chris_

Message sent

Uncovering a few nasties...

Definitely bent...

Hi I have been thinking of the same question for my 9 year old son as well. I will be interested to see any replies

Hi Martin, the forks move up and down freely, but one tube is bent back from the bottom of the lower yoke/clamp. I need to get it apart to confirm, but I am 99% sure just from looking. One leg is noticeably set back and distinctly banana shaped.

Sorry, some more newbie questions; Forks Will forks from a later 247 (1978/9) fit as a straight swap on my 1973 bike? One of my fork tubes is bent, and I am unsure whether to go for a later pair currently being listed on eBay, or to try to get mine straightened. There are mixed opinions as to whether or not it is worth trying to straighten a bent fork anyway (assuming that there are no creases). Rear shocks What is the correct size/length? I am fairly heavy (85-90kg depending on lunch) so what would be a suitable specification if I were to go for new shocks or springs? I am trying to work out whether it is worth rebuilding the old Telescos (which are totally worn out) or going for new. Speedometer Is the speedo simply a "bolt-on" job (assuming you have got all the parts) or are there differences in the forks or hubs between bikes that were supplied with speedos from new? I have looked at parts lists and diagrams but none of mine show the speedo parts? Thanks again

That looks fantastic, and there are certainly some wonderful bikes out there for inspiration. One thing that I read in the article was about getting his frame repainted where he mentions; "

The rear sprocket is a 48 so that seems fine. It's a bit difficult to count the teeth on the front sprocket, so I am not sure what is on there.

Hi Martin Armed with a rag and some de-greaser, look what I found; Thanks very much for the pointer and thanks to everyone so far for your input, it's much appreciated

The frame number is 21M 12511 so according to this, it dates it after October 1973 but before Feb 1974 Oct. 1973 21M 12,115 Filter element, "Twin-air" Black frame version DATE Feb. 1974 21M 13,107 New black frame.

So it looks as if it has the right carb for the engine type at least. Regarding the exhaust; this is the only picture that I have on my pc and I haven't taken the seat/tank off yet, so maybe you can tell from this photo?. It does not have the external/rear silencer, so from what I understand, it looks consistent with the early engine.

In reply to a couple of other points; -The carb looks to be a bit odd as well. It is an Amal carb as you can see, the number on it is "626" -I agree that the rear frame does look to be bent and sitting higher (compared to Greeves' lovely example) Talking through some of these points with the seller, his view was that the bike could well have been a "works" bike, given that it has some of these peculiar features. The frame and engine certainly seem to be a few years apart and who knows how they came together? I respect the opinion of the previous owner (given his personal background) but I suppose that many of these end up like Trigger's broom with bits getting swapped an replaced over the years. It is certainly intriguing, and even if it is a bit of a Frankenstein bike, I love it!

Thanks very much for the replies so far, it is much appreciated! I agree that the front wheel is definitely the other way round compared to normal. This is what it looks like at the moment; The seller told me that these were "works" hubs rather than standard production ones. The difference (apparently) is that the standard (smaller, 1970+) hubs have fins or ridges, but the ones used on the works bikes were smooth to stop dirt building up. I don't know if this is true or not as I have not seen a standard bike up close to verify. I don't know if someone could kindly check or confirm?

The engine number is "25 10"

I have been over to the intros to say "hello" and now hoping to pick up some much needed advice as I start out on getting my "new" 247 up and running again. The frame number is 21M 12511 which I understand makes it late 1973 or early 1974 There are a few "issues" including non-original bits such as the engine, plus some bodging in the past. For example, the rear mudguard is too high and has caused the damage to the seat, plus the front wheel appears to be the wrong way round. There is also a fair amount of mechanical work needed as every wear and tear item looks to be thoroughly worn out. I can't wait to get started!

Cheers Dave and thanks for the offer. I will definitely bear it in mind when I get the bike finished

Hi from Kent I have just bought an old Montesa to restore, and then need to go about trying to ride it, and hopefully getting started into trials. Cheers Chris