For those who like old Motorcycles.

[polybear]

1 hour ago, PupCam said:

In case anyone is interested ..... happening tomorrow at the Shuttleworth Collection at Old Warden

 

https://www.silverstoneauctions.com/the-shuttleworth-motorcycle-sale-2023/2023-07-30/ipp-100

 

Has Puppers spotted several RD's in the line-up?  I know, silly question.....

 

If only they sold for the guide prices - some values seem way off to this Bear.

[PupCam]

1 hour ago, polybear said:

 

Has Puppers spotted several RD's in the line-up?  I know, silly question.....

 

If only they sold for the guide prices - some values seem way off to this Bear.

 

Might have done .... 😀

[MrWolf]

1 hour ago, polybear said:

 

Hi Wolfie,

Did you have any joy with Insurance?  Any news on fixing the bike?

 

That all got ridiculous, very long and convoluted story, despite being insured by a specialist company.

 

The cause of the fire appears to have been a fracture of a weld at the rear of the tank allowing fuel to come into contact with the electrics.

 

The spill plate fitted to the A7 inlet manifold will not fit the smaller bore twin carburetors, so they are fitted with flame traps in the bell mouth as a compromise. 

It was a standard fitment in the 1949 parts catalogue for the single carburettor bikes and still to be found on later monobloc fitted machines.

 

So far I have racked up about £700 on:

New fuel tank

Wiring harness

Ignition leads

Battery

Battery case

Throttle cables

Clutch cable

Saddle cover

Fuel hoses

Fuel taps

Paint

 

I did come across two brand new old stock rocker boxes which were impossible to resist, so they will be going on it as well. I can then bore out the drive side holes for the rocker shafts which are worn oval (and leak!) so I can press in some undersize bushes and ream them to size. 

[PupCam]

Shuttleworth Auction Early results ...

 

'76 Honda CB400F  4        £3000

'74 Honda CB550 K1        £5800

'73 Honda CB125S           £2800

'76 Yamaha RD250          £4000*

 

* That should have gone to Puppers' garage!

[PupCam]

A couple of projects for the weekend ......

 

An Excelsior something or other

 

 

And one of TEN Aerial Square Four projects out of a barn. Some were a lot worse!

 

 

 

The auction has just finished at 15:30.  

 

Hats off to the auctioneer for a 4.5 hour non-stop marathon with just a few sips of (presumably) water!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 30, 2023 by PupCam

[Peter Seager-Thomas]

I used to be into BSAs. I wonder what this one would be worth now. Ex-Vesco.

 

Peter.

 

 

[New Haven Neil]

The Excelsior is a muchly desirable Manxman - price depends upon capacity - 250, 350 or 500.

[MrWolf]

You beat me to it. Having ridden one, all I can say is that a Manxman is on my lottery list!

 

Looking at the Ariel owner's club mag, there seems to be a lot of Square Fours for sale at the moment, I suspect that it's a generational thing. Rigid / girder models are still strong money though as ever.

[New Haven Neil]

8 minutes ago, MrWolf said:

Having ridden one, all I can say is that a Manxman is on my lottery list!

 

A pal just down the road here has two, (250 & 500) one of which appeared in the TT 100th anniversary parade.  Suggestions he leaves one here 'for safekeeping' have been ignored!  Another guy in the Friday morning crowd has seven of the damn things!

[MrWolf]

The closest I've been to ownership was an early Talisman Twin and several Villiers powered Consorts. The latter did have good quality Webb forks fitted at least!

[Kickstart]

Well, finally dragged my FZ750 out from the back of the shed. Tax disk expired in August 2006, and I had fitted an Ohlins shock but never ridden the bike since then.

So time to get to work. Yesterday stripped it down a bit. R/H footrest hanger won't come off (one of the mounting bolts is very rounded, and a pig to get off - hoping that once the rest of the bike is in pieces I will be able to get at it from the inside and remove it or drill it out). Engine still in place and the front and rear suspension, so at least it can still be wheeled around.

I have started making a list of the bits I need to buy. Engine is fairly solid, but I will strip the top end off it to refinish the barrels and head (the crankcases seem to have a better finish).

One nasty pit on the forks, so they will need rechroming.

All the best

 

Katy

 

 

[spikey]

1 hour ago, Kickstart said:

 ... I have started making a list of the bits I need to buy ...

 

Asking just out of curiosity as I haven't the faintest, but what sort of price would that bike have fetched as was, and how much might it go for once you've done the rebuild?

 

And talking of prices, I've been noseying round various Facebook old Brit bike groups and there's been much shaking of head in wonder here at the prices being bandied about for old iron that would have changed hands for a tenner if you were lucky in the 1960s.  Having said that though, the biggest surprise is the apparent number of people working on old bikes when it's obvious from the questions they ask that they haven't a bloody clue about anything mechanical!

Edited September 25, 2023 by spikey

[Kickstart]

5 minutes ago, spikey said:

 

Asking just out of curiosity as I haven't the faintest, but what sort of price would that bike have fetched as was, and how much might it go for once you've done the rebuild?

 

 

Difficult to know. My guess would have been £500 as it was, but possibly more than that (the early 1FN model like this is worth more than the later shape bikes, partly due to eligibility for a race series, and partly as people prefer the half fairing). Restored £2k~£3k. I would probably make a loss if I sold it after rebuilding it! If I really went to town (including a good respray on good quality original fairings, etc) then it might push a bit more.

But FZ750s don't seem to be worth that much compared to a GSXR750. Despite, to me, the FZ being the first of a new generation of bikes (liquid cooled, perimiter frame, engine and frame designed to compliment each other, down draft intakes, airbox above the engine, much of the fuel tank behind the engine, etc) while the GSXR was the last of the previous generation (glorified air cooled engine with a  large oil pump / cooler, traditional frame, conventional carbs, somewhat bendy chassis, etc).

 

The early and late FZs are quite different. Between the 1FN and 2MG at first glance only are different in the fairing lowers. But rear suspension is different, forks are different, rear bodywork is different, ignition system is different, petrol tank changed for a flush filler cap, exhaust changed from 4>2 to 4>1, pistons were changed quite substantially and they lost the centre stand. Even later they switched to a 17" front wheel with larger disks and 4 piston calipers (at least you can then get at the tyre valve more easily!).

 

There are quite a few FZs around that have been tweaked with parts from newer bikes. Various forks / swinging arms. Better brakes (FZ stock brakes are fairly wooden). And other engines can easily be fitted (the basic engine was used in the FZR1000, FZR750R, Thunderace, GTS1000 and the YZF750, and bits can be mixed and matched or complete later engines fitted). A fairly common mod used to be to use FZR1000 pistons to get a 911cc bike while keeping the 6 speed gearbox from the 750.

But I have owned this bike since 1990, and not too worried about resale value, nor really worried about it being quicker. I might use my spare petrol tank and some pattern / 2nd hand bodywork to paint it blue to match the YSR50, TZR250 and RD350F2 I have, but not decided yet.

 

All the best

 

Katy

[spikey]

19 hours ago, Kickstart said:

 ... and they lost the centre stand.

 

I really don't think I could be doing with a bike that doesn't have a centre stand.  Just doesn't seem right to me ...

[MrWolf]

1 minute ago, spikey said:

 

I really don't think I could be doing with a bike that doesn't have a centre stand.  Just doesn't seem right to me ...

 

Me neither, unless it's really ancient and has a rear stand. In my experience an awful lot of of post 1970 stands fill up with rain and rot off, snap or just flap about hitting the road, even though they look massive compared with 1950s offerings. 

Or you have side stands that either aren't up to the job and bend, but it's more often the lug or frame that gives out. I've ended up repairing a lot of those, or worse, undoing previous bodges.

 

That said, the centre stand on my 1949 Star Twin has always flapped about. I'd always put it down to the wrong spring being fitted. So I bought a brand new spring, fitted it and the stand almost trailed on the floor. Back to the old zed bed spring and an annoying Clack! when I go over a speed hump.

 

One good thing that has come out of her catching fire and the resulting total stripdown / shot blasting was I found the problem.

 

Many moons ago, she must have been in a smash that bent the footrest lugs and ripped off the stand mount. Someone had gone to great lengths to cut the mount from a scrap frame and braze it into the frame - THE WRONG WAY AROUND... The lug which the centre stand spring attaches to was facing the rear wheel rather than the gearbox, thereby shortening the distance between the two points of attachment by an inch and a half.

 

A happy hour with the oxy acetylene had it put right and I couldn't help but laugh, because like the rest of you, I've NEVER spent hours doing something only to realise that I've b@llsed it up with a schoolboy error...

 

Or have we? I know that more than once I've made a pair of brackets or repair sections, only to realise that I have made two for the same side!

 

[New Haven Neil]

7 hours ago, MrWolf said:

only to realise that I have made two for the same side!

 

Not once, but twice....d'oh.

 

I rather like those early FZ750's but I think their reputation for having the most uncomfortable seat in motorcycling did for big sales.  Well that and the VFR750.  I agree about the GSXR's too, went like stink due to added less weight but the early ones were a bit wobbly.  I ran circles around one on a NS400R on the A686 Alston road until the long straight - when he disappeared over the horizon! 

Edited September 26, 2023 by New Haven Neil
Corrected 400 designation

[Kickstart]

21 hours ago, spikey said:

 

I really don't think I could be doing with a bike that doesn't have a centre stand.  Just doesn't seem right to me ...

 

Honestly depends. It is useful to have but for me not an essential. Doesn't help that some bikes are hard to get onto the centre stand (the FZ is not easy, the Triumph Thunderbird 900 my better half had was lowered and generally took 2 people to get onto the centre stand).

 

20 hours ago, MrWolf said:

 

Many moons ago, she must have been in a smash that bent the footrest lugs and ripped off the stand mount. Someone had gone to great lengths to cut the mount from a scrap frame and braze it into the frame - THE WRONG WAY AROUND... The lug which the centre stand spring attaches to was facing the rear wheel rather than the gearbox, thereby shortening the distance between the two points of attachment by an inch and a half.

 

A happy hour with the oxy acetylene had it put right and I couldn't help but laugh, because like the rest of you, I've NEVER spent hours doing something only to realise that I've b@llsed it up with a schoolboy error...

 

Or have we? I know that more than once I've made a pair of brackets or repair sections, only to realise that I have made two for the same side!

 

 

A friend bought a bike a few years ago and showed it to me. The spring for the centre stand went from the stand to the pivot bolt.......

Some people admit to making mistakes like that. Others just don't admit it. When I was working on the FZR600 I had low compression on cylinder 1 - turned out when I did the shims I mixed up the shims on the 2 intake valves on cylinder 1 so one was 0.1mm tight and the other 0.1mm loose - muppet!

 

14 hours ago, New Haven Neil said:

 

Not once, but twice....d'oh.

 

I rather like those early FZ750's but I think their reputation for having the most uncomfortable seat in motorcycling did for big sales.  Well that and the VFR750.  I agree about the GSXR's too, went like stink due to added less weight but the early ones were a bit wobbly.  I ran circles around one on a NS400R on the A686 Alston road until the long straight - when he disappeared over the horizon! 

 

Yes the seats are a pain. I have suggested they were rejected by the Spanish Inquisition as too cruel a form of torture! When I bought mine it had a very crudely cut down seat fitted. I picked up a cheap seat from a breakers. After a week or so I went back to the crudely cut down one. It is a pity that sports bikes have fallen out of favour mostly. They morphed to race replicas, which became too extreme for most people with sports tourers offered which lost out on the sportiness.

 

All the best

 

Katy

[2mmMark]

This might be of interest to those who live in the Greater London area and have a not yet Historic-qualified bike which is registered prior to the EURO 3 regulations.  (July 2007)

As I live in the now expanded ULEZ area, my 2002 Enfield Bullet 350 is deemed non-compliant and regarded as “highly polluting”.  Fortunately, bikes have the option of being tested  for compliance with the Euro 3 Nox emissions levels.  There’s a motorcycle workshop  (Big Jim’s Motorcycles) near me in Ealing who are planning to offer tests but they are still not ready, awaiting some more equipment.  With the ULEZ deadline of 29th August looming, I booked a test at the easiest test centre to reach which is in Stevenage, 45 miles away via M4, M25 & A1M.

Test day arrived on Weds 23rd August so I trailered the Bullet up to the centre.  I didn’t know what to expect, so I took some tools,  a spare carb, a standard silencer, some fresh fuel  and a bit of oil. The Bullet has a free-flowing exhaust rather than the huge OEM torpedo and a rejetted carb with a simple mesh filter.

Arriving at the centre, I unloaded the bike and it was placed in the test cell which is a rolling road. It was strapped down and various cables & sensors connected.  I only managed to get a rather blurry photo as photography & filming was not strictly permitted.  What seemed to be measured was engine RPM via a clip on the HT lead and obviously exhaust gas.

Gary Smith at the centre explained that the test is a simulated 10 mile urban ride, following a set programme, mirroring the EURO 3 homologation test.  Speeds vary up to about 50 to 55mph. Tales of bikes being revved to the redline that I’d heard are definitely not true, at least at this centre.

 

I think this was the first Bullet they tested as I needed to show Gary how to start the bike (the regular single cylinder kickstart/valve lifter routine) and how the gears worked (RH side, 1 up, 3 down).  Gary started the test and I was able to watch via a window and also see the measurements on a computer screen slaved to the one Gary was using.  The test took about 20 minutes and the bike simply sounded like it was being ridden pretty much as how I ride it.  At the end, Gary came out and said the bike has passed very easily.  

It’s the NOx level that’s measured and the Bullet measured 0.03g/km, way below the Euro 3 limit of 0.15g/km.  Gary said the bike was overfuelling which I think is modern bike speak for “running rich”.  This was the first time one of my bikes had been on a dyno as all my tuning is done on a vacuo-visual gluteus maximus assessment basis.  It appears that lower NOx levels are gained by running slightly rich. Leaning off the mixture increases them.  Now I know the bike is rich I can try dropping the needle one notch. I suspected it might be on the rich side, because the downpipe has never blued.

To get this result straightaway was very pleasing. I was expecting to need to put the Bullet back to near factory configuration. None of the extra stuff I took was needed.  The bike went in just exactly as I use  it, no adjustments or modifications needed at all. Bear in mind that this is a bike that has its origins back in 1949, when the Bullet was first built.

The test results are uploaded to TFL so after 24 hours for bureaucratic gears to grind, I got a compliant bike.  Cost to me was £175 plus my time & travel.  I received  a certificate showing the test result. Importantly, the test is a one-off and lives with the bike for the rest of its life.  It might make a good selling point but my Bullet is a very nice one, which I intend to keep.

I make no comment on the rights & wrongs of ULEZ...😉  However, it does beg the question of how many other vehicles, not just motorcycles, might comply with the ULEZ requirements and are being scrapped needlessly.


 

 

Edited October 5, 2023 by 2mmMark

[MrWolf]

Probably a hell of a lot more than people think. If a petrol vehicle is in a good state of tune, the emissions are minimal.

A good number of years ago, when emissions testing had recently become an MOT requirement, I took a 1953 Vauxhall Velox for its first MOT in over a decade. It was a one owner, 60,000 mile car which had had no modification from factory standard.

All I had done to the engine was service it and replace the core plugs.

 

It went through the test and when the young lad in the garage brought the emissions testing kit over, the tester laughed and told him that he wouldn't need it as the old cars were exempt.

 

I asked him if he wouldn't mind testing it anyway just out of interest and he agreed for the same reason.

 

Not only did it pass, but the emissions were three points lower than the three year old Rover on its first MOT that had preceded it, despite that car having engine management, catalytic converter and running on unleaded petrol.

 

All I will say is that we are being lied to in the name of control, profit and taxation.

[Northmoor]

2 hours ago, MrWolf said:

Probably a hell of a lot more than people think. If a petrol vehicle is in a good state of tune, the emissions are minimal.

A good number of years ago, when emissions testing had recently become an MOT requirement, I took a 1953 Vauxhall Velox for its first MOT in over a decade. It was a one owner, 60,000 mile car which had had no modification from factory standard.

All I had done to the engine was service it and replace the core plugs.

 

It went through the test and when the young lad in the garage brought the emissions testing kit over, the tester laughed and told him that he wouldn't need it as the old cars were exempt.

 

I asked him if he wouldn't mind testing it anyway just out of interest and he agreed for the same reason.

 

Not only did it pass, but the emissions were three points lower than the three year old Rover on its first MOT that had preceded it, despite that car having engine management, catalytic converter and running on unleaded petrol.

 

All I will say is that we are being lied to in the name of control, profit and taxation.

Alternatively, your Velox was well-maintained and the Rover wasn't (wouldn't be the first car, probably not even the first that day, to have seen no maintenance at all in its first three years).  I wouldn't extrapolate that to deduce that the whole set-up is a con.

 

The problem in terms of meeting emissions regs is not so much that the limits have tightened, but that the focus has changed.  Hence why ULEZ focusses on NOx whereas the MOT has focussed ever since emissions testing was added, on CO and HC.

 

But @2mmMark makes an excellent point about the number of perfectly serviceable vehicles probably being scrapped unnecessarily, just like the last government scrappage scheme did.  Now THAT was a spectacular waste of taxpayers money, or as I call it, MY money.

[MrWolf]

Actually, I was citing my first hand experience as an example of how vague the whole issue of car pollution is. Your point that the supposedly greener Rover hadn't been maintained merely adds weight to the vagaries of the cut-off date for compliant and non compliant vehicles.

Apart from being a bike and car enthusiast, much of my work life as an engineer was centred around the chemicals and petrochemicals industry as well as fuel gas extraction from waste and black water, so I have looked into these things somewhat and it's not just the reaction of some "Right wing dinosaur" as it's apparently fashionable to label anyone who calls BS on the green agenda.

Speaking of which, it matters not one iota who is in at number 10, but more who is in charge locally, and more than them, who is working making the decisions at local level and then agendas, because they are never thrown out of office. ULEZ is robbery (I'm sure that every penny goes towards improving public transport, has anyone looked at TfL's debts?) as are the scrappage schemes, they, as you rightly say rob the taxpayers and waste a perfectly good resource of vehicles that were often far from life expired.

Sure, you can "recycle" them, but you can't recover all of the materials and none of the energy used to make them. Far greener to repair, reuse and keep strictly maintained.

[Kickstart]

15 hours ago, 2mmMark said:

It’s the NOx level that’s measured and the Bullet measured 0.03g/km, way below the Euro 3 limit of 0.15g/km.  Gary said the bike was overfuelling which I think is modern bike speak for “running rich”.  This was the first time one of my bikes had been on a dyno as all my tuning is done on a vacuo-visual gluteus maximus assessment basis.  It appears that lower NOx levels are gained by running slightly rich. Leaning off the mixture increases them.  Now I know the bike is rich I can try dropping the needle one notch. I suspected it might be on the rich side, because the downpipe has never blued.

 

Oxides of nitrogen are greatly caused by combustion temperature, and a lean mixture greatly increases that.

Emissions is a wide range of things. CO, CO2, NOx and hydrocarbons.

I know ~20 years ago I had a local MOT station test my standard (at the time) 1200 Bandit. It just about passed the limit for a non cat car for CO.

 

CO2 is pretty much directly related to fuel consumption (a litre of diesel will produce ~15% more CO2 when burnt than a litre of petrol will, and if converted CO will become CO2).

 

Hydrocarbons is largely unburnt fuel. NOx is a side effect of high temperature.

 

These are all a balancing act. Can get CO quite low even without a catalytic converter, but NOx will go through the roof and the driveability will reduce. Hydrocarbons affected by wear, fueling, cam timing, etc, with a catalytic converter cleaning things up after they are produced.

The ULEZ limit is just on NOx, which is fairly easy to reduce. You will get a 1980s sports 2 stroke through the NOx test, and I doubt many would claim that they are clean (even if the smoke smells nice)

 

All the best

 

Katy

[rockershovel]

My 2013 Triumph T100 Bonneville has a centre stand. Very awkward to get the bike up, but useful. 

[MrWolf]

58 minutes ago, rockershovel said:

My 2013 Triumph T100 Bonneville has a centre stand. Very awkward to get the bike up, but useful. 

 

I had the misfortune of mending a neighbour's Honda Forza 125 recently. It had fallen over and the (utterly pointless) plastic silencer cover had shattered. That was an easy job. 

The main damage was the front mudguard rear half which is clamped to the forks, this had snapped clean off on both sides when the front edge had touched the ground, barely marking the paint.

The centre stand is huge and incredibly easy to use, but I soon found out why.

It only lifts the rear wheel. The weight of the engine keeps the front one firmly planted on the ground - unless it's windy of course...

To remove the front wheel and detach the mudguard, we needed to jack the bike up. 

The method of attaching the belly pan meant we couldn't get the bike lift under anything solid, so we had to wrap a piece of wood in rags and place it beneath the forward belly pan mount and use a trolley jack.

Getting the front wheel out was a doddle but it probably won't be in a couple of years. (The bike is April 2023) as there was absolutely no sign of grease or oil used in the assembly process, everything was bone dry. Less than six weeks later it's been at the dealership for over a week with electrical issues.

Maybe the above design and production faults don't matter, as long as it runs, as most people don't work on their bikes anymore, they just get their phone out, followed by their wallets?*

 

Present company excepted of course!

 

*Possibly why it is so easy to fool people into believing that their vehicles are dangerous polluters?

[spikey]

Couldn't help having a good gawp at a rebuilt A65 in town this morning .  Somebody must have spent an inordinate amount of money having it blasted, polished and generally tarted up.  

 

Not only have I never seen Amal monoblocs polished before, but it's also never occurred to me that anyone might do that.  Surely if they'd gone a bit manky over the years, all it would have taken to restore the nice original finish is blasting with the appropriate medium, of which there seems to be a vast choice nowadays.