February 20, 200917 yr I would hae to agree there woody, maybe we are now used to modern bikes, most of which are pretty lively. I had a newish gasser pro 300 which had enough power to get you into all sorts of trouble, but controllable once you got used to it. My brief ride on the Montesa showed perhaps similar power, probably less aggressive. But I also ride a Yam WR450 which puts out enormous power in comparison, so its all relative! Steve
February 20, 200917 yr I owned both a 348 & a white 349 from new. The 348 was a nice bike to ride the 349 wasn't, bloody thing was always 5 yards in front of me & pulled my arms out. Perhaps this is why I don't like big bore trials bikes. The 242 mont that replaced the 349 was heaven to ride in comparison. I think Woody & I have radically different views on what is & isn't a nice trials bike to ride, can't think I'd have had the urge to take a tyz or a birkett special round Scotland. Now I've got the 4 stroke thing out of my system can't see me riding owt but a 250 Gasser.
February 20, 200917 yr The 242 mont that replaced the 349 was heaven to ride in comparison. The 242 was a much better bike than the 349 (Sandifords supported riders chose the 242 over the 349). I wish I'd had the common sense to buy a 242 instead of my second 349. The 242 was built along the lines of the Fantics, which were dominating at the time. The 349 was built along the lines of Allen Jefferies Triumph.
February 21, 200917 yr The 348 came with chain guide tubes. 349 came with a spring loaded tensioner. The tensioner was a running change, early 349s had the chain tubes.
February 22, 200917 yr The tensioner was a running change, early 349s had the chain tubes. Sorry VC, all 349s had the chain tubes.
February 25, 200917 yr Taken from another thread, ref my 1980 349: I see you have a special left-handed Cota 349 there with the primary drive and gearshift on the left side. That must be a rare one! Is this correct, anyone care to expand? just curious. Bottom pic shows the engine mounted chain tensioner, or part of it anyway! Thanks Steve
February 25, 200917 yr Steve, in my browser at home, your photos were mirror-imaged so I joked about it being a left handed motor. I'm at work now on a different computor (and sober) and the pictures are the right way around. Sorry for the confusion. David
February 25, 200917 yr Steve, in my browser at home, your photos were mirror-imaged so I joked about it being a left handed motor. I'm at work now on a different computor (and sober) and the pictures are the right way around. Sorry for the confusion.David Ah ! I did wonder !!!!! no worries ....
February 25, 200917 yr Ive got a 242 and a MH349,given the choice i allways go for the MH,its a far more forgiving bike at low revs,can be ridden easily without clutching it,and has the grunt to get you up more modern sections. Steering feels more positive too.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.