February 8, 200818 yr I recently got a couple of 348 monts. This one is registered 1980. I've not found an original pic of 1 1980, if it is a '80 348 even. Chassis looks like a 349, but what do I know! Chassis no: 51M17604. Its got a Mikuni carb too. Was that standard in those days? And some sort of air forks. So, knowledgeable twinshock gurus - is this a last 348 or some sort of mongrel? I've also got a 1977 Rathmell replica in similar, but slightly worse condition. It's mot'd & was taxed. I'm probably going to sell that once I've given it a look over.
February 8, 200818 yr Hi, I dont confess to be any sort of twinshock expert but to me it looks like a 349 with a 348 tank/seat units and tailpipe! Cheers B
February 8, 200818 yr I vote the other way....348 with a 349 frame. Its a 348 front end (349 front wheel had a conical hub) 348 Motor (349 engine cases were different) 348 Exhaust system (349 large back box) 349 Frame (348 had a rear frame loop and frame tubes/wire mesh instead of a bolt on sump shield) Hope this helps Martin
February 8, 200818 yr Agree with MartinM, don't think Mikuni was OEM, but probably a good mod. I had an ex-Rathmell '77 348 with right side gear shift, he put a Mikuni on it too. Pretty bike though !
February 8, 200818 yr It could be a Julian Wigg modified 348. Something he was doing to them when he owned the shop, and long before the factory brought out the 349...... he always prefered the 348 to the 349.
February 8, 200818 yr That chassis number is well into 349 territory, double check the inlet manifold between carb and barrell, 348 stub is part of barrell , 349 is a 2 bolt on stub. Whats ebgine number? looks like a mongrel of 2 or more bikes to be honest! S_M.
February 9, 200818 yr I just had to add my two cents worth. The forks and front wheel on the bike in the photo were used on all 348s and the first two models of the 349; the 1980/81 red tanked model 349 with the sight guage tube in the side of the petrol tank and longer swingarm, and the 1981/82 white tanked model). During the white tanked model run, 349s started to come out with the horrible (prone to failure of the spoke flanges) conical Honda design hub. The fork tube spacing was narrower on the white tanked model 349 compared with the 348s. This doesn't really matter but may help with identifying which model triple clamps you have. Not sure about the first red tank 349 fork spacing. If you intend riding the bike in competition, compare the swingarm length of your Monties. You may have the swingarm from the first model 349 which had a longer swingarm than the 348 and the later 349s. The long swingarm is great for hillclimbing and the shorter one is great for tight stuff.
February 9, 200818 yr I agree that it's a 349 chassis with 348 parts. I suspect the engine is 348, at least the sidecovers are. The rear silencer is 348 but has been modified to mount on the 349 frame with the 2 bolts further apart on the 349.
February 9, 200818 yr Author Great info guys, thanks Its engine no 51M14964. I'll check intake stub etc later. Were the air valve fork tops standard? Any ideas on the correct pressure? Ta, Mike
February 9, 200818 yr Yes the air forks were standard fitment to late 348s and 349s. The forks are meant to be aired up to about 8psi with a max of 12 psi. Any more and the fork leg may split. The engine is 348.
February 9, 200818 yr Author Yes it seems its a 348 motor - cast in intake stub. It has the one inch longer swingarm too, compared to the earlier MRR 348. So looks like a bit more mix 'n' match is in order.
March 3, 200818 yr Author Another question - both these bikes have twin plug heads. I assume the centre plug is the "correct" one. Would a decompressor have been fitted in the other plughole? Is a decompressor of any use - other than for making a great farty noise?
March 3, 200818 yr Another question - both these bikes have twin plug heads. I assume the centre plug is the "correct" one. Would a decompressor have been fitted in the other plughole?Is a decompressor of any use - other than for making a great farty noise? I use my decompressor to great effect. It will slow you down on a downhill so perfectly, especially when you are in loose soil and braking would cause you to wash out. I'm surprised more people don't use them. And the farty noise puts a smile on the older riders.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.