pre-65 Spanish?

[Greg Harding]

Hi everyone,

Allan, you may remember me as one of the people who spoke to you about your bike. Asking you if I could photograph and I hope you dont mind me posting one here? Personally,I am impressed with people who lead by example and think it is great that you ride & not hide such a nice bike! It really is a credit to you and your father(as you explained)! Being the first to admit that I dont know much about "Classics", what I do know is how hard it can be to find parts for post classic bikes! Without adding a possible twenty years for parts to wear out, rust away or simply be lost or scrapped!
I agree we should seek to include, not exclude! You may notice, the photo shows the bike in parc ferme after passing scrutineering! Obviously you have gone to great lengths to prepare the bike & have it comply with the rules. From a spectators point of view, the more diversity of bikes from all over the world makes Trials more interesting & informative. I first watched the Aussie Titles in 2004 (the last time it was at Pacific Park) this motivated me to get a licence and have competed ever since! One of the many things that attracted me to trials is how friendly the people are & I am very dissapointed that your experience is memorable for all the wrong reasons!

Look forward to seeing you at Thunderbird Park with the Bultaco to defend YOUR Australian Title!

[Observer 3000]

Am I missing something?...

What on earth is the problem with the early Bultaco in question riding in the Twinshock class? Just as many spectators & competitors would have commented on the bike being a jolly fine example and how super it was to see it. Just imagine the cheers if that bike had won the Twinshock class. In the unlikely event that it couldn’t quite beat the best blue Bultacos, because they're more modern & probably better, it should be remembered that the riders are all riding for fun anyway!

I note reference to a phone call being made to Sammy Miller in the UK. What was he asked? “Did you develop a prototype Bultaco in late 1964?” Surprise, surprise, he would have said yes! In my opinion an M10 Bultaco was not available to anyone before 1965.

This is what Mr Miller had to say on Pre-65 trials while he was still competing in Pre-65 on his Ariel:
“This is why you get Pre-65 events today. It was Pre-65 - it was really pre-Bultaco, because Bultaco brought in the modern stuff, and when you say Pre-65 you are really saying pre Sammy Miller going to Bultaco.”

Sammy Miller is referring to Pre-65 as an era, not a definitive date. To my knowledge, this is accepted throughout the world, with the exception of a certain club in NSW.

What do I think? – No Spanish bikes in Pre-65.

[Twinshock]

I would love to see the Bultaco at Thunderbird Park in August but competing in its rightful Class, Twinshock !!!!
A few others seem to agree with my earlier comments about the era thing, its not about the bike looking "nice", "pretty", and "ride don't hide" its about the facts of when that bike was built. Obviously Alan and Bob McGlinchy know something that I don't and I cannot understand why someone doesn't give us the facts and figures on the bike to shut us up.
Regardless of that, sorry Steve, "meticulous replies" do not "justify" the bikes inclusion in Classic class only the facts do that and we haven't had them yet .
Cheers
Twinshock

[Geoff Lewis]

Hi All. Before I put my two bob's worth in, let me make it clear the outcome of this debate doesn't really affect me as far as my Trials competiton is concerned(which is probably a good thing) because as many of you are aware , there is virtually no one competing in Classics in Victoria on a regular basis except me and therefore most of the time I'm lumped in with twinshock so ride mainly against Japanese and Spanish and Italian bikes anyway, and as it is highly unlikely I will be vying for top spot at the Aussie Titles, the A or B grader that rides Classics once a year(or the only time) to add Australian Champion to his CV might as well be riding in a wheelbarrow or a hovercraft for all it will affect my placing! As the subject appears to be somewhat emotive it may help to balance the issue of eligibility with some facts.
Nowhere in the MOMS does it state originality as a crieria of eligibility only that the age of the machine will be considered in the terms of the period(age?)of the latest major component.
Also there is no onus on any competitor to disclose to his fellow competitor any modifications he has made to any of the components of his machine provided that they don't modify the chassis performance or the minor components out of keeping with the era.(a bit of a subjective rule)I am more than happy to tell people all about my bike but I like to do it at length, in person as I enjoy watching their eyes glaze over as they finally start to lose the will to live from the boredom.This can be verified by almost anyone at the Oakleigh motorcycle club! Now for my opinion. I have at my disposal many photo's of bikes of the era loaned to me by my friend and former A grade rider, Ray Lander. A top competitor in the era (pre 65). The most successfull trials bikes in Aus then were in fact Bitsa's and home built, heavily modified with hand made frames etc.Usually based on Bantams,villiers etc. Ray also owned and competed on a 150 CZ twinport in the late fifties. The best bike he ever rode, he once told me. Fortunately this tradition of artful bodging still exists and makes for a good standard of competitive machines even if sometimes their appearance is a little rough. I am certain many of us like fiddling with our machines in an attempt to hopefully make them go better. (Gristy is the only person I know competing that seems to do a lot of work to his bike to make it worse!) I can understand Allan Phillipsons chagrin as regards his perception of sour grapes by other competitors but from what I have read the Bultaco M10 is a quantum technical leap ahead of anything that came before (as history proved) and the age of the machine seems to be in some doubt and that appears to be the real issue, For anyone to say that the M10 is not as good as a Tiger Cub seems,to my way of thinking, deluded, as it would be a very, very ordinary bike indeed to be worse. I know I own one! As the rules currently stand it is clear that some spanish bikes or parts thereof are eligible. Early Sherpa N for example( Someone has to help me out here as I dont really know much about these bikes, only what I have recently read) And I assume if Allan had been riding an example of one of these bikes there would not have been a problem? So as I see it, it seems to be more an M10 problem than a Spanish bike problem at the moment.( I noticed early Montesas and Bultaco's were competing in the 2009 Classic Scottish anyone know more?) More discussion please as I feel we need to clear this matter up so we can move on. I have decided to defer any recomendation for changes to the rules for the time being and will make every attempt to attend the Denman Two day , as Gristy suggested, so that interested parties can get together and hopefully have a meaningful discussion and form a resolution as regards these matters. It seems that in Britain the Classic and Twinshock movement are going from strength to strength and ours should be too.We need to turn this around and soon. On another subject I met a chap in Tassie who was riding a very smart Bantam named Colin Phillipson (Any relation?) He mentioned his interest in 250 cc Unit single Royal Enfields and I have found some info for him and would like to contact him to pass this info on, Can anyone help out me out.
Regards Geoff.

[David Lahey]

PM sent to Geoff with Col's phone number

[paulm]

"I met a chap in Tassie who was riding a very smart Bantam named Colin..."
I think it's good to give your bike a nice name like Colin.

Paul Mac

[Twinshock]

Me again
Geoff mentioned the 2009 Pre 65 Scottish two day which is probably the worlds premier Pre 65 event.
I've had a look at the entry list for this years Pre 65 Scottish and out of 174 bikes entered there are Zero, nil, none, 0 Spanish bikes entered. If they appeared last year they have certainly stopped them this year, there's a couple of Jawa's and a Panther but also no Japanese either.
Anyone interested should have a look at the list on the Scottish Six Days Trial website and they will see what I have been raving on about, an ERA,,,,, Spanish belong in the next era and they called it Post Classic.
Cheers
Twinshock

[David Lahey]

There were no Spanish bikes in that pre-65 Scottish simply because the rules set by the club that runs the event prohibited them from entering.
Our rules for the Titles are made by Australians for Australian circumstances and we should not exclude some of the potential field on their interesting non-British pre-65 bikes.
One of my favourite pre-65 bikes and riders to watch is Craig Gillies on his Dad's CZ125. How would we get to see that combination in action if the Titles was to become a Pommy-bike-only affair?

[sherpa]

First of all congratulations Alan on a fine win in the Aust Championships.However I wonder if this thread would exist if you hadn't won.
Secondly I don't understand all the questions relating to the year that the model 10 Bultaco was introduced. There is ample evidence to support 1964 as that year

A recently published spanish book 'HISTORIA DE LA SHERPA T- The story' Pub 2001- has a very comprehensive history of the sherpas. On page 75 Model 10 is listed as 1964 - 1967

Mario Candellone in his book 'PHOTO TRIAL 1995' on page136 lists the Model 10 as 1964 - 1967

The Spanish Trials website TODO TRIAL has a test on the Model 10 and in their technical info on the bike, list the years as 1964 - 1967
http://www.todotrial.com/ttclasico/inde ... -total.htm?

Placing a ban on Alan's well presented and restored piece of history, to me is very poor form and has no merit.
It is akin to the English banning all foreign players from next years Wimbleton Tennis Tournament so Andy Murray can win.
It wasn't that long ago when the eligible year for twin shock was increased to allow later model more competive bikes like the TLR Hondas to compete. I dont recall any complaints or debates happening when that decision was made.

Cheers Greg N

[A.Phillipson]

First of all, I’d like to thank everyone for the kind words, it does show that there are gentlemen that ride this sport. I will apologise if I said anything that offended people.

I would like to say that I will be in Queensland to compete on my trusty Bultaco. I’ve looked into it and if the rule changes get submitted and accepted they wont take effect until the 2011 season. So I shall bring the bultaco as its possibly it will be his last huge event.

I agree with gristy about that we should get together and talk about this issue as adults and not hiding behind a community forum, so the Denman twin shock and classic open would be the best spot were we could all talk about this.

Hi everyone,

Allan, you may remember me as one of the people who spoke to you about your bike. Asking you if I could photograph and I hope you don’t mind me posting one here? Personally, I am impressed with people who lead by example and think it is great that you ride & not hide such a nice bike! It really is a credit to you and your father(as you explained)! Being the first to admit that I don’t know much about "Classics", what I do know is how hard it can be to find parts for post classic bikes! Without adding a possible twenty years for parts to wear out, rust away or simply be lost or scrapped!
I agree we should seek to include, not exclude! You may notice, the photo shows the bike in parc ferme after passing scrutineering! Obviously you have gone to great lengths to prepare the bike & have it comply with the rules. From a spectators point of view, the more diversity of bikes from all over the world makes Trials more interesting & informative. I first watched the Aussie Titles in 2004 (the last time it was at Pacific Park) this motivated me to get a licence and have competed ever since! One of the many things that attracted me to trials is how friendly the people are & I am very disappointed that your experience is memorable for all the wrong reasons!

Look forward to seeing you at Thunderbird Park with the Bultaco to defend YOUR Australian Title!

I never got an email from you asking about some clean, full resolution pictures, PM your email address and I will send some your way.

Am I missing something?...

What on earth is the problem with the early Bultaco in question riding in the Twin shock class? Just as many spectators & competitors would have commented on the bike being a jolly fine example and how super it was to see it. Just imagine the cheers if that bike had won the Twin shock class. In the unlikely event that it couldn’t quite beat the best blue Bultacos, because they're more modern & probably better, it should be remembered that the riders are all riding for fun anyway!

I note reference to a phone call being made to Sammy Miller in the UK. What was he asked? “Did you develop a prototype Bultaco in late 1964?” Surprise, surprise, he would have said yes! In my opinion an M10 Bultaco was not available to anyone before 1965.

This is what Mr Miller had to say on Pre-65 trials while he was still competing in Pre-65 on his Ariel:
“This is why you get Pre-65 events today. It was Pre-65 - it was really pre-Bultaco, because Bultaco brought in the modern stuff, and when you say Pre-65 you are really saying pre Sammy Miller going to Bultaco.”

Sammy Miller is referring to Pre-65 as an era, not a definitive date. To my knowledge, this is accepted throughout the world, with the exception of a certain club in NSW.

What do I think? – No Spanish bikes in Pre-65.

Have you ridden a early Bultaco compared to the Blue Bultacos? I own the model 10 and a 198 and the amount of difference between them is unimaginable, the early bully doesn't like to stop at all, the suspension is terrible, its bad for your posture, quite gutless and heavy.
Compare the above problems with a newer blue bully and its the opposite, it stops as good as my 1098 Ducati, has fantastic suspension, its body position is fantastic, my 198 has bags of power and is quite light.
So as you can see from the description of the same point that the bikes are totally different, which renders the model 10 not at all competitive in post classic.

There are only a few people that can say that they're competing just for the hell of it, and i think this is the reason my bike is so questioned by many people. If we where there just to ride in a group and have fun there wouldn’t be a problem, but because I proved that the bikes competitive the uproar has started saying that its not meant to compete, but as it stands, the Australian rules allow me to.

There was a phone call to Sammy Miller about this subject and there was more asked than building a prototype late 1964. I have a wonderful book in front of me that says that it was built in November 1964 and it competed and won "the British experts trial" in December 1964. When discussing with Macca about my bike he asked me to prove that it competed in 1964,the above sentence proves this.

I 'm also curious as to what this "certain NSW club" is you refer to?

I would love to see the Bultaco at Thunderbird Park in August but competing in its rightful Class, Twin shock !!!!
A few others seem to agree with my earlier comments about the era thing, its not about the bike looking "nice", "pretty", and "ride don't hide" its about the facts of when that bike was built. Obviously Alan and Bob McGlinchy know something that I don't and I cannot understand why someone doesn't give us the facts and figures on the bike to shut us up.
Regardless of that, sorry Steve, "meticulous replies" do not "justify" the bikes inclusion in Classic class only the facts do that and we haven't had them yet .
Cheers
Twin shock

The rightful class is classic, its been accepted by MA as a classic motorcycle, the rules back up the facts to prove its eligibility in classic.

SO what facts do you want?
There is a lot of information in books stating that they were built between 1964 and 1967, the design remained unchanged during mass-production.
check out this-http://www.brbultacos.com/IDbike.html

It says that Bultacos should only be referred to by a model number (first couple of digits of the engine number) not by a year. A 1974 Model 120 Pursang may have been sold and titled in 1975. Only the model number will result in a correct identification.

YEARS SHOWN ARE ROUGH ESTIMATES AND NOT ALWAYS ACCURATE.

Well I can assure you that my frame and engine number both match and start with the numbers 10.00.001.With the above statement my bike is a model 10.
I’m sure some of the guys bikes fall, outside the cut off limit. I have done some research and found out that triumph tiger cubs were made from 1956-1968,Bsa bantams made from 1948-1971,Bsa C15t available from 1959-1967,honda 90s from 1964 to 1979,bsa B31 made from 1949 to 1959
My research shows that some of the bikes that compete in the classic grade can fall well outside the cut off date 31st December 1964 and still be accepted to compete.
The hardest part with proving the exact date of manufacture is that over these lengths of time these types of documents can be lost.

Hi All. Before I put my two bob's worth in, let me make it clear the outcome of this debate doesn't really affect me as far as my Trials competition is concerned(which is probably a good thing) because as many of you are aware , there is virtually no one competing in Classics in Victoria on a regular basis except me and therefore most of the time I'm lumped in with twin shock so ride mainly against Japanese and Spanish and Italian bikes anyway, and as it is highly unlikely I will be vying for top spot at the Aussie Titles, the A or B grader that rides Classics once a year(or the only time) to add Australian Champion to his CV might as well be riding in a wheelbarrow or a hovercraft for all it will affect my placing! As the subject appears to be somewhat emotive it may help to balance the issue of eligibility with some facts.
Nowhere in the MOMS does it state originality as a criteria of eligibility only that the age of the machine will be considered in the terms of the period(age?)of the latest major component.
Also there is no onus on any competitor to disclose to his fellow competitor any modifications he has made to any of the components of his machine provided that they don't modify the chassis performance or the minor components out of keeping with the era.(a bit of a subjective rule)I am more than happy to tell people all about my bike but I like to do it at length, in person as I enjoy watching their eyes glaze over as they finally start to lose the will to live from the boredom. This can be verified by almost anyone at the Oakleigh motorcycle club! Now for my opinion. I have at my disposal many photo's of bikes of the era loaned to me by my friend and former A grade rider, Ray Lander. A top competitor in the era (pre 65). The most successful trials bikes in Aus then were in fact Bitsa's and home built, heavily modified with hand made frames etc.Usually based on Bantams, Villiers etc. Ray also owned and competed on a 150 CZ twin port in the late fifties. The best bike he ever rode, he once told me. Fortunately this tradition of artful bodging still exists and makes for a good standard of competitive machines even if sometimes their appearance is a little rough. I am certain many of us like fiddling with our machines in an attempt to hopefully make them go better. (Gristy is the only person I know competing that seems to do a lot of work to his bike to make it worse!) I can understand Allan Phillipsons chagrin as regards his perception of sour grapes by other competitors but from what I have read the Bultaco M10 is a quantum technical leap ahead of anything that came before (as history proved) and the age of the machine seems to be in some doubt and that appears to be the real issue, For anyone to say that the M10 is not as good as a Tiger Cub seems, to my way of thinking, deluded, as it would be a very, very ordinary bike indeed to be worse. I know I own one! As the rules currently stand it is clear that some Spanish bikes or parts thereof are eligible. Early Sherpa N for example( Someone has to help me out here as I don’t really know much about these bikes, only what I have recently read) And I assume if Allan had been riding an example of one of these bikes there would not have been a problem? So as I see it, it seems to be more an M10 problem than a Spanish bike problem at the moment.( I noticed early Montesas and Bultaco's were competing in the 2009 Classic Scottish anyone know more?) More discussion please as I feel we need to clear this matter up so we can move on. I have decided to defer any recommendation for changes to the rules for the time being and will make every attempt to attend the Denman Two day , as Gristy suggested, so that interested parties can get together and hopefully have a meaningful discussion and form a resolution as regards these matters. It seems that in Britain the Classic and Twin shock movement are going from strength to strength and ours should be too. We need to turn this around and soon. On another subject I met a chap in Tassie who was riding a very smart Bantam named Colin Phillipson (Any relation?) He mentioned his interest in 250 cc Unit single Royal Enfield’s and I have found some info for him and would like to contact him to pass this info on, Can anyone help out me out.
Regards Geoff.

I agree with the bolded statement you made, how ever I used my bike as an unmodified example of a bike and my bikes being excluded, yet its the most original bike that competes, I am unaware that CZ actually manufactured a trials bike.

Colin phillipson is a relation, he's my father.

Me again
Geoff mentioned the 2009 Pre 65 Scottish two day which is probably the worlds premier Pre 65 event.
I've had a look at the entry list for this years Pre 65 Scottish and out of 174 bikes entered there are Zero, nil, none, 0 Spanish bikes entered. If they appeared last year they have certainly stopped them this year, there's a couple of Jawa's and a Panther but also no Japanese either.
Anyone interested should have a look at the list on the Scottish Six Days Trial website and they will see what I have been raving on about, an ERA,,,,, Spanish belong in the next era and they called it Post Classic.
Cheers
Twin shock

Is that because England has the no Spanish bikes rule, not Australia?

First of all congratulations Alan on a fine win in the Aust Championships. However I wonder if this thread would exist if you hadn't won.
Secondly I don't understand all the questions relating to the year that the model 10 Bultaco was introduced. There is ample evidence to support 1964 as that year

A recently published Spanish book 'HISTORIA DE LA SHERPA T- The story' Pub 2001- has a very comprehensive history of the sherpas. On page 75 Model 10 is listed as 1964 - 1967

Mario Candellone in his book 'PHOTO TRIAL 1995' on page136 lists the Model 10 as 1964 - 1967

The Spanish Trials website TODO TRIAL has a test on the Model 10 and in their technical info on the bike, list the years as 1964 - 1967
http://www.todotrial.com/ttclasico/inde ... -total.htm?

Placing a ban on Alan's well presented and restored piece of history, to me is very poor form and has no merit.

Thanks, I think none of this would happen if I didn’t win. Thank you with the research and providing information to help my case.