OzVMX Forum
Marketplace => For Sale => Topic started by: firko on January 29, 2012, 10:46:20 pm
-
Former vintage racer John Vergotis rang me last week to tell me that he'd like to sell off his last few vintage racers. He hasn't used them since the 90's as he's now involved with V8 Super Car racing. I well remember John's bikes being fast and immaculately presented. The TM250 is fitted with an RH top end and a close ratio transmission. Because it's been sitting for a decade or so you'd have to go through it a little but John reckons all of the big money's been spent....all that's needed is a tidy up. It's currently set up for dirt track but it'd be easily converted back to MX trim. John's asking $4000 o.n.o.
ring John Vergotis on 0247824074 or ah 0417203995
(http://i1112.photobucket.com/albums/k495/firko2/VERG02.jpg)
(http://i1112.photobucket.com/albums/k495/firko2/VERG03.jpg)
(http://i1112.photobucket.com/albums/k495/firko2/VERG05.jpg)
(http://i1112.photobucket.com/albums/k495/firko2/VERG08.jpg)
(http://i1112.photobucket.com/albums/k495/firko2/VERG06.jpg)
(http://i1112.photobucket.com/albums/k495/firko2/VERGO7.jpg)
-
i thought the guys on here said you cant fit RH bits to TM 's ?
-
Finally took delivery of the TM today (now my TM250 :)) and it's an absolute peach of a bike. I can't wait to ride it ;D
Thanks for listing this Firko. John is a fantastic guy and I'm really happy to have purchased this equally fantastic bike from him. I look forward to adding another chapter to it's racing history 8)
-
Craig,sounds like it could be your ride in the pre75 250 classes at the classic nats in June ;)
-
Craig,sounds like it could be your ride in the pre75 250 classes at the classic nats in June ;)
It is Paul .. in fact I had already entered it before I took delivery ;)
Already had new MX tyres fitted yesterday .. maybe a shed night at my place next Wednesday with the guys and you can check it out?
-
Craig,sounds like it could be your ride in the pre75 250 classes at the classic nats in June ;)
Turns out it wasn't after all
-
What happened ???
-
Same as Bill, ???
-
Same as bill ??? was it a later model frame not pre 75 legal ???
-
Does unfortunately look like a '75 frame around the upper rear shock mount area :(
-
Me too....I feel bad if it's illegal as I sort of prompted the deal :-[. The bike raced regularly in the 90's with no concerns so I wonder what the problem is? ???
-
The problem is that it's apparently a 1975 frame. Having very little knowledge of these bikes I had absolutely no idea until I rolled up at scrutineering and was told that I couldn't ride in pre 75.
Frame number is TM250-50073 and the 5 at the beginning designates it a 1975 frame. Apparently the only difference is the rear shock position is different by about three quarters of an inch.
When I got home yesterday I checked the 3 other frames I have here and every one of them has a 4 designating them all as 1974 frames. This frame is the only one that starts with a 5 and if I had of known that beforehand I could easily have changed the frame to the one that I was starting to build before buying this one from John.
I learnt a lot about a lot of things this weekend.
-
Does unfortunately look like a '75 frame around the upper rear shock mount area :(
I had no idea it wasn't a 74 frame until Friday. I purchased it as it was advertised and relied on the ad being accurate.
It's interesting you can see that from the pictures because when I rolled into scrutineering I got the feeling that other people knew as well. In fact one of the officials said they knew the bike.
I'm obviously as stupid as I look but I wish someone could have said this to me before the race weekend. It would have saved a whole lot of heartache.
-
Sorry also I believe one of the scrutineers said the shock position on the swingarm had been changed? I guess that also constitutes an illegal mod as well?
There were a couple of scrutineers or experts involved in the short conversation and I recall one of them (please forgive me as I was in a bit of shock at the time and there was a few people talking about the bike so I wasn't able to focus clearly).
Also someone that commented on the RH Barrell and head but I am not sure if he was just commenting on it or whether or not he was saying it was also illegal.
-
Sorry I never looked at the pics close enough to notice it earlier Simo :( As you said the difference is sweet bugger all which only adds salt to the wound. '74 RH parts are legit, you can race a '74 RH250 in pre'75 hence it follows that all parts from said model are also 100% legal.
-
Not having competed at a VMX meeting yet, what happens if your bike does not conform to a year category such as this, are you forced to ride a later period class or are you allowed to ride but just not receive points or recognition for the ride?
-
Not having competed at a VMX meeting yet, what happens if your bike does not conform to a year category such as this, are you forced to ride a later period class or are you allowed to ride but just not receive points or recognition for the ride?
I was offered the option of riding it in pre 78. Unfortunately I had also entered my 1977 YZ250 ... the same one I recently spent $600 having lowered to meet the 9/9 inch suspension rule so I now had 2 bikes in the same class. I struggle to ride one.
-
pays to do your home work ::)
-
pays to do your home work ::)
Geez kick a bloke when hes down ::) Simo has already said he bought what was advertised a 1974 TM 250L( and the bike has been raced before with no issues). This sucks on so many levels , what you say Paul is correct but its an easy trap for a novice . All of us on this forum who saw the bike advertised had no idea , or somthing would have been said im sure .
The situation still sucks for Simo :( if its a 75 frame ??? then yes as the rule book stands its not eligible for pre 75 , and as much as i hate the red tape and bullshit that goes with scrutineering ::) the scrutineers have applied what is in the rule book and thats what their there to do.
Personally i would struggle to pick the differences (maybe easy if you have a 74 and a 75 model side by side ) I have owned and raced 3 TM 250s in the last 12 yrs and when i saw it advertised i didn't pick it as a 75 frame .
If the Bike has been raced at a national level in pre 75 in the past whats changed ??? more dilligant scrutineers or the rules ???
I dont imagine the scrutineers enjoyed telling Simo he couldn't race the bike in pre 75 , or the bloke who sold it to him thought there would be a problem .
I feel for Simo as i think this was his first vintage Nats and its a bastard when this happens . However its good that the scrutineers were on the job and nipped a potentiol protest before the event got underway, it cant be a nice job turning people away but somone has to do it .
I agree with Doc that the 75 TMs should probably be a flow on ??? but theres a procedure to try to change that (if somone feels strongly enough about it )
Its a dissapointing outcome for Simo , but on the upside he does have correct 74 model frames he can build the bike into :)
Simo hope you had a good Nats (sounds like it was a real ripper ) on your YZ and that you are able to build your TM into a 74 frame and enjoy what going by the pics is a very cool TM 250 :)
-
im not kicking him ,bill
ive been caught out myself on stuff not as decribed so to speak :o
-
Sorry mate ::) I feel for the bloke as its a prick of a situation, where its just circumstances rather than somones fault .
-
You can pick up another 74 TM frame for SFA with a bit of looking, just reframe it and swap your gear over/
-
If the Bike has been raced at a national level in pre 75 in the past whats changed Huh more dilligant scrutineers or the rules Huh
I think the problem lies in that the bike was mainly used for dirt track where that kind of scrutiny isn't as diligent. I must be honest and admit that I had personally scrutineered the bike back during John Vegotis's ownership and never once picked up on the frame being '75 vintage. I feel pretty bad for recommending the bike to Simo but I genuinely didn't know of the 'problem'......and neither did any of those John raced against in the 90's, some of them known for their pickiness.
Thankfully Simo's told us that he's got a couple of 4 series frames so it's not such a big fix. Unfortunately he missed the Nats which is the main reason I think he bought the bike in the first place. Sorry mate.
-
I know rules are rules BUT it wouls have been nice to point it out and say start off the back and you wont get any points- if not the nats may be that could have happened.
-
You can pick up another 74 TM frame for SFA with a bit of looking, just reframe it and swap your gear over/
Can you help me get one for SFA? If so I will take it. Seriously I will because the 3 spare frames that I have, all TM250 - 4xxxx numbered, have all got issues. One of them has been completely butchered around the rear shock with the frame being cut off just above the brake pivot and another complete section welded on up higher so it's scrap value only.
And the other two are completely different around the rear shock area. One looks very stock to me but it has other issues so I now need a good frame (see my wanted ad) to be able to make a decent bike out of all this mess.
So, as I said above, do you know where I can get one?
-
Sorry to hear what transpired on Sat and unfortunatley I can't help you out.
But I am sure this'll be a great example of the forum network at it's best.
Steve.
-
Probally what should have happend on the originally advert or via the sales process is the frame number was published or advised. It would have been cleared up in 2 mins.
The longer Swingarm and shock mount changes doesnt make much differant in DT so you can understand how it passed unchallenged there previously. In national level Motocross where Suspension is everything then you have to stick to the rule book, other wise every thing would be slipping through and every suspenion gets another inch or too.
Sorry no one picked up the frame on here before you hit the line up, but credit to you , that you took it on the chin and kept swinging away on the track on your other ride for the rest of the weekend. ( unlike some others)
Unfortunalty in your case you already had the pre 78 ride otherwise you would still have gotten a ride, but in this case at least you still had a spare bike at the track for that event anyway.
Sorry that you didn't get to ride it this year in your preferrred class, but there has to be some integrity in the rule book particularly at the fundimental levels, the big 3 - frame, engine, shock travel.
Fix the frame and come out firing next year, its just a little hurdle.
-
Freaky I’m going to start this of by saying clearly up front, that I’m barely able to talk about the weekend at the moment. I need to improve my state of mind and build my bridge to get over it and have pretty much stayed away from commenting on the whole ordeal until now for a couple of reasons. And those include the fact that I do not wish to be a keyboard warrior and shitcan anyone about what happened. In the end it was my responsibility to present a class legal bike and I didn’t. There are many things that could of, should of happened but what happened did and they can’t be changed. I only hope to never have to go through, or put any other official through, what we had to go through on the weekend.
I also want to clearly state that from my perspective the preparation of the track and the event was superb and the focus needs to be squarely directed to all the organisers for doing a brilliant job in putting together a brilliant meeting. Regardless of how things transpired for me, they did a great job.
So let’s talk a bit about the bike and what happened.
Probally would should have happend on the originally advert or via the sales process is the frame number was published or advised. IT would have been cleared up in 2 mins.
To be honest Freaky I still would not have known the frame was 75 even if the number was posted in the ad although maybe that might have given someone else that did know the opportunity to advise me. Paul was right when he posted a few post sback that it “pays to do your homework”. I didn’t and I paid the price for that (I know you weren’t having a go at me Paul).
The longer Swingarm and shock mount changes doesnt make much differant in DT so you can understand how it passed unchallenged there previously. In national level Motocross where Suspension is everything then you have to stick to the rule book, other wise every thing would be slipping through and every suspenion gets another inch or too.
The swing arm is longer?? Are you sure? I can see where it had been strengthened but I didn’t think it’s been lengthened as well? I will have to check that because I can’t see where it’s been lengthened. Then again I’m obviously not too bright when it comes to these things so I will measure one I have that I think is standard to see how it compares. I will get back to you on the length tonight.
Just as an aside, I don’t know much but I did think that a longer swingarm would be an advantage in dirt track? Irrelevant as it is, is that the case? Would it slide better with a longer swingarm?
I believe the bike has the required 7 inches in the front and 4 in the rear so no advantage in travel by the different shock position.
The fact that this bike has a long racing career (in NSW though) and has been scrutineered umpteen times before I purchased it, and according to the previous owner, in exactly the same trim it is in now makes the fact that it didn’t comply even more shattering. God I hope the previous owner never won a championship or trophy on it because surely that should be handed back?
Freaky I had to defer to the expert knowledge of the scrutineers at the time and if they say the bike is not class legal then that’s that. I learnt a few things about TM frame numbers that I will never forget as long as I live.
Sorry know one picked up the frame before you hit the line up, but credit to you , that you took it on the chin and kept swinging away on the track on your other ride for the rest of the weekend. ( unlike some others)
Freaky, I hate to let you down (in fact I hate letting anyone down) but I didn’t ride the rest of the weekend. In fact I left and went home .. was I not alone? A combination of many things led to that decision but if you think less of me for that then that’s you’re entitlement. To say I was shattered with how this turned out is an understatement.
Sorry that you didn't get to ride it this year in your preferrred class, but there has to be some integrity in the rule book particularly at the fundimental levels, the big 3 - frame, engine, shock travel.
From what I was told on Friday (by a number of experts) the difference between a 1974 and 1975 TM250 frame is around 3/4 of an inch in shock position. That’s it. At my level of riding skill (or lack thereof) I wouldn’t be able to tell the difference. In fact when I rode the bike for the first time a week or more earlier at the BMCC Nudgee practice day, I thought the rear shocks weren’t working at all so I put a small zip tie on the shaft to see if any of the travel was being used. That zip tie ended up smashed up under the bump stop rubber which shocked me (pardon the pun).
This is my very first pre 75 250 (my era is more evo and pre 85) and my first ever TM Suzuki but I purchased this bike specifically for the titles and to go from 1 ride (on the yz in pre 78) to 3 rides, pre 75 and age class.
I’m glad the rule book has integrity too bad it doesn’t allow the Scrutineers and Clerk of the Course some scope for common sense and flexibility. I basically begged to be allowed to ride the bike around for no points but rules are rules. At one stage a scrutineer asked me the question “what if someone dies and we have to explain why you were there” What The ?? Anyway, without going into the whole sordid deal, Freaky you know the lengths I went to to try to negotiate a ride for the TM but without success. I’m not having a go at anyone, far from it, the organiser’s job is difficult enough and I felt genuinely embarrassed to even be asking for special consideration but wow, I wish the rules allowed for common sense and flexibility.
Fix the frame and come out firing next year, its just a little hurdle.
Fix the frame? You mean ditch the frame surely? Mate I will try to do my best like always and have already posted a wanted ad for another frame because the 3 spare frames I have all have issues. I never ever want to be in that position again and, I’ve said this before in the 9/9 discussion we had a few months ago that resulted in me lowering my YZ to ensure class legality even when some told me not to bother as they won’t check, I would never deliberately present a bike that did not comply or worse, was cheating. That fact alone made it harder for me to accept the scrutineers decision and inability to be flexible.
In closing (a long response Freaky but one that I needed to post so I thank you for prompting me to finish building my bridge), I again repeat that the situation wasn’t good for either myself or the scrutineers who I tried to negotiate with. In the end it was simply better I walk away and let them get on with their jobs.
This event was the 6th race meeting I have entered since rediscovering a VMX passion 3 years ago with a ride at a QVMX day at Coles Creek. I don’t possess a network of friends or contacts in the sport and I also don’t possess an understanding of the people or the sports past or even a great deal of knowledge on the sport itself but maybe that will come in time. Like I said in an earlier post on this subject, I learnt a lot last weekend.
And finally, I say this to everyone reading this post (if you have stuck it out this long) can we leave this issue alone now. I do not wish this to become any more of an issue than it already has and I certainly do not wish anyone’s name/s to be included for better or worse. Anyone wanting to take exception to anything I have written above please take it off forum and send me a PM.
Cheers
Craig
-
Wow! If that TM was still within its travel limits, one would surely consider a '75 model as a roll-on from the '74 model !!!!!!!!
In these times of depleting fields and the family environment of classic mx, one would expect everyone to be included in the day and leave it open to rider protests; should any other racer feel the need!
Officials these days need to take care, I am seeing similar crap in modern mx and roadracing.
I forsee the same crap happening over the alloy swingarm on my RM125, it just stops me wanting to spend all the money to come along and race if attitudes are this way!
I just can't believe it! We are all a big family in this sport, the majority need to make a stand to stop it all going downhill. If the rules need to be changed then everyone should speak up!
-
when i say length simo, i mean from where the mounts are.
Yes just get a 74 frame and all will transfer over.
I rode a 75 TM in pre 78, totally out gunned, but thats the rule and im happy to ride there. If you put it in pre 75 and stuck a decent rider on it like Melvin's kid then its not going to be fair how ever you cut it. You just cant ask bikes to be allowed in cause of the rider other wise you would have to Grade the riders as well.
Like you said put it down to an experiance and plan now for Canberra !
-
Simo, post up some photo's of your 74 frames and lets see what your up against.
-
Wow! If that TM was still within its travel limits, one would surely consider a '75 model as a roll-on from the '74 model !!!!!!!!
In these times of depleting fields and the family environment of classic mx, one would expect everyone to be included in the day and leave it open to rider protests; should any other racer feel the need!
Officials these days need to take care, I am seeing similar crap in modern mx and roadracing.
I forsee the same crap happening over the alloy swingarm on my RM125, it just stops me wanting to spend all the money to come along and race if attitudes are this way!
I just can't believe it! We are all a big family in this sport, the majority need to make a stand to stop it all going downhill. If the rules need to be changed then everyone should speak up!
for one you need to distinguish the difference between a club day and the highest level of our sport being a national event with championships on the line.
Secondly Simo was further stuffed up because he was told he could 'ride up' a class in pre 78 250 instead which would have allowed him a ride but unlucky for Simo he had a bike for that class already. Double whammy! This year things really got stepped up in the eligibility stakes. Pretty much all pre78 bikes were measured up.
-
Wow! If that TM was still within its travel limits, one would surely consider a '75 model as a roll-on from the '74 model !!!!!!!!
In these times of depleting fields and the family environment of classic mx, one would expect everyone to be included in the day and leave it open to rider protests; should any other racer feel the need!
Officials these days need to take care, I am seeing similar crap in modern mx and roadracing.
I forsee the same crap happening over the alloy swingarm on my RM125, it just stops me wanting to spend all the money to come along and race if attitudes are this way!
I just can't believe it! We are all a big family in this sport, the majority need to make a stand to stop it all going downhill. If the rules need to be changed then everyone should speak up!
John a '75 TM250 frame has the shocks moved forward and they have a claimed 5.8" rear wheel travel, Simo's bike looks to have a '75 frame with a '74 swingarm.
Myself and plenty of others had alloy swingarms on '77 RM's without a problem.. why people think you can't use them has got me forked.
-
Simo, post up some photo's of your 74 frames and lets see what your up against.
Okay Geoff here goes. First the current bike with 75 model frame:
Gratuitous shot of bike because I think she look stunning wearing her new MX treads ;D
(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a438/Simo63/DSCF1635.jpg)
Top Shock Mount (note the corrosion under the powder coating. This is why I hate powder coating as I mentioned somewhere else when someone was asking whether to paint or powdercoat). Note the frame curves around 2 inches below where it meets the frame rail under the seat. This is the only difference between 74 and 75 model TM frames I believe and results in the shocks being moved around 1/2 inch forward :
(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a438/Simo63/DSCF1679.jpg)
Lower Shock Mount:
(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a438/Simo63/DSCF1680.jpg)
Best Frame I have:
(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a438/Simo63/DSCF1672.jpg)
But has issues in this area including a hole in the frame (easy fix I know) but has had other crap welded on and one of those welded on bits has completely ruined the brake pedal stop. Also has a few other issues but is the best candidate I have at the moment:
(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a438/Simo63/DSCF1673.jpg)
It’s frame number:
(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a438/Simo63/DSCF1675.jpg)
The frame I was actually building before realising I was running out of time and buying the ex Vergotis TM. But note that the rear sub frame, whilst looking factory stock to me, is completely different to all the other TM frames I have. Instead of running reasonably parallel and then turning 90 degrees behind the seat and over the rear mudguard, it seems to rise to that same point but in a straight line ... looks factory welds to me but definitely not consistent with the other bikes. Likely that if I had of finished this one not knowing it was different the result would have been the same. So I assume it’s no good for my purposes:
(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a438/Simo63/DSCF1676.jpg)
It’s frame number:
(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a438/Simo63/DSCF1678.jpg)
And finally, the one I mentioned that had been badly butchered. Worthy of a picture if only to see how badly it’s been turdinated:
(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a438/Simo63/DSCF1671.jpg)
Now, an interesting thing on the swingarm. I have confirmed the swingarm fitted to the ex JV bike is the same length as any of the other ones (just over 500mm from pivot centre to the end) but it looks like the mount is in a different spot as shown in the pictures:
Ex JV Bike:
(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a438/Simo63/DSCF1680.jpg)
And another one that looks completely unmolested in any way (ie not strengthened or anything):
(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a438/Simo63/DSCF1683.jpg)
Notice how the ex JV one has the mount in front of the end of the swingarm tube whereas the other one it seems to be behind it? I guess if the 75 frame leant the shock a ½ inch or so forward then moving the lower mount on the swingarm forward would straighten the shock up again (ie reduce the “lay-down effect”? So probably it’s in the same position as it would be on a standard 74 frame after all this.
Anyway that’s what I have to work with at the moment. I would like to get the bike going so I can enter the next race QVMX meeting at Biddadaba in a couple of weeks but I really want to hold out and get the best frame that I can that cannot be questioned in any way.
-
Simo that's a '74 swingarm, the '75 is moved up a couple of inches.. See below
(http://i1208.photobucket.com/albums/cc374/JohnnyO31/Johnsifonepics-1.jpg)
-
Now I look hard at the bike I'm with Johnny O...it looks to be a '75 frame with a '74 swingarm. I know rules are rules but I'd have let the poor bugger ride. :-[
-
Simo that's a '74 swingarm, the '75 is moved up a couple of inches.. See below
(http://i1208.photobucket.com/albums/cc374/JohnnyO31/Johnsifonepics-1.jpg)
Thanks for the picture JohnnyO, definately a 74 swingarm but has it been illegally modifed though? Or is the other swing arm (the one that looks unmodified) froma 73 or earlier?
-
Now I look hard at the bike I'm with Johnny O...it looks to be a '75 frame with a '74 swingarm. I know rules are rules but I'd have let the poor bugger ride. :-[
Thanks Firko. I have no doubt the scrutineers were right in claiming to be a 75 frame particularly after one of them pointed out that the frame number (or engine number for that matter) started with the year of production and since the frame number is 50073 I couldn't argue with them on that point and I didn't. A low number, does that make it the 73rd frame made in 1975?
Anyway it's no good to me so if anyone wants to buy a nice 1975 TM250 frame, send me a PM.
-
Simo, I've been on the receiving end of the old ineligibility stick myself so I know a bit about how you feel. I also know that once you've fixed and start racing the old thing, this dark moment will pass from your memory, replaced by the good fun and cameraderie of being involved in the sport.
-
Here is the '74..not the best pic but may help.
(http://i1208.photobucket.com/albums/cc374/JohnnyO31/Johnsifonepics133.jpg)
-
Craig, the TM frame (TM250-45018) with the straight rear loop is stock. The frame number ID's it as a 1973 TM250K.
-
replaced by the good fun and cameraderie of being involved in the sport.
I hope so Firko because that's one of the things I love most about our sport and why I had my 10 year old son with me last weekend to introduce him to the wonderful world of VMX. And also why I'm keen to not get personal in any way with this so that relationships aren't permanently damaged. As disappointing as the whole episode is, I've learnt a bit and I do look forward to happier times.
-
I agree that there has to be some rules but 'if' the bike in question did have 4" travel, then I think it should have been left up to the fellow competitors to put in a protest; which they wouldn't if the gent was going to run mid field or worse! That way everyone is happy.
Judging from the above pics, with the top mount moved forward, and the much further forward swingarm mount, I'd expect there to be more than 4" travel.
Sure if I finished second to a '75 TM250 with 4 1/4" travel on the rear end, in a National race, I would protest, and the officials should uphold it. But if I finish 15th and he was ahead of me .... stiff shit.
At least the guy gets a ride, hasn't wasted a ton of money entering and driving there and the winner of the race then beat a larger field.
Then if the guy wants to start winning ....... re-stamp that frame number LOL ;-)
-
It was a National Title event, if we don't have a set of rules and people to police them then it'll be anarchy.
Flexibility is fine at a club event, I think Simo has handled it sensibly, as dissapointing and confusing as it was.
-
Craig, the TM frame (TM250-45018) with the straight rear loop is stock. The frame number ID's it as a 1973 TM250K.
How does that work Doc? I was told by the experts on the weekend that the first number is the year of manufacture. Sure that designates that frame as a 1974 model?
Not wanting to argue, just learn and understand ;D
-
There has been times when winning a club-day has been as important to me as a State or National title; it doesn't matter what level of racing it is, if there are rules, we must all abide by them all the time.
I'm saying in an instant like this it would make more sense (and keep riders happier) to take the initial decision away from the official and put in the hands of the fellow competitors, then 'if' a rider protests, then an official can uphold it.
That way the guys gets to ride and it takes the pressure of the nazi official who will only have to uphold a riders protest IF anyone does protest!
-
Craig, the TM frame (TM250-45018) with the straight rear loop is stock. The frame number ID's it as a 1973 TM250K.
How does that work Doc? I was told by the experts on the weekend that the first number is the year of manufacture. Sure that designates that frame as a 1974 model?
Not wanting to argue, just learn and understand ;D
Vintage Suzuki's serial no page has some 73's and 75's starting in 4, my opinion is that it is just a coincidence that all 74's start with 4. the other cc numbers are all over the place.
Model Frame Number Engine Number
1971 TM400R 10001 - 15999 10001 - 15999
1972 TM250J 10001 - 34738 10001 - 34749
TM400J 16600 - 30000 16600 - 30005
1973 TM125K 10001 - 20578 10001 - 20602
TM250K 34739 - 41776 34750 - 41823
TM400K 30001 - 33481 30006 - 33499
1974 TM100L 10001 - 17205 10001 - 17225
TM125L 20579 - 43174 20603 - 44498
TM250L 41777 - 49510 41824 - 49588
TM400L 33482 - 40917 33500 - 40956
1975 TM75M 20705 - 27487 20720 - 27777
TM100M 17206 - Up To RM100A 17226 - Up To RM100A
TM125M 43175 - Up To RM125M 44499 - Up To RM125M
TM250M 49511 - Up To RM250A 49589 - Up To RM250A
TM400M 40918 - Up To RM370A 40957 - Up To RM370A
You will notice that a new engine size started at 10001 and they just continued on from there.
Not wanting to argue :-\ just an observation
-
Vintage Suzuki's serial no page has some 73's and 75's starting in 4, my opinion is that it is just a coincidence that all 74's start with 4. the other cc numbers are all over the place.
Model Frame Number Engine Number
1971 TM400R 10001 - 15999 10001 - 15999
1972 TM250J 10001 - 34738 10001 - 34749
TM400J 16600 - 30000 16600 - 30005
1973 TM125K 10001 - 20578 10001 - 20602
TM250K 34739 - 41776 34750 - 41823
TM400K 30001 - 33481 30006 - 33499
1974 TM100L 10001 - 17205 10001 - 17225
TM125L 20579 - 43174 20603 - 44498
TM250L 41777 - 49510 41824 - 49588
TM400L 33482 - 40917 33500 - 40956
1975 TM75M 20705 - 27487 20720 - 27777
TM100M 17206 - Up To RM100A 17226 - Up To RM100A
TM125M 43175 - Up To RM125M 44499 - Up To RM125M
TM250M 49511 - Up To RM250A 49589 - Up To RM250A
TM400M 40918 - Up To RM370A 40957 - Up To RM370A
You will notice that a new engine size started at 10001 and they just continued on from there.
Not wanting to argue :-\ just an observation
Thanks for posting that Nobby, but nowhere does it list any TM250 frame with a 5 at the beginning of the number? Mine is 50073 but it isn't listed at all, even in 1975?
-
Looking at that table of numbers it doesn't seem that the frame number exactly matches the year, that is definitely coincidence. However, a number beginning with a 5 is definitely a 75 model - that is, any frame number that is after 49511 but isn't RM250A will be a 75.
I'll guess then that your bike with 50073 is the 562nd 1975 bike built...
-
Graeme is on the money. Suzuki engine and frame numbers don't follow any set pattern for year models (only numerical)
Engine and frame numbers never match either. (only ever saw one instance of matching numbers and that's on an RM370 in the US)
-
Thanks guys, I'll use the above to check the frame numbers I have and tag each frame with a year so I don't forget.
Looks like I do have one pretty good 74 frame (with a bit of grinding and welding around the brake cable area) but I'm still looking for a mint unmolested one so might wait a couple of weeks before starting the deconstruction and reconstruction process.
-
John - general consensus never works - we all know that and there are a million and one examples throughout everywhere to show you why. And to claim an official is a Nazi because they followed the rules is a bit rough. I feel for Simo - regardless of where you come from it is expensive - but as has been said this is not a club ride day - it's the Nats. If this was allowed what does that say to every one else that spent many hours and dollars making sure their bikes complied. I feel sorry for Simo because he didn't know before hand. I was fortunate because with my YZB there was plenty of assistance letting me know what I had to do to make it eligible - I think that is the point that was missed here. But it certainly isn't a scrutineering fault.
If I have read you comment wrong I apologise but I certainly don't think the scrutineers/system is at fault here.
-
Simo, post up some photo's of your 74 frames and lets see what your up against.
Lower Shock Mount:
(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a438/Simo63/DSCF1680.jpg)
Mate looking at the above photo it very much looks like a '75 swingarm that has been modified to look like a '74. The space between the axle slot and tube joint, position of the shock relative to the axle and the threaded hole location seems to indicate a modified '75 arm.
Really sorry to hear about your issue at the Nats and I have to comend you on the way you have handled it as I am not sure that I would have been the same.
The really strange thing is that the '75 TM250M is not legal even when modified to replicate a '74 yet my understanding is you can run a centre port TS400 and all is OK but unfortunately they are the rules.
I have to agree that the Scrutineers are not to blame here
-
At last years DT titles in Brisbane, a friend of mine turned up with what he had purchased as a complete and original 1977 RM 250, it was picked up at scrutineering that the forks were actually off a 78 model, I'm not sure what the difference is but it would hardly make a difference on DT but thems the rules.
He was allowed to ride up a class and he ended up winning it.
I have no doubt we'll be talking about yet another example after next years Nats.
-
John - general consensus never works - we all know that and there are a million and one examples throughout everywhere to show you why. And to claim an official is a Nazi because they followed the rules is a bit rough. I feel for Simo - regardless of where you come from it is expensive - but as has been said this is not a club ride day - it's the Nats. If this was allowed what does that say to every one else that spent many hours and dollars making sure their bikes complied. I feel sorry for Simo because he didn't know before hand. I was fortunate because with my YZB there was plenty of assistance letting me know what I had to do to make it eligible - I think that is the point that was missed here. But it certainly isn't a scrutineering fault.
If I have read you comment wrong I apologise but I certainly don't think the scrutineers/system is at fault here.
Thanks :-) nah I wasn't having a go at the official, he was just doing his job, maybe I was steering my concern to the rulebook? What is a 'Nazi' but someone that follows through on the rulings of a higher power, whether it be wrong or right. As I said previously, when I am racing it doesn't matter what level the racing is (club or National), I abide to the letter of the rules (when you're a big mouth like me, you have to abide lol). I was just thinking that it takes the pressure off a scrutineering official if eligibility concerns were initiated by rider protests, and then followed up by a scrutineering official with the rule book.
The 99% of riders are still going to adhere to the rules, for fear of a rider backlash, so it wouldn't get out of hand.
That way, if it's a petty matter that no one is worried about, it doesn't become an issue.
Anyhow, enough of my crap, back to the frame ;-) ........
-
Lower Shock Mount:
(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a438/Simo63/DSCF1680.jpg)
Mate looking at the above photo it very much looks like a '75 swingarm that has been modified to look like a '74. The space between the axle slot and tube joint, position of the shock relative to the axle and the threaded hole location seems to indicate a modified '75 arm.
I agree Montynut, it looks different to the other swing arms I have so I suspect that it's been modified (aside from the strengthening rib) in terms of shock position. I don't want to take the chance that it's not right so won't use it on the reconstructed bike.
A couple of questions:
1. Am I allowed to strengthen the swing arm with bracing?
2. Can anyone identify the shock in this picture? There are no identifying marks on it and it's previously been repainted so I have NFI what it's from. It is rebuilable if that helps.
3. What length shock do I need to comply to the regs with an standard/unmolested frame and swingarm?
Thanks
-
Firstly Simo / Craig has handled this whole incident with dignity and integrity and huge respect to him for that . Mate your new to the sport but with your attitude you will bring a hell of a lot to the sport and all power to you :)
Get that bike sorted and get out there and enjoy it .
Quote "
Myself and plenty of others had alloy swingarms on '77 RM's without a problem.. why people think you can't use them has got me forked."
John i think the concensus is that after market arms are ok , its the optional Suzuki arm that for some Dog unknown reason the officials wont accept , no matter what evidence is produced ??? I truly believe this issue has become a matter of ego ;)
Quote " And to claim an official is a Nazi because they followed the rules is a bit rough. " Probably is a bit rough , but i wonder if the bike would have got through Scrutineering with different scrutineers (ie less Suzuki product Knowledge) ???
As has been said the bike has been scrutineered many times before with no problems , but in this case it was a problem ??? Consistentcy and continuity would add credibility to the whole scrutineering process .
Quote " The really strange thing is that the '75 TM250M is not legal even when modified to replicate a '74 yet my understanding is you can run a centre port TS400 and all is OK but unfortunately they are the rules."
That is a very strange one ??? TS 400A 1976 / 77 different frame , different motor but its a flow on ??? I actually think that particular flow on rule is a good one :) but if you modify your 75 TM to 74 specs wheres the problem ??? there are a few others that should be considered flow on models ie 1975 / 76 KX 125 (only the 125 ) as there is bugger all difference to the 74 model .
On the day the official can only apply what he interprets to be the understanding of the rule in the book, if he has a knowledge of the product then he will pick up things others in his position would possibly miss ??? but i doubt there is an official out there who knows every detail of every make model that gets presented .
Quote "
Vintage Suzuki's serial no page has some 73's and 75's starting in 4, my opinion is that it is just a coincidence that all 74's start with 4. the other cc numbers are all over the place.
Model Frame Number Engine Number
1971 TM400R 10001 - 15999 10001 - 15999
1972 TM250J 10001 - 34738 10001 - 34749
TM400J 16600 - 30000 16600 - 30005
1973 TM125K 10001 - 20578 10001 - 20602
TM250K 34739 - 41776 34750 - 41823
TM400K 30001 - 33481 30006 - 33499
1974 TM100L 10001 - 17205 10001 - 17225
TM125L 20579 - 43174 20603 - 44498
TM250L 41777 - 49510 41824 - 49588
TM400L 33482 - 40917 33500 - 40956
1975 TM75M 20705 - 27487 20720 - 27777
TM100M 17206 - Up To RM100A 17226 - Up To RM100A
TM125M 43175 - Up To RM125M 44499 - Up To RM125M
TM250M 49511 - Up To RM250A 49589 - Up To RM250A
TM400M 40918 - Up To RM370A 40957 - Up To RM370A "
While the vintage Suzuki list is very helpfull i doubt weather it would carry any weight with officials at events. Its a list compiled by a Vintage parts supplier and while i dont doubt its accuracy i wouldn't take it as gospel .
I do believe that Moms needs a serious tidy up and that maybe Lozzas log book system has some merit ;)
-
The shocks look like period Mulholland that have been painted Suzuki yelow instead of the orange/red they would have been originally.
John I am afraid your definition of NAZI is just possibly a little broad ::).
-
Yeh I'd call the shock 'Boge Mulholland's that were originally orange with alloy finning.
-
here's a few more ID charts, the 2nd is from a Suzuki publication ;)
https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=86267C09A3452A71!4758&authkey=!APOaaYSXU3CTYy0 (https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=86267C09A3452A71!4758&authkey=!APOaaYSXU3CTYy0)
https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=86267C09A3452A71!787&authkey=!AO69YbI8BFUme1E (https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=86267C09A3452A71!787&authkey=!AO69YbI8BFUme1E)
-
Doc thats great and to you and I and most of the known universe its proof a plenty :D
But would it stand up as evidence with event officials ??? You know yourself with the Satanist Optional RM B arm ::) undeniable evidence of their existance in 1977 has been produced by yourself and others :) BUT as far as im aware those who hold the big stick are still in denial ;)
I just wouldn't want anyone to feel that whats presented on this or any other forum will automaticly stand up to officials .
Its all very well having a Moms ( and an ambiguous one at that ) but on the day you have to convince officialls (who generally remain silent between events ) that your interpretation of the rule is correct ;)
-
Craig, the TM frame (TM250-45018) with the straight rear loop is stock. The frame number ID's it as a 1973 TM250K.
How does that work Doc? I was told by the experts on the weekend that the first number is the year of manufacture. Sure that designates that frame as a 1974 model?
Not wanting to argue, just learn and understand ;D
Nope they never said that. What They said was having a 5 in your frame makes it the 75 model frame. Dont read into it.
What the stament meant was a 5 means 75 frame, its not a year stamping its a serial number that denotes the frame was model released out of the period. IF it had a 4 and any combinations of serial numbers before 9510 with it it would be a pre 75 model. iTs just a simple cut off alarm number to say 75. ( if you see that dreaded 5 prefix you ask questions)
its also my impression that a 75 swing arm wont fit in a 74 model frame and vice versa ( hence why the 75 swing arm was made to look 74 by way of moving the mount to the rear plate.)
Simo i dont think you will be able to fit the arm you currently have anyway to a 74 complient frame, so you wont have to worry about it.
-
Craig, the TM frame (TM250-45018) with the straight rear loop is stock. The frame number ID's it as a 1973 TM250K.
How does that work Doc? I was told by the experts on the weekend that the first number is the year of manufacture. Sure that designates that frame as a 1974 model?
Not wanting to argue, just learn and understand ;D
Nope they never said that. What They said was having a 5 in your frame makes it the 75 model frame. Dont read into it.
What the stament meant was a 5 means 75 frame, its not a year stamping its a serial number that denotes the frame was model released out of the period. IF it had a 4 and any combinations of serial numbers before 9510 with it it would be a pre 75 model. iTs just a simple cut off alarm number to say 75. ( if you see that dreaded 5 prefix you ask questions)
its also my impression that a 75 swing arm wont fit in a 74 model frame and vice versa ( hence why the 75 swing arm was made to look 74 by way of moving the mount to the rear plate.)
Simo i dont think you will be able to fit the arm you currently have anyway to a 74 complient frame, so you wont have to worry about it.
The reason I said that above is that when the frame was identified as being 1975 (by virtue of the first digit being a 5) the scrutineer stated the bike was a 1975 model made to look like a 1974. The expert (and I wish I knew who he was) then checked the engine number and stated it was a 1974 model engine because it had a 4 as the first engine number. The next few minutes are a blurr to be honest as people were saying things all over the place and I was too shocked and embarrassed to focus clearly but I definitely remember that declaration.
Based on the numbers that Doc posted (thanks again for that) it is obvious to me now that even having 4 in my engine number doesn’t exclude the engine being 1975 vintage and if that is the case then the whole lot is going in the corner of the shed and won’t be looked at for a long time. Either that or the scrap bin.
And the previous owner has assured me that the swingarm is a 1974 one that came from the spare frame I got with the bike and that is definitely a 1974 model based on the number. In fact it’s the best frame I have at the moment and would be the best reconstruction option. If there is any doubt on the swingarm then I won’t use it.
-
75 model TM motors are OK., just swap it all over to the 74 frame and ride it.... if in doubt take fotos and send it to the eligibility scruitineer prior to the nations for comment. he may advise you if anything obvious
-
You know yourself with the Satanist Optional RM B arm ::) undeniable evidence of their existance in 1977 has been produced by yourself and others :) BUT as far as im aware those who hold the big stick are still in denial ;)
You seem to be a ’glass ¾ empty’ sort of guy when it comes to officialdom Bill. ;D
The fact that the bike has been passed through previously isn’t a slight on the rule book, it just mean the scrutineer either didn’t pick it up or decided to turn a blind eye.
I is rumoured that the optional B swingarm is kept out of the rule book not because the rule book doesn’t refer to any specific part but purely to give Suzuki owners the shits. :D
I think someone said something once about not pleasing all the people all the time…
But enough of that shit, Simo is trying to move forward.
The Bastardised frame…
Like many other frames I think it looks worse that what it really is.
There are bloody horrible bits of shit welded to the tubes from the swingarm pivot to the shock mounts but these tubes are in the wrong place anyway so you would simply cut them out and replace the whole lot.
The shock mounts being pressed out would be the hardest part to reproduce.
As with any frame the deciding factor on repairing such a frame depends wholly on the availability of replacements. A rare frame you would get fixed, a common frame you would replace.
Seeing as you have better frames there is no point doing anything with it now but don’t pitch it. Old frames can come in handy to steal brackets from in order to repair other frames. You may even come across a good frame with bastardized engine mounts that someone may be able to make a good frame from the two.
The better frame…
That small part I saw near the right side swingarm pivot is nothing.
An unmolested frame would be rare for any brand and from what I saw from your photo this frame looks okay.
Not sure what the brake pedal parts are supposed to look like but you could maybe steal some good bits from the other frames?
If you grind those welds off don’t go all the way with a grinding wheel, just use a grinding wheel to take it down as close as possible to the frame tube without touching the frame tubes.
A common mistake is to grind the lot down leaving deep grinding marks all over the frame tube that either look horrible through the paint or you have to sand down the tubes thickness to get rid of them.
Aim for getting down to 0.5 – 1.0mm from the tube and then finish with a sanding disc. Sanding discs require a rubber backing plate on your angle grinder.
Forget those stupid flap discs, there only any good for taking off rust or paint. If you try to take a weld down with a flap disc you will find yourself taking material away from either side of the weld as well
Try an #80 grit sanding disc and don’t be tight with them and let them get too used. A overly used disc will also take material away from either side of the weld while you’re getting rid of the welds.
Carefully rotate the sanding disc around the tube while holding it flat as possible over the tube. Using the edge of the disc will leave flat spots.
Anyone not familiar with these sanding discs I recommend getting a scrap piece of tube, putting some welds on & then sanding them down.
There is no substitute for experience
As for powder coat lifting, that can be many things.
# Not put on properly in the same way some painters don’t apply paint properly.
# It may not have been blasted or cleaned properly first.
# the area may have been subject to a repair and painted over.
Whatever, just don’t be in a hurry to get some new colour on it.
Make sure all fittings are right, no stripped threads etc.
Even if you have to do a dry run assembly first to check everything.
I have come across a few nicely painted frames over the years that have had imperfections that weren’t noticed and couldn’t be rectified without damaging the paint
-
Based on the numbers that Doc posted (thanks again for that) it is obvious to me now that even having 4 in my engine number doesn’t exclude the engine being 1975 vintage and if that is the case then the whole lot is going in the corner of the shed and won’t be looked at for a long time. Either that or the scrap bin.
The numbers themselves don't rule out parts, the numbers are only used to confirm parts.
If the parts are the same then the numbers mean nothing and from what I understand all the TM engines were identical, only the frames and swingarms were different.
-
You know yourself with the Satanist Optional RM B arm ::) undeniable evidence of their existance in 1977 has been produced by yourself and others :) BUT as far as im aware those who hold the big stick are still in denial ;)
You seem to be a ’glass ¾ empty’ sort of guy when it comes to officialdom Bill. ;D
The fact that the bike has been passed through previously isn’t a slight on the rule book, it just mean the scrutineer either didn’t pick it up or decided to turn a blind eye.
Just to Clarify ::) I have no problem with officialdom , i have been an official in many roles at motorcycle events for many years inc being a scrutineer ( although never an eligibilty scrutineer).
I just believe that if you are going to be in a role then take the role seriously . Your comment "it just mean the scrutineer either didn’t pick it up or decided to turn a blind eye." just shows what a flawed and usless system it is when humans are used to run it ;)
-
Just race it in UN zud- 6 basic rules and go racing
-
Craig, I have overlayed the 2 arms to show what the main difference is in an unaltered arm between years
(http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i180/mutchoo/001-8.jpg)
-
and Freaky is right, the '74 arm won't bolt straight onto the '75 without mods, 74's have a 12mm pivot and '75 are 14mm ;)
-
But has issues in this area including a hole in the frame (easy fix I know) but has had other crap welded on and one of those welded on bits has completely ruined the brake pedal stop. Also has a few other issues but is the best candidate I have at the moment:
(http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a438/Simo63/DSCF1673.jpg)
So what is the brake pedal stop supposed to look like?
What are the other issues?
That hole and bits welded on I would call very minor.
-
Firstly Simo / Craig has handled this whole incident with dignity and integrity and huge respect to him for that . Mate your new to the sport but with your attitude you will bring a hell of a lot to the sport and all power to you
Amen to that. That is the thing that has struck me most about this whole saga. Good luck with it all Simo63.
Tex
-
Simo, good on you for going about this in a grown up manner, what GMC says is true, they are only minor problems to fix and if you cant or dont know how to fix them then bring them down for the Biddadaba meet in a couple of weeks and i'll look at it for you. It's pretty easy to swap bits and peices on frames. Now, I dont know if you have thought about this but old mate sold you a 74 TM250...a bike that fits in the pre 75 class, what you got was a 75 TM250....a pre 78 class bike and worth way less than a 74 (youd be lucky to get a grand for a 75 in any condition). I dont beleive that the owner didnt know this having owned the bike for so long and racing it, somebody would have spotted it, if it was me I'd be ringing him up , explaining the situation and asking for some money back. At the end of the day it cost you near on $200 to enter the Nats plus the other costs, the embarrasment of the srutineers knocking your bike and the cost to make it a geniune pre 75 race bike. I think it's definately worth a call.
-
Go for the full refund and start a new project, lotsa genuine 74 TM250 out there for less than $3000K.
I also dont think you have a "RH" gearbox in there either as you eluded to earlier was sold as having. MY understanding is you cant make a RH anything fit inside a TM case, there a completely differant fish.
-
Yea, I didnt think of that aspect Freaky, who knows what gearbox is actually in it, I've seen the RH motors and there way diferent to a TM. a full refund would probably be the go.
-
Probably 75 TM g'box - closer ratios than 74 TM
-
Hi everyone. Firstly I want to say thanks for the support and kind words. What happened last weekend was difficult at the time for myself to accept but importantly it was also difficult for the scrutineers, clerk of course and organisers as well. But that is all behind us now and I for one am now well and truly over it and looking to move forward.
I did speak with the previous owner of the bike on the Friday after it was initially identified as a 75 frame as it seemed logical to me to call him to talk about the problem. John was as shocked as I was and I believe that he genuinely didn't know it was a 75 frame. He even followed up with some information later that evening to try and provide supporting information. From what I understand he has never had any issues with eligibility or scrutineering so I have to believe him. In fact throughout my dealings with John, it has been my impression that he has been honest and straight up front with me about the bike. Subsequently I won't be going down the path of requesting any refunds from him. I am happy with what I paid for the bike considering the superb condition of it, the inclusion of the rare RH parts and the spares I received.
John advises me that he sourced the NOS RH Barrel (and head?? .. I keep forgetting to ask him about the head) from someone in NZ and I'm certain he paid quite a lot of money for it at the time. I’m not sure what that would be worth but between that and the rest of the bike, you can see there has been a lot of money spent on it. One of the many things that really attracted me to the bike was the RH cylinder because as I understand it, it has transformed the bikes power. The alleged RH gearbox was not something I treasured at the time of purchase because I (ignorantly) thought all MX’ers had close ratio boxes. Well they all did in my era which is more 80’s. It’s only now that I understand the pre 75 TM’s had a wider ratio box [insert blushing here] and that this bike has a close ratio box of some kind.
I have heard and read a couple of times now that the claimed RH gearbox can’t be because they don’t fit. Now I can’t guarantee it is an RH gearbox and if people more knowledgeable that I state it doesn’t fit then I have to believe them. But what I do know is that I received a spare engine with the bike PLUS another spare gear cluster set. Now John has told me the spare gearbox set is the one removed from this motor when the RH gearbox internals were put in. So it seems likely that something about this box is different to original. As I said above, I now understand that pre 75 TM’s have a wider ratio box and that 75 and onward TM’s had a closer ratio box so it could be very possible that the gears in the bike are 75 TM. Or maybe there is some way to make RH gears fit? I don’t know but having ridden the bike (just the once unfortunately), I like the gear ratios and I can tell you that the gearbox is one of the nicest gearboxes I have ever used. It is so precise in it’s action it’s not funny. Are they all like that??
Anyway, I’m happy with everything on this bike except the frame so I believe I can reconstruct it into the bike I always thought it was. And I still look forward to adding (or maybe now it is creating) it’s racing history.
Cheers
Craig
-
Stay with it Simo,rebuild around an earlier frame(Terry's got a complete bike floating around).Most of us here have been burned at some stage be it intensional or not (as in your case) all part of the rich tapestry of VMX.At least its not an Impala and will be a good thing when you've sorted it :D
-
Stay with it Simo,rebuild around an earlier frame(Terry's got a complete bike floating around).Most of us here have been burned at some stage be it intensional or not (as in your case) all part of the rich tapestry of VMX.At least its not an Impala and will be a good thing when you've sorted it :D
Thanks Paul ;).
Yes Terry called me yesterday asking if I wanted to watch Origin at his place with you guys over a few beers (but I had to work unfortunately) and let slip that he had a 74 TM iin the shed. He's a man of many surprises and talents is our Terry. Might have to chase him up on that .. see what he plans to do with it.
And you're right, not like it's a rusty Impala is it ::) Although if you think about it, it's simlar in a lot of ways though .. everything is fantastic except it has a flawed chassis. Actually it's too similar for my liking now I think about it ;D
But yeah, will stick with it and make it into the best bike it can be.
-
John was as shocked as I was and I believe that he genuinely didn't know it was a 75 frame.
Craig.......Knowing John and having scrutineered the bike in the 90's, I have no doubt that John knew nothing of the bikes ilegality either. My old memory's pretty foggy but I'd be pretty sure that he'd bought the bike from another racer and then set about improving it with the fancy paint and RH bits. If that's the case both John, you and everyone who scrutineered and raced against it may have been misled by an earlier owner of the bike. Whatever the truth is, it's in the past so move on and do what you have to do to get the bike back on the track.
John advises me that he sourced the NOS RH Barrel (and head?? .. I keep forgetting to ask him about the head) from someone in NZ and I'm certain he paid quite a lot of money for it at the time.
I'm almost certain John bought the RH parts from the late Barry Senn, a Kiwi collector who was good mates with a number of forum members. Barry was tragically killed in a race accident a few years ago. Anyone who knew how much he treasured his beloved RH's and RN's would know that Barry would have asked really big numbers to part with RH top end and transmission.
I have heard and read a couple of times now that the claimed RH gearbox can’t be because they don’t fit.
Ironically, the bloke who can settle that argument happens to be the same bloke who knocked the bike back in scrutineering ::). Testing my old memory again, I seem to remember a conversation with Dave where he told me that the RH gearbox can be fitted but with a lot of machine work. I may have imagined that conversation though so don't take it as gospel ;D.
s I said above, I now understand that pre 75 TM’s have a wider ratio box and that 75 and onward TM’s had a closer ratio box so it could be very possible that the gears in the bike are 75 TM.
The TM has a closer ration trans to the TS but it's still a lot wider than other bikes in its class. The '75 TM may well have had shorter ratios but it seems a silly thing for them to do for a model that was released purely to use up old TM stock prior to the RM's release.
-
One final post to close the chapter on the issues around this bike. Over the weekend I have successfully transferred the running gear into a pre 75 class legal 1974 TM250 frame. And despite my best attempts, it lives ;D
It's first race in it's new guise will be the Connondale Classic in a couple of weeks time. I can't wait ;D
Another learning firmly pasted into the book.
-
Look forward to that thing being fired in anger! :D
-
So you double checked the frame number starts with a 498 or under huh.......... just to be sure