old trials fanatic

It's that long ago and had far too much cider since then but i cant for the life of me remember what gearing i used to have on my old TY250R back when. For my sins i've just bought another one as a project to do up so guys whats std gearing and is there a better alternative?

Hi we have been running a class for Pre95 air cooled monos now for 4 years and i wouldnt say we have been swamped by entries but then again we get on average 4 of 5. Most of them are TY250's but we also get a few RTL Hondas and a GAS GAS and the odd Aprillia. A guy used to ride regularly on a Montesa but havent seen him for a bit. Strangely not many Fantics but thats probably because the Fantic mono gets robbed of it's motor a lot over here for use in twinshocks. The class seems mostly popular with the older rider who just wants to ride and not have a lot of maintenance issue like you get with P65 and to a lesser extent twinshocks. Modifying ACM to twinshock if frowned on over here but i understand it's fairly a common thing in the US. Good luck with it i feel it's worth having a class as long as the sections dont alter to suit which is the usual complaint from the P65 boys. We just ran the class using the same section severity regardless and surprisingly the ACMonos dont usually drop the least marks. I dont know what that proves if anything but if it means i get 4 or 5 more riders at each event then it goes someway towards paying for the land plus it might just get the odd, all teenagers are odd to me LOL, youth rider to borrow dads bike and have a go.

Sales rep for the AMCA if i was i wish they would pay me actually i wish someone would pay me. No only mention it because we changed over along with the other two Classic clubs in this area for many reasons but one was the license issue which was causing problems at our trials with riders not bothering to get one. It got to the state where at one round i would have had to turn away half the entry and as a club we cant afford to do that. I got fed up of handing out application forms then the ACU started getting heavy with CoC's so decided enough was enough. Also there was the monetary side which ties into the SACU thread which was why i mentioned it there as other posters on that thread have.If you were a satisfied customer of a firm, say a bike or accessories supplier you had recieved good service from, you would bring it up in connversation wouldnt you? That was the only reason i brought it up. I do think the online facility the ACU have introduced is a great step forward but i am unsure why to be a license holder you have to be a member of a club. Most riders are members of many clubs but why does this have to be a prerequisite of obtaining an ACU license? OK the ACU have decreed it is and thats fine the clubs are all affiliated to the ACU so agree to abide by their ruling which is as it should be. Just my opinion thats all you think one way i the other but we both loves Trials and want to see it prosper. Incidentally a lot of the riders who couldnt be bothered to get an ACU license were already fully paid up club members it was just that they seemed to have a paperwork phobia which may have been rectified by the online license application proceedure. Then again as most of them now ride just AMCA events perhaps it hasnt? Do know of quite a few of our members who moan that they have now had to join another club to obtain a license just to ride the Scottish Pre65 though.

Great video and IMHO this would be far more likely to inspire somebody to participate in Trials than any video of a WTC round. THIS is the sort of thing we need to use as a promotional tool NOT the sort of stuff that goes on at WTC, no matter wether it's stop allowed or not, as people will feel "i reckon it could do that" and possibly have a go. Who cares if they find bikes leaping up massive rock walls spectacular or that made a great photo opportunity? As others have said a lot more eloquently than me WE NEED MORE PARTICIPANTS and this sort of video will do more to encourage that than any WTC round ever will. Well done lads

You might struggle with matching engine and frame numbers as most bike have had parts replaced at some point but if thats your thing then fine but you might not get the best bike but the numbers match up to you on that one it's not really my thing.Re the brake and gear levers. Bultacos and OSSA normally have the brake on the right and the gearlever on the left but they both have the gear shaft running right through the cases and will accept a right hand gear lever and can easily be adapted to take the brake on the left if you prefer but then again that wont be original which might be a problem if thats also important to you. All depends on what you want really there are quite a few "garage queens" about at premium prices but most would be not really competitive in all but very easy trials and if you spend all that time money and effort to go for originallity why throw it at a big pile of rocks? Sorry as you've probably guessed i'm a competition man through and through and to hell with originality if i can modify it to work better i will, within the rules of course , but if i can be of any help please ask. Most Classic clubs are populated by enthusiastic knowledgeable soals who just love to talk bikes so visit your next nearest one and chat to the riders you'll pick up a lot of hints and tips.

i wouldnt have given him a five either. It does seem very strange how the proponents of stop allowed turn a blind eye to rule infringements, rolling back etc, but apply zero tolerence to non stop i.e. an unperceptable micro millisecond or less must have been a stop even though i'm not sure without slow motion frame by frame replay. Very strange.

Twinshocks and "Pre65" Classic trials are great fun much more so than modern trials and theres less swearing and "attitude" so much more FUN !!! Pre65 bikes need a LOT of maintenance and constant fettling so if you enjoy that side and have at least 2 or 3 grand to spend go for it but if you want something cheaper around a grand and that is not quite so hands on after every trial, all competition bike need some regular maintenance, go the Twinshock route. IMHO the prime concern when buying is parts availability so be very careful if buying a Montesa as spare can be a problem. OK the Montesa is cheap but why? Answer parts. Athe the other end of the parts availability scale is Bultaco and Yamaha closely followed by Ossa so i would definately buy one of those three if i was starting. Suzuki is a good middle of the road bike but has frame craking issues and spares are getting hard to come by. Finally Fantic and Honda. Fantic is argueably the most competitive but fairly expensive and Honda is definately the most expensive to buy in the first place but are pretty reliable. As in everything you pays your money and takes your choice. What i will say though is unlike modern trials bikes Pre65 and Twinshocks hold their value whereas a modern bike drops in value daily till after 4 years you can struggle to give them away. Just my two pennorth but keep us posted as to how you get on

well said.

Nice one made me smile especially the bit about the fans.

Strewth glad i'm in England and changed our club from ACU to AMCA. Main reason i did it was because AMCA to us was better vfm and a LOT less hassle plus riders didnt need a comp license so removing a lot of grief from the organisers. It does sound a lot when viewed from over the wall. I'm sure the SACU have their reasons but i dont get why it should be so expensive up there to ride compared to a rider riding ACU events never mind AMCA events down here. At least it's still cheaper than riding in Spain

Oh this is going to be fun

If you need to pm him on here then he posts as Jack the lad. Just trying to help

ACU £10 pa but if you only ride AMCA you dont even need a license. Does sound expensive for our friends north of the border.

Probably easier but gas gas front ends are getting harder to find because the Twinshock and P65 lads are snapping them up along with TY mono ones. If i remembre correctly GG are 38mm but dont know the centres. So either get your yokes machined to 38mm dia or get the GGstem replaced with one to fit the TY and bearings. Either way machining will be involved so would have thought i would be easier to either sort the drum brake out or forget it and ride the sherco if you dont fancy maching parts to fit.

You cant compare the performance of a drum brake to a disc as you say night and day no more than you can compare an 80's air cooled mono to a Sherco. That would be silly wouldnt it. Usually drum brakes performance is badly affected by wear. Thats wear to the drum, easily rectified by skimming. Wear to the shoes, replace with shoes relined with softer friction material and oversize then skim in a lathe to the exact diamiter of the hub. Finally check the condition of the brake pivot, these often wear and the brake plate also allowing too much play so fit a new pivot or get it machined and get the brake plate machined so they are a snug fit. These are all mods that the "pre65" lads do and if done correctly you can do stoppies with a drum set up properly. Cant want more than that eh?

Anybody could fit Domino, Venhill or Amal levers it's personal choice my personal choice is to fit Domino ones for the reason i pointed out. to the best of my knowledge fitting Domino or any other make of lever would not make your bike ineligable for this or any other event as long as the levers are ball ended. You really are determined to have a go at every oportunity i must have really wronged you at some point.As for Yorkshire Classic i only used them as an illustration as they like the scottish ONLY cater for "p65". Then again you bring my club into it. They use two routes we run three the scottish run one. The routes my club runs is my choice if riders dont like it they can choose to ride elsewhere. What has this to do with the thread in question apart from your desire to have yet another personal attack at me? Bugger all actually so lets try to keep it on topic and not just turn it into an opportunity for you to drag peak classic into a discussion on 5 riders being excluded from the scottish.

This is one of the reasons we went AMCA but thats nothing to do with this thread. I'm a bit confused as to why a Club cant charge a Club Membership irrespective of if an ACU licence holder has to join or not? Just charge a Club membership if they are one they ride if not they join then they ride thats always how it used to be. To me the ACU licence issuing is between the ACU and the competitor. The fact that they have one and ride in your event is a insurance compliance matter. Sorry if i've offended anyones sensibilities but it doesnt seem rocket science to me.

Wasnt going to bother answering but thought i had better before another round of character assasination atempts so. Agreed none of the items mentioned were available before December 31st 1964 but does it matter? Some of the parts, take domino levers or any other similar pattern levers, are just sensible mods as if you snap an Amal perch then they are a bugger to replace and saves time out on the moors not really a performance advantage. Bit like using Sherco mudguard braces although they do improve the fork action . To answer the accusations that people pick on this one trial a year and not others was answered in part by Woody in his post above. I dont feel i'm "picking on" anybody BTW. I doubt that the 5 riders mentioned deliberately tried to contraviene the eligability criteria it's more than probable that like a lot of people they dont really understand what the eligability critera are. They like most of us just looked at photos of previous competitiors in this trial and built a bike similar, in their eyes, to what they saw. OK if you are daft enough to fit a Bultaco front brake youre asking for it but is that different to people riding unchallenged in previous years using Grimica hubs with the little ribs machined off to disguise them and resemble Rickman ones? they werent excluded or banned. Then again i cant find any mention of a ban for future years for an eligability infringement. You cant just apply retroactively rules as you see fit can you??? OK why does the Scottish 2 day always inspire such passionate discourse especially about the subject of eligability? Well because most people realise that unless you build a "pre65", god i hate that term, bike to be eligable for the event is value is severely deminished and becomes almost unsellable. That shouldnt be an issue because unbelieveably there are 51 other weekends of the year that you can ride a British Bike that is NOT Scottish eligable but thats the way it is. You see because the two main governing bodies refuse to grasp the nettle and publish a comprehensive set of construction rules that we could all work to everbody applies their own interpretation to the eligability rules as published which we all know are not the same version that is applied in practice. The only other club i know of personally that has grasped the nettle and tried their level best to publish a workable set of eligability critera is Yorkshie Classic and they are very successful. I dont understand some of them but that is not important. Their rules were voted for by their members and they have a "specials" class for all bike that do not comply and they dont seem to get any problems. I am not saying their rules are better than any others but i am saying theirs are more comprehensive and make a damn sight more sense than the published ones for the Scottish 2 day. If the ACU and AMCA finally came up with a set of rules would it change anything re the Scottish 2 day situation? doubt it as the are not members but are governed by the SACU and what with devolution on the horizon then their trial will be governed by whatever criteria they choose to adopt. Thats fine by me but this debate will always rear it's ugly head until a proper, comprehensive and more importantly workable set of rules are published for anybody hoping for an entry to see and build a bike to conform to. Heres a thought? If GOV 132 entered this year i am pretty sure the organisers would be delighted and give the bike an entry however would that be in line with the published eligability criteria? especially when so many bikes have been excluded for "modifications" deemed unaceptable. Just a thought anyway probably would be uncompetitive against some of the 2012 Ariels Incidentally a period of stability instead of altering and tinkering behind the scenes each year wouldnt help. Finally before my merry band of detractors say that i only criticise and never offer anything like a workable option hers mine. 1. A minimum weight limit measured at scrutineering before accessing the ramp. Subject to class variations. 2. A maximum ground clearence limit measured by putting the bike on a box of specified height when both wheels must just touch the floor at the same time with front and rear suspension fully extended. Subject to class variations. 3. A minimum wheelbase length. Subject to class variations. 4. A maximum front fork leg and rear suspension unit length measured at the same time as the ground clearence limit. Any bike NOT complying to this and or other criteria should be in a "Specials" class as Yorkshire Classic do and most successful it is too. Incidentally i am not a member of Yorkshire Classic it's just that they are a very influential club in my area and do publish openly their eligability criteria.

BJ it's an idea but i dont quite see how that would sort out the issue because the same anomalies are also evident in the pre unit classes. Reminds me of a trial i rode in earlier this yeasr when a rider on an Ariel cleaned a section with a big step in it. I commented to the rider next to me in the queue who happened to be riding a very original 78 Majesty "wow that was a great ride" the reply made me smile "well his bike is over 30 years newer than mine". Agreed Javier as you say it's their trial. But what would they call it? The Scottish Pre65 2 Day Trial for Pre Unit Bikes only.

Totally agree with you Javier the scottish 2 day is the number 1 event for riders of British Bikes. My only reservations are towards the eligability criteria and namely how those criteria are applied. None of my comments have been reguarding any other aspect of the event. Not that a lot of people on here will believe me especially hondars250, or whatever his name really is, but i would just really have liked the organisers to have had a better published eligability critera. Now it appears that only myself, woody and charlie seem to think this is a problem. So be it. As the entry and ballot, for whatever number, is always oversubscribed it proves how popular the event is and how much so many riders want to add it to their CV. At least you have spent some little time with me and YOU hopefully know how passionate i feel about British Trials Bikes and "Classic" events. As for the rest believe what you want to believe axe grindings, blue nun, wind up merchant, idiot whatever. Good luck with your and the rest of the Spanish riders entries i know those of you that get through will have a great time as i did when i rode. Still think the eligability critera as published are not up to the very high standards of the rest of the event but there we will have to agree to dissagree. Be interesting to see photos of the top riders bikes at the event and see how they comply with the criteria as applied to the rest of the field but thats the scottish and as most contributors never fail to say if you dont like it dont enter. Oh yes i've never drunk blue nun and have no intention of starting now but should anyone care to discuss Classic trials over a pint of decent ale then i will be more than happy to buy them one back.

Think you'll find Charlie did Javier.

Question if your quote is to be taken as the general view why oh why do we have a forum at all? The five people excluded , which after all is why we are having this discussion, were caught pushing the envelope, one ridiculously so, but would have been welcome to ride at almost every "classic" trial for the other 363 days of the year. No prob they got caught their fault.i just feel that i wonder how anybody can submit their bike for entry and feel they will be judged eligable on the PUBLISHED reg as against the "whim" of whoever "scrutineers" (sic) the event. Not that anybody will believe it but i think every serious "pre65", LOL, rider i.e. people who ride "pre65" week in week out, as against those who just ride the event as a one off , should have ridden it at least once in their trials life. All i would like is transparency and clarity accross the entire entry and even handedness in the application of the "rules" across the entire entry. Some of you live in a very subservient "respect your betters" world. You are welcome to it. The event will always be oversubscribed so NOTHING said on here matters. They could say every bike must be red and people would comply . Good luck to everybody who enters the lottery and i hope you have a great time. It is a great event but it's NOT the be all and end all of Classic trials in the UK. Oh and before anybody says it neither are the events i organise. Keep on tugging your forelock. LOL

Youre not alone.

Good point. Obviously some people have a very selective view when it comes to their understanding of "pre65 design". We all know that prior to 1965 all bikes were designed with frames made out of T45 or lighter tubing and ALL hubs and yokes were designed to be made from billet alloy. Dont know what happened to the bikes i owned back then because for some odd reason the frames weighed a ton and the hubs seemed to be invariably made from steel as incidentally were the yokes and rims. I must have been unlucky oh yes and unlike hondars250 who seems to think the ballot is for 180 riders most people know it's more like 80 if youre lucky. Before the detractors all start just thought i'd state that i dont have any problem with lightweight frames and billet parts in fact i think theres something wrong with anybody who doesnt use them and i dont have a problem with up to 100 effectively seeded riders but i do get annoyed by people with their blinkers on who think the event and organisers are deitys and we should a be grateful and accept whatever unquestioningly. Anybody would think it's the vatican

With the winter approaching the clocks went back and riders got a welcome extra hour in bed to ready themselves for Round 9 of the Peak Classic Trials Clubs Championship. With four rounds to go every championship point scored could be precious in the pursuit of class success at the end of the year. Rain had been forecast for later in the day but thankfully it held off until after the trial so the course was in prime condition and with the use of a piece of land that had been lost for some time we were able to lay out 10 sections to be ridden 4 times over a more expansive lap which resulted in far less queuing than usual at this popular venue. Due to a dates clash the entry was slightly lower than usual but with the return of a few old faces like Barry Micklethwaite and Jon Tye it was just like old times. The Expert Twinshock class was won by Steve Bisby on his faithful Ossa 250 gripper with a loss of just 2 marks lost on section 7 a long adverse camber climb over tree roots and leaf mould that proved tricky for most of the Expert entry with just Rob Mycock, Bultaco, staying feet up on this one. Whilst on the subject of staying feet up all day Peter Carson on his rigid Bantam won the Classic Expert class and Peter Elvidge, Honda, won the Classic Intermediate Twinshock both being the only riders who kept a clean sheet which was an outstanding effort from both riders. The Classic Expert Twinshock class was closely fought with the eventual outcome being that Gary Shaw, Fantic, and Tony Sprinks, Bultaco, both tied on 7 marks lost but Gary took the victory on most cleans. After riding most of the Sammy Miller championship Bultaco mounted Gary Shield made a welcome return to our event to win the Intermediate Twinshock class with a very good ride finishing on 10 marks from Cliff Bradley, Yamaha, taking second place with a loss of 27. Evergreen Tony Shaw, Bultaco, took second in the Classic Intermediate Twinshock Class making class winner Peter Elvidge work hard for the win but as previously mentioned Peter was on form and kept his feet firmly welded to the footrests of the little 125 Honda to take victory. It was so nice to see the ever young at heart Jon Tye riding with us on his immaculate rigid Bantam, one of only two in the event the other being Classic expert winner Peter Carson, take the class win in the Clubman British Bike class with a great score of just 11 marks. Seems like a rigid Bantam may be the secret weapon in the future? Watch this space. Though he lost 10 marks Sean Wickstead, Honda, won the Clubman Twinshock category cementing his lead in the club championship with now just 3 rounds to go. Second went to Phillip Higgins having a good ride on his Ossa for a loss of 17 marks and with birthday boy Paul Smedley celebrating his half century on his Honda losing 22 marks that just about ties it up. For more details of the current standings in the Club Championship go to our club website www.peakclassic.co.uk Thanks must go out to the landowner Gordon Statham for the use of his land and an even bigger thank you to our two observers Graham and Pat Chinnery who always turn up in all weathers to help ensure that we can have such an enjoyable time. We really more observers to help make our events even better so please if you know of anybody who would like to help bring them along to our events and we will make them most welcome. So another successful event in 2012 done and dusted the focus moves to our next event round 10 of the Championship at Bracken Rocks, Holloway near Matlock on November 25th start time 11.00am see you there. Expert British Bike 1st Richard Turner Tiger Cub 27 marks Expert Twinshock 1st Steven Bisby Ossa 2 marks 2nd Colin Pickering Honda 6 marks 3rd Dale Shaw Majesty 6 marks Expert Pre95 Air Cooled Mono 1st Mark Weston Gas Gas 4 marks Classic Expert British Bike 1st Peter Carson Bantam Rigid 0 marks 2nd Mick Atmore Trifield 6 marks 3rd Geoff Gadsby BSA 31 marks Classic Expert Twinshock 1st Gary Shaw Fantic 7 marks 2nd Tony Sprinks Bultaco 7 marks 3rd Peter Kearsley Honda 18 marks Classic Expert Pre95 Air Cooled Mono 1st Gary Martin Yamaha 24 marks Intermediate British Bike 1st Neil Walker Francis Barnett 14 marks 2nd Barry Micklethwaite Francis Barnett 30 marks Intermediate Twinshock 1st Gary Shield Bultaco 10 marks 2nd Cliff Bradley Yamaha 27 marks 3rd Mark Kearsley Yamaha 41 marks Classic Intermediate British Bike 1st Paul Beswick James 16 marks Classic Intermediate Twinshock 1st Peter Elvidge Honda 0 marks 2nd Tony Shaw Bultaco 6 marks 3rd Peter Austin Montesa 32 marks Clubman British Bike 1st Jon Tye Bantam Rigid 11 marks 2nd David Pickering Saracen 26 marks 3rd Jim Wickstead BSA 38 marks Clubman Twinshock 1st Sean Wickstead Honda 10 marks 2nd Phillip Higgins Ossa 17 marks 3rd Paul Smedley Honda 22 marks