Twin Shock or Win Shock?

[pjc]

Back in the day, when men were men and badly suspended twin shock bikes bounced into your nuts so often it made you sound like anything but, we all kind of knew the pecking order as to what was the best piece of kit at any given time. 

We had the most popular evolution of roughly Mont, Bultaco, Ossa, Yamaha, Fantic and SWM. Each taking the previous ones crown and moving the game on significantly over the last ‘best thing.’ There were many others, like the Beamish Suzuki, but they never quite gained the kind of popularity needed to give real credence to being ‘the best’ at the time.

We may not have personally ridden them, or even liked them, but purely as a machine there was often a consensus. I rode a Bultaco, but when Ossa launched the Gripper, the ground clearance alone would humiliate mine over rocks. 9 inches versus 13. Apologies for sounding like my ex wife there when she told me the reason she wanted a divorce. 

Anyway, I still brought another Bultaco, so I would personally say the Bulto, but the real answer is the Ossa. My two questions are: 

If you had to buy a Twin Shock to compete with now, what would you consider to be the absolute best piece of kit to go for, within the current twin shock regs? Put personal preference to one side and assume all the bikes respond to our riding style beautifully. I’m hoping to get a consensus of answers based on the merit of the machine rather than answers that don’t lead to a decision, or at the very least a very short shortlist. Yes, of course, I’ll try them before buying.

Finally, on the bike you recommend, what mods would you do to it that, again, stayed within the regs for competition today?

[lee harris]

Fantic 340, modded head angle and footrests, 249 engine, keihin carby....thats about right I think

[johnnyboxer]

Beamish Suzuki because they just look the best and were part British 

[fourex]

3 hours ago, lee harris said:

Fantic 340, modded head angle and footrests, 249 engine, keihin carby....thats about right I think

The 1984 Fantic 300 (249cc) would be my pic as Lee alludes to. Where does the 340 come into it Lee, surely you can't bore the std 249 out to 340?

My reasoning for the Fantic is it has good ground clearance, good drum brakes, responsive engine even with the std Dellorto and good suspension when upgraded with something like the magical fork springs and pre-load adjusters plus 350mm long shocks (std is 340mm). Still weighs a ton at over 90kg, but they all did back then.

Not too many mods required for this bike IMO, stuff that I have done is simply aftermarket top triple clamp to position bars over forks to open up the cockpit and alleviate that 'tiller effect' and lightened up the clutch pull because it is a very responsive motor particularly down low and I need to work the clutch a bit to reign it in, but I love it. I haven't altered the head angle as Lee suggested because I want to keep those things std, I'm happy with the 10mm longer shocks and forks dropped slightly in the clamps to give me a similar effect, ground clearance is very good, the magical stuff in the forks works well and helps to keeping them sitting up high in their stroke.

I also have a '83 SWM Jumbo and '83 Cota 350, which are a little more "old school" compared to the Fantic 300, the engine characteristics are all very different, the Fantic is the closest to my '14 GG in 0 to 1/4 throttle openings in my opinion, hence needing the clutch a bit. Hope this is of assistance.

PS: I think the Cota 330 was the last of the Twin Shocks, I've never ridden one but love the look of them.

[turbofurball]

A fully modern Majesty-ised TY175; 'cause it's light, nimble, reliable, easy for parts, and can be built from a cheap and cheerful regular TY175

[shakennstirred]

1 hour ago, johnnyboxer said:

Beamish Suzuki because they just look the best and were part British 

I like your reasoning .

I have a Beamish Suzuki and so far in my very short Trials career I have 3 wins, a 2nd and a 9th from 5 rides.

hasn't been modded in the foot pegs or fork angle, so as it was back in the day and its beating a lot of upgraded bikes.

biggest change to mine is its not Yellow lol, for some that is a sin hahaha.

 

 

[petert]

55 minutes ago, fourex said:

The 1984 Fantic 300 (249cc) would be my pic as Lee alludes to. Where does the 340 come into it Lee, surely you can't bore the std 249 out to 340?

I think you'll find Lee means a 300/301/303 motor into a 240 frame, hence the 340 name.

 

[metisse]

Good thread and I have been speaking about to chums on a similar line here in France. If and only if trials are set out as they used to be in the late seventies and early to mid eighties you don t need a trick Fantic , but a well fettled Bultaco, Ossa Montesa even Suzuki... is good enough if the rider is of a good standard. Certainly here twinshock trials have become tighter and tighter where you need a 200 Fantic, or Ty 175 just to negotiate the turns. I hate the fact that big bikes are dying out and that history is repeating itself where everybody thinks you have to have a Fantic, trick Yamaha or Honda to do well. We recently ran a trial here and I deliberatly put in big hills and power sections just to level the playing field. Back to the thread, I have a 340 Fantic which is the best by far however I ride a red and white SWM for the challange and a Bultaco being built to ride.  

[pjc]

I’m beginning to understand how powerful personal preference is, despite demanding that everyone here who answers this thread puts it to one side. I can feel myself failing badly, yet it is not you who have let me down.

I rode from 72 onwards (aged 7), right through the 70’s and 80’s. Rathmell seemed on the wane and Lampkin was pipping him all the time, a massive hero to me as a boy, sealed when he let me, a 14 year old, take his winning works bike for a spin at the end of the Scott Trial. That memory is more indelible than a tattoo and I saved and saved and saved for a polypropylene slim tank. Then Schreiber and watching Vesterinen on a Bulto at the SSDT. I think I have free will, but clearly not.

When Bultaco introduced a 175 I got the first one! Finally, a REAL bike for Class A and B schoolboys!!! I became Martin Lampkin. I bought the orange Clice gear, stitched Hammond’s Sauce logos on it - basically everything that demonstrated how pro I was except when I rode and demonstrated the huge gulf of talent between us, massively emphasised because I had all the gear I couldn’t hope to earn with hindsight.

I remember when he signed for SWM. Its not something I wish to ever talk about.

Monts and Bultos had a romantic heft, which was actually shown to be old engineering and badly built in terms of weight when the Yams came along. Bultaco engines grunted, yet did very little else immediately. Open the throttle, get a cup of tea, eat your sandwiches then maybe, just maybe, the acceleration would kick in before the end of the trial. But gents, a third gear hillclimb with plenty of run up!!!!!!!

Fantic? How dare those bloody foreigners come over here (Lampkin made Bultacos British, I’ll have you know), with far better bikes that weighed less, had a good throttle response and fantastic ground clearance. Shockingly bad manners. How VERY dare you.

I’m sad I’ll probably buy a Fantic, or try a Fantic, as it wasn’t my era. I find trials bikes like the music of youth. We think the artists we loved when we were growing up were amazing, but with hindsight, you had little choice as that is all there was, now pasted as a memory. We had reduced choice but we didn’t know it. So I just missed Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Pink Floyd and the like, and swore that ABBA and the new romantics were better. Youthful idiot.

I wanted, against all the odds, for it to be Bultaco. But I also don’t want to dab in a section on a Bultaco when I maybe wouldn’t have to on a Fantic, the bloody stupid fizzy damn things.

[dmc2028372]

8 hours ago, fourex said:

The 1984 Fantic 300 (249cc) would be my pic as Lee alludes to. Where does the 340 come into it Lee, surely you can't bore the std 249 out to 340?

My reasoning for the Fantic is it has good ground clearance, good drum brakes, responsive engine even with the std Dellorto and good suspension when upgraded with something like the magical fork springs and pre-load adjusters plus 350mm long shocks (std is 340mm). Still weighs a ton at over 90kg, but they all did back then.

Not too many mods required for this bike IMO, stuff that I have done is simply aftermarket top triple clamp to position bars over forks to open up the cockpit and alleviate that 'tiller effect' and lightened up the clutch pull because it is a very responsive motor particularly down low and I need to work the clutch a bit to reign it in, but I love it. I haven't altered the head angle as Lee suggested because I want to keep those things std, I'm happy with the 10mm longer shocks and forks dropped slightly in the clamps to give me a similar effect, ground clearance is very good, the magical stuff in the forks works well and helps to keeping them sitting up high in their stroke.

I also have a '83 SWM Jumbo and '83 Cota 350, which are a little more "old school" compared to the Fantic 300, the engine characteristics are all very different, the Fantic is the closest to my '14 GG in 0 to 1/4 throttle openings in my opinion, hence needing the clutch a bit. Hope this is of assistance.

PS: I think the Cota 330 was the last of the Twin Shocks, I've never ridden one but love the look of them.

He's referring to a fantic 300 with a 240 engine, hence 340

[petert]

I am about to turn 60 and back a couple of years ago after a 30ish year layoff (kids, work, mortgage etc) so I can relate to your rose tinted outlook. Back in the day I had tiger cub, Greeves Scottish, 250 Sherpa, Cheney Ossa, ty175, Beamish Suzuki, 348 Mont before turning to the dark side of enduros. I would love my old Beamsih back but they seem to fetch silly money now for a decent one. I ride a 300 pro Fantic at present (work in progress) and before that a fully fettled 240 pro, I chose Fantic for 2 reasons, 1. there are loads about at a reasonable cost, 2. spares both OEM and aftermarket are readily available again at a reasonable cost. I have also had a couple of moderns since being back but they don't seem to have the same character as a twinshock.

[dmc2028372]

51 minutes ago, dmc2028372 said:

He's referring to a fantic 300 with a 240 engine, hence 340

Sorry, got that a*** about face. Meant to say a 240 chassis with a 300 or more modern equivalent engine. Just be careful because the most popular series by far is the Kia rounds and you can't use acm engines for a start. 

Ive got a fairly well sorted 240 with original engine. You'd be hard pushed to beat one of these. A really nice majesty is also a cracking little bike, something like a 200, as is a nice tlr Honda, but be prepared to to have a large cheque book for one of those!

[huski]

240 fantic,with some good rear shocks.The top tube used to bend,so making the head angle slacker and making the steering poor and reducing the ground clearance.I took the engine out of mine and straightened the top tube with a jack resting on 4x2 timber across the bottom tubes .Fond memories,it took me from novice to expert very soon after buying it,back when trials only had one route.In my opinion it was miles better than the competition till the monoshock yam came out

[gordo]

I don't mean to change the subject, and apologize if this is in the wrong place. I recently saw an 85 Merlin 350 Gallach and was wondering if this bike deserves any recognition in this thread.

[metisse]

I think to get the best out of Merlin, you need to be a very very good rider,  Possibly one of the liveliest, fickle bikes I have ever ridden , motor having just been done / prepared by the famous El Puma in Spain, not for me . I have seen Luis Gallach ride his and will gladly leave to him.  Hope this helps, maybe someone else may have a differing opinion.