If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
I have recently been sent this pic by former member John Roach. He says its an ME frame, but obviously with later banana forks. I am awaiting frame number.
Looks a tidy bike.
Have heard back from owner John Roach (a former GRA member) This is what he says about the bike.
The ME has no number and I had to use another number to get it registered.
It had been removed prior to me buying it.
It was really bad build. The motor was out of line and the tank was raised at the back, the frame was bent and it fell apart if ridden. It had the forks in it when I bought it. I had to straighten the frame and start again making up a cradle to reposition the engine. make an oil tank etc etc. I got the ME info by Googleing the Triumph engine number which took me to a Bonhams results page from where the bike had been sold as a basket. sadly this number had been used at the DVLA so I had to start again. It certainly looked like the correct frame with the seat mounts silly high and a somewhat butchered part welded cradle.
Started off like this, https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/16230/lot/404/ but then badly built up by a subsequent buyer frame number listed by Bonhams as ME769 but I think thats a typo and it is probably 169, I dont think they sold over 700 ME's
The Carrick/Walker book states a specific production of 89 machines, although it is unclear whether that is in addition to any works models, such as ridden by Dave Bickers.
Highest number so far I have is 193 (I suppose Bonhams did not look closely enough as a 1 can look like a 7) Anyway some idiot has now ground the number off so we will never know. Will be interesting to see if 169 turns up on another bike.
Comment