The BSA Workshop > Twins

A65T Fork Slider Length

<< < (2/3) > >>

JulianS:
Cannot see the flat side of the end caps but presume they are also marked with the counterbores? The fork bottoms certainly look like the description of A65 items.

Th earlier post with service bulletin 254 shows that the A65 forks are different to the other models in the range.

I have attached a page from Pitmans "The Second Book of the BSA Twins" and a snip from the 1969 A65 owners maintenence handbook, they both mention the difference in the end caps and the need for proper assembly.

If your end caps are also as described it would appear that the lower part of your forks are as the designer intended.

Bess:
Hi,
     I'm not convinced they are an A65 sliders, possibly for a Triumph?  Seems a bit of a mismatch.

See the mudguard bracket on the attachment is not the same as yours and the lug which fits into the brake plate is longer on yours.

Best wishes...

JulianS:
BSA were constantly changing part specification which must have been a nightmare for the big dealers who kept a large stock!

They revised the fork bottom and mudguard fixing arrangement in parts Service Bulletin G60 from December 1969. The previous arrangement was changed to use a captive nut. See first photo.

The parts book illustration was not changed for the A65 but you can see it in the B44 and A75 books. Second photo below is from the 1970 B44 book. You wiill see the different bracket and the captive nut marked 61. The key shows it as 97 3926.

I am happy that the part you have are A65, but the modified parts not illustrated in the A65 book.

Bess:

Cool, just goes to show you never stop learning, another fact my library.

Thanks Julian.....

Charles R:
Dodge

I've got a 1970 BSA A65L (pre oil-in-frame) that has a similar problem:

The right fork outer member (Pt No. 97-3934) is 268mm long (10.54") - this is the one with the brake lug.
The left fork outer member (Pt No. 97-3933) is 272mm long (10.71"), ie 4mm longer.
(Dimensions measured with a steel rule and don't include the end caps.)

The part numbers come from the BSA parts list (00-5707 Aug 1969) but I have no way of telling if that's what I've actually got!

The 4mm difference would try to put the wheel spindle out of alignment.  In practice it would be pulled into alignment when the fork end caps are bolted on.  This would then put slightly different compressions on the fork springs.  This just doesn't sound right.  Id like to know if the discrepancy is acceptable or whether I have a problem (incorrect part from a previous repair?).

Before I dismantled the forks I hadn't noticed anything untoward, though I got the bike as a semi basket case so never saw it in a running state and it could have had all sorts of hidden issues.

The photos shows the offending items, though I could have done a better job on the photos to show more detail!

Is it a coincidence that these outer members have a remarkably similar difference to yours?

Is it anything to do with compensating for the brake forces being taken up by only one of the outer members?

Cheers, Charles

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version