Flatslides on Twinshocks

[Twinshock200]

Hey George
Let me put you straight buddy, I had nothing to do with the eligibility rule for Mk1 Concentrics, I just go along with the rules as set by MA and, for your info, I was the one that visited Mike Estall over here and clarified the definitions on square barrels so I will be interested in his latest edition if it exists.
If you are so keen to get the carby ruling changed why don't you get off your arse and do something about it yourself rather than waiting for someone else to do it for you to suit your 230cc Cub.
Incidentally I wonder what would have the biggest advantage, a Cub with a square barrel or a Cub with 230cc,,,, when are you going to ride in a classic trial event again George ??????????????

Did I upset you at some stage in the past as you keep having a go at me, if so I never intended to so give me your email address and we can patch it up, mine is [email protected].
cheers
Rog G

[FM350]

If a 230cc Cub wasnt fitted with a square cylinder (not a "P65 part), then it would run very hot indeed, and seizure would be almost certain. Cant quite see the point of having any rules at all concerning "P65" if they are anything like those in the UK, which seem half arsed and arbitrary and mean modern frames and costly billet parts are acceptable, while period carburetion such as the VM Mikuni (1964) isnt.

[Jon V8]

Chris,I am going to make a final post on this thread as you seem to be unable to understand what I'm saying. I am happy with the rules/guidlines of my club and all the other clubs I currently ride in,both AMCA and ACU.All these clubs are slightly different in the way they do things - its really not a problem.I took over as sec of the Bath club and just carried on what was set up by the highly respected and long standing previous sec. I saw no reason to change anything other than keeping an eye on section severity - which was what the large majority of riders asked for as I asked around.ALL of our members/riders/observers can get hold of me either before,during or after a trial,I am more than happy to discuss any trials related questions they have.But for the last two years all I can say is that the sub commitee and me have had nothing but positive comments,(The same as the Somerton Classic commitee received yesterday after their excellent two day British only trial.) so if anyone IS fed up with how we - not just me are running trials then they need to speak up.
If change IS requested then it WILL happen,there is absolutely no point at all in running trials that people dont like,nobody forces them to come along and ride.Put on rubbish trials and you soon lose the entry - its not like there is no choice of clubs or places to ride.
So just incase you did miss what I said before,if you dont like how a club is being run,get involved and do something about it.

[TriCub]

Roger.
I didn't say that you had the rules changed only that you seem to wholehearted support the new rule. I did try to have the new rule stopped before MA voted on it by sending quite a lengthy submision with exploded drawings of several different carbs , but it seemed that MA would not go against the Commissions recomendations.
Thank you for enquiring after my health, it's been almost 12 months since my back operation where they fused 2 disc's and fitted 1 arterfical disc. I may try and have a ride soon but after the debacle that was the 2010 titles I have lost interest in riding classic but I will probable ride the cub in twinshock or clubman.
My motor is actualy 250 and on a hot Queensland day I would go for the extra fins every time. If the rule book had of said the motors had to remain stock capacity it would be. However when I got the motor from Mike Riley it was already way over bored and the crank was stuffed so after all the repairs it ended up 250cc. It's power is probably less than your 200 with it's bigger carb and high lift cams but I have more low down I guess.
Here is a copy of an Email I got from Mike Estall regarding his book and the French Cubs. It was dated 14-9-2010 which was after the 2010 titles. I should pass this info on to MA I guess.


"Hello George.

First of all you must appreciate that by the time the book was being researched and written, (late 1990's), both the Triumph and BSA factories had gone the way of all flesh, so to speak, so in the book I have reported what was the best information available to me at the time. As time has gone on since publication of the first edition in early 2000 little bits of new information have turned up and each new edition has incorporated whatever new detail has come to light at the time it is published.

The first French Army Cubs were delivered in June or July 1964 and at that time Cubs of all model types used the 'Oval' head and barrel. As it states in page 203 the 'Square' head and barrel did not appear until February 1965 so only machines originally built after that date would have borne the new components.

So far as I can tell and to help you identify those bikes which would have been originally fitted with 'Oval' heads and barrels any French Army Cub numbered up to serial number 99719 would have been delivered from Meriden in the Autumn of 1964 and so would have had 'Oval' components. After that the serial numbers had three or four digits and the bikes were built at and delivered from Small Heath with 'Square' components.

For any of your trials machines that are not derived from the French Army Cub but from another model and delivered to another dealer the situation is more complicated and would require individual research to find its original delivery details. I can do this by email, all I need is the serial number and model type stamped on the frame and engine. For bikes with differing frame and engine numbers one part might be pre-65 the other not and it would depend on your rules as to whether that bike would be eligible for competition or not. If you send me the model type and serial number, e.g. T20 99799, TR20 123, T20B 2345 etc. I will tell you when the bike with that number was delivered from the factory. I cannot tell you when it was built, (obviously the build date woud be before the despatch date), as I do not have the 'Build' records which have mostly not survived. Hope this helps?


Would you please send me details of the frame, engine and registration numbers of your bikes plus the serial numbers of any loose frames, engines, crankcases, so that I can add them to my Register of Machines? (I am trying to find out how many machines still survive)!



May I please have your postal address/phone, to complete the entry in my Register of Machines? This information is never passed on to anyone without your consent!


All the best. Mike.

[TriCub]

If a 230cc Cub wasnt fitted with a square cylinder (not a "P65 part), then it would run very hot indeed, and seizure would be almost certain. Cant quite see the point of having any rules at all concerning "P65" if they are anything like those in the UK, which seem half arsed and arbitrary and mean modern frames and costly billet parts are acceptable, while period carburetion such as the VM Mikuni (1964) isnt.

It is actualy a 250cc motor and yes it does run very hot especialy on days were the temperature is pushing 40 deg. It hasn't seized as yet but the carb has over heated a couple of times making the motor cut mid section. I think the square finned has a definate advantage but I would not use them as they are post 65 components.

[Twinshock200]

Thanks George
I didn't know you had back operations, probably caused by those fierce VMX bikes you ride !! but I sincerely hope you have made a full recovery.
I accepted what Mike Estall told me about the French army Cubs and if someone does get the rules changed to ban square barrels on Cubs then, so be it.
Over here in the UK they all have square barrels but most of the events cater for Pre 70 bikes and that lets them in along with many more makes of bike and I would campaign for the same thing in Aus when I come back.
I still have my original Cub stashed away over there sporting the fantastic engine rebuild you did for me many years ago and it was running sweet when I parked it, by the way was the Honda conrod you adapted for it Pre 65 ?????

Anyway I haven't seen you in the results for a while so get your bike out again and show these young blokes a thing or two.
Cheers
Rog G

[FM350]

Chris,I am going to make a final post on this thread as you seem to be unable to understand what I'm saying. I am happy with the rules/guidlines of my club and all the other clubs I currently ride in,both AMCA and ACU.All these clubs are slightly different in the way they do things - its really not a problem.I took over as sec of the Bath club and just carried on what was set up by the highly respected and long standing previous sec. I saw no reason to change anything other than keeping an eye on section severity - which was what the large majority of riders asked for as I asked around.ALL of our members/riders/observers can get hold of me either before,during or after a trial,I am more than happy to discuss any trials related questions they have.But for the last two years all I can say is that the sub commitee and me have had nothing but positive comments,(The same as the Somerton Classic commitee received yesterday after their excellent two day British only trial.) so if anyone IS fed up with how we - not just me are running trials then they need to speak up.
If change IS requested then it WILL happen,there is absolutely no point at all in running trials that people dont like,nobody forces them to come along and ride.Put on rubbish trials and you soon lose the entry - its not like there is no choice of clubs or places to ride.
So just incase you did miss what I said before,if you dont like how a club is being run,get involved and do something about it.

To prevent TS ultimately going down the tubes in the same way as "P65" has in the UK maybe there is a need for sensible rules on machine eligibility, which would help to extend access to the sport, rather than simply increase costs? UK classic clubs catering for a wide range of rider abilities are obviously aware of the different capabilities here, and possibly catering for more rather than less riders might mean more popular events, with higher entries?

[FM350]

If a 230cc Cub wasnt fitted with a square cylinder (not a "P65 part), then it would run very hot indeed, and seizure would be almost certain. Cant quite see the point of having any rules at all concerning "P65" if they are anything like those in the UK, which seem half arsed and arbitrary and mean modern frames and costly billet parts are acceptable, while period carburetion such as the VM Mikuni (1964) isnt.

It is actualy a 250cc motor and yes it does run very hot especialy on days were the temperature is pushing 40 deg. It hasn't seized as yet but the carb has over heated a couple of times making the motor cut mid section. I think the square finned has a definate advantage but I would not use them as they are post 65 components.

If you are using strictly "P65" parts where did you get your "P65" stroker crank I wonder? Might be completely wrong on this, but I thought around 220cc was the maximum capacity you could get on a Cub without fitting a stroker crank?

[Geoff Lewis]

Hi All, Just finished the Vic Champs and must compliment the Sporting Club on a great weekend. However to get back to the subject at hand , I know that square slide Dellorto carbs were used on trials bikes (factory fitted) in 1972. So there should not be a problem to fit them on any machine of that year and later.Other makes of carb? Well I just don't know! And as for some of the other things people are saying well they are only opinions and we have to respect peoples right to express them I guess, even if we don't agree. When it comes to Pre 65, at least here in Victoria, our biggest problem is not eligibility because at the moment we won't be terribly fussy,but actually having enough people to have our own class. We need to have four riders to constitute having our own class and we just can't seem to get there , its not a shortage of bikes as I could have loaned someone a bike if they wanted to ride. At the Vics once again we were rolled in with Twinshock which the orginisers were quite expecting, which had the downside of the sections having to cater to both grades which meant they were very hard for a Clubman level rider on, lets say a rigid Francis Barnett and far too easy for a good 'B' grader on , lets say an ex works Honda RS 250 . Under the circumstances it was the only way the orginisers could proceed but we are in dire straits here if we cant get more riders in Classic as we are at risk of losing the few riders we have. On the subject of the notion that the bike doesn't make any difference to a riders performance, then why is it that when an ex or current 'A' grader goes to the Aussie titles to shoot fish in a barrel, they never come armed with a popgun! Makes you wonder why the factories bother to develop bikes at all, we really should all still be riding rigid Jimmies and simply spend the money going to the gym!
Regards Geoff

[TriCub]

If a 230cc Cub wasnt fitted with a square cylinder (not a "P65 part), then it would run very hot indeed, and seizure would be almost certain. Cant quite see the point of having any rules at all concerning "P65" if they are anything like those in the UK, which seem half arsed and arbitrary and mean modern frames and costly billet parts are acceptable, while period carburetion such as the VM Mikuni (1964) isnt.

It is actualy a 250cc motor and yes it does run very hot especialy on days were the temperature is pushing 40 deg. It hasn't seized as yet but the carb has over heated a couple of times making the motor cut mid section. I think the square finned has a definate advantage but I would not use them as they are post 65 components.

If you are using strictly "P65" parts where did you get your "P65" stroker crank I wonder? Might be completely wrong on this, but I thought around 220cc was the maximum capacity you could get on a Cub without fitting a stroker crank?

The crank is the original 1957 item that I altered the stroke on. Was this mod possible in 1964? The conrod is roller bearing item that was fitted in USA at some stage in the motors past.
The Aus rules state that Major components must be pre 65. Major components are listed as, All engine and gearbox external castings - Frames - Brakes - Wheel hubs - Forks - Carburettors(MK1 Amals allowed). Just recently added, No Japanese or Italian carbs on British machines.(I should track down a Bing carb and fit it up.)
So with these rules any internal changes are allowed as is any ignition system.

For the Twin shock guy I appoligise as we have gone a bit astray here. I do believe that the rules should say for Twin shock - Any carburettor, round or flat slide and for Classic - Any round slide carburettor.
If you want these rules to be changed get onto your clubs and get the subject brought forward to the trials sub-committee, the sub-committee passes it on to the trials commision for a proposed rule change and then the next years rule book should have changed. Anyway that is what is meant to happen.