Cub barrels.

Need help finding information or parts for that old machine in your shed? Someone in here will know!

Moderator: Moderators

sybella
B grade participant
B grade participant
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 9:33 am
Bike: Honda

Re: Cub barrels.

Postby sybella » Sun Mar 10, 2013 10:19 am

Hi all,thanks for your replys I know this is new for me classic bikes but addictive now have 4 ,its gotta stop.From what i've read this started, a alium barrel with 8 fins instead of 9, .So if that barrel had 9 finns would this be ok ,as per the rule23.5.0.4 . As like most people who ride these bikes i just want mine to work,with out cooking them. I am of the opinion the rules which we are governed by are ok .thanks tony bax ps like that carby's are taken out of major components.



Geoff Lewis
A grade participant
A grade participant
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 9:39 am
Location: tyabb,victoria

Re: Cub barrels.

Postby Geoff Lewis » Mon Mar 11, 2013 11:47 am

Hi All, It is interesting reading a few of the comments and in my mind, points out two different but intersecting angles to the issue. To clarify what I mean, we must go back to the roots of the pre 65 class. In Victoria at least back when Classics started ,it was all kicked off by members of the HMRAV. So was basically a group of Historic Motorcycle enthusiasts getting a bunch of old dungers out to flog around in the mud and rocks. However in all competition there are always those individuals to whom the competiton (and trying to win) becomes the focus. Therefore rules were brought in to regulate what could and couldn't be modified, maximum clearance etc. so that no one bike or rider had a great advantage over another. Clearly this is never going to be the case as has been quite evident, irrespective of the rules, the guy who has lots of money , suberb engineering skills (or can afford to pay someone who has)and is a superb rider as well is going to be pretty hard to beat. So there are the two extremes . The Old trials bike enthusiast who enjoys a ride, competition or not, or the Trials competition enthusiast who has a bike on which to compete in the Classic class. Of course there are those placed somewhere between these two extremes. I put myself somewhere in the middle . Who should drive the debate? Guys like Tony Bax and Steve Johnson are top riders and are going to win anyway and they know it, so needn't become involved unless they wan't to and their opinion and point of view is valued but remember if the class disappears completely in the meantime because of lack of entries during the season, and it basically has in Victoria, we will be the poorer for it. It shouldn't just be a class for the Championships! After much thought ,that for the moment, I would like to see the rules left as they are and a list of bikes that are not strictly eligible but are in the spirit of the class, added (Could be done through sup Regs initially?). List to be compiled by someone who knows what they are talking about. That's not me! Not a cure but a band aid just to see what happens. Any thoughts? Axe to grind ,sick of being the only entry in classics!(Have bought aTwinshock now)
Regards Geoff.


GO CZ!

sybella
B grade participant
B grade participant
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 9:33 am
Bike: Honda

Re: Cub barrels.

Postby sybella » Mon Mar 11, 2013 7:48 pm

Hi geoff ,the reason i first got into classics and have only had three trials on them so far ,was watching you and steve johnston belt these old bikes though modern day sections,I now have two cubs and a c15t .I was dissappointed to see such a special class slowly get shelved,i watched the qld series classics with only one competor over the last three years ,every now and then one extra would turn up{ ie peter S}. Dan ,gumby and myself from qld will be hopfully doing QLD, denman,vic, and the aussies and the central qld twin shock title on my farm on the 8th of sep ,run on the same format as connondale.I think the only to grow the twin shock scene is to have events catering for these bikes .WDTC at connondale put on one of the best trials for twin shocks and was so good to see 9 or more classic's . Hopfully this is part of the solution.cheers tony bax



Twinshock200
Expert participant
Expert participant
Posts: 273
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 2:19 am
Bike: Classics & Twinshock
Club: SQTA
Location: Queensland
Location: Redland Bay

Re: Cub barrels.

Postby Twinshock200 » Mon Mar 11, 2013 8:10 pm

The last two posts from Geoff and Tony provide the solution to the disappearing Classics.

Geoff wrote:I would like to see the rules left as they are and a list of bikes that are not strictly eligible but are in the spirit of the class, added
This is what I have been banging on about,a "specials" class within Classic

And from Tony,
Tony wrote:I think the only to grow the twin shock scene is to have events catering for these bikes .WDTC at connondale put on one of the best trials for twin shocks and was so good to see 9 or more classic's
,,,,, because the organisers put on suitable sections, the riders know it and they turn up
The problem is we can't simply put on enough events catering solely for Classic and Twinshock and need to rely on the section setters putting on sections that are suitable for these bikes and the older brigade of riders who ride them, section severity has been the main cause of diminishing numbers of Classic bikes over the last 20 years
Two good suggestions to increase numbers and as Tony says we could leave the rule book as is
Cheers
Galps


Pre 65 Classic bikes

gristy
Junior participant
Junior participant
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 8:38 pm
Location: redhead n.s.w

Re: Cub barrels.

Postby gristy » Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:21 pm

I don't really want a heap of rules and measurements. I just like the idea, if it is pre65 it is in, no matter what country of origin. If it looks visually the same and comes post '64 it is in. Does it matter if it's a square barrel, round barrel or hexagon? Does it really matter if it is a 4speed or a five speed? I have only ever used 1st in all the sections I have ridden. These days you can get a small primary drive to gear any old bike down gear box wise. The only trial I know of in Aus where 4th and 5th are handy is Glenmaggie, with its big loop (looking forward to it).
For those that have Cub forks a good modification is to get Honda CB250N forks. Machine a taper top of CB tube to fit top Cub triple, standard Cub fork cap bolt screws straight in same thread (cycle). For the bottom machine extra long top Cub bush out of alloy tube so it sleeves Cub bottom slider. Cub seal holder will lock sleeve in place just like original bush or make new alloy seal holder to run modern seals. Run all CB internals, you now have eligible forks, the only difference looking at them is the fork tubes are now chrome. All said work above was done by a machinist at a good rate (cash still works).
On a different note if anyone out there has a heavy weight Triumph Twin or rigid of any make and wants a lightweight Cub pm me, as I want to go heavy weight.

Regards,
Gristy



TriCub
Expert participant
Expert participant
Posts: 273
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 11:38 am
Bike: Triumph
Club: Wester districs trials club

Re: Cub barrels.

Postby TriCub » Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:38 pm

Some more good talk.
From what I see the main objective is to try and keep the class going and perhaps grow.
I don't think adding extra classes will do any good when we have so few allready.
Got to ask why more don't take it up. I know quite a lot of classic MX guy's that have shown an interest in riding trials, when I ask them why not get a classic most say that the rules are to anal. The MX pre65 class has no country distingtions or crazy carb rules(now mostly fixed) and is quite free with lists of excepable components from later more available machines. If as has been suggested we take a leaf out of the classic MX rules by letting in some of these later bikes and bits we should see a few more bikes turn up.

The other thing that will help is more promotion of the class by the clubs. Things like that very racist TY trial promoted by TCQ(I think it is TCQ).
The Twin Shock Masters is great but only once a year is not enough to bring out riders.

Roger I know that a few guy's have parked thier classic because they feel the sections are a bit to hard but on the other side of that I have in the past had quite a few people come up to me at trials and comnent on how the classics have turned into a class that is a lot more appealing with the improved standard of machines and sections being riden. When I first started to notice the classics at trials and had a ride on a couple of them(Villiars powered) in novice sections I thought not for me. But after watching a couple of good riders push them a bit harder it wasn't to long before I'd started to look around for a swingarm frame for my 1954 plunger Cub and after the first ride on clubman sections I was hooked. If the novice line had of been the only option I would have parked the bike due to boredom and we wouldn't be having this conversation.

All you guy's that have pledged support please come on and give us a idea of what the majority thinks will work so that a draft can be put forward. I'm prepared to help formulate a list if need be but would need help with some of the makes I'm not familiar with.

Gristy. Agree with a lot of what you are saying, keeping it simple is good but we do need to somehow limit the mods and trick component or those super expensive English specials will start to creep in and I think that would definetly kill the class. I still think it is quite a grey area with those sort of fork mods but seems to be common place. Wouldn't it be better to allow later forks in so that people didn't have to spend money on cheaters.



Twinshock200
Expert participant
Expert participant
Posts: 273
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 2:19 am
Bike: Classics & Twinshock
Club: SQTA
Location: Queensland
Location: Redland Bay

Re: Cub barrels.

Postby Twinshock200 » Tue Mar 12, 2013 12:43 am

To be fair George the previous Pre 65 rules did not preclude any foreign makes and did allow any bike that was manufactured prior to December 31st 1964 no matter what country it was built in.
If you and others are building a bike based on a model that was on the market prior to 1965, no problem, the "No Spanish" change was wrong it didn't need to be there at all, if a bike is Pre 65 who the hell cares where it was made.

Interesting Gristy is thinking of bringing a heavyweight bike out again, I also have plans for a heavyweight bike but there is no way I am going to ride white lines on it, I'm 67 with a replacement hip and I know other guys feel the same way.

We could let in some other bikes but it goes back to what I have suggested several times now and that is a "Specials" class within Classic, if its not Pre 65 its either a Classic Special or a Twinshock,,,,,,,, simple


Pre 65 Classic bikes

Geoff Lewis
A grade participant
A grade participant
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 9:39 am
Location: tyabb,victoria

Re: Cub barrels.

Postby Geoff Lewis » Tue Mar 12, 2013 8:48 am

Hi all, I am glad Tony was stimulated into riding classics by watching the suberb , athletic, riding skills in Pre 65 at the Aussie titles (Steve, not me!). It is good to hear you are riding more than just title events as well. Fiddle forks have been around as long as I can remember as guys in the HMRAV were sneaking them in from the word go, but of course swearing they weren't! For Victoria anyway, I don't think we can afford to discriminate between Standard and Special at the moment and if someone turns up on an ultra trick Cub or Bantam or Zundapp for that matter, even if it cost $20,000,I think they will be most welcome. I am going to ask Trials Vic if they can allow certain models in the sup regs. as discussed ie. Sprite, M10 , Anglian, in both the VMS series and the Vic Champs and we can see what happens. Of course Trials Vic may just tell me to piss off as well. Other Vic riders or potentials should let me know if they are OK with that. If they are not, then I won't ask.
Regards Geoff Lewis


GO CZ!

TriCub
Expert participant
Expert participant
Posts: 273
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 11:38 am
Bike: Triumph
Club: Wester districs trials club

Re: Cub barrels.

Postby TriCub » Tue Mar 12, 2013 10:53 am

Roger.
I think the idea of adding a extra class won't get through MA, as the numbers just aren't there at the moment to support it. If at some time in the future if a large number of bikes turn up at an Ausy title or we get large number at regular trials then you may have a chance of adding in an extra class.
It is still quite possible for a specials class to be introduced or promoted by any Club at anything up to a Tilte event if the numbers are there.
Titles I believe are to be run as per the Rule book although that didn't stop the organisers of the 2010 tiltes from making up their own rules for pre65.

There was a problem with the rules pre 2010 and that was in the wording which stated must be made before 31st Dec 1964. What it should have said was the major components have to be from a designated 1964 model or earlier as per the classic MX rules. Then there would have been no question that an M10 Bultaco was not eligable but it also would have unquestionably put out the square finned bits as well. Ancient history now though, we need to fix the damage.

To all.
It's not enough to say you are interested in supporting a rule change if a agrement is not meet on what to change. So start typing and remember that we stand a much better chance of getting a change if it's not to radical.



oldslowcoach
C grade participant
C grade participant
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 1:14 pm
Club: wdtc

Re: Cub barrels.

Postby oldslowcoach » Tue Mar 12, 2013 2:58 pm

Gents,
As always, passionate and compelling thoughts and ideas. In no particular order some more thoughts of my own:

Pre 65 trials competition started in the UK around the mid seventies. 99% of contemporary trials bikes were Spanish. People wanted to see and ride something different. There is nothing magical about 1965. It was chosen purely to stop the first model Spanish trials bike being ridden. The class could just easily have been named Early Trials Bikes not made in Spain. It wasn’t. 31 Dec 64 was never meant to differentiate Cub motors or similar. It was the vibe, the Mabo. The present MA moms adhere to that doctrine

My brother races a Trident in UK. When I told him of the present regulations conundrum, his immediate response was. “Changing the class regulations will only mean the same riders will ride different bikes”. I think that could easily occur here

The M10. I was not at The Australian Championship. I understand many people were thrilled to see an early Bulto in competition. Others not so thrilled, especially to see it in pre 65. A couple of years ago I am sure I saw a competently ridden, original radial head Bulto win the OPEN class of the WDTC Twin shock Masters at Conondale. I am not surprised. Theses bikes are good and the M10 destroyed the British trials bike industry overnight

Perhaps the answer, as I think occurs in Europe at the moment, is to have two Twin shock Classes
1)Any Twin shock to 1972 (more thought on cut off date needed)
2) Any Twin shock (not modified monoshock)

Yamaha forks on my Cub. Hopefully this is a stop gap. Lack of practise and a poor bike means I cannot get round the white arrows. Yamaha front end and Betors on the back might give me a sporting chance. If I still cannot get round with practise on an over specified bike I can safely give it away. If I can get round I’ll ride Twin shock until I sort the Triumph forks

My final conclusion on the whole regulations debate is that it is virtually 100% subjective. The only way for it to become objective is for everyone to build and ride what they want. Presently every bike can be ridden in an existing moms class. Only when people and bikes are out there being ridden can we have any hope of getting the moms right for the majority. The way forward at present is not to change the rules but to ride the bikes. Suitable sections would help as well

OSC




Return to “Twinshock & Classic Trials”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests