AJS or Matchless - Which Jampot to go for ?

Lassenc · Post by **Lassenc** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 11:00 pm

Go back to topic lads

bjork · Post by **bjork** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 11:09 pm

quote:
Go back to topic lads

Fair comment, and for me it would most likely be a Matchless, but I can't give any logical explanation why! I think in the end I would pick the bike that ticks the most of the boxes on my hypothetical list. Ian's list may have different boxes to tick, it could mean most mechanically sound or most likely to win prizes at shows. Go for whichever you fancy Ian, you'll enjoy it either way.

Biscuit · Post by **Biscuit** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:00 am

My personal opinion is:-

Go for the 1956 500, the ‘56 has the following advantages.

Tidier treatment of the oil tank/toolbox/battery housing.
Larger diameter fork stanchions.
SR1 magneto with auto advance/retard.
The defining feature - jam pots.
Longer seat.
B52 gearbox. While having a more ‘notchy’ change than the later AMC box, it doesn’t have four holes in the main shell to weep oil, there’s no fiddly timing to set up the change mechanism and you can tension the kickstart spring to taste.
Tidier treatment of the speedometer (in the headlamp)
QD rear wheel.

Downside - pressed steel primary chaincase which needs some experience and patience to achieve oil-tightness.

Apart from the magneto all this applies to the Twins, if a twin the G11 is the one to go for.

Earlier models have some of these features but not all.
Edited by - Biscuit on 25 Mar 2008 10:06:36 AMEdited by - A Moderator on 27 Mar 2008 09:40:37 AM

ianrichards · Post by **ianrichards** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:32 am

What a lively forum and great fun too.
My Royal Enfield is great and has been a good introduction to the world of "Classic Bikes". But I cannot get away from the fact that despite it being made of genuine RE parts (be them Indian) it somehow lacks the real heritage that I am after. I know that I would really prefer the genuine article even if it is made up like my "Grandfathers Axe" .... two new handles and one new head.
The advice about a 1956 G80 model is greatfully received and I will be on the lookout for one in the not to distant future.
Many thanks
Ian

quote:
Back to Ian, my personal opinion is:-

Go for the 1956 500, the ‘56 has the following advantages.

Tidier treatment of the oil tank/toolbox/battery housing.
Larger diameter fork stanchions.
SR1 magneto with auto advance/retard.
The defining feature - jam pots.
Longer seat.
B52 gearbox. While having a more ‘notchy’ change than the later AMC box, it doesn’t have four holes in the main shell to weep oil, there’s no fiddly timing to set up the change mechanism and you can tension the kickstart spring to taste.
Tidier treatment of the speedometer (in the headlamp)
QD rear wheel.

Downside - pressed steel primary chaincase which needs some experience and patience to achieve oil-tightness.

Apart from the magneto all this applies to the Twins, if a twin the G11 is the one to go for.

Earlier models have some of these features but not all.
Edited by - Biscuit on 25 Mar 2008 10:06:36 AM
Edited by - ianrichards on 25 Mar 2008 10:34:43 AM

Merlin · Post by **Merlin** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 3:19 pm

I presume the same would apply to my 1956 3GLS Alan great bike little short on power but fast enough for my lanes.

itma · Post by **itma** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:16 pm

Surely all that matters is that Ian buys an AMC bike, rides it, enjoys riding it, and gets the help and advice he needs when he needs it. without a load if inconsequential bilge being thrown into the subject from a person who plainly knows sod all about the subject