Points in case B40 BSA for Pre65

[Momus]

I am looking at a late B40 BSA powered Pre 65 project. I know there are no issues running the early distributor type version of these engines, but has there been a resolution, or is there a consensus or precedent for using the non dissy, points-in-case version in this era? Thanks, Marcus.

[bazza]

think there was only w model (war) and was argued about? or was it "M" military version

[big mac]

The side points B40 has been knocked back before on the grounds that the engine was not manufactured in 1964, the B44 GP suffers the same fate even thou it was on display at the Earls Court show in 64. Who's to know how the winds of thought may have changed so best of luck in your quest.
Rory

[Momus]

The windsock is a bit limp.

[djr]

The side points B40 has been knocked back before on the grounds that the engine was not manufactured in 1964, the B44 GP suffers the same fate even thou it was on display at the Earls Court show in 64. Who's to know how the winds of thought may have changed so best of luck in your quest.
Rory



As you say there was a B44GP  on display at the November 1964 Earls Court Show. 
The problem is that it is generally accepted that BSA didnt start - making & selling them to the public  in 1964 , which you would think would be a fair requirement for calling a model - PRE 1965
this has been discussed all around the world in classic racing ,
and there are 2 sides to the argument- do you accept a model if a prototype/worksbike existed before a cut-off date , or do you use the actual date of the start of production bikes being made/sold.

( I think the same argument has cropped up about the Bultaco Sherpa that Sammy Miller rode late in 1964 )

However i think  there should be some - flexibility / common sense / re-writing of history   , as time goes on and getting people out on track maybe should be the priority

[huskibul]

  There is a 7 page thread on page 3 of the british section under  jeff smiths bsa , from a few years back -might be of interest & good luck

[Momus]

211kawasaki
Guest

Re: The Infamous Vern Grayson Cheney Triumph Case

« Reply #77 on: July 22, 2011, 08:48:40 AM »

Quote

The new rules are to go via the Board of MA so until then Im not going to comment specifically on the new rules but I will comment on the B44.
Some years ago the commission created pre 68 unit and pre unit classes with the view to see if the take up of this class would foster and grow an alternative to the pre 65 arrangements and the fact is no one supported it until we took it out of the book. I would have to go back over the corespondance but I seem to remember that I have mail saying there isnt a snow balls chance in hell we are going to run that class - we want B44s in pre 65. The pre 68 rule was taken after a look at the UK experience and the success of same; why why why would we want to revisit that when there was an earthquake of non support for the attempt to create a new class that was so clearly rejected?
The new rules (should they be passed) will not cater for the B44 or any other bike that was made after the 1964 model year unless considered a follow on - a distributor B40 is an example of a follow on, a points B40 isnt.
That the proposal will allow a frame to be essentially free is an attempt to allow riders to get an engine, find some period hubs, forks, tripples and make a bike fit the suspension criteria. It should be possible to do this cheaply and easily as the biggest hitch in building a bike was always questions over frames. We have just had Australian Champion classes at the CDT nats in pre 60 and pre 65, there is growing support for these bikes. If I was going to build a bike I would build (say) a B33 make a light copy of a Matchless frame get an AMC gearbox, some Royal Enfield forks find an alloy tank, make a seat that works and go racing. In pre 60 and pre 65!
On the B44 matter - as I have said before - while ever the B44 remains at best the 1965 model it will not compete in pre 64.
On the back of the attempts to placate the B44 riders with things like the pre 68 class -  rejected what are we to do? If the new rules get over the line it will need riders to support it, if no support I dont know what else to do.
211

This response from commissioner DT seems to have answered my question about points in case B40's.

[huskibul]

    Its fine that your happy with that -many were not ! And others keep heaping the b44 onto the b40 case ! For most the: (sidepoint b40 =pre 65) (b44=pre 70)  (b50 =pre 75) P.S you can make the distributor b40 go just as well as the sidepoint -just cost more $$

[big mac]

The fact is that the MOD took so long to approve the contract for the B40 that BSA no longer made distributor crankcases. so BSA said we'll give you the b44 MOD said no must be a 350 so they gave them a b44 bottom end with 350 barrel  and head so it is not a follow on model. With that said I wish it was as I have a rough rider in the shed that would love to be an MX'er.