Trials Australia Forums

For all that, results give a far more useful gauge of capability than hearsay, anecdotes, sales figures or entries numbers.

Miller won five consecutive Brit Championships on the factory Sherpa Ts (‘65-69; the first 2 or 3 on the 4sp prototype). He also won six consecutive Brit Championships before that on his Ariel (’59-64).

And he won 3 SSDTs on the factory Bultacos (’65, 67 & 68) & 2 on his Ariel in ’62 & 64, as well as two Euro Championships later in ’68 & 70 on the 5sp factory Sherpa.

Such utter domination at national level & excellent results internationally gives credence to the widely held view that he was the undisputed maestro of the era. He could win on anything.

Top ten or top 20 placings (if available) are a better measure of a production model's capability than wins or top three placings as it reduces the effect of one-off works specials and/or exceptional rider(s). Aside from Miller’s results on the factory bike, top ten placings (below) in the Euro & Scottish from the ’65-’67 era show the 4speed Sherpa was nowhere near dominating as people suppose. Where are they all?

(It's nearly impossible to arrange things clearly in columns on this website. First column is Euro top 10; 2nd column is SSDT top 10)

1965 - European Champ --- - Scottish Six Day

1st - - Franke (Zun 250) - - - 1st - Miller
2nd - - Barndl (Zun 100) - - - 2nd- Lampkin (BSA)
3rd - - Sengfelder(Zun 175) - 3rd- Andrews (James)
4th - - Ickx (Zun 125) - -- -- 4th- Davis (Gre)
5th - - Wilkinson (Gre) - - - 5th- Sayer (200 Tri)
6th - - Gienger (Zun) - - - - 6th- Peplow (200 Tri)
7th - - Lehner (Zun) - - - - - 7th- Wilkinson (Gre)
8th - - Smith (Gre) - - - - - - 8th- Adsett (Gre)
9th - - Vanstenagen (Gre) - 9th- Lampkin (250 BSA)
10th -- Hithcock (Gre) - -- 10th- Fletcher (500 RE)

Team Award: Triumph (Cubs)

1966 :-

1st - Franke (Zun 250) - - 1st- Lampkin (BSA)
2nd - Smith (Gre) - - - -- 2nd- Miller
3rd - Miller (Bul) - - - --- 3rd- Andrews (Bul)
4th - Sandiford (Gre) - - 4th- Lampkin (BSA)
5th - DeGraaf (Bul) - --- 5th- Ellis (BSA)
6th - Gigot (Gre) - --- -- 6th- Wilkinson (Gre)
7th - Cramer (Maico) - - 7th- Jones (Sprite)
8th - Blakeway (Bul) - - - 8th- Fletcher (500 RE)
9th - Kopetski (Zun) - - - 9th- Edwards (Bul)
10th - Brandl (Zun) - - - 10th- Gaunt (350 James)

Team Award: BSA (C15s)

1967 :-

1st - Smith (Gre) - - -- - 1st- Miller
2nd - Franke (Zun) - - - - 2nd- Rowlands (BSA 175)
3rd - Brandl (Zun) - - - - 3rd- Jones (Gre)
4th - Sengfelder (Zun) - 4th- Wilkinson (Gre)
5th - Rayer (Gre) - -- -- 5th- Farley (226 Tri)
6th - Wyss (Bul) - - - - - 6th- Smith (Gre)
7th - Simens (Bul) - - - - 7th- Sandiford (Gre)
8th - Farley (Tri) - - - - - 8th- Lampkin (254 BSA)
9th - Gienger (Zun) - - - 9th- Sayer (200 Tri)
10th - Chaligne (Gre) - 10th- Edwards (Cotton)

Team Award: Greeves (Anglians)

Such results show that Greeves, BSA 175 & 250, James, Cotton, Sprite, Cub, Zundapp 100/125 & 175/250 were still very competitive, even at the top level, in ’65-67.

Even looking down to 20th place in the Euro for ’65, 66 & 67 (see trialonline.org), M10s hardly over-ran the competition. They couldn't out-do Greeevs in any of those years:

Greeves had 50% of the top 20 in ’65, 30% in ’66 & 32.5% in ’67 while
Bultaco had 0% of the top 20 in ’65, 25% in ’66 & 32.5% in ’67.

We can go to 15th place in the Scottish which shows:

1965: Greeves 30% of top 15; BSA, Tri & AJS 13% ea; Bul 7%
1966: Bul 33% of top 15; BSA 20%; Greeves 13%
1967: Greeves 40% of top 15; Tri 33%; BSA 13%; Bul 7%

ie No one manufacturer dominated, but Greeves did best on average (28%), being almost double that of the Bultaco's (16%).

There remained considerable variety of manufacturers competing throughout ’64 to 67. Entries in the Euro show eleven diff makes in ’64 (4 Brit, 7 non-Brit), eleven in ’65 (8 Brit, 3 non-Brit), twenty in ’66 (13 Brit, 7 non-Brit) & ten in ’67 (4 Brit, 6 non-Brit). The drop in UK models after ’66 coincides with the end of Villiers engines, James & FB trials models, & TR20 Cubs.

There was an incredible array in 1966:- AJS, Ariel, BSA, Butler, Bultaco, Cotton, CZ, DOT, Francis Barnett, Greeves, Hercules, Husqvarna, James, Maico, Matchless, Moto-Becane, Royal Enfield, Sprite, Triumph & Zundapp were entered. Has it ever been bettered?

Of those entries, 22% were Bultacos, 20% Greeves, 16% Triumph & 13% Zundapp.

Whichever way you look at it, it was hardly a one-horse race in ’65-67 - the M10's era.

Even in ’67 - the peak of the M10's popularity - Bultaco entries in the Euro (47% of the total) were still less than Greeves' peak in ’64 (52%).
(In the SSDT, M10 entries peaked in '67 at just 34% of the total)

Beyond that, total Spanish entries in the Euro jumped to 65% in ‘69, 80% in 70, 83% in 71 & 92% by 72.

That jump in ’69 (to 65%) was after Greeves had ceased production of their Anglians in ’68 & the 5-speed M27 Sherpas & 5sp Cota’s had become available along with some Ossa Penines.

By then – the 5speed era - the superiority of these later more-developed Spanish models showed in the results:

1969 Euro:
Smith (Mon)
Jones (Suz)
Miller (Bul)
Franke (Zun)
Bengtsson (Bul)
Harries (Mon)
Vanstenagen (bul)
Bjork (Bul)
Farley (Mon)
Andersson (Hus)

1970 Euro:
Miller (Bul)
Farley (Mon)
Telling (Mon)
Sellman (Mon)
Rathmell (Gre/Bul)
Evertsson (Oss)
Bjork (Mon)
Smith (Mon)
Luhtasuo (Mon)
Andrews (Oss)

1969 SSDT:
Wilkinson (Gre) *
Andrews (Oss)
Miller (Bul)
Smith (Mon)
Lampkin (Suz)
Farley (Mon)

* Ironically, Greeves did not have a trials bike to sell in ’69 to cash in on Wilkinson’s SSDT win.

1970 SSDT:
Andrews (Oss)
Edwards (Mon)
Miller (Bul)
Rathmell (Bul)
Farley (Mon) ?

By 1970 the Spanish all-but dominated entries & results. By then they made up 97.5% of the Euro top-20 placings & didn't look back for many years (‘till the TY & Fantic invasions). The only thing that stopped it being 100% was that Rathmell started the season on a Greeves before switching to Bultaco mid-season.

Morley noted: “Five years after Miller’s & Bultaco’s historic first British National win in 1965, not a single home-produced machine was entered in the British Experts. Indeed, of a very large entry, only six bikes even utilized home-built frames. The Spanish takeover during that trialing boom period was complete.” (“Spanish Trials Bikes”)

“The Miller developed Bultacos became so good that they would change forever the very make-up & nature of the sport. As a result,… all of Bultaco’s rivals were obliged to copy or disappear.” (“Classic British Two-stroke Trials Bikes”, emphasis added).

Montesa & Ossa ‘followed suit’ & prospered. Others disappeared.

.
So what is the difference between the 1st Model 10 Sherpa Ts & the 2nd Model 27s? Was it substantial?

The M10 itself had few updates during its (almost) three year production run: 35mm forks almost immediately in early ‘65 (after # M1000026), followed in early ’67 by a different flat-bottomed tank, alloy rims, larger (longer) bash plate & different front mudguard. One book claims they had a little more rake & slightly longer wheelbase, but there's no other evidence in Sherpa T literature to support that claim. These later M10s were reportedly “built to far more exacting standards than their predecessors” (Morley).

In Aug ’67, the 2nd generation M27 Sherpa went on sale. This was said to be “a brand new bike… Mechanically, very little of the old bike survived.”

When you look at the changes, you’re almost compelled to agree:

Another new tank sat lower on the frame, as did the seat. The front hub & brake were smaller (5”). The engine was five speed, “heralding yet another trialing first.”

The head, barrel & cases were completely new & different, incorporating three main bearings instead of two & drum-selector instead of cam-plate selector. The cylinder was spigoted into the cases & attached via long studs thro’ the cylinder & head, instead of short studs thro’ a flange at the cylinder base. Main cases were larger & stronger (allowing increased capacity later) with different engine mounts.

Neither cases, cylinder, head, gearbox nor selector are interchangeable. The frame is somewhat similar but has different engine mounts to suit the new engine.

With the relocation of the bottom engine mount to the rear of the cases, & a small change in the speedo-drive lug under the engine, the whole engine could sit much closer to the bottom frame tube(s). In effect the bike was said to be ‘shrunk vertically’ giving 1.25”/30mm more ground clearance & 0.75”/20mm lower seat height. Wheelbase was 10/15mm longer. Compression ratio was raised from 8:1 to 9:1 & it had1.6HP more maximum power at considerably lower rpm (5,500 vs 8,000rpm) due to different porting in the new cylinder.

That new cylinder (stamped "27") remained the same on subsequent models to the mid 70s (ie on M49, M80, M91, M124 & M150)

About the only things that remained the same from the M10 to the M27 were the 35mm forks, rear wheel & specified weight. The M27 truly was "a brand new bike".

Whereas the 1st generation Sherpa M10 was little more than a modified road/trail bike - albeit with dependable electrics & superior suspension - the 2nd generation M27 Sherpa was little short of a whole new ‘ball-game’.

John Cane (Trail & Trials, UK), who owns the ex-Benny Crawford M27, thinks similarly: “I reckon the Model 27 is the first ‘proper’ trials model from Bultaco – previous production bikes seem more like modified trail bikes to me” (Classic Dirt Bike #1).

It could be argued that the 5-speed M27 was the real game-changer. It was a “specialized trials model” that was a considerable step up from anything else before it, including the M10.

In ’68, on the factory version of the M27, Miller won every single round of the Euro Championship, as well as the Scottish, the British Experts & the British Championship. Quite a year, even by his standards!

Don Smith, the reigning European Champion in ‘67 on a works Greeves, handed back his Greeves & bought his own 5-speed Sherpa (as did Jim Sandiford apparently) & won seven of his next ten events, with a 2nd & a 3rd as well. He then went on in '68 to put the finishing touches on the production Cota 5-speed (21M) developed by Pedro Pi along similar lines, helping Montesa to four consecutive Manufacturer's titles at the SSDT from '69.

Those two models, along with the M27’s very similar sibling (the M49), were the ones that overwhelmed the competition, in a couple of years, as the evidence above shows.

Thanks JC1 and JonV8, for taking the time to find all this information. It has been very interesting to read.
It has also changed my mind on what we should be allowing to compete in classics in Australia, but there is no need to
comment in this thread and hijack it so I will discuss this via email.
cheers
Gary Mc

Thanks Gary.

It's changed my mind on a few issues more than once during the course of this research too.

The story continues...


In the face of a new challenge from Spain with an entirely different attitude to development & progress, Don Smith had pleaded with the directors of Greeves to build a better mouse-trap - “create a new & up to date machine” (Trial Mag, # 9) - & he offered to do it himself.

To his delight they eventually gave him the go ahead, but then pulled out at the last minute. That was the last straw for him.

Or was it the release of the 2nd generation 5-speed Sherpa? Bultaco pressing on with development, or Greeves set in their ways? Either way, he gave up on Greeves & bought the Bultaco with his own funds.

It must have taken a lot of courage for the #1 factory rider to turn his back on a factory contract, but it probably seemed to him like it does to us in hindsight – a no brainer!

The press apparently “had a great time reporting on his impressive results” on the Bultaco & when they reported that he was not linked to any factory, guess who came knocking on his door? Not a British factory, but a Spanish one. (surprise, surprise!)

Another sad but true anecdote regarding the staggering attitude of certain British bosses of the day, compared to the talent within the UK industry, can be read here (note post # 11):

http://www.trialscentral.com/forums/top ... ntry353157

Spare a thought for what we may still be riding if left to those bosses!

(More can be read in Bert Hopgood's book, "Whatever Happened to the British Motorcycle Industry"? Well worth a read.)

.
In summary then, the production M10 Sherpa can hardly be blamed for the rise of the light-weights or the end of the heavy-weights which by 1964 “didn’t sell”, since both of those pre-dated it.

It was not the first production trials model or “specialized trials model” available. In fact, it was not much more than a modified road/trail bike, all-be-it with dependable electrics & superior suspension that raised the bar for all who followed.

Nor did it cause the demise of the British trials industry which was caught up in the wider throes of a slow death - the factory bosses did a good job of that themselves! Though it no doubt ‘turned up the heat’ on the terminally ill industry, to claim it was anything more that the final nail in the coffin seems to me to be burying one’s head in the sand and/or putting the cart before the horse.

And it never attained the saturation levels that Greeves did before it (or Yamaha apparently did many years after it).

Perhaps the most important difference between it & the established British marques of the day was that its creators saw it as being in the infancy of development, not at the peak.

It was reliable, capable, available & affordable, at a time when the prevailing British industry was either smug in its arrogance & complacency or ‘on its knees’, & as such it contributed substantially to the boom in trials & its spread throughout the world. We are all beneficiaries of what it brought to the table. As such it surely is tragic that it seems to have no place in classic trials - for reasons valid or otherwise.

If its main advantages back in the day were electrics, suspension, weight & availability, considering the thriving aftermarket ‘cottage industries’ today, those are easily matched now (within the rules), especially on Brit classics, notably the Bantam, Cub, James, DOT etc.

You’ve got to seriously wonder if a production M10 Sherpa would have much advantage now, if any. I am not suggesting it should be included in Pre-65. (See posts above) The point is; there’s little/no valid reason to feel threatened by it today.

As Duncan McDonald (Armac) recently surmised: “The Tiger Cub & Bantam could – and should - have been developed into the sort of mass-appeal bikes the Yamaha TY175 & the Honda TL125 became” (Classic Bike, Nov 2013) - as they (Cub & Bantam) now are in Classic Trials.

So why the ‘fear & loathing’ of the production M10 Sherpa? People seem to be psyched out by it, as tho, once it came out, it slayed all opposition. But as good as it was at the time, there’s no evidence in the public domain that it over-whelmed or over-ran the competition as people suppose.

Miller undoubtedly did, but the production M10 did not. That was left to the more-developed 2nd generation 5-speed Sherpa’s & Cota’s (& eventually the MAR) which really were “specialized models”.

Rather than ‘crucify’ it as a scapegoat for the demise of the British trials industry, and/or for the saga of its in-again-out-again place in our Pre-65 rules, I’d have thought it deserves more than a little credit - even lauding - for what it brought to trials & did for trials all around the world, without turning it into a one-horse race.

Whatever our view, hopefully it’ll be an informed one.

If nothing else, this has been an interesting & informative history lesson, at least for me - like discovering one’s heritage.

This is our trials heritage. It's worth cherishing!

Something else to consider when comparing machines of that era is the fact that almost all of the Cub's and Bantam's that are competing today have got current gas shocks on the rear , some type of improved forks(Honda or Yamaha internals even Ceriani). Add to that new ignitions, Carbs, overboring , porting, alloy rims and alloy tanks. All of which turns a poor English medium weight bike into a machine 10 to 15 kg lighter than the M10 with good electrics and suspension.

Well done John for a good history lesson

JC1 wrote:Miller did not compete on a production M10 Sherpa T in Dec 1964. His prototype (669 NHO) reportedly had M4/B4 engine/frame number prefixes but I have not been able to confirm or refute that.

Some new info of considerable interest has surfaced on Trials Central. It appears that the above is now proven. Millers original 669-NHO has turned up & been verified - & is a prototype with M4 designation not an M10. See here:

http://www.trialscentral.com/forums/top ... pa-669nho/


So here is a brief up to date summary of the chronolgy of events culminating in the production M10 Sherpa T:

Mid-'50s - Miller makes a name for himself on a 197 James with numerous victories including Irish Trials Championship, before being offered a loan of one of the newly released HT5s by Ariel's Competitions Manager Ernie Smith for the '56 SSDT. That's when Miller met GOV132.

1959 - Henry Goutars, President of the Belgian M/C Federation brings trials to Europe & begins to foster it.

Under BSA ownership, Ariel ceased production of the HT3 &HT5 in favour of the new C15T. Miller continues as a privateer but still employed by Ariel.

1960 - Snr Bulto, who was already a keen off-road rider himself (a past-time shared by his family), had already recognized that the future of the motorcycle was in leisure & sport, not commuting. He saw an opportunity for a new market & began the annual San Antonio Trial in 1960 on his own private property, initially for family & business contacts.

Anelays dealership in Blackburn, Lancashire are appointed UK importers for Bultaco

Miller, who was still competing in other forms of m/c sport, tried a 175 Bultaco 'scrambler' (M3 Sherpa S) in Lancashire & concluded, "For a 175 it's a real flyer, but the frame and suspension need sorting out a bit".

1961 - Factory Bultaco roadracer Dan Shorey wanted a trials bike to ride in the off season to keep his reflexes sharp, but the only choice was british machinery which he did not want to be seen to be riding. Bulto gave him one of the newly released 155 Sherpa N’s (M4) to ride & modify as he saw fit.

Shorey & friends did exactly that back at Bert Shorey’s North Bar Garage (ie a Triumph dealership that also sold Bultacos) in Banbury, UK. Late in ’61 he entered his first trial locally (an ISDT qualifier) with promising results.

That was the 1st known case of a Bultaco in a public trials event.

Both Anelays & Bulto himself noticed & became very interested and Anelays began their own development bike based on a 175 Sherpa S (M3).

1962 - Annelays’ entered Tom Ollerton in the SSDT on their modified Sherpa.

Bulto sent his nephews Oriel Puig Bulto & Juan Soler Bulto to the St Cucufa Trial in Paris (organised by the FIM) where they saw Miller victorious on his Ariel. They came away convinced of his prowess & how good the British bikes were in general, but also of the potential of their own Bultacos with their light weight & maneuverability. Juan rode a modified sherpa S & Oriel rode his '62 ISDT bike suitably modified. They continued their development in Spain with ideas gained in France. Claude Peugeot & Claude Coutard were particulary helpful with advice on how to build a trials bike.

Miller becomes increasingly restless with his situation & early in the year talks about retiring from trials. The Ariel/BSA management has no interest in the publicity value of his numerous wins since he is riding an obsolete model . BSA closes the Ariel factory at Selly Oak & absorbs it into Small Heath much to the chagrin of Ariel staff. Brand rivalry leads to intense friction (which probably explains why he never switched to the C15T or B40 factory bikes).

In August he forsakes the Ariel & borrows a 250 James to compete in the James Trophy Trial. He is almost persuaded by Alan Kimber to join James, getting as far as packing up his tools, but on arriving at the James factory & seeing it so dark & dingy he returns to BSA & the Ariel, winning the Manx Trial, but knowing he will soon need one of the emerging lightweights.

1963 - Ollerton entered in the SSDTagain, gaining a 2nd class award.

US importer John Taylor urges Bulto to produce an Enduro model to be called a Matador. Prototype 175 entered in ISDT.

After an unsuccessful SSDT for Miller, & recognizing the rise of the lightweights, he switches to a 250 Greeves for the Welsh Trophy Trial (soon after the SSDT) & wins convincingly but returns again to the Ariel. His dissatisfion was becoming increasingly obvious, with little/no factory support or interest in the face of rising competition from the Cub, C15 & two-stroke lightweights. Rumours abound about his future.

A mutual friend of Miller's & Bulto's (Harry Lindsay of Dublin, Bultaco importer) suggests the two get together to produce a Bultaco trials bike. It was clearly an opportune time for both, which could be mutually beneficial. Miller makes a secret trip to Banbury to try the UK bike and meets Bulto secretly at the '63 ISDT in Czechoslovakia.

Pictures taken in ’63 show the Spanish factory trials bikes/prototypes making considerable progress in development. They compete again internationally in France at the Trial de Clamart in Paris.

Early ’64 - production 200 Matador, also with M4 designation, was released to the public. (The M3 Sherpa S & M4 Sherpa N were ‘morphed’ into the Matador) The Spanish trials prototypes increasingly appear to be based on this bike.

Oriel Puig Bulto rides his 200 prototype trials version in the newly established Goutars International Challenge series (forerunner to European Championship) in March & then the SSDT. Ollerton again rides the SSDT on his modified Sherpa. Miller tries Oriel's bike at the Scottish & offers to help develop it

Miller again forsakes the Ariel to ride a Butler 250 (Greeves-powered) in the Kingston Trophy Trial in early April & wins, helping his friend Chris Butler to establish his new marque.

There is conflicting evidence in the British and Spanish versions of events from here on (mainly in the timing/sequence) but most convincing scenario is as follows:

Perhaps late '63 (Oct/Nov) Miller made his first trip to Bulto's San Antonio villa to sample the 200 Bultaco, and told Bulto he needed a 250, which Chief Engineer Alberto Numen was developing.

After the Welsh 3 Day Trial in May '64, Miller travels to Spain "on holiday" with his Ariel for 12 days of testing, comparing & modifying the prototype which was based by then fairly clearly on the M4 Matador, but with the new 250 engine which turned out to work very well for trials straight away.

Some reports claim Miller developed the whole bike in those twelve days, giving little/no credit to the prior Spanish development, claiming the existing prototypes were little more than rehashed ISDT bikes. Others claim the bike was almost a fait accompli before he started. The truth is most likely somewhere in between.

The fact that it was only 12 days probably indicates that the prototype was already reasonably developed. Miller's contribution is often mentioned as sorting out the gear ratios & suspension, adding an extra flywheel weight & refining the steering geometry to replicate his Ariel - still a fair bit to achieve in 12 days. Time was short; they agreed that Miller would ride the Bultaco immeditaley after his Ariel contract expired after the British Experts Trial in early Dec '64.

After the September '64 ISDT in Germany Miller again travels to San Antonio and returns to the UK with 2 prototypes - one being registered 669NHO - & after riding GOV132 to victories in the Scott Trial in Oct & British Experts Trial in early Dec he famously won his 1st UK trial on the Bultaco & a few weeks later in Feb '65 he won his 1st national trial on it (the Colmore Cup Trial). He recently said that he was "deliriously happy" to win that trial on the new bike. That bike was said to have M4 serial numbers, not M10 as for the production SherpaT.

It has recently been claimed (by the deputy Clerk of the Course on the day) that Miller apparently stopped off at a trial in St Cucufa in France in November on his way home. He had pre-entered on his Ariel but on arrival asked if he could switch to the Bultaco, which they allowed. The press discretely did not report what make he rode that day.

1965 – production M10 Sherpa T becomes available early in the year after being shown at the Barcelona Show.

2015 - Millers original bike, 669-NHO surfaces in public & proves to be a prototype with M4 designation, not an M10. Official DVLA records show that in Nov ’64 two prototypes - 669NHO & a sister bike - were registered in the UK, neither having M10 VINs. They also confirm that this bike is the original 669-NHO and that it has M4 designation.

I noticed some interesting info recently while reading Tommy Sandham's book, The Castrol Book of the Scottish Six Days.

Way back in '53 two Montesas were entered in the Scottish, the 1st Spanish entries a decade before Bultaco.

Apart from Bultaco's well known 1st entry in '63, other interesting first time entries he mentions are: DKW in '36, CZ in '49, Lambretta (!) in '55, Jawa in '57, WSK in '61, Zun in '62 & Suz in '64.
(I've edited a post above to include these at the appropriate place)

John there is a well-made (very old) promotional film available about some Italian scooters competing in the SSDT. Can't remember if they were Lambretta or Vespa but is sure looked like hard work riding them