woody

To be honest, you can get the standard bike set up to work very well without any drastic mods. The standard clutch in good condition (ie; no ridges on the basket to stop the plates sliding smoothly) and set up properly is good enough for the classic trials over here. The bike will ride most sections without the clutch anyway - I've just done the Lakes 2 day on my 340 and there were only 2 or 3 sections over the whole weekend that needed clutching to get around a turn - out of 80 sections. Lengthen the clutch arm, make sure the cable run is free and not snagged or has tight bends in it. If the clutch springs are tensioned by nuts you can back the nuts off and expeiment, finding the balance between a light pull on the lever and too much slippage when riding. WARNING - If you back the nuts off more than about 4 turns from fully home they will foul the inside of the clutch cover. You can mill/cut/file the nuts down in thickness to avoid this. If you have clutch springs that are held in by pins there isn't much you can do about relaxing the tension a little. However, if your springs are old, or you can get your hands on older springs that have compressed/weakened over time, you can fit three strong, three weak, this will require less effort on the clutch lever. It's just finding the balance between biting/slipping. Don't worry about it slipping when kickstarting, that can be normal, as can be occassional slipping in top gear. Again, it's about finding the balance. I use Barnett plates and they seem ok - don't know of any other trick plates. Front forks aren't so good on the Bultos - in my opinion - damping is too weak and they can top/bottom out easily, especially accross the moors or riding fast up rocky sections - can depend on how heavy you are I guess.... I've fitted Ossa damper rods in mine and they work much better. I'm going to look at filling in one of the holes on the damper piston on the other Bulto I have to slow the oil flow and see if that stiffens up the damping. Again, all about experimenting and trial and error. No more than 200cc per leg - SAE is personal choice, with the Ossa rods I use 10W Engines don't really need anything doing, they are very strong, the 325 pulls like a train. However, if you want to sharpen them up, fit a 250 ignition flywheel to a 325 and the pick up is much quicker. If you want to go further, fit the single weight on the clutch side. Not gone that far yet. Bing carb is fine on 325 if in good condition, OKO is a cheap alternative if it isn't. Ditto the Amal on the 250, fine if not worn. Exhaust needs to be packed correctly to get the best out of the engine. It's a crappy job but if it is coked up or has blown all its packing out it will affect the way the bike runs. The exhaust note should tell you, they whisper when packed correctly. Middle silencer and lower pportion of the clubfoot will both need doing. Decent working shocks to finish off should give you a bike that rides very well, make them 10/12mm longer if you want to quicken the steering a little. Brakes - not much to say abouit them - they'll either work or they won't.... Well set up, the Bulto will easily cope with the type of sections at Bath Classic trials, Miller series etc, and model 159 onwards will cope with the sections in most of the Traditional rounds. You would have to work harder on it in some of the Traditional rounds where the sections need a bit of clutch and brake control but there aren't that many. To do a Vesty rep is a lot of work, there are plenty of pictures about of them plus an article on the bike itself in a recent Classic Dirtbike mag. When they were developing that bike they were trying to keep up with Fantics etc and the sections they were riding were much harder than anything we ride now in classic events. I've never ridden one so I don't know how much better they ride than the standard bike. It would be a nice project to have a go at and a nice bike to have, but your Bulto set up well will cope with today's classic events no problem.

Yes I know, the suggestion was tongue in cheek, they're a lot of money - if it was the only bike I had I could probably find the money for one but I'd rather have a bit of variety and have a few old 'uns than just the one. They're for riding and I enjoy riding them. I don't know for a fact what he does to the Puma bikes but from riding a few I would say nothing too dramatic to the engine, maybe very slight porting to clean things up but I'd say that most of the benefit comes from lightened flywheels and perfect carburation, the engines run clean right through the range, instant pick-up and they rev a bit higher maybe as a reult of that and possibly from changes to the exhaust. He's used various length front pipes from longer to much shorter, middle box is a bit fatter, probably just more packing than bigger bore core. Rear sliencer is probably straight through with baffles removed and replaced with a perforated tube. Its the improvemets to the clutch, brakes and suspension that really make the bike feel good though. Clutch has perfect take up and is one finger operation, very light. So are the brakes which means you don't need to put much effort into using them which, along with the slightly quicker steering, gives the bike a light and effortless feeling to clutch / brake and makes it easier to flick around. No idea what he does to the clutch to make it work like that but the Montesas were the same. The forks are Bultaco but must have modern internals as they were faultless and the rear shocks were very good also - Magicals I think. The performance of the bikes is really down to superb preparation in all areas, everything works as it should but it is in essence still a Bultaco, or Montesa. A puma bike still looks like it should and isn't too far from a standard bike. There is no website and El Puma doesn't speak any English - there is no info on the web about these bikes - just some very nice pictures in Todotrial reports.

Go to Spain to a classic trial, beg a go on one of the Puma Racing Bultacos and you'll forget all about a Vesty replica. The Puma bikes retain the standard set up at the back, have a slightly steeper steering angle and have everything else (clutch, brakes, motor, suspension, carburation etc.) set up so perfectly that they ride like a dream. Yours for about 4 - 5000 Euros and if it is the only classic bike you'll own, worth every penny. I tried 3 when I went to Robregordo and they are superb. So was the 247 Montesa I tried which belongs to El Puma himself, and a 250 Ossa MAR.

The reason as explained to me yesterday, was that the timekeeper initially went to the wrong location. Riders are clocked off somewhere en route back to the start area, not at the last section. Some riders were finishing before this situation could be rectified, therefore, as they had no finishing time recorded they had to scrap the time limit. Although rumours were circulating late on (I was at the back of the entry) they were just that, rumours, so riders were still attempting to get a move on and finish in time. No-one, as far as I know, took it for granted that the limit had been scrapped and used it to an advantage. It was only confirmed to me by an official after I'd finished the last section and arrived back at the road en route to the timekeeping location. So, although unfortunate, there was little else the club could have done. In an ideal world I'd agree that you shouldn't scrap a time limit, but in this case I can't see that there was an alternative. I've ridden quite a few 'big' trials where time limits have been scrapped, it's not uncommon. On Saturday, there was unfortunately a lot of queuing and one of the things that contributes to this is riders asking for a 5 instead of attempting the section. To bypass a queue of riders and go straight to the opbserver to get a card punched takes up a lot of the observers time. This has the knock on affect of adding more delay to the time riders have to wait whilst queuing to make a proper attempt at the section. More so if there is only one observer, rather than an observer and a punch operator. So riders who correctly attempt all sections then suffer due to others who make no attempt and just get their cards punched. Strictly speaking they should get 10 for missing the section.... Anyway, this one hiccup aside, and the unusual amount of queuing on Saturday, still a great weekend so thanks to all who organised, observed, grafted etc. to make it all possible. Looking forward to next year already.

They are different, the stipes you buy here in the UK are all copies of the stripes for the alloy tank. The stripes for the fibreglass tank, which was illegal in the UK by the time the MK2 MAR came out (the first model with the stripes) you will probably have to source from Spain

They aren't replicas though, they're modified originals - A Gripper with a MAR tank and engine and one hell of an exhaust and a Sherpa with light frame mods at the rear with a nice seat, tank and rear silencer. Not sure aboout the Gripper but the Sherpa looks stunning, the mods are only slight but they make such a difference. The new Ossa twinshock is a replica of the original MAR but I've heard nothing about them since they were announced. I'd imagine they will end up with collectors if they are produced, not ridden. A new model with the Ossa name won't really be an Ossa I guess, just as the Sherco was never a Bultaco, but as an Ossa fan, I suppose it would be nice to see the name in the line up again.

What is it people can't see about the reason or need to tighten sections under stop and hop rules to take marks off better riders. Sections that can be cleaned or may take a mark with a tricky turn under no stop will easily be cleaned by a stop and hop ride. If the SSDT left the sections as they are now (still hard for average clubmen, without whom there would be no trial) and changed the rule to stop and hop, what do you think that would do to the scores of the top dozen or so riders. Under no stop, where they can't stop and correct their mistakes, they are only dropping a few marks a day as it is. If they were allowed to stop, correct mistakes, hop to another line to get out of trouble etc. how many of them would be going round clean each day. I'm not talking WTC riders, I mean good national riders like Dan Thorpe etc. as well as the likes of Wigg, Brown, Dabill. If a section is laid out so that it could be cleaned with a very very good no-stop ride by the odd rider but the rules allow stop and hop, what do you think riders will do. Those that can will just hop around the hazard = no hazard. It's the reason stop and hop sections are made tight. We've had some very good trials in the Traditional championship this year and the sections have taken marks off the leaders of the series because they have to ride them no stop. If they'd been allowed to stop and hop, or just stop, I can think of a few trials that would have cleaned by more than one rider. Simple fact is that if you lay out a section so that it may pinch a mark off most but allow a talented few to clean it under no stop, then under stop and hop there will be many cleans recorded. Apply that to each section in the trial and you're not going to have a winner. I'm not saying no stop will sort out WTC, don't know, don't care, but it isn't possible to lay out no stop style sections for stop and hop rules.

Mid 90s - they were actually lobbying some riders to enter due to the shortage of riders purely because the trial had become too hard. It was beyond most clubmen. I know someone, who had been a regular rider up until then, who received a letter asking him to ride

Not much joy with these I'm afraid. No number on the slide or needle jet Pilot I changed to a 34 Needle is standard, I think 6KL - it's faint Needle position on middle clip Main is standard 112 If there are other jets in the carb I can't see them. This is the type with the tube attached on the top of the inlet stub. No idea what it's for, I blanked it off. Bike runs fine.

Michelin still make a tubed tyre but it's not an X11. Just don't bother buying one if you ride predominantly muddy trials.

You've guessed incorrectly

The aftermarket springs sold by Bultaco UK are longer than standard by about 1 - 1.5 inches as an estimate as that is how far the stick out of the top of the fork tubes - as per Pursang length probably, but I think they are not the same rate as a Pursang. It's difficult to say what the correct length Sherpa spring is as there is no way of knowing whether these changed from model to model. Generally they sit about flush with the top of the forks. When I fitted the new springs as a pair I found they gave too much preload for me so I just run one new, one old and it's just about right for me. Whether your falcons leak is down to luck I think - I have several pairs and most have developed a leak after a period of time and often that period has been months not years.

Didn't mean to steer Bogwheel's thread into a carb thread - OKO is out of the box apart from smaller pilot, 36 maybe, can't remember. I've no idea where the air jet is so if one is fitted it's still there. Ditto the starting jet. I have to clean the carb in the next day or two for this weekend's trial so I'll check the numbers.

It isn't necessarily a kickback that caused it. My 05, which I bought new and which came from the factory with the fix, broke without a kickback. On the first 05 models, the bolt that held the kickstart stop plate in place inside the clutch was too soft and the head could break off the bolt. Once this happened the stop plate was no longer fixed in place and the kicksart would return too far. The fix was to fit a high tensile bolt that wouldn't break. Instead, on mine at least, the kickstart constantly returning against its stop must have chipped away at the lug housing the bolt and eventually the bolt just ripped out of its cracked housing causing a bit of a mess, fortunately fixed under warranty with a replacement engine. I'm no engineer but the kickstart stop didn't look a particularly strong design to me when surveying the aftermath. I've no idea what they could do to cure it though as it would mean a redesign, although you don't seem to hear of it happening to bikes later than the 05.

Standard shock length for all the Sherpas is 340mm. As for which make, look around at all the events you go to and see how many trials bikes are fitted with Hagons. I have never seen one. I'm not knocking Hagon as a brand but for trials there is no history of riders using them here, therefore no rider feedback on which to develop the shock into a leading brand. They're considered a budget shock if you're not too serious about your riding. The favoured shocks are Falcon, Rockshock, NJB, Betor (nothing intended in the order I've listed them) The Betors are probably the best to go for if you want a cheaper shock that works reasonably well - assuming they still do the cheap version. The new versions are more than Falcons. Falcons work very well but they can be prone to leaking. Rockshocks are improving in their set up, the quality of the shock itself has never been an issue. There are other shocks from Spain that are very good but you'll pay a heavy price. Ultimately, depends on how serious you are. A length of 370mm is too long, it will really upset the bike. I have 10mm longer on my 199b and it just quickens the steering a little, but enough, without upsetting the handling. They're Falcons with superlight damping and 60lbs springs and the back end works really well. Back end of a Sherpa normally feels pretty dead or wooden, but this set up gives loads of feedback. Obviously it's the shocks themselves, not the extra 10mm in that respect. I've also modded the front forks with a longer spring in one leg, standard in the other, no spacers (springs as sold by Bultaco UK - I found fitting both gave too much preload, for me) It also has Ossa damper rods as I've never thought the Bulto forks worked particularly well, damping is too soft. They have 200cc of 10W oil. I have blocked off the air vents in the fork tops so they don't spew oil in my face every time the forks depress (I'm just about to fit valved tops) and this also adds a bit of preload. They work really well now. Note though, I am around 240lbs so it won't suit everyone's tast/style. Might as well add that I also have a 250 ignition flywheel fitted, electronic ignition and an OKO 28mm carb. It pulls like a train.

The SSDT was in real danger of collapsing in mid 90s due to lack of riders due to section severity with stop and hop. In '97 they went no-stop and had a very healthy entry. Entries rose in 98 and 99 until 2000 came along and everyone wanted to ride due to it being the year milenium year. They were overscribed so there was a ballott. That year also had extremely good weather with endless sunshine and that was it - oversubscribed ever since. So yes, it was no-stop rules that rejuvinated the SSDT, no question. Whether it will cure whatever the problems are at WTC is another matter, one that doesn't concern me or most of the people I know. In the UK I still think clubs should be given the choice to run under whatever rules they wish due to the present day spread of machines and the age and abilities of riders taking part. Riders or observers don't need a degree in physics to understand the difference between stop and no-stop rules. Being able to read (the regs) is a definite advantage though.

I'm also in the same position - rebuilding a 247 MK4b and the Amal is worn. I'm going to fit an OKO as it is a lot cheaper than a Mikuni and they work well. They also seem to work on just about any bike straight from the box. I have a 26mm on an Ossa, all I did was drop the needle, 26mm on a 320 Yam Majesty no changes, 28mm on a 340 Bultaco has smaller pilot jet. All run fine. Problem with Mikunis is the huge variety in needle/needle jet combinations depending on the type of Mikuni. Certain needle jets only work with certain needles and carb bodies. Bit of a minefield. OKO is much easier. May be worth a try - you'll just need an adapter for the inlet manifoldb as they are push on not bolt on.

Skirt clearance I don't know (haven't a clue about real technical stuff like that...) I'm guessing you mean for the rebore, in which case it would be the same as the MAR I would think. All that fitting the 72mm MAR piston involves is a rebore as the liner is plenty big enough. Maximum oversize piston is 72.60 for the Tarabusi although the Wiseco increments in .25 measurements I think so they may go to 73.00. On the 250 MAR that is about as far as you can go as the cylinder stud spacing prevents a bigger liner. On the 250 Gripper the studs are spaced further apart if I remember correctly, like the 350 motors, so once you've reached the 250 maximum oversize there is scope for overboring I would guess. If you're only on 70mm now though, it's unlikely you'll ever need it. The rings on the MAR and Gripper are the same type, the really thin wire rings. Not sure of the actual thickness but 0.8mm sounds as though it would be about right

You're kidding right? How is this any different from any other bike? The problem with the KT forks is that they are too soft in damping and spring rate which doesn't help when tackling long rocky sections at speed, the front end is difficult to control. The rake on the steering also makes it hard to bring the bike back on line quickly as the steering is slow. Turning tight on the KT isn't really an issue, it will turn tight ok, it is the speed that the steering responds that is a disadvantage against some other bikes. I have no idea about the rigidity of the frame but it is way over engineered and too heavy. The rear engine mount alone is overkill.

Don't know if you know about this site already but if you don't there is a list of specialists at the bottom. You might get a Gripper piston from one of the US specialists. Mats Nyberg Ossa site If you can't get one you can use a 72mm MAR piston which takes it out to 244cc, Gripper was sleeved down to 238cc with its 70mm piston. You just need to cut the slot in the back of the MAR piston using your original as a pattern.

Not to do with performance for me, rather the limited choice of tubed tyres now available, IRC and Michelin. The IRC grips as well as anything but has been spoilt by the butter-like strength of the sidewalls, if you weigh over about 12 stone they roll around all over the place. Increase the pressure to over 5psi to stiffen it up and you lose grip. If you can put up with the rolling they're fine but at 17+ stone I can't and I'm sick of the bloody things. They puncture easily too. The Michelin isn't a tubed version of the X11, I've no idea what it is but it's about as good as a racing slick on ice when used in a muddy trial. Didn't have one on long enough to try it on rocks. I'd bet a Pirelli MT43 is better.... Soft sidewalls apart. as regards performance in terms of grip between the IRC tubed and any tubeless tyres, if there is a difference, you'd have to be able to ride well enough to push the tubed tyre to its absolute limit and then be able to ride the same terrain with a tubeless and feel any difference. 95% of trials riders don't have to worry about that. Main advantage of tubeless is wider choice, less chance of punctures, stiffer sidewalls. Some tubed rims will seat a tubeless tyre with a tube fitted with no problem. Again there is a theory that the tubeless doesn't work as well with a tube in but if a rider can tell that they should be in WTC I reckon.

Aprilia ?????

All parts will be ok in the main but there may be one or two things to watch out for. If your 92 frame is the mk1 version which had only the rear facing tubes from footrests up to seat, if you replace with the mk2 frame which has the forward facing tubes as well, your tank, if it is the slimline fibrglass version, may need trimming to clear the forward facing frame tubes and the aircleaner to carb hose. If you have the alloy Homerlite tank/seat unit it should be ok on either. Brackets for a rear silencer could differ on early or really late 91/92 frames. Some late bikes may have had the boomerang silencer fitted, not the small triangular silencer of the early model. If you go for a later model 124/5 frame, the chain tensioner and mounting point may be different That should be about all though. Edit: - just noticed this 92 engine on ebay - give them a ring about the frame. Ellastone ebay item

I agree with you on the weight issue, I'm staggered anyone can consider any modern trials bike too heavy. The 4RT may be a little front end biased as regards weight whch gives the front a heavy feel, like Betas (not tried an Evo) but overall weight isn't an issue. That only matters to the WTC and top National championship riders who have to throw them up things that good national riders and below can only gawp at. Most riders could save themselves a lot of money on weight saving gimmicks and get the weight off themselves instead. Can't agree on your thoughts on adapting to 4-strokes though. Takes about 10 minutes, no difference from changing from one make of bike to another. A lot is made of the difference in technique that is required. It was never an issue before the 4RT, certainly isn't an issue in the enduro world where riders regularly change from 2 to 4-stroke. I ride my C15 exactly the same way as I ride a Bult, Ossa or KT. Only real differences are you have to hold the throttle open a little longer on climbs, a 2-stroke can be shut off earlier due to less engine braking to carry you over the top, together with engine braking in general. Much is made of using 4-stroke torque and riding off lower revs to gain grip. When a section starts in a rut and goes straight up a 40 foot climb of UK snotty mud there is only one approach - full throttle, let the rear tyre burn through for grip in as high a gear as possible. Try pulling low revs and you won't make the start cards, never mind the ends cards on 2 or 4-stroke. I've no idea why Honda are reportedly pulling the plug again, but the 4RT is now very expensive to buy and is not really a good bike for non-experts, at least not in muddy conditions. I know of several good national riders who have sold them as they cannot get them to grip in muddy conditions. These are national standard riders, not beginners. They know how to ride. The power, at least on the earlier bikes was too snappy, even with soft mapping and they spin up easily at low throttle and this punishes a beginner badly. There are easier bikes to ride, 200, 125 etc. Many riders don't need 250 upwards. I've no idea of sales figures but know of a lot of people who didn't buy another 4RT (me included) so maybe it is falling sales that have influenced a decision by Honda. Certainly can't be the lack of success at WTC. It will be a shame if they do go, in Repsol colours I think it is the best looking trials bike out there, but maybe it no longer has the appeal it once had now that many more riders have tried or owned one and made their own minds up since they first appeared amidst all the hype.

They didn't go off the boil, Steve finished 2nd in 1986, Lejeune I think was 3rd. Although both were well placed for another crack in 1987, both lost the chance to win the '86 title at the last round, particularly Lejeune who was way down the results. Who knows when Honda made the final decision to quit, but after 3 titles with Lejeune on the twinshock, perhaps two years with no title was deemed a failure by Honda, maybe hastening a decision that was already being planned. For '87 Steve went to Fantic, Eddie rode his last season on the RTL and went to Merlin after. No real Honda factory involvement in WTC until the 315 almost 10 years later.