Achieving the ideal
Is there such a thing as an ideal motorcycle for an event such as the ISDT, or is a good compromise the best one can hope for?
Normally at this point, the writer would postulate several theories, put forward arguments for and against certain aspects, while drawing the reader to their conclusions – after which everyone would think the writer was fabulously knowledgeable and experienced.
As I said, that’s generally what would happen, so, let’s cut straight to it instead and say there’s no such thing as the ideal ISDT motorcycle… there, how’s that?
The focus of the ISDT has changed considerably since its launch in 1913 when a six-day trial was proposed which would build on the success of the already popular ACU Six Day Trial.
The difference being an international element, plus the stipulation machines must be production or production orientated. This last bit allowed for some slight modifications in specification.
In truth, the very early events would be little different from riding on the roads and by-ways used by everyone, so manufacturers would be able to showcase their machines and crow about how they stood up to the elements. The other side of such things is the buying and reading public would see which machines actually stood up to the conditions in the event.
Don’t forget, despite Nottingham’s Radcliffe Road having the distinction of being the world’s first tarmac highway in 1902, this type of road surface was still not common in 1913. A macadam surface would be more common but still not an easy surface to ride on and any public showcase where a maker could claim their machine survived better than the others, had to be good.
In those far off days, motorcycles were starting to have the attributes we’re familiar with, but were still flimsy contraptions and woe betide any owner who left home without a few rudimentary tools, as even the ride to work might require a puncture to be repaired or an exhaust valve to be changed.
Such requirements bring about the first attribute,
a successful ISDT, or ISDE if you’re a modernist, machine needs to be one of those which are ‘easy to work on.’ This fact has remained relevant in 107 years of the event and is where the legend of fourminute tyre swaps and such things started.
As road conditions improved in the UK, manufacturers could afford to pay attention to the build of their machines and as the post-first World War period rolled on to the beginning of the Second World War, it was reasonable for them to expect the majority of their customers at home would be riding on decent surfaces.
So, tyres became smaller in diameter but larger in cross section, mudguards wider to protect the rider from weather and the move away from an ‘every surface’ machine was in process. There was however, still a market which required a more robust machine capable of regularly being ridden on nonmetalled surfaces. It was called the colonial market and it was an important sales area for all types of manufacturer.
Some makers would have a competition model which had minimal equipment on and be sold as a Colonial Model while others would advertise their Colonial Model could be ordered by the UK sporting enthusiast for use in a variety of events.
Colonial specification would generally include either a high level exhaust to keep it out of harm’s way, slightly larger diameter wheels with studded tyres, narrower mudguards with more clearance between them and the tyre, a smaller petrol tank, wider handlebars and smaller seat. Inside the gearbox might be a cluster with a wider spread of ratios and lower overall gearing and in the engine a piston giving a lower compression ratio to cope with poorer quality fuel might be seen, but a canny
maker might fit a compression plate which lifted the barrel a little and lowered the compression in that way. This could also be removed if petrol quality improved.
So, what was starting to be seen was a slightly lighter, easier to ride motorcycle with some attention paid to limiting damage to components should the rider and machine part company, and making it easy to work on if things were damaged.
Mudguard stays doubling as stands would allow either wheel to be lifted clear of the ground, quickdetach hubs would allow the rear wheel to be removed without disturbing the chain and brake drum, and so on.
The golden age of this style of motorcycle was the Thirties and for most makers the model offered would be a 350cc or 500cc one, suggesting these were the ideal capacities for the job. Er… no… they were what the British industry made in abundance and sizes settled on because of taxation laws favouring certain weights and power of machines… this is where the term weigh-in stems from in the ISDT and SSDT for example.
In case you’re smiling at this and thinking how quaint all this weighing of machines is – they were actually weighed at the start of events – and manufacturers building bikes to taxation classes, and it would never happen these days, just hark back to the very late 1970s when, thanks to French taxation laws favouring 240cc machines instead of 250cc ones, the majority of trials bikes coming from Spain went down in capacity by 10cc. Or when learner laws changed in the UK and 125cc bikes were the ones everyone wanted as the monstrously powerful 250s were outlawed by a concerned Government…
Okay, back to the ideal ISDT or ISDE machine, during the Thirties some of the familiar modifications were starting to be developed or thought up, mods which an enterprising owner could actually do for themselves so were allowed under the regulations.
For instance if a bike falls over then a cable can be damaged, let’s say the throttle cable as an example. To change a complete cable would mean fiddling about under the tank, lifting the top of the carburettor and removing springs and clips which could easily be dropped. Far easier to make up a cable with a junction box in it which sits behind the headlight and make a cable to go from the twistgrip to the junction box – easily changed as the rider sits on the bike.
Other cables would be routed alongside the originals, their ends protected against damage so should the original have a problem all a rider needed
to do was quickly swap the ends over, rather than fiddle a cable through the maze of a motorcycle.
All these modifications are simply ways to perform tasks quicker rather than create an ideal machine for the competition. In this period of course the idea behind the event was still to showcase standard models and few actual modifications from standard were allowed. It may have occurred to some makers if they catalogued an ideal machine or one which embodied these ideals, even if they only made a certain number, then perhaps success would come their way. In reality, few manufacturers had such resources to do something of that sort in those days.
Once the world stumbled towards something akin to normality in the Forties, there had been a subtle shift in attitude to the purpose of the ISDT, it was becoming less of an industry showcase and more of an out and out competition between national teams, with some of the eastern European makers being state backed.
Because the UK home industry had always regarded a 350 as a small bike, our teams had been mounted on mainly 500s with the odd 350 or 650 as required by capacity classes. The European makers had little worry about mounting their teams on much smaller machines and taking advantage of the more relaxed speed schedules enjoyed by these bikes.
Once the Fifties were through and a certain amount of affluence had arrived, things changed more rapidly. Fewer countries had a motorcycle manufacturing industry left, which meant fewer countries could meet the ‘mounted on machine manufactured in the team’s country’ Trophy contest stipulation, so felt this rule was outdated. The Silver Vase had been open to any machines irrespective of where they were made for some time and the Trophy contest was finally laid open for 1970. Initially, the UK stuck to motorcycles made in the UK but they were far from the stock machines of previous years.
By the Seventies our home industry was effectively Triumph and even they were not all that keen on supplying motorcycles to an event which
had gone way beyond what they felt would gain valuable publicity for them. Yes their engines were used in Cheney frames but generally these machines were dealer supported, with help from the ACU and maybe even using the existing riders’ engines. Such motorcycles were easy to ride, easy to work on and generally reliable, so coming close to our ideal for the event.
Triumph had been involved in the Sixties with their parent company BSA in an abortive attempt to combine the best of both companies into one machine type which would satisfy the loyalties of both sets of factory riders.
What occurred was a sad situation where parts vanished, bikes were not completed and a host of other things which prevented what could have been an almost ideal machine. The BSA riders didn’t want a Triumph engine, the Triumph riders didn’t want a BSA frame and so on. Yet the motorcycles which did emerge from this were liked by most of the team. The lessons weren’t forgotten and Triumph launched the Adventurer, or Trophy Trail depending on the year it was created, and felt another attempt at the ISDT – to be held in the USA in 1973 – would be a sensible thing for their motorcycle aimed at the vast tracts of land still open to USA riders then.
To this end, several machines were shipped to the Triumph HQ in California where the ideal enduro machine would be constructed. Using the Adventurer frame, which was similar to the BSA MX frame, Triumph’s robust unit construction engine was given a good going over. To meet capacity criteria – the regs said under and over 500cc – rather than use a 650 for the bigger classes the idea of overboring barrels until they were 501cc met the letter if not the spirit of the rules. This idea had been realised in the mid-sixties and gave the big class riders a massive weight saving of around 60lb with a physically smaller motorcycle overall.
In the workshops in California a critical eye was cast over certain aspects of the bike and with little compunction to stick with what the factory supplied, if there was a better thing out there weight was carved off, mods made to speed up work and reliability, and what was created has become a legend in Triumph circles. So much of a legend it could be said it was the ideal machine for the ISDT… except it can only – and this is from a Triumph fan – be classed as the ideal British machine…
In 1973 the UK Trophy teams were Triumphmounted in the main and put up a spectacular performance to come the closest to winning the event the UK teams had done for a lot of years. It was a bittersweet thing as midway through the event BSA Triumph collapsed and the bikes were impounded at the end of the event. This meant for any future events there was little chance of factory machines to come the team’s way. However, the team riders and management had been casting envious eyes at the host of foreign riders mounted on superb lightweight two-strokes. Even in America there were two team men on ultra-lightweight Rickman Zundapps and though ending up with standard engines rather than the promised works tuned ones from the German factory, the bikes proved their worth.
Released from any need to support the nonexistent home industry for nationalistic pride if nothing else, machines were offered for future events.
Though it had proved difficult to gain special parts for motorcycles built in the home factories, they did at least arrive eventually. When dealing with foreign machines, certainly Eastern Bloc ones, the supply chain was a nightmare. Settling on Jawa as a make to use seemed sensible as the bikes were winners and even the standard ones were much better than the British machines running at the peak of their development. But ‘standard’ isn’t ‘works’ and the gap between the two was wide. Intentional? Maybe, but despite what was often promised, what arrived was not quite ‘it’… A case of ensuring their own teams won or had the least possible competition perhaps? Who knows.
What most people did know was the foreign machines were a lot closer to this ISDT/E ideal than previous bikes the British were mounted on. With Jawa fast becoming outdated too, the team looked towards Austria and KTM machines for team honours.
Badged Pentons in the USA, thanks to the work of the Penton family in convincing the Austrian factory to make such machines in the first place, the KTMS were fast, light, easy to ride and reliable machines reflecting the needs of the team much better than even the Jawas had. But were they ideal? Well, as the event had changed in concept the newer machines were tried by the British team manager Ken Heanes who decreed them to be just about right, but could a softer seat be fitted?
This inspection of the ideal machine for an event which needs a compromise is academic in the extreme.
Take the actual event itself, a time schedule has to be maintained, the bike will have to meet certain tests at various checkpoints and if, say, the lights proved to be not working, then a rider would have to remain at that check until whatever the problem was had been fixed.
At other points in the event a rider may have to trickle along as if in a one-day observation trial, then a few miles further on there will be a speed test requiring flat-out MX action. So setting a motorcycle to meet these tasks will always be a compromise. What is the ideal – to look at what the majority of the course will consist of and make the machine suitable for this and accept there will be difficulties in other areas? Hardly a good idea, as those minor areas are where the problems occur. Once problems start a situation can go downhill rapidly, so again a compromise has to be reached and what is ideal for one bit isn’t ideal for another, which brings me back
to my initial statement that there is no such thing as an ideal ISDT motorcycle.
Other variables
There are two major variables which affect what could be the ideal – quite simply these two variables are the biggest factor in what can, or can’t, be an ideal machine – they are the rider and the weather.
Taking the rider first, there are some who are great at MX, there are others who are handy at trials, still others are capable of keeping on time over long distances. The ISDT/E rider needs to combine these attributes with the ability of a mechanic to enable maintenance to be carried out – don’t forget the rider cannot have any outside assistance – and as well as all these factors the rider needs to have some form of mechanical sympathy to ensure the bike is used to the full, but not abused to the max.
There are those who have a determination to succeed and a sort of red mist comes down which nothing but the finish can be seen through. I was party to one conversation at Telford one year when two notable names with gold medals to their credit were discussing just such a thing. One said to the other ‘my bike could go almost straight into the showroom after the event, yours wasn’t fit for
the skip’ yet both had earned gold medals at the particular ISDT in discussion. Which one of those riders is the ideal ISDT competitor? The two I’m talking about are both very successful in all aspects of motorcycle sport, neither known for giving up but both incredibly different.
Each of the ideals required for a rider are needed in some way – a sympathetic rider who eases a machine around could get away with not being a brilliant mechanic as the bike wouldn’t be damaged but someone with a determination to finish will often overcome problems which would cause others to retire.
Add in physical size to the mix and a great big bloke will be able to fling a bike around with impunity or haul it out of bogs, whereas a smaller rider might be able to float over soft ground and not become stuck in the first place.
On then to the weather – if a mild week is experienced then any number of motorcycles and riders will fit the ‘ideal’ but given where some events have taken place, a rider could experience a multitude of conditions in one day, let alone the week.
A bike which performs well in the dry may be unridable in the wet as the power spins the wheels instead of gripping, The flip side is that a bike okay in the wet may not be fast enough in the dry and being ridden flat out might experience problems.
There, you see it’s harder and harder to determine an ideal motorcycle, so to sum up, an ideal machine must be light, strong, fast, flexible, nimble, easy to work on, reliable, able to cope with often questionable fuel, be powerful in case the rider is big, not too powerful in case the rider is slight in stature… and so it goes on…
The last word
I’m giving the last word here to a rider I will name, Vic Allan. His comment: “gold is easy, it means everything went right and there were no problems – silver and bronze, well they’re much harder to earn…”