Triumph Rat Motorcycle Forums banner

161 - 167 of 167 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
273 Posts
Discussion Starter #161
The ignition timing is sorted and it runs. Even the b/w and b/y wires are correctly connected. It needs strobing I think but that will have to wait.

Went back to basics and set the locating tool in the 38 deg BTDC slot on the flywheel. Rotor mark was on the 38 deg pointer. The magnets were about 20 degrees out - and I don't know how. Relocated the magnets and it ran straight away, and sounds very nice. Sorted the tick over and it'll sit there quite happily at 1000 rpm.

A few runs up and down the cul-de-sac, I can get 1st and 2nd but ran out of room. The brakes work, no obvious oil leaks. It's good to MOT I think. Fingers crossed. Swing arm bearing is new, so no play, the brakes work, the lights all work, the indicators work, the horn works, the engine does not blow smoke (I'd be annoyed if it did with new pistons, valves and valve guides), the wheels have been re-built and re-spoked, the wheel bearings are new, the steering head bearings are new taper bearings and there's no play at the headstock.

Have I missed anything for an MOT?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
273 Posts
Discussion Starter #163
I'm in the ride it sympathetically, but don't mollycoddle it, not far from home for a start, and listen and look for things that are not right camp. Gradually build up the miles and torque the head when it's supposed to be done. Even if it's a pain.

Looking forward to some long days out on this.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,593 Posts
Yep, a tank of short/medium runs, staying under 5,000 RPM, NEVER lugging the engine, and NEVER letting it idle below 1,000.

Oil change & re-torque (inspect for particles)

Then, another tank of regular riding but NOT to red line.

Oil change & inspection, re-torque, valve adjustment, and off you get.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
6,660 Posts
Hi Andy,

ignition timing is sorted and it runs. Even the b/w and b/y wires are correctly connected. It needs strobing I think but that will have to wait.

Went back to basics and set the locating tool in the 38 deg BTDC slot on the flywheel. Rotor mark was on the 38 deg pointer. The magnets were about 20 degrees out - and I don't know how. Relocated the magnets and it ran straight away, and sounds very nice. Sorted the tick over and it'll sit there quite happily at 1000 rpm.
(y) Excellent! I'm pleased it was such an easy final fix.

pity DVLA don't know their frames. They have declined to give me a new age-related reg based on the frame number (authenticated by the Owners Club (I am a member)) and have allocated it a DVLA VIN number,
They say they will give me an age-related plate if I get TOMCC to certify that all the major components are 1972/3 - which they are, and TOMCC are on the case on that. The frame number is clearly stamped, where it should be, and TOMCC have identified it as a correct factory number.
seems that DVLA just don't want people building bikes from old frames
Bit late to the party on this ... it could also be the 'system' DVLA has to ensure no one major component dictates the 'age' of a complete old vehicle - from their pov, right skill and time, nothing to say you couldn't have stuffed a new EFI Bonnie engine in a '73 frame, but without all the low-emission farkles a new EFI Bonnie has?

Afaict, it's mainly the Land-Rover - with a few Mini - enthusiasts we have to thank for the system. Certainly it's possible to build a brand-new Landy from 2019/20-made components; what the DVLA don't want is owners then claiming MOT/VED exemption based on a brand-new copy of a 40-year-old vehicle just happening to have a 40-year-old chassis number. Similarly (albeit some years ago), I found it was possible to buy brand-new (Austin/Morris/BL) Mini body shells ... into which you can (at least theoretically) fit a Honda Civic R engine (2 litres, EFI, blah).

If I understand the DVLA system correctly, each major component from the desired age-related period scores a certain number of points; if the the total number of points exceeds a certain threshold, the vehicle's eligible for an age-related VRM. Neither frame/chassis nor engine - say - from the desired age-related period score enough points on their own, but would together, say. Curiously (at least under the system as I saw it), if all of a vehicle's major components except engine or frame/chassis were from the desired age-related period, the collection would still score enough points for an age-related VRM ...

RH peg
was a bit more than finger tight all the way off - I had the pegs powder coated, there's no obvious coating in the thread but there must be just enough to make it stiff. Anyway, I had it on the bench and worked the nut and its stud (the nut is tight on the stud) in and out of the footpeg threaded hole until it'll go in and out all the way by hand.
Sorry it didn't occur to me earlier but another reason stud 'n' footrest threads could've been "stiff" is they're different threadforms:-

. As it's a stud, and you have to use a "Whit" spanner on the nut, the stud thread is (almost certainly) 1/2" Cycle.

. However, 1/2" Cycle and 1/2"UNF have many of the same specs. - major diameter obviously but also 20 tpi and 60-degree included angle at each peak and trough.

. Nevertheless, the two threadforms do have profile differences; if the footrest female thread is UNF, that could be another reason for stud and footrest being "stiff".

Regards,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
273 Posts
Discussion Starter #166
Suart,

DVLA have told me that they will give me an age-related plate based on the age of the newest major component (so frame, wheels, forks, engine and gearbox). That has to be certified by the TOMCC, and that's with the Registrar now. AFAIKT, everything is consistent with a late 72 manufacture date, other than the front m/g, which as you identified is a Harris Bonnie part - and that's not a major component. Clearly, the forks could be later, say 79 (?) but that does not preclude them from being a 72. The engine can't be much later as it's RH shift.

They gave me a new VIN, to be permanently attached at the headstock on a plate, so I bought some stamps, and made up an ali VIN plate about 10 mm by 70mm, and that's now fixed to the steel plate reinforcing gusset at the headstock with 2 drive screws. The plate has to be 'certified' by a dealer or 'garage', DVLA say.

The company that does my resto work also deals in classic bikes and they will 'certify' the plate and its new DVLA number.

I then have to get it MOTd (even though it's >40 years old). Which is a pain but a local bike dealer (North Wales Motorcycles) has done this before to get classics registered and will collect the bike, MOT it and bring it back. For a fee. They say it's not unheard of for a bike, sans plate, to be ridden to get its MOT. Just my luck to get pulled, so I'll opt for the money canon in this case. I could do without a 'driving whilst uninsured' conviction.

And that, should get me a 72 plate.

I was advised that I should have simply told DVLA that it was a complete bike that just needed a reg, but given that you have to give them frame and engine numbers, and show receipts, photos etc, and since my bits were all imported and have NOVA traces, I felt that pulling that deception could get me found out, so I was honest and up front. I'm a little disappointed that DVLA feel they have to issue an new VIN when it's got a perfectly good one certified by TOMCC, and since DVLA accept TOMCC as the arbiter of provenance, why won't they in this case? TOMCC advise that may affect resale value, but that doesn't bother me. I'm not likely to be worrying about that when my kids come to sell it.

I bought the bike as a project (retired, done all the travel I want to, done the DIY and gardening, idle hands, reasonable workshop, capable mechanical skills and I know my limits, bored), firstly to get it running and then to rebuild it once I'd worked out what was wrong it it, and I've done just that. Sure, I've got a bit in it that I'll never get back, but can't take it with me so I might as well get the use out of that cash whilst I'm still fit enough. One day I'll realise it's too late. I've also re-learned a lot about Triumph Twins that I think I used to know, but have forgotten over the years, and then learned a lot, lot more from those on here who do know their stuff.

So, I think it's money well spent. And I'll certainly be getting the grin factor on it this summer. Provided DVLA stick to their end of the bargain that is.



.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
6,660 Posts
Hi Andy,

AFAIKT, everything is consistent with a late 72 manufacture date,
forks could be later, say 79 (?)
Stanchions and single-disc sliders were the same externally from the first '73 (model year) to the last '83; yokes are either '73-'78 (speedo. 'n' tacho. attached to stanchion tops) or '79-'83 (speedo., tacho. 'n' idiot lamps) attached to top yoke).

engine can't be much later as it's RH shift.
Last RH-shift 750 twins were '75, but yours has a '73 model year date code and number anyway.

disappointed that DVLA feel they have to issue an new VIN when it's got a perfectly good one certified by TOMCC, and since DVLA accept TOMCC as the arbiter of provenance, why won't they in this case?
Ask them? :) It'd be useful to know if there's a policy reason, not just the whim of the clerk whose desk your paperwork happened to land on.

All the same, thanks for taking the time to detail the current DVLA age-related reg. system.

certainly be getting the grin factor on it this summer.
Certainly hope so. (y)

Regards,
 
161 - 167 of 167 Posts
Top