dgshannon

One of the toughest questions to answer, because it depends... For those who spend less, and buy older bikes (1999-2001), you have two outcomes. The ones that figure out they don't like trials, end up happy. For those that figure out they love trials, they then regret not having purchased a more up-to-date bike. At first, they don't know any better, but soon get frustrated with it as they learn that the clutch isn't smooth and progressive, brakes aren't as good, etc. Ultimately, end up selling it and buying a newer bike.

Note the BIG GIANT red notes, as you come into this area. If your topic is related to a specific brand of bike then please post in the dedicated Forum for that brand of bike.

Tough to give any better advice than that. No doubt, the best 2-stroke, adult beginners bike, out there. If, you want to go ahead and take the plunge into the 4-stroke world, so you won't have to relearn all over again later, then the Scorpa SY 175F is a good bet.

Small firecracker? I thought Sherco parts just fell off on their own.

Looking forward to it.

No, just staring at that butt ugly Montesa, with the gold rims and yellow hoses!

Not a new bike, when you got it, I presume. I seriously doubt you had a corrosion problem on a bike that was only "a few weeks" old.

No personal experience, but do have a word of advice from a restoration pro. His take was that powdercoat is a problem later, when it is chipped and worn, and you once again want to freshen up your bike, whereas paint can always be easily removed and done over again. If you are doing a garage queen, then powdercoat is great. For a functional rider, go with paint. Again, just passing along advice, with no personal insight.

Good thing you are tall Martin, or else we wouldn't see you! Wouldn't a Montesa sticker look good over the Kawasaki logo?

Riding around inside the house, on the stairway, is one thing, but the car! That was no junker, brought out of the scrapyard, for a demo.

As a beginning rider, the heavier flywheel is exactly what you need. Don't mess with it. I had four of the SY 250's in a row (2002, 03, 04 & 05) and on each of them with the heavier flywheel, by intent. Once you better understand how a trials event is not like an enduro, you will come to appreciate why the bike is less "revvey", as you put it. In fact, as a new rider, I would even recommend a slow throttle (black tube vs. white) to help you with your throttle control.

Yeah, Danny might pass for Italian, as long as you don't let him wear his MotoMex t-shirt!

True. If you like working on bikes, then gassers are good. If you would rather have dependability, and skip having to work on your bike, then Scorpa would be a good choice. I had 6 in a row, starting with 2001. Each year, better than the last, and always reliable, low maintenance bikes.

The 175F is 143cc engine, where as the 200F is 163cc. I had the 175F for a little over a year, and loved it. Yes, the front of the sump guard is lower, and can hit on very slow drop-offs, where you have no opportunity to carry the front end out a bit. On mine, I had changed the jetting, and modified the exhaust tube. And yes, I did remove all of the rods in the tube, on mine, with great results. As far as the clutch goes, the 175 and 200 should come with the hydraulic clutch. Even then, the performance can be a bit on or off, but there is a fix. There is a company in the US called B & J Racing that makes a clutch kit. The kit provides different plates and discs, which completely transform the clutch performance. With the mods in place, I really loved mine, and was always blown away by exactly how much I could do on the bike. Being a small displacement 4-stroke, one can easily underestimate what it is capable of. Based upon your description of your riding style, you should find the bike very satisfying.

The 175F is a great bike, and would serve you well on the Novice line. I rode one for a year in our Sr. Amateur class, no problem. The only performance issue I had was if I was at a dead stop, right at the bottom of a steep climb. I weigh 225 pounds, so I was pushing it in that situation. For example, where we practice, we had a hill with a full lock turn, right at the base. Your front wheel would actually be starting up the hill before you came out of the turn enough to start accelerating. IN that situation, it was tough to build RPM. But, in any other circomstance, where I had an opportunity to build up a little RPM first, it would climb MAJOR stuff without problem.

Looking through the 2008 manuals, for both the 2-stroke and 4-stoke, Beta calls out the coolant as "Bardahl Permanent". A web search does not turn up a match. But, you can find "Bardahl -38" and "Bardahl Long Life". I am assuming that the word permanent may just be a bad translation of long-life. If so, the spec sheet shows that coolant to still contain water, but it is "demineralized" water. From that, I would assume that this means that the salts, chlorides, etc. are removed, but there is still water content.

Being "used to the power of an enduro bike" has no relevance to picking the right trials bike. It makes as much since as reasoning that an airline pilot should find "nothing wrong" with buying a top fuel dragster, sinply because he is already "used to" handling all the power of a jet plane. A new (to trials) rider already has a steep learning curve, with a lot of new skills to master, including throttle control. Making it worse, by adding even more power to the equation, wouldn't be a wise choice. Any of the 200cc 2-strokes, or a Scorpa SY175F/SY200F would be a great starter bike.

Can't speak for the white, but the black one, on my 4-stroke, does not appear to be paint, and it is tough as nails (so far). I have banged it, scrapped it against trees, and even bent it double (upward, not down) and there is not a mark on it. I must say that I am very pleased.

I reckon there should be no trouble figuring out he is American!

You might try looking at the already existing thread? Link: http://www.trialscentral.com/forums/index....showtopic=18108

This may be the better path to pursue, than those where the lights were left on. The act of removing the lights, and leaving only a kill switch (setup wrong, faulty, intermittant, etc.), may be the contributor to the failure. Sounds reasonable that a design weakness, combined with inconsistant (or questionable) modifications, could potentially lead to failure. The seemingly random variable may be the modification itself.

Is that a technical term?

I you go into a Honda dealer, they will have a Hondaline product that is already mixed. The water and coolent are ready to use, right out of the bottle.