Page 3 of 11

Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 8:04 pm
by Stu
What brand of pegs are those on the TY? Is the pic of the 175 or the 250? I had to modify a set of unknown pegs to fit my Ty ages ago and they have no return spring. This was pointed out to me at the trial on the 1\7\07 at Mt Kembla. So I gotta get them fixed before the Pacific Park ride.

Posted: Tue Jul 10, 2007 8:44 pm
by David Lahey
Those are Hebo brand modern trials footpegs.
No idea what metal they are made of but it is lighter than steel and very tough.
They are on my unwashed TY250B using custom made mounting brackets.
Those springs came with a set of Sammy Miller brand universal folding footpegs.

Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:05 pm
by Nathan S
Stu return spring... was pointed out to me at the trial on the 1\7\07 at Mt Kembla. So I gotta get them fixed before the Pacific Park ride.

Sorry for the thread hikack, but is having self-retuning footpegs actually a requirment for trials? How do the TL125 owners cope?

Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2007 4:08 pm
by David Lahey
The original TL125 setup had a spring that clipped onto the end of the footpeg to hold it up for kicking. Most people took both that spring and the footpeg spring off and lived happily ever after.

Note that the rule in the MOMS says "self-returning". It doesn't say "spring loaded".
Gravity can be made to provide the self-returning action with careful design of the up-travel stop for the footpeg combined with a free pivot.

Foot pegs

Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2007 8:53 am
by Phil
Hi All
I would like to let you know that I make weld on foot peg loops
for your early model bikes in the same style as Hebo pegs.
We have these loops also fitted to late model Betas,Montesa and Sherco
to increase the foot peg size.
If you would like any more info you can email me at.

Or give me a call on 0415 861 036.

Cost: $27.50 inc GST plus Postage.

The second photo is of my 1972 M92 Sherpa T fitted with foot peg loops
and brake conversion.

PTR Engineering.

Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:46 am
by Stanm
Your peg set up looks good. I made my extensions myself and bronzed them on to the originals and welded an adapter into the bottom cross tube. My Pegs are 50 mm lower than the standard set up. May be to low but still have the option to put them back to the original mount which I think I will try and see if their is much difference.
I noticed your back sprocket is much smaller than mine. I could make a significant weight reduction here. Is yours set up 520 and what is the gearing? Would this be the same for an A?

Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:11 am
by David Lahey
Are you able to post a photo of your footpeg mounting setup? Lots of people want to try lower pegs but dont want to cut off the original peg lugs.

That sprocket is 53T for 428 chain. Front is 12T. Maybe it just looks small due to the angle of the photo?

Not sure if all the internal gear ratios of the A model are the same as the B and later models (I think one of the gears 2nd or 3rd maybe is a slightly different ratio) but I have the same sprocket sizes on my TY250A as on the B and it feels the same to ride in first gear.

Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 9:13 pm
by Stanm
Picture below shows the set up with the existing mount above. I used a solid bit of bar that fit nicely in the bottom cross tube and ground it away to get near to the same shape as the original mounts and built up some spots with weld as required. Then you need to tack weld the new adapters into the bottom tubes.
The 428 sprocket is much smaller than the 520.


Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2007 8:01 pm
by Stanm
A few more questions

I generally seal the flywheel cover with form a gasket silicon. But when I steam clean around the front sprocket water always get in. I tried a paper gasket with silicon but that didnt help. Any better goo or suggestions

Some comments on my Falcon Shocks. I got mine sent over from England about six months ago and it cost about $380- for the set. I found them to hard at firsts but they seem to have settled in now. One complaint is that the bottoming out rubber is made from soft poor quality rubber that is almost useless and is nearly gone. I complained to falcon but they did not seem interested. Anyone had similar problems with this rubber and should it be replaced?


Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2007 8:58 pm
by David Lahey
My first set of Falcon shocks were bought about 5 years ago and the bottoming rubbers failed exactly the same as you described. The two pairs of Falcons I've bought since and the replacement bump stop rubbers were all made of a different material which has held together very well.

The condition of the bottoming rubbers on Falcons is not critical. The only effect of not having any rubbers is the increased loading on the bike shockie mounts when they bottom out. It won't hurt those shockies. This is not the case for all shockies ie old Konis will smash the valving inside if you remove the bump stop.

Using a steam cleaner on a motorbike is asking for trouble. So is using a high pressure water blaster anywhere near bearings and engine covers. Degreaser, brush and gentle hosing is much less likely to cause water ingress problems.