4 Speed In The P65

[big john]

Well boys and girls I'm riding a M10 unmolested bike in scotland. And believe me it has no advantage over a well tricked up Ariel cub batam etc etc . I've ridden them all ..Ability goes a lot farther in trials

 

And you usually ride very well my friend! Having seen your Sherpa many times and openly admired it, there is no doubt to those who know their Bultaco Sherpa T history, that yours is an unmolested original motorcycle.

 

Big John

Edited January 9, 2016 by big john

[jc2]

Somewhere I have the programmes for the 1963,64 and 65 Scottish Six Days in which I rode.I will check,but I am sure that there were no Bultacos in the 1963 event.Possibly one 200cc ridden by a Spaniard in 1964 and a few in 1965. 

 

I think you'll find that Tom Ollerton was entered on a SherpaS based 175/200 in '62 & '63 & I believe again in '64. And Oriel Puig Bulto was entered in '64 on a 200, either an M3 or M4 based prototype. It's well documented in the public domain.

 

But as revealed convincingly on TC recently not even Miller rode an M10 in '64:  669-NHO was a modified M4 -  http://www.trialscentral.com/forums/topic/57725-discovered-sammy-millers-original-bultaco-sherpa-669nho/

 

 

Allowing the M10 surely makes an open mockery of the Pre65 cut-off date, but then, as others have often said, that's already been done by many/most of the 'fiddle' bikes. It again begs the question, as Roger said above: Why haven't they dropped the farcical "pre65" moniker & called it something else more fitting?

 

Perhaps the organisers in their wisdom, & in the light of other 'fiddle' bikes already allowed, have deemed the M10 to be little/no different to or better than an M3/M4 etc !!?

 

 No doubt that the particular M10 mentioned above (which has been entered) is "an unmolested original motorcycle" ... "which is more than can be said for many of the so called Pre65 bikes out there". But is that really the point at issue here?

 

This is the one event that affects classic trials almost everywhere so the repercussions will most likely reverberate around the world. And some of those repercussions, when followed thro to their logical conclusion (which they will be), are potentially huge.

 

 

Can't help wondering how long it will be before there's a 4sp Bultaco 'replica' lightweight frame available with modern geometry.

 

Then will the floodgates open & history repeat itself?

 

As someone famous said, "The only thing that man has learnt from history is that man doesn't learn from history". Trouble is, it seems that we still haven't learnt that lesson.

 

 

PS I hasten to add that I say all the above as a Bultaco man, not as a Bultaco hater

 

 

Edited January 10, 2016 by jc2

[woody]

Although on a personal level I don't care what they do with the rules of this trial, Including the M10 is a strange decision at best, especially after all the fuss they make about bikes and components being of Pre-65 origin and appearance, but the rules and their application have always been a contradiction

 

If they meant to clarify that 4 speed Bultacos manufactured before 1965 - ie: Sherpa N, are allowed to compete then they've screwed up completely choosing wording which simply states 'Bultaco - 4 speed models only', as that obviously includes the M10 - a bike which is not, however anyone may want to try and convince themselves or anyone else, a Pre-65 bike. That's enough to exclude it alone. Put it in the exclusions - No M10 Sherpa T models.

 

Then there is the final eligibility statement:

 

None of the above exclusions shall apply to any component of any machine which is, or proven to be, Pre ’65 original factory fitment to that machine.

 

So the M10 shouldn't be allowed on that basis either, it's a bike that wasn't manufactured until 1965, therefore you can't prove that any component fitted to an M10 was fitted to that bike before 1965 as the bike did not exist before 1965. Add to that the forks, wheel, some engine components and not to mention the overall appearance of the bike differ noticeably from the 1964 components and bike and you have another reason.

 

By accepting the M10 into the trial, does that mean they consider that the parts fitted to it are considered Pre-65. So why are Bultaco forks and hubs listed as an exclusion on British bikes? Does it work the other way around and the M10 must use an IRZ carb and not an Amal which wasn't fitted to 4 speed models by Bultaco?

 

It just gets more and more bizarre every year...

[twinnshock]

Perhaps now they are eligible for the pre 65 SSDT the M10 that has been listed on ebay several times (4 time I think) staring bid at £4000 without selling (last time finished 8th January) will soon find a buyer!

 

Does not look toooo bad...... original IRZ carb replaced with Amal and the exhaust is cranked downward but in my opinion would need a fair bit spending to get up to standard. I would be concerned with the tank condition based on what appears a repair on the top and I probably think others think the same hence still not sold.

 

 

Stuart

Edited January 10, 2016 by twinnshock

[woody]

Do you think it's worth anything near that much Stuart? Would even a restored bike put back to original or near original get that much? I've seen much better examples than that one go for a lot less. I guess it depends what someone would want it for, if you just wanted to get it good enough to ride you wouldn't have to spend too much on it, the engine sounds healthy enough, but you have still ended up paying a fair bit over 4k for something that isn't worth it

 

If you want one to put back to catalogue spec to just look at and not ride, or treat as an investment, it is going to end up owing you around 6k with labour unless the owner does a lot of work themselves. At a quick glance the following would need to be done for catalogue,spec:

 

Full exhaust and heat shield  -  £260

Frame repaint  -  £100

Sidepanels  -  £30

Rims are wrong, new rims and wheel build  -  £300, maybe more if new spokes needed

Tank repair, lining and respray  -  £300

Original mudguards  -  £200

Polishing / Rechroming parts -  £200

Seat  -  £160

Original style number board  -   £40

Original shocks  -  £150?

 

On top of that you'd need original bars with welded levers, IRZ carb and speedo kit, no idea if any of these are available or how much, although I guess they are in Spain, but maybe another £2-300 needed?

 

You end up with a bike owing you a lot of money which is fine if you don't mind spending it and it's what you want but risky if you ever expect to recover it one day. I've spent more on some of mine than I will ever get back (although nowhere near that much)

 

I think it's way over priced, not sure I'd even want to give half of the opening bid price for it.

 

 

[twinnshock]

Woody,

 

I am more than aware of the value of this bike and what it would cost to put back to what in my opinion is a usable bike, and lets face it still a 1965 spec model 10. And that is from somebody who quite frankly loves these bikes.  I have been watching the value of Bultaco's for many years and have watched the values drop in the last couple of years. I would also not want to spend more than half the opening price. A couple of years ago you could sell a model 10 to Spain for quite a sun. I know, I did.

 

At the Braintree trial just after Christmas we has a local chap bring along a M10 he had for sale. The story was he was clearing out his sadly no longer with us brothers shed. The bike not used for many years had a M10 frame butchered and modified and a engine that was seized. Radial head, 4 speed but with no numbers on the engine. Correct hubs but very rusty forks, A butchered modified lower yoke. Modified rear brake. Wrong exhaust. Tank unit from a Alpina. In need of total restoration needing far more parts than listed above. In my opinion only good for breaking. Asking price offers in the region of £800.

 

However a member of Colchester club has just spent £9000 in a James Trials bike. Admittedly supposed to be restored and ready to go so there are still a few out there with more money than common sense. (I wonder if he is reading this?)  If a model 10 is usable in the pre 65 this will have an affect on value.

 

Stuart.

[trialsrfun]

Hi,

Having read the Eligibility booklet again, I assume that the unwelcome Greeves forks, described as the 'banana' (a description that I know Bert Greeves detested with a passion) are the type seen in the attached image.

Yes they are Deryk, exactly like the ones fitted to the Anglian you used to ride.

Surely now is the time to allow all Villiers engined Greeves bikes into the P65 along with DOT, Cheetah, Cotton, Sprite, Elstar, Firefly, Saphire etc.

Edited January 11, 2016 by trialsrfun

[greevesman]

There are 2 types  of Greeves banana forks the ones Deryk put on came out in late1965 and the first ones as in photo

[woody]

That just about sums up the stupidity of the rules if picture 1 (B&W) is banned and picture 2 (colour) is accepted. Yes there may be a difference but just how pedantic can it be! Pic 2 looks a lot more authentic and period than a pair of Nortons with welded on extensions and modern mudguard brace. Total farce.

 

And as the trial is no longer Pre65 but Pre68, then they should be allowed anyway, along with all the other Villiers engined bikes mentioned above

 

 

Edited January 11, 2016 by woody

[trialsrfun]

Detail differences only between the two types of fork with spring dampers, both are banned. The earlier rubber in torsion type though probably not too different in suspension performance are I believe elegible for P65 entry.

The last British bike to win the SSDT was a Greeves Anglian with Ceriani forks ridden by Bill Wilkinson in 1969.

Edited January 11, 2016 by trialsrfun

[woody]

I don't think both are banned as I know someone who has ridden 3 times in the last 4 years with an original Greeves fitted with those forks, presumably the earlier set.

 

I don't know the difference between both sets but I understood one to be acceptable, the other not.

[woody]

Nothing wrong with the term Pre65 as it can (or could...) be looked upon to mean any bike prior to 1965 which excludes trials specific Spanish bikes, specifically the Bultaco. All other Pre65 or Pre70 series are designated British Bike trials, so no issue with Spanish bikes being entered.

 

All the bull**** about copy or replica parts and the 'enforcement' of rules on some, overlooking them for others is where the real issues started, not the term Pre65. But that's old hat now.

 

The two pictures above are a bit misleading as they are both banana forks it seems (just been looking in my Greeves book I forgot I had) and are 1966 forks. The eligible Pre65 type have a different appearance with no visible dampers and the down tube is straight not bent, so I can see why they aren't allowed purely in terms of manufacture. But being pragmatic, why woould it be an issue to allow them?

 

If it is all supposed to be about period appearance, which presumably is for the enthusiasts spectating (otherwise why bother about appearance) surely, someone who is enthusiastic about that era is going to appreciate seeing a bike ridden with those banana forks, even if they are 1966, rather than the *******ised, extended, welded and modernised offerings on most bikes..?

[greevesman]

Sorry about that I should have said both of the banana forks in the photos (B/W & colour) are banned its the Leading Link forks that are allowed.

[trialsrfun]

The earlier rubber sprung Greeves forks have the brake plate torque arm fastened to the lower link so that when the brake is applied the suspension stops working and the forks rise to their full extent, later forks and both types of banana fork have a fully floating brake plate so the suspension continues to work under braking.
Most later model Greeves were factory fitted with Ceriani forks as was the one ridden by Bill Wilkinson to win the SSDT.

Edited January 12, 2016 by trialsrfun

[totalshell]

The last British bike to win the SSDT was a Greeves Anglian with Ceriani forks ridden by Bill Wilkinson in 1969.

and it had scrambler yolks