Jump to content

trialsrfun

Best Handling Bultaco

Recommended Posts

sherpa325, on 08 Feb 2015 - 11:10 AM, said:

M190 250, shorter frame-wheelbase, lower headstock/handlebar, more ground clearance- tried and tried to like this frame, even fitted my 325 engine, but never really liked the handling, always preferred the stability, steering and riding position of the 325 frame.

M199 Really liked the handling of this bike but struggled to get it to run as good as the earlier 325's, later found out the small airbox was the problem. Also the bike didn't look a patch on the earlier bikes, I can remember getting it out of the crate and being so disappointed to see all the alloy painted black and three different shades of red- guards, airbox and tank all different!

Ended up on a 348 cota for a year as a result.

I am not familiar with the Model 190 but have seen some Bultaco with a less curved lower yoke and what appears to be a curved frame down tube.

With regard to the 199 air box was an upgraded part fitted to the 199a & b models?

Thank you for your sharing your thoughts on the bikes you have ridden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I am not familiar with the Model 190 but have seen some Bultaco with a less curved lower yoke and what appears to be a curved frame down tube.

With regard to the 199 air box was an upgraded part fitted to the 199a & b models?

Thank you for your sharing your thoughts on the bikes you have ridden.

Yes the bikes with the curved front down tube and less curve in the bottom yoke are the 250's that ran a different frame to the 325's from 1975 though to 1977. [m158, m182, m190]

The 199A had the same airbox as the 199, but my 199A ran much better than the 199- maybe I had a dud 199 who knows

The airbox was upgraded on the 199B

As most will agree, the most complete package is the 199A - 199B

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
 
nigel dabster, on 18 Feb 2015 - 05:16 AM, said:

a pal had a 175cc frame, surprising how much smaller and lighter it was, might handle different too?

Did the 175 or Model 221 share the same frame as the 158 which for some reason had those flatter fork yokes mentioned above by Sherpa 325 or was it the same type as used on the 199 and later a & b models?

Any one know what was the reason for those shallower fork yokes, were shorter fork legs also needed or were the legs the same.

Edited by trialsrfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 

I have moved the pegs on my M199B about a half an inch down and half an inch back. I also used modern pegs and brackets. I put some Apico`s on it and it improved the feel and seemed to improve the traction as well. I really liked the modification. Graham.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Did the 175 or Model 221 share the same frame as the 158 which for some reason had those flatter fork yokes mentioned above by Sherpa 325 or was it the same type as used on the 199 and later a & b models?

Any one know what was the reason for those shallower fork yokes, were shorter fork legs also needed or were the legs the same.

175cc frame is the same as model 158, 181 and 190. The forks were shorter yes, to with the smaller frame. When the 198/199 came out the 250 reverted to the bigger frame and forks.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Not my speciality but I've a 199b which I killed in the Summer.

Couldn't fault the handling,never wanted to tuck in or throw you over the bars.

Really planted in a straight line.

I thought it was fine in the tight stuff.

If set up right the bike would scare me.

Should have it running in the Summer.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I think welding new peg mounts for the later style of wider pegs is a good move and will help your feel on the bike. I keep mine in the standard position forward/back but get them as low as possible. As breagh said I find the standard geometry fine. I have tried moving them down and back but found the front end not as planted with a tendency to push in turns. I don't have trouble finding traction so for me it was not a good move. However the current crop of spanish bikes 'Puma' etc seem to be moving their pegs back as well as down, so it must work for some. A couple of things to take into consideration when modifying bikes, particularly bultacos, is that the standard bike is pretty good for the period of time it was built. They won five world championships on the trot with three different riders. Also remember pretty much everything is a compromise, handlebar height,wheelbase, steering head angle, flywheel weight ,footpeg position. If you are not riding the bike at least weekly at a reasonable level and have some favorite practice sections to test your modifications on, it is going to be very difficult to gauge any improvements. For me its important to have the bike running in really good order, Carburation needs to be spot on, timing needs to be done regularly, new fork springs, good rear shocks, good tyres, barnet clutch plates, one finger clutch and then plenty of practice.

Cheers Greg

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...