esteve

An interesting thread. I googled a bit to find out more and found a water cooled one; looks like a conversion:

The original (1975?) TL125 High Boy was marketed to take all the TL125 running gear so if you can find TL125 forks and yokes you will be back to standard. Look at this photo: http://3.bp.blogspot...an-horwood1.jpg - click to zoom. The TL125 bottom yoke needs to be modified to fit the High Boy frame. There are some earlier postings in the forums regarding High Boy Frames (do a search of the Honda forum). This link: http://w5.nuinternet...1/Honda_TL125S/ shows the original Sammy Miller brochure; the TL125 High Boy is on page 2 and it states that the kit price includes modification to the lower yoke. Looking at the photo of the Honda TL25 at the top of the page on this link and comparing the steering head with that in the the image of the High Boy frame it seems the modification is to shorten the stem of the lower yoke - however, if the TL125 stanchions are angled/raked wrt the stem (see my remark below) then the location of the stem in the bottom yoke will need to be adjusted commensurate with the shortening as moving the yokes closer together will require the stem to be moved forwards. Check out mid to late '70s SL100 and SL125 forks and yokes as they look the same and are the same diameter (31mm) and may be more readily available. The TL125 forks in my 2010 TL125 High Boy are 760mm from axle centre to top stanchion (just under 30") but my bike has the SM billet yokes (hence my vagueness about TL125 yokes). The part number for the SL125 top yoke is the same as the TL125 K series; 5231-110-000 - still available from CMSNL; http://www.cmsnl.com...op_53230110305/ for Euro 47.5. If the SL top yoke is the same as the TL125's then the SL bottom yoke must match dimensionally? The TL125 bottom yoke part number is 53200-355-0008; 355 infers a TL125 so that part may be unique to the TL125 but it looks the same in the parts fiche for the SL125: http://www.cmsnl.com...05.html#results - maybe the difference is something trivial like the steering lock mount? There is quite a lot of offset (from stem to stanchions) on the TL125 yokes which isn't ideal for a nice steering feel but that is what riders must have found acceptable when they were new?. I mention this as if you start mixing and matching components you could end up with very strange steering characteristics and possibly have the added aggravation of the forks fouling the tank on/near full lock if you use yokes with less offset from the stem. The SM Products billet yokes are still available and listed here: http://www.smproduct...&keyword=hi boy - I suspect they would cost more than you paid for the bike? They appear to have a large stem-stanchion offset similar to the standard TL125 items? The stanchions of my billet yokes appear to have approximately 1 or 1.5 degree offset with respect to the steering stem (does this replicate the originals?). If they are raked (its not the weather to be in the shed at night trying to measure this in torchlight) then this reduces trail. Note that the 2010 High Boy frames have slightly different geometry to the 1970's frames; the steering head angle is reduced by 1 1/2 degrees and the swinging arm lengthened by about an inch and a 1/4 to maintain the wheel base of 51 1/2 inches (according to the information on the SM webiste). There have been some "TL200" High Boys created using TLR200 engines in the 2010 frames. They appear to use SM Products High Boy billet yokes for 35mm stanchions to mount the TLR200 Forks and front wheel. TLR200 forks use a leading axle so I wonder if the SM yokes are machined parallel for the TLR200 forks or the trail would be very small with both angled yokes and a leading axle, although the standard TLR200 yokes do have a small about of rake in them. Contact Richard Jordan at Sammy Miller Products to get information and possibly find out what is required for the TL125 bottom yoke modification if you take that route.

Michelin http://www.michelinm...fitment2012.pdf recommends a 2.5 rim for the Trial Competition and X11 Rear (but 1.85 to 2.15 is compatible) and a 2.75 rim for the Trial X Light !!!!!! IRC http://www.irc-tire.com/mce/ recommend a 2.15 rim for the 4.00R18 Trials Tourist (street use) rear, but don't stipulate a rim width for the competition trials tyre. Dunlop http://www.dunlopmot...rt-trials/d803/ recommend a 2.15 rim for the D803 Rear tyre 4.00R18 (with 3.00 as an alternative). So its still open for debate, in the case of Michelin tyres anyway, as to whether there are advantages or disadvantages in using a 1.85 or 2.15 rear rim with a 4.00R18 trials tyre.

Thankyou for your reply and the one on the Honda forum. I might just give it a go as the wheel is already built with a 1.85 rim. However I was hoping someone might post a tyre manufacturer data sheet or technical bulletin that might settle the debate - anybody?

Jon, I ask because I need to rebuild my Honda TLR200 rear wheel and acquired a complete wheel which has a a 1.85 rim (vs the standard TLR200 rim which is a 2.15. I have seen references to getting a better tyre footprint from using the narrower rim with a standard 4" x 18" (not a narrower tyre) tyre but as I said in the original post "nothing conclusive". Maybe I should add that bike uses Tubed tyres.

There have been a few threads on the forums about whether to use a WM2 (1.85) or WM3 (2.15) rim on a rear wheel but i never saw a conclusive recommendation. Can anybody throw any light?

The rear wheel on my TLR200 needs a new rim (its dissolved from the inside). There have been a few threads on the forums about whether to use a WM2 (1.85) or WM3 (2.15) rim but i never saw a conclusive recommendation. The original is a 2.15. Can anybody throw any light?

There was a BMW in the 2011 Pre65 Scottish, Rider No. 105. I remember I took this photo on Day 2 at Pipeline and there is also a shot of the LHS in the paddock.

Yes, thankyou for posting. I didn't get to Scotland this year.

Search for Montesa 250cc (NB misspelt with two "s" - I'm typing ss here but it gets corrected to Montesa everytime I submit it..........?). Manchester area.

Yes, that surprised me; I was convinced all the changes happened for the 2002 year. I'm going to tear up my notes and have edited my post above. According to this site: http://www.apexmotosports.com/Montesa_Models.htm the changes to front forks and rear caliper occurred thus: 1997 to 1999 Paoli/outboard 2000 Showa/outboard 2001 to 2004 Showa/inboard If you go to this page: http://www.apexmotosports.com/montesa%20parts%20book/e-1.htm The Parts Lists are provided for the 315 and you can figure out how the components changed by model year. I just checked my dating letter from Sandiford's and my bike, Frame No. VTDMT03A02E30**** was imported in March 2002 and manufactured in September 2001, so the Frame number is giving "Model Year".

Rear caliper above S/A is the earlier model. To determine the year (of the frame anyway) check the frame number, and VTDMT03 does NOT mean 2003 as some sellers will try to tell you; its the letter/digit after VTDMT03A0_ that gives the year: 1997 = V 1998 = W 1999 = X 2000 = Y 2001 = VTDMT03A01E300001 2002 = VTDMT03A02E300001 2003 = VTDMT03A03E300001 2004 = VTDMT03A04E300001 Hint: - even if everything looks and sounds good, pick it up by the back end till the back wheel just comes of the ground then lower and raise it around that position and if there is any play in the suspension linkage you are looking at £100 to £200 of parts (bearings). (edited after Ham's post) Front forks type can also be an indication of model year. According to: http://www.apexmotosports.com/Montesa_Models.htm the changes to the make of front fork and rear caliper location at points in the production run were: 1997 to 1999 Paoli/outboard 2000 Showa/outboard 2001 to 2004 Showa/inboard Paoli forks - vertical mudguard fixings on fork legs with a "U" bracket for the mudguard. Showa forks - horizontal mudguard fixings level with the tops of the sliders (and I think the colour of the coating on the stanchions changed from year to year as well) ... however I think it's possible to swap swinging arms....forks .... and bodywork and...... Search the forums for more information. Good Luck.

Pyramid Parts are a New Zealand company... http://www.pyramidparts.co.nz/ ...their kits also come with seals.

You might get it here: http://stores.ebay.co.uk/MIDLANDS-EXHAUSTS?_trksid=p4340.l2563 at first glance there doesn't seem to be anything under 3" but there is one listing that says they can provide in any size. Please let me know if you have a success as I have a similar job to do. Good Luck.

I hadn't considered the possibility of the kickstart flicking into the stored position...something to look forward to - not. I can't imagine how that is happening and will have to dig out the kickstart and look at it to understand how that can happen. If you didn't glaze bust when you fitted the new rings at the time of the last/recent rebuild then you didn't give the rings a chance to bed in. An interesting if controversial article here: http://www.mototuneusa.com/break_in_secrets.htm My sympathies with your problem(s). There are too many variables to pin it down (new carb, new ignition, new build; is the cam timing spot on? can the cam timing be out and not have piston/valve contact? valve clearances (tappets) OK? Valve guides were mentioned? OK? Valves seating sealing OK?). I've no experience of the PVL system but it is a modification I intend to use so I have researched it somewhat; is the rotor keyed or did you have to accurately position the rotor on the crankshaft at TDC (with degree disc etc)? Is it accurately positioned? Re checking the ignition timing with a strobe I would recommend this as a first check before you put the primary cover on to make sure that the spark at tickover is occurring around 3deg BTDC and that the ignition timing advances with increasing revs. You say that when the yellow dots are aligned at TDC there are 3 degrees BTDC advance at static; then at tickover under the strobe light the mark on the rotor and the static mark should be aligned or at least quite close together with the mark on the rotor slightly in advance of the static mark if some further advance from static is associated with the rpm at tickover - did you get an advance curve with the ignition kit? As you increase the revs the mark on the rotor should advance with increasing revs up to the maximum advance (is it specified?). If the mark on the rotor appears after the static mark and increasingly so as you increase revs then your ignition is retarding; I don't know if this is physically possible with a PVL system but the Pazon ignition system will retard if wired incorrectly). Anyway food for thought. If all the engine settings and clearances are correct and the ignition is working as per specification then the probllem goes back to the carb? Are you using fresh fuel?

If the overall appearance is "nice and clean" and the engine sounds good then I'd buy it. It might be the crankcase seals; when they go an engine can become gutless? Foam air filters can degrade and choke the intake? Forks are repairable/replaceable. Are they bent? Brakes: clean them/service them - use a decent brake lining (e.g. Saftek or Classic Brake Services) and have them turned to match the drum ID. Check for cracks in the front hub; I know someone who had to repair his almost shattered front hub (on a virtually brand new bike) during the SSDT with araldite and some steel sheet; he finished. After that he and all the other Ossa riders in the area replaced the front hub with Honda 50 stepthrough components (pretty sure it was Honda 50; definitely small capacity Japanese).

The part number for the RS200T petcock is 16950-357-010 So, according to http://oldmanhonda.com/MC/HCodes.html the model code 357 indicates it was originally for the CR250 M0 model CMSNL list this as not available (under the fiche for Honda CR250M ELSINORE K0 USA) so no luck there... Try the Moto Cross specialists?

If nobody comes up with the codes, here is a link to where you can buy the paint:- http://www.rsbikepaint.com/en-gb/colours.php#makeid=59&modelid=811&prodyear=1975

Just a thought: you said "Timing was set as instructions (align yellow marks with piston at TDC) which I believe is an actual static timing of 3mm btdc." Have you strobed it to see when the spark is actually occurring?

Bruce Kickstarts fouling footrests is a bugbear of mine too... re Terry's Kickstarts, he told me if I need to bend it (to clear a footpeg) DON'T use heat, just use a long bar. He then produced about 8ft of what looked like scaffolding pole to demonstrate what "long" meant. I've no idea how you are supposed to hold the other end....I haven't fitted mine yet and haven't decided on footrests either; the cub is such a long term project I ended up buying a TLR200 just so I could get out and ride. Esteve

Terry Weedy - Avery Products - stocks the splined kickstart shafts.

This is quite an old thread (from 2007) but to answer the original question about gearing for a TLR200: Popular choice for trials: 9/44 = 4.88:1 As the standard rear sprocket is 44T this makes it an easy choice when you convert a bike with standard gearing. Alternative 1: 10/48 = 4.80:1 (not very different to 9/44) My choice. I use 10T on front to give the chain an easier time and there is an easier run over the top of the swinging arm at the pivot. Purists will argue that the difference in leverage due to the chain pull from this set up adversely alters the suspension characteristics - I'm not good enough/don't do the expert route to know... Alternative 2: 9/46 = 5.11:1 A very good rider in my club uses this set up as he says "it makes 3rd gear more usable" - needless to say he doesn't ride the easy route; I've seen him attacking climbs and he does get to the top. A tip for changing the rear sprocket:- Remove the circlip then, rather than remove the sprocket completely from the hub and then struggle to undo the nuts on the locating pegs, do the following: just pull the sprocket out far enough to slip an open end spanner onto the locating studs (i.e. most of the length of the locating studs are still in the holes in the hub) then you can apply torque to loosen the nuts with the sprocket held in a fixed plane and the wheel gives you something to hold onto. Use the reverse procedure for fitting. The spacer(s) and circlip required for the small front sprockets are available as Honda parts. As mentioned above, space the sprocket out away from the engine cases and fit the sprocket with the raised boss on the engine case side. I've seen cases that have substantial wear grooves in them, if not from direct chain wear, from material stuck to the chain. The chaps at TYTrials (Trail and Trials UK) keep a lot of consumables for Hondas (despite the TY name) including the spacer and circlip; you probably need more than one spacer so the sprocket fits snugly with almost no axial play (to protect the splines on the output shaft). Trialsbits.co.uk have also given me excellent service for parts. http://www.tytrials....200-Reflex.html

Peugeot 308SW: I've transported Montesa 315, Honda TLR and Cub trials in this. I remove the nearside and middle front seats (they clip in/out) to create some room and move the front passenger seat forwards (all the way so there is definitely enough room to get the bike in; it can be moved back later). I remove the front wheel and insert the bikes backwards. if there isn't enough clearance for the rear mudguard through the rear opening the bike can be inserted at an angle as the roof height is taller than the opening. I check the bars will go through the opening before loading (I crudely use a tie down strap held between the bottom of the forks and top of the bars to measure that distance then compare that with the opening) and if there is no clearance I put the axle in the fork and loop a rope from the bars to the axle and compress the forks sufficiently. I rest the bottom of the fork legs on a piece of wood so they don't wear holes in the carpet and have a sheet of plastic under the bike so the carpet doesn't get stained/dirty. The 308 has a pair of tie down loops in the floor near the opening and I run tie downs with cinch buckles from these to the bars to hold the bike upright and adjust the front passenger seat position so the rear wheel is pressed against it (with a blanket for protection); the seat position is usually still "normal" for passenger use. Make sure the tailgate doesn't press on the front mudguard. Chocking the rear wheel so it can't move is a good idea as the tie down points are so far back that the tendency is to pull the bike forwards (towards the rear of the load bed) and then the bike will flop about. I position the bike on the passenger side as the central console extends too far back to allow me to get the bike all the way in on the centre. That's how I do it, but I hate doing it. I can unload the bike myself, running it down a plank resting on the bumper (with a blanket to protect the paint) but loading is really a 2 person job. If I had to travel such a distance that I didn't want to take the trailer or for security didn't want to use a trailer then I am glad that I have this option but for a 1 hr. drive to a club trial I use the trailer every time. It nice to know I can move a bike with my estate car (a lot of self control is needed at Telford) but the next vehicle I have will be something like a VW Caddy or a Sharan so I have in effect a small van that I can carry a bike in without removing the front wheel and without needing assistance to load it.

...and keep the autodecompressor to give the starter gears an easier time; the bike affected had the auto decompressor disconnected in favour of a lever on the bars for manual control.

The shafts are on the same spacing (as kickstart gears are same teeth and PCD for TLR200 and 250). It looks like the 4th CS 26T pinion is a TLR200 item as is the 2nd gear CS 33T pinion judging by the the wear grooves halfway up the teeth on both 2nd gear pinions. Now the search begins for the missing pinions to complete the cluster...