dan

Sorry... for some reason I didn't get email updates from this topic and missed the replies for a week or so. Must have forgotten to check the box I guess. Thanks for all the advice. Was meaning to give this a go over the weekend and show you the results but my local paint mixer was closed and Halfords plastic primer all states "for non-flexible plastics". I don't think trials mudguards count as that, especially not when connected to my bike! As for why I'm painting it and not buying... well largely because as far as I'm aware you can't get Gas Gas front mudguards in black. It's also quite nice to have a bit more of a hand in personalising your bike than just shelling out cash for new bits

You may find some clubs will be picky about open ended grips as they leave the handlebars quite exposed which can be dangerous in a crash. Grab some bar ends or some closed end grips and you'll be fine.

I'm looking to paint my front mudguard soon. I know I need to use the right sort of paint in order for it not to peel and crack at the first sight of a pressure washer or when I bend my mudguard during a crash, but I don't know what sort of paint that is. Can anyone recommend me a suitable paint for this application? I'd also appreciate any advice you can give that will help ensure a lasting finish.

As far as I'm aware the only 'realistic' trials game (as opposed to the fun but cartoon like ones available online) that's been produced is MotoRacer 3 (only available for Windows PCs as far as I'm aware). I've got a copy of this and it's actually quite good, if a little frustrating. All indoors unfortunately, but fun for the occasional play. I'd love to hear of any other games that I've not come across, but I'm not sure they exist.

Indeed. What exactly would be the point of enforcing a move to 4 stroke only if 2 strokes are able to comply with emissions regs? As far as I'm aware emissions was the only reason for moving to 4 stroke in the first place, so surely it's more sensible to implement blanket emission limits regardless of engine type. If there are other limits that it's felt are needed (noise perhaps?) then these should also be implemented across the board, without restricting what bike can be entered as long as it complies with the limits. As far as I can see the 4 stroke only thing was/is a bit of an arbitrary imposition that doesn't really make much sense to me.

Phwoar! I like that. Any idea where the front mudguard and light came from? The mudguard doesn't look like it's just been painted, and the light looks a lot smaller than standard, more like the Jitsie Carbon light (maybe it is that, it doesn't look like cf though). Shame about the green top yoke though... looks really out of place. edit Just re-read your post. Do you mean the mudguard may be available soon as well as the front pipe?

Wow, you have such a way with words. I really don't think abuse and threats (with serious intentions or not) are appropriate. If you're not able to debate your point without resorting to such things then it's clear how much weight your argument carries!

Haha! Sorry if it comes across like that... I guess I'm probably quite keen to talk about it, and it's one of the few things I feel like I can talk about competently. Didn't think I'd read like that though! I'll watch what I say from now on

I guess it may depend upon the year and set-up. I've only ridden one Pro 200 which is an '04 with a flywheel weight added and that thing can still pick up very quickly. It never feels like too much power, but it does feel (and sound) quite racy, so I assume without the flywheel weight it would be a bit of an animal. Compared to an earlier (as in not 2007) 250 I imagine it would be softer as they were equally racey bikes, but I still wouldn't consider them soft in their own right. As I said, it may differ for different years and set-ups though, my experience of the little bikes is a bit limited.

It's a diary and not just about Trials, but you could pick up a Motorcycle Diary from here? Lots of excellent biking pictures included.

The 200 is anything but smooth power (assumably the same for the 125 as well). In order to compensate for the smaller displacement these bikes really rev and can be quite a handful! Although they are very fun to ride, they can inspire a 'flat out attack' style of riding that may not best suit you. If you want something smooth you're probably best looking at a softened 250 - this will normally involve fitting a flywheel weight, carb spacer and a possibly a few other mods in order to smooth out the power delivery (many of the pro models are set up for use on the dry Spanish rocks so pick up pretty quickly). Although a 2007 250 will offer relatively smooth power from stock this will be a little out of your price range. I'm not sure what the 300s are like, I think some models are quite soft in delivery, but they definitely pull like crazy, so may be a little too much power really. Depending on how smooth you mean by smooth it might be worth considering a different make of bike, rapid power delivery is pretty much an inbuilt characteristic of Gassers and while this can be smoothed out they're always going to be quite 'poppy' engines, it's just the way the bikes are designed and the way most of us like them. From my experience non-racing model Scorpa SY250s offer very smooth power, but it could also be worth looking at 4 strokes (Scorpa or otherwise) as they should be smoother than any 2 stroke available.

Looking really nice. You want to look into getting some gold clutch and engine casing bolts as well - I've swapped out the ones on my '07 gasser for gold and for a relatively small outlay (less than a tenner) it makes the whole bike look a lot nicer. It's all in the detail! You can see some pictures of my bike over here: http://delusional.org.uk/gallery/07gasgas Unfortunately you can't make out the bolts too well in most of the pictures (rubbish camera), but I think you can get an idea of how they look in the first picture. Get over to http://www.hyperbolt.com, I had a really pleasant experience buying from them (and they're half the price of other similar sites I came across). That's really nice! Super special looking bike that is.

Student. I'm studying English with Creative Writing down here in Cornwall (I know, I was surprised I could do a degree down here as well). I've not always been a bum though, I used to work in Software Development for a fairly reputable firm in Soho.

Hmm, my apologies. It seems that a lot of the things I had in mind were actually formed by the Liberal Party earlier in the 20th century. Although the NHS was the early Labour Party. I should probably spend more time checking my facts when I post, but for minor points like the one above I often don't bother. The 'good things' I had in mind can generally be covered under the umbrella of the welfare state (welfare payments, NHS, etc), although I'm also of the opinion that a lot of the post-war nationalisation was a good thing - particularly so today when I dislike seeing public services in the hands of private, profit driven, corporations.

"What did the Romans ever do for us?"

Hahah! That made me laugh. Socialist? The only remnants of Socialism in the Labour party today are in the name and a little in lip-service. The problems people always bring up with giving "our money to layabouts" is not really a problem of concept, but of form. The problem is that most contemporary governments (especially our current one) don't handle things well at all - just throwing money at a problem never fixes it. I think it's got a lot to do with the fact that capitalism has become so entrenched in our collective consciousness that we often seem to believe that a problem simply needs money thrown at it to make it better. Surprisingly humanity in all it's spectrum of existence really has very little to do with money. Anyway, would you really want to see the UK do away with more of the good things earlier (actually mildly socialist) Labour governments brought in? We seem to be going that way, but the day we lose the NHS - not neccessarily in it's current form which is being stifled and eventually killed by ridiculuous policy, but as a general concept of free healthcare for all - will be a very sad day. Our taxes aren't outrageous considering we actually have the basis of a decent welfare state (that is being horribly damaged in image and function by the current government). But leaving that aside, we have a monarch still thanks to all the political cutting and diving of the 17th Century. Essentially our first civil war did away with our royalty completely, executing Charles I in 1649 and instituting what was basically a military dictatorship headed by Cromwell until his death in 1658. Charles II was re-instated as king in 1660 (known as The Restoration) by a new parliament with shared power. Then later on in 1688, to put it very simply, Parliament didn't like having a Catholic king (James II) so they invited in William of Orange who marched in and took power in the Glorious/Bloodless Revolution. In order to prevent there being another Catholic monarch the Bill of Rights was introduced that also took away most of the monarchs powers, essentially leaving them as little more than a figurehead and shaping our current Constitutional Monarchy. As to why we still have a monarch, that's a very good question. Perhaps because we've got so used to the system now as to not question it strongly enough, or perhaps because of our history we still associate our current form of monarchy with democracy in this country. I'd personally rather like to see the monarchy gone as they really serve no purpose any more beyond making the UK appear somewhat quaint and antiquated. Bleeding heck... are you serious? Ever heard of a small event known as The Holocaust? I'm sure things would be just fine, providing you're not Jewish, gay, black, Polish, Roma, or really anything other than the Nazi concept of Aryan.

Ah, sorry for any confusion then. I'll remember that in future

Most events in Cornwall are

Are you serious?!? If so, I'm just speechless and frankly, it goes a long way to explaining why the world's in such a miserable state. Well gee, I know us Brits is just a bunch of poor old-worlders still living in the dark ages and it's just not our place to question the motives and actions of the Greatest Country On Earth but last time I checked, I had over 100 TV channels including BBC (******* liberals, eh?) ITV News, Sky News (more pinko liberals... ), CNN, Fox, CNBC, CCTV etc. from which to gather news of current events. Which of those do you consider to be authoritative? And before you say Fox, may I refer you here (WARNING: not suitable for anyone with an IQ greater than that of a glass of water). Oh, and unless I'm mistaken, I do hear we have this new fangled thing called the intarweb. Thankyou. That's pretty much what I wanted to say. Although you're forgetting our "old-worldy" attachment to the printed word and the slew of different newspapers all taking differing opinions. And of course, the fact that the BBC is not STATE sponsored, but is sponsored by the populace. The BBC is entirely seperate to the government and is comissioned with a remit of non-politically biased reporting (obviously such a thing is a myth, but the point is there is no explicit political agenda as there are with all commercial news agencies).

Where are you based Pipster? There's a Greybeards trial on this weekend (the 29th) in Cornwall. It's run by West Cornwall Motor Club and is at Trevaylor. The phone number listed on the ACU site is for the club secretary Rachel Barker, you can contact her on 01756 788135. I don't think she'll be the event secretary, but she should be able to point you in the right direction.

It looks like a '95 to me. Although in that case it's a JT not a JTX (the JTX was the '97 model). You can check these things over at http://gasgasmuseum.com. Looks quite tidy, enjoy!

Heya. You may know of me as 'delusional' from TF. It shows how out of touch I am, I thought you were a good few years younger than you are (sorry). Good luck with the motorbikes, I'm sure you'll soon find yourself wanting to sell the push bike to get a better motorbike :op

Perhaps the best argument for not having such a multitude of classes is simply the fact that there's just very little point. If you're seriously competitive and out to win then you'll probably be wanting to ride modern machinery to know you're achieving the very best performance you can. If you're not competitive and just enjoy riding the older machines then you can simply enter whichever class allows you to ride the course appropriate to you and not worry about what position you finish in! Perhaps the other key thing here is that for everyone on the MX track you are competing against the other people on the track in a very direct manner, whereas for the majority of trials riders the competition isn't so much against the other people but against the terrain. For MX then it doesn't matter so much how old your machine is if everyone is on a level(ish) playing field, whereas in trials an older machine will almost certainly mean less capability in beating a bit of terrain.

I think the problem is that people mix up religion as an institution with the individual people who have religion. There is no doubt that religion can teach good things, and does seem to inspire people to do good, but I'd like to think that this is something fundamentally good in people that causes this (that is 'good' from my liberal, western perspective). What religion (or at least the fundamental belief in something that can only be accepted by blind faith) can do however is cause an awful lot of hate and pain. It's the barriers that this belief draws between people that is the problem, for these barriers to be traversed would essentially be for religions (as institutions) to die out as it would mean accepting the other guys belief, even if it contradicted yours, which is incompatable with belief. After all, neither of you can prove the elements of your religion, if you could it would be science not religion. It's hard for me to discuss this because frankly I don't understand belief. I don't just mean belief in religion, I mean belief in general. I accept that things are true based upon the evidence presented to me, but I never believe anything. Actually, I'm not really sure why I'm weighing in here, it seems the very nature of belief in a person makes debate around the subject of those beliefs impossible - if you were capable of really having the debate you wouldn't be capable of holding the belief! I should point out that I don't mean intellectually capable here (before someone takes horrendous offence), but that the belief itself counters the prospect of debate. It is the very nature of belief: it is, and must be, impregnable to doubt. But what can I say, I'm a sucker for a bit of a debate. Essentially I think the world today would, in many ways, be a nicer place if there were no religions, but for at least the next few generations it's an impossibility - it's just too deeply entrenched in our various cultures. In the post-modern age it's hard to see how religion in the sense we understand it can survive, as long as cultures mix ideas will be exchanged and beliefs will be called into doubt, and fundamentally multiple religions cannot survive in such a climate. It is, of course, impossible to "stamp out" religion, the only thing we can do is hope that people gain enough sense of humanity to stop killing each other over it. That and nationality - there's nothing wrong with having an identity as long as you accept that it is not set in stone, can change with time, and is NOT sacrosanct. But I'm wandering off into completely different territory here. No but they are bombing entire cities to the ground and indiscriminately killing thousands of people. Let's make no bones about this, the US (and to a degree the UK) government is very much a Christian government. Blair has to be careful about the way he refers to, and acts upon, his religion as most people in this country shrink from the thought of a government acting on religious grounds, but Bush has openly talked about being on 'a mission from god' on several occasions and Blair has let the odd thing slip. Sorry if that's a bit rambling. This is such a broad subject as to make it very difficult to write on succinctly.

Thanks people. Maybe it might be better to come at this from a different angle then and look for excellent places to ride first and then find friendly places to stay in the area later. Actually, considering the riding is the entire point of the trip, I don't know why I was ever thinking of doing it another way!