Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - DODGE

Pages: [1]
Twins / Re: A65T Pre OIF Tuning Help Needed
« on: 16 April, 2018, 15:48:25 »
Armed with a new flange gasket I set about to remove and clean the carb again. When removing the LHS side cover I noticed that the HT wire was loose in the coil. Once re-attached the bike fired up, idled and ran very well. It must have had sufficient connection to idle but not rev.
The bike now accelerates well of the bottom and revs out in all gears. A slight flat spot in the mid-range but nothing to really affect a ride. I got out on Saturday and Sunday whilst the weather is good up here.

Twins / Re: A65T Pre OIF Tuning Help Needed
« on: 11 April, 2018, 15:25:01 »
I don't know.
I did replace the gasket with the O-ring as shown in the parts book and as mentioned in the Amal gasket kit.
Do you think an air leak might cause the problem - too lean?

Twins / A65T Pre OIF Tuning Help Needed
« on: 11 April, 2018, 15:16:50 »
Hi all,
I recently gave my 1970 A65T a birthday (new float valve, carby clean and gaskets, new fuel lines, taps and filters) and now it runs terribly. It idles well but is hard to start, backfires and does not want to rev out in any gear. It ran fine before my intervention.
Anyway, as all settings (float height, idle air screw, needle valve height) were returned to what they were before the carby clean, can there be some other reason for the problem?
It seems to run rich so I was going to drop the needle a notch but thought I'd seek advice 1st.
Also, does anyone know of someone in Aberdeenshire who could help me tune it?

Twins / Re: A65T Fork Slider Length
« on: 08 January, 2018, 08:54:41 »
Thanks everyone for the advice.
Unfortunately I could not accept that the wheel should not be parallel to the forks so I have sourced and fitted a pair of 1970 Triumph sliders and spindle end caps. They fitted perfectly and the wheel is now central to the forks, parallel to the sliders/stancions and perpendicular to the road. No adjustment to spokes needed.
Rather than BSA deliberately boring the spindle 'hole' on an angle, maybe the metal has suffered 'creep' over the last 47 years due to the stress applied when aligning the different length sliders - I'm not sure if the loads would be sufficient though.
I'll keep the old sliders with the rest of the original bike in case I sell it one day and the new owner wants it with the original wonky wheel.
I'd be very interested to learn more on the subject if anyone knows more.

Twins / Re: A65T Fork Slider Length
« on: 03 December, 2017, 00:09:00 »
Thanks Bess,
out of interest - why did BSA design and manufacture A65 fork components that obviously offset the front wheel to a 'weird' angle?

Twins / Re: A65T Fork Slider Length
« on: 02 December, 2017, 18:32:35 »
Thanks Bess,
I must be missing something - are you saying that the wheel should be on a slight angle?
I have checked the following:
 - sliders and end caps have 'counterbores'
 - LH slider approx 1/8 inch longer than RH slider (brake side). LH end cap approx 1/8 inch thinner than RH end cap.
 - LH & RH sliders and caps spindle 'bores' not at 90 degrees to slider. LH slider bore < 90 degrees with slider when measured wheel side and above. RH slider bore > 90 degrees with slider when measured wheel side and above.
 - wheel spindle not bent
 - wheel 90 degrees to the spindle and true
 - when assembled with or without springs, the wheel is slightly cocked-off (i.e not parallel to the sliders - leaning to the LHS at the top)
 - small amount of play between the brake plate and the lug on the RHS slider (i.e. not pushing the wheel over).
It seems to me that the wheel leans to the left because the spindle bores and uneven leg lengths force it that way. I know you and others have mentioned that the parts are meant to be like that, but is the wheel really meant to be on an angle, even if the top of the rim is central between the fork legs?

Twins / Re: A65T Fork Slider Length
« on: 02 December, 2017, 14:14:18 »
I'm still experimenting and researching with no solution. The same problem was solved for a triumph by reworking a deformed spindle. The photo in the attached thread is exactly how mine lines up.
I'll now look at that unless someone else has a better idea.

Twins / Re: A65T Fork Slider Length
« on: 26 November, 2017, 14:56:36 »
Thanks for the suggestion but the rim is 90 degrees to the spindle. The wheel is true.
If I adjust the spokes in one position to make the rim parallel to the forks, when rotated 180 degrees it will contact the forks, be out of true and 'wobble'.

Twins / Re: A65T Fork Slider Length
« on: 26 November, 2017, 12:13:06 »
I have had the chance this weekend to investigate further and have identified that the spindle bore in the fork sliders and end caps is not 90 degrees. I had assumed that the metal had 'creeped' over the years causing the misalignment, until I read the post above.
Now I have a dilemma. My forks seem correct, the spindle is true, but when I fit the wheel and bolt them up the wheel remains cocked off 90 degrees to the spindle.
I was going to rework the bores to 90 degrees but am now not sure - is there something that I am missing?
Any suggestions on how I can rectify the problem would be appreciated.

Twins / Re: A65T Fork Slider Length
« on: 06 November, 2017, 10:26:16 »
Wow - thanks for all of the information.
I checked on the weekend and my spindle caps also have the counterbore - so it seems that everything is correct. The bike is original in every other way and shows less than 10k miles so I can't imagine why one of the slider legs would have been changed.
The different leg lengths might also explain why the manual says to tighten the thicker RHS cap first. This leads to the question - why? Maybe it does have something to do with the brake forces as suggested by Charles - who knows. Unfortunately after nearly 50 years, tightening the caps (even with some preload (my wife) on the forks), does not fully align the spindle by compressing the longer LHS leg, but rather cock's the wheel off centre - the reason I first started this investigation. The only way I can get the wheel vertical is to shim the bottom of the RHS fork leg a few mm, hence my original thought of simply filing down the longer LHS leg.
I've now played around with the various seals and spacers and think that I can 'extend' the operating length of the RHS leg by placing an additional washer above and below the oil seal. I might even skim a mm off the LHS upper bush flange too. Less drastic and permanent than attacking the leg itself. I have some parts on order and will let you know how it goes.
If anyone can see an obvious flaw in my logic, please let me know.

Twins / Re: A65T Fork Slider Length
« on: 03 November, 2017, 09:19:44 »
Hi Bess,
here are the images. It seems both have the 'counter bores' if they are the small dimples behind the drain holes.
Rather than file a deeper axle groove in the longer leg, I might just shim the oil seal holder 1/8 inch to make the total length from spring seat to axle the same. What do you think?

Twins / Re: A65T Fork Slider Length
« on: 31 October, 2017, 15:14:01 »
Thanks Julian,
so it seems I have different model sliders. Any idea which one is correct, or what the correct part numbers should be?

Twins / A65T Fork Slider Length
« on: 30 October, 2017, 12:39:53 »
I'm just returning to British bikes via a 1970 A65T (Pre-OIF) project. Previously I've restored a Bantam and B31. I'm a new member of the BSAOC.
On rebuilding the forks, I cannot correctly align the front wheel. It appears that all components on both sides are identical except for the sliders and axle/spindle caps. The RHS (Brake plate) slider seems to be ~ 1/8 inch shorter (from top of slider to top of spindle groove) than the LHS, with end caps also showing ~ 1/8 inch difference.
- Have I got sliders from different models?
- Which one is correct?
- Can I just file down the spindle groove on the LHS slider?
Any advice would be appreciated.

Pages: [1]