First Post 1960 Triumph Find - Page 2 - The Jockey Journal Board

Go Back   The Jockey Journal Board > General Discussion > The Board

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10-31-2011, 03:07 PM   #21
chassy55
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: pacific northwest
Posts: 246
Default Re: First Post 1960 Triumph Find

I'm not sure they had that support tube in 1960. Looks like it still has the original rear tank mount. That's rare on a custom. Why replace the rear section? I think it fits the bike good.
chassy55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 10-31-2011, 05:10 PM   #22
supercrouton
Senior Member
 
supercrouton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: North Mississippi
Posts: 2,035
Default Re: First Post 1960 Triumph Find

A Duplex is a Duplex. There was only one version, from 1960-1962 and they all came with that support tube. The front frame loop of the above bike is a 1960 Duplex. You are right though about the rear section, it looks good to me too
Cheers, Dan.
__________________
If you were to take out someone's small intestines, and stretch it all the way out end to end, you'd go to jail.



Angry Monkey Motorcycles official website

Last edited by supercrouton; 10-31-2011 at 05:12 PM. Reason: shpelling
supercrouton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2011, 06:56 PM   #23
BikeVice
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 162
Default Re: First Post 1960 Triumph Find

The first 60's didn't have the lower support tube, but frames were breaking in service. Triumph added the support tube mid year.

Eric


Last edited by BikeVice; 10-31-2011 at 07:03 PM. Reason: Added image
BikeVice is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Old 10-31-2011, 07:20 PM   #24
latte hardtail
Junior Member
 
latte hardtail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 12
Default Re: First Post 1960 Triumph Find

Thanks for all the quick insight.
All of the people here have a real passion for the art of Cycles. That is what I love about the Boards here. I have learned a lot from reading here over the last year, and can tell I have only scratched the surface.

Now to some more figuring. I did a little bit of mock up tonight after work, and took some quick measurements. I want the bottom frame rails to be as perpendicular to the ground as possible. So I took the front wheel off and blocked the bike up with some 2x4's. The bike sat about 3.5" off the ground. I love the low look, but what is the optimal ride height for lowness? I then shoved a 3/4" piece under the front, and it still looked decent. With the later scenario the approx. center of the fork front axle is 3" lower than the wheel axle. In your opinions how much fork travel do I need to lose. I know 3 is the obvious answer, but with sag and all in consideration I'm guessing maybe 2 - 2.5.

One last question for me to go on for now. Do I tear this engine down (turns free, and the previous owner said it ran when put away 10 years ago)?

Mock-up pics.





latte hardtail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2011, 07:52 PM   #25
supercrouton
Senior Member
 
supercrouton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: North Mississippi
Posts: 2,035
Red face Re: First Post 1960 Triumph Find

Quote:
Originally Posted by BikeVice View Post
The first 60's didn't have the lower support tube, but frames were breaking in service. Triumph added the support tube mid year.

Eric

I stand corrected, as usual
__________________
If you were to take out someone's small intestines, and stretch it all the way out end to end, you'd go to jail.



Angry Monkey Motorcycles official website
supercrouton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2011, 12:28 AM   #26
tombat
Senior Member
 
tombat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: eawa
Posts: 333
Default Re: First Post 1960 Triumph Find

Quote:
Originally Posted by latte hardtail View Post
Thanks for all the quick insight.
All of the people here have a real passion for the art of Cycles. That is what I love about the Boards here. I have learned a lot from reading here over the last year, and can tell I have only scratched the surface.

Now to some more figuring. I did a little bit of mock up tonight after work, and took some quick measurements. I want the bottom frame rails to be as perpendicular to the ground as possible. So I took the front wheel off and blocked the bike up with some 2x4's. The bike sat about 3.5" off the ground. I love the low look, but what is the optimal ride height for lowness? I then shoved a 3/4" piece under the front, and it still looked decent. With the later scenario the approx. center of the fork front axle is 3" lower than the wheel axle. In your opinions how much fork travel do I need to lose. I know 3 is the obvious answer, but with sag and all in consideration I'm guessing maybe 2 - 2.5.

One last question for me to go on for now. Do I tear this engine down (turns free, and the previous owner said it ran when put away 10 years ago)?

Mock-up pics.






In my opinion stance is an often and quite glaringly overlooked component of an appealing bike. As can be seen in your mock up photos, you haven't spent a dime yet and just by getting the stance to an eye pleasing level it already looks quite different (better I would say). I think that a couple inches out of the forks would about right, you might test the drop by refitting the front wheel and having a sit. That should give you a good starting point for amount to lower the forks. There are some good tech threads here about lowering external spring triumph forks.
As far as the engine goes..... well that's your call but sludge traps are a significant concern for Triumph lower ends..... I'm sure you could run it a bit but it could be a time bomb, I am not aware of any way to really tell the condition of the sludge trap without splitting the cases and pulling it out. Then you always end up getting into the "while I'm down here...I really should....." situation, at least I usually do.
Tombat
tombat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2011, 07:13 AM   #27
Englishman
Senior Member
 
Englishman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 944
Default Re: First Post 1960 Triumph Find

Quote:
Originally Posted by BikeVice View Post
The first 60's didn't have the lower support tube, but frames were breaking in service. Triumph added the support tube mid year.

Eric

I have a 61 with that tube missing, I haven't yet determined if it was just removed by a PO.
__________________
The Horse BC.com
[email protected]
Englishman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:02 AM.