If you have the high first gear the bike is capable of 70MPH in first gear. As I understand it all postwar twins, maybe with the exception of very low geared outfits, will happily pull 70MPH in second.
Rather than trying to improve the low speed, high gear, pull away of a 60 year old bike, wouldn't it be kinder to change down.
I run an original clutch with the Australian extra multispring ESA set up from Neal Videan which I am assured is too heavy for solo use, without problems. If the ESA was intended to constantly run in and out, rather than just react to clumsy clutch take ups, would we not have seen that many had needed replacement over the years due to a level of wear similar to that of cams and followers?
My bike will, if I'm desperate, pull away from a standstill in third gear (on the flat) but, in general use, I change down to accelerate. It may be less economical in terms of fuel consumption, but I'm sure that using more revs to reduce shock loading will prove more economical in the long run. If you want to chunter around at 40MPH in top, why have a Vincent?
Rather than trying to improve the low speed, high gear, pull away of a 60 year old bike, wouldn't it be kinder to change down.
I run an original clutch with the Australian extra multispring ESA set up from Neal Videan which I am assured is too heavy for solo use, without problems. If the ESA was intended to constantly run in and out, rather than just react to clumsy clutch take ups, would we not have seen that many had needed replacement over the years due to a level of wear similar to that of cams and followers?
My bike will, if I'm desperate, pull away from a standstill in third gear (on the flat) but, in general use, I change down to accelerate. It may be less economical in terms of fuel consumption, but I'm sure that using more revs to reduce shock loading will prove more economical in the long run. If you want to chunter around at 40MPH in top, why have a Vincent?