Amazon: New (to me) 1963 Volvo 122

[john.wigley]

Originally Posted by Othen

The CB200 runs and rides:

https://youtu.be/H9HyWL5weSM?si=l8-yZsceqP_OTfXF

I‘m quite pleased that it is (at the very least) a good basis for improvement.



PS. GAM continues to run and ride just fine

Watching that, Alan, one can quite understand how the Japanese decimated the British motorcycle industry in the '60s.

It is a great pity that we did not get our act together and stop them doing precisely the same thing to our car industry a decade later!

When I look at your Honda and compare it to the last Bantams and Cubs that we were producing in the late '60s it is clear that that there was no contest and the writing was already on the wall for all to see. Shame that no one took any notice!

Regards, John.

P.S. See you and GAM at Patchings next month? J.

[Moomoo]

Originally Posted by john.wigley

Watching that, Alan, one can quite understand how the Japanese decimated the British motorcycle industry in the '60s.

It is a great pity that we did not get our act together and stop them doing precisely the same thing to our car industry a decade later!

When I look at your Honda and compare it to the last Bantams and Cubs that we were producing in the late '60s it is clear that that there was no contest and the writing was already on the wall for all to see. Shame that no one took any notice!

Regards, John.

P.S. See you and GAM at Patchings next month? J.

And mostly based on which way you split a crankcase!🤨

[john.wigley]

Originally Posted by Moomoo

And mostly based on which way you split a crankcase!🤨

Mmmm ... Speaking of splitting crankcases, remember the BSA Dandy - a 70 cc scooterette? You needed to do just that simply to check and adjust the points!!

The gearchange was comical too, a primitive two-speed pre-selector arrangement that I never really got the hang of - mind, I didn't keep that one long for obvious reasons!

Regards, John.

[142 Guy]

Originally Posted by Moomoo

And mostly based on which way you split a crankcase!🤨

Indeed. Right to the very end. The 350 CC BSA / Triumph Fury / Bandit which I think was the last design to come out of the traditional BSA / Triumph brands retained a vertically split crankcase even in 1970. All the better to leak oil - notice the drip tray on this museum display model
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triumph_Bandit
Electric start was also an extra cost option on the Fury / Bandit.

Honda released the CB 350 twin in 1968 and up to around 1972 it was Honda's single biggest selling motorcycle. With electric start (standard around 1970), CV carbs that worked, an engine that was incredibly reliable and didn't leak (that horizontal split helped), the dudes at BSA / Triumph should have taken notice of the sales success and at least looked at a CB 350 and said 'we need to do better than a motorcycle that has already been on the market for two years'.

The Bandit was a nice looking motorcycle, at least form the left side. The right side not so much. I remember in late 1970 early 1971 there were a lot of multi page adds in North American publications showing the bikes along with the 1970 'refresh' on the other bikes. That cart was a little before the horse because the Bandit / Fury never made it into production so they were spending money selling a motorcycle that didn't exist.

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by john.wigley

When I look at your Honda and compare it to the last Bantams and Cubs that we were producing in the late '60s it is clear that that there was no contest and the writing was already on the wall for all to see. Shame that no one took any notice!

Regards, John.

Funny you should mention that John, i was watching a video on YouTube earlier about "The lost MGs" including an Aston Martin variant, a 6 cylinder MG Metro (put together by Alec Issigonis in his retirement) and some of the later ideas that would broadly come under the umbrella term of MG X-Power.
I also recently saw a similar video about the "lost Triumphs", similar idea but included a 4x4 Triumph 2500PI (a special build for a Swiss [i think] doctor) and a few other one-offs, either protoype/concept cars or built to special order/customised by purchaser.

The point of all that is the one thing missing was the investment - something the Japanese made sure was present. If we had developed our motorbike and car industries with the same sort of investment instead of resting on our laurels so to speak, we could still have been world leaders in automotive engineering and manufacture.

[Othen]

Originally Posted by 142 Guy

Just under 2000 RPM? That does not exactly sound like tick over (idle). All of the Hondas that I owned were of the 4 cyl in-line variety. Even the smallest had idle speeds more around 1000 RPM and I expect the two cylinder CB 200 should be around 1000 - 1200 RPM. Sounds like you might have a cold idle up adjustment problem or you really do need to do that carb cleaning and adjustment done if it will not idle below 2000 RPM.

The book figure is 1,500 RPM Dave, at the moment I've set the tick over at about 1,800 whilst it is running in. That is pretty normal for a 360 degree twin with a very small flywheels to get the motor round to its next power cycle. Bear in mind also this has a mechanical tachometer (worm drive and cable), so I'd be surprised if it is very accurate.

I cleaned the carburettors whilst the engine was out, but they do still need a bit of setting up, so I've included them in my 'to do' list:

1. Adjust the cam chain.
2. Check and adjust the tappets (I bought a really natty tool for adjusting the tappets on small engines - a 3mm square drive surrounded by an 8mm socket).
3. Check the ignition timing (with a strobe).
4. Balance the carburettors (with a manometer).
5. Fit the new front lever brake light switch (on order).
6. Rewire the handlebar switches, routing the wires through the ‘bars (like Mr Honda did).
7. Fix the horn.

If points 1 and 2 don’t make the motor mechanically quiet I may have to change the cam chain. It would be easy to argue I should have done that when I had the motor apart, but it wouldn’t take me long to get the motor out and stripped a second time and would only cost me a cam chain and a bag of gaskets. I could route the starter cable the right way at the same time.

That might have to wait a while though; I should complete on the purchase of the Skeggy sur la Mer house tomorrow (Wednesday), so my focus will change to that for a few months. I'm pleased to have got the CB200 to this stage (that is back together, running and riding) before Project Skeggy started.

Alan

[Othen]

Originally Posted by john.wigley

Watching that, Alan, one can quite understand how the Japanese decimated the British motorcycle industry in the '60s.

It is a great pity that we did not get our act together and stop them doing precisely the same thing to our car industry a decade later!

When I look at your Honda and compare it to the last Bantams and Cubs that we were producing in the late '60s it is clear that that there was no contest and the writing was already on the wall for all to see. Shame that no one took any notice!

Regards, John.

P.S. See you and GAM at Patchings next month? J.

Absolutely John. I was watching an Australian car programme a few weeks ago, which happened to mention 1950s Japanese cars - one of which was an almost exact copy of an Austin of the time (the Japanese copied lots of British cars and bikes back in the day). The problem was that Austin model would have stayed the same for the next 25 years whereas the Japanese moved on to better things very quickly indeed.

The CB200 is a little marvel compared with British bikes of the day: OHC, twin carburettors, electric start, 12v and a disc brake on a 50 year old motorcycle - compared that with a Triumph Tiger Cub.

The Patchings? I'm going to be a bit busy this month due to the Skeggy sur la Mer house, so it may be March before GAM and I visit.

Alan

[Othen]

Originally Posted by 142 Guy

Indeed. Right to the very end. The 350 CC BSA / Triumph Fury / Bandit which I think was the last design to come out of the traditional BSA / Triumph brands retained a vertically split crankcase even in 1970. All the better to leak oil - notice the drip tray on this museum display model
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triumph_Bandit
Electric start was also an extra cost option on the Fury / Bandit.

Honda released the CB 350 twin in 1968 and up to around 1972 it was Honda's single biggest selling motorcycle. With electric start (standard around 1970), CV carbs that worked, an engine that was incredibly reliable and didn't leak (that horizontal split helped), the dudes at BSA / Triumph should have taken notice of the sales success and at least looked at a CB 350 and said 'we need to do better than a motorcycle that has already been on the market for two years'.

The Bandit was a nice looking motorcycle, at least form the left side. The right side not so much. I remember in late 1970 early 1971 there were a lot of multi page adds in North American publications showing the bikes along with the 1970 'refresh' on the other bikes. That cart was a little before the horse because the Bandit / Fury never made it into production so they were spending money selling a motorcycle that didn't exist.

That is a good point about horizontally split crank cases, and the 350cc Bandit/Fury was a good example - the 750cc Trident motor was even worse (a 500 twin and a half so the vertical split wasn't even in the middle of the motor).

As I mentioned in a reply to Dave above, I may have to strip the motor again if the cam chain needs changing. I'm in no way concerned about that if it needs doing - because the horizontally split crankcase makes getting the getting the crank out quite easy (just one special tool - to remove the oil pump) required for the whole job.

The biggest single advantage of a horizontally split bottom end is of course that it is easy to provide some main bearings in the middle of the motor, so the crankshaft is inherently much stiffer.

Alan

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Moomoo

And mostly based on which way you split a crankcase!🤨

That was certainly one reason Andrew: so one could provide bearings between all the cylinders rather than just at the ends. The Japanese learned much quicker also, the CB200 has OHC, twin carburettors, 12v electrics, an electric starter and a disc brake 50 years ago (and they all worked).

Alan

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

The point of all that is the one thing missing was the investment - something the Japanese made sure was present. If we had developed our motorbike and car industries with the same sort of investment instead of resting on our laurels so to speak, we could still have been world leaders in automotive engineering and manufacture.

Investment is only part of it Dave; one has to ask why investors were not prepared to put their money into British industry as they had done during out Victorian era and did in Japan, the USA and Germany in the post-war era. The answer was (of course) that the returns were neither safe or attractive enough.

So, why wasn't the UK an attractive place to invest in after WW2? I think most of it comes down to us Brits not having the stomach for industry any more. This manifests itself in many ways through our nation, one of which is planning objections: because we have a high population density and everyone thinks they have a right to their say it makes any change difficult. In a motor car context I recall a planning objection preventing BL from assembling the body for the new SD1 and painting it in the same plant - resulting in every bare shell being shipped across town by road to the paintshop. It is hard to imagine the council at Toyota City getting away with that one. The same continues today - just look at how long it takes to gain approval for a new nuclear power station (although most folk want reliable power without burning coal or oil) or HS2 - which has almost been killed off by planning issues rather than engineering challenges.

A second reason for the UK being less attractive for investment is the workforce. Back in the 60s and 70s it was difficult to get anything done without being interrupted by industrial action - that pervades somewhat today. In some industries it is just too difficult to employ British folk because the work is too hard and the compensation too low for most to bother with. I'm thinking of agriculture in particular: all (with no exceptions) of my farmer mates have given up trying to employ Brits at harvest time, but instead use very willing (and relatively well paid) East Europeans. The alternative would be letting the crops rot in the fields or increasing prices dramatically (which those same Brits that don't want to pick the harvest won't pay for at Tesco).

I see successful British manufacturing companies (from example JLR, Triumph (motorcycles) and Dyson) moving production overseas because working here is just too difficult and too expensive. This trait isn't unique to the UK, it happens in all the developed world because the planning and employment law makes it difficult to produce stuff. Whilst we moan about this happening, us Brits won't tolerate a new factory or the infrastructure it needs to support it in our back yards. We all want cheap and well made stuff, but we don't want to make it ourselves.

Perhaps none of this matters (at least not in my lifetime, maybe not even in Dan's time). The population will keep growing and we can keep on living on the wealth we earned during the industrial era - and all make a living selling each other insurance and mortgages for quite a while yet.

Alan