can't be right, surely? It states 300cc for the clutch which sounds ok as that's the same as a Sherpa but a Sherpa has 600cc in the gearbox, so 200cc for the Mont seems low. I have a Clymer manual and that says 200cc for the clutch and 300cc for the gearbox..... Just spent the last 2 days cutting open, repacking and welding up the middle and end silencers and what a **** job that is, so now I want to see if the pain was all worth it, get it fired up and see if the newly rebult motor purrs, just like my mate's did back in '75 - don't think I've seen one running since then...

New class for 2010 then - British Replicas Looking forward to seeing who has entered what in which class at the first round..... I guess riders could say they should still be in the 2-stroke, pre-unit or unit class or whatever, as there are no 'replicas' of 60s bikes out there.... Now, where's the avatar for slapped wrists and mischief making

Don't know of any limited production run models in 2001 with the Bultaco name. The Bultaco name was only used in 1999. The original Sherco, or GasGas clone.... was produced in 1999 and they hired, leased, borrowed or whatever, the Bultaco name to launch the model. They couldn't call it a Sherpa because, somewhat strangely, Kawasaki owned the rights to Sherpa. Bizarre when Bultaco had produced a Sherpa model for nigh on 20 years from the early 60s. So they called it a Bultaco Sherco. In 2000, the Bultaco name was dropped and it became plain Sherco. Picture here: http://www.ataq.qc.ca/galerie/showimg.php?...rco1999_2.5.jpg

ok, thanks for that - I see where I may be going wrong as I was trying to fit it with the straight part of the spring already located in the slot. I'll try again tomorrow. After that, there may be a further post about fitting the chain tensioner spring...... something else I've had to walk away from today....