Thinking the Unthinkable - Auto Clutch on a Competition Trials Bike

[Motobene]

BETA QUESTION
Beta is a fine machine, and a successful auto clutching of a Beta would take away the reason I have had to avoid the Beta historically: the two stroke trials Betas being the only modern
trials bike and the only Beta two stroke to retain the old European format of right side drive, clutch on the left. Every other two stroke on earth, including all the bigger Beta's is now Japanese-format left-side drive, clutch on the right.
Fitting a left-side foot brake has been a must for me since the `80s, and the Beta 2-stroke trials bikes were and remain too busy on the left side to do that. The kickstart is there. The shifter is there. The clutch is there. The muffler is on that
side too. So I went elsewhere over the years. As for their 4-stroke trials bike, it's never been a favorite.

The Beta has had ONE advantage for me, being left kick. Starting a kick trials bike for me is also left kick, and on all the Japanese left-side drive format bikes I kickstart standing on the right side, before I mount the bike.

Now an auto clutch would mean that I can lose the left-side brake. My goal goes beyond that - no foot brake at all, so the brake-on-left objection to the Beta goes away, and the probability of success is higher with a pre-Rekluse EXP-type
auto clutch and Beta's (or Honda's) conventional clutch. But I have been a TRS man since RYP went poof and the new administration made a series of unfortunate mistakes. The TRS I have found to be very high quality in design. The clutches
the power spunky and smooth, and the handling right on, for me. And what can I say? Electric start has been a dream for me and always worked flawlessly. Not having to kick a bike a hundred times in an event save a lot of energy over a typical event weekend.

OVERALL PROJECT TURN
A major question for me has been WHO to partner with to do an auto clutch for a trials bike as like it or not, it would be a development project. I've done a lot of design development and know what it takes to iterate designs before ANY metal
is cut so you only have to cut one time without a complete redo.

I turned to the engineers at Rekluse first because I found them very sharp on past projects, and significantly, their EXP-based clutches come at the get-go set up 'right' with the engage/disengage versus RPM characteristics that would make
for a successful competition trials bike implementation. Unfortunately the Cota clutch is based on legacy Honda street bike parts that Rekluse has no economic incentive to make and EXP packs and clutch plates for.

I turned to EFM with several inquiries over time as I was musing over this project and in a kind of probing about a working relationship. My last email where I proposed the 315R clutch basket to make implementation easier for him, and asking a critical question, "Please tell me your confidence at being able to achieve a clutch with my preferred characteristics for this application. And being able to do so in, say, no more than three iterations? I need to know what I'm getting into as this project would cost me around $15k" got me the following response. Hmm.

315 is more of a standard type hub.

Thank you for the interest in EFM Auto Clutch Inc.

Garry Buzzelli
EFM Auto Clutch Inc.

WHICH BIKE & WHOM CO-DEVELOPMENT
Gary might still help me out, but we shall see. I already like the TRS, a lot, and the fact that the local small dealer is a friend and a sharp professional engineer. When I discussed my project he was enthused and responsive, volunteering co-development time and resources, like his RP and CNC machines. Of course he wants me to remain in the TRS fold and not see me wandering off into Cota land. My TRS 250RR is a great platform for auto clutch development and - this is an update - I have figured out HOW to pull off an auto clutch on a diaphragm-clutch bike. Now I'm doing sketches as a first step to fleshing out a design in CAD.

I could have justified a 280 Gold, but the drop-dead ordering date for one of the 150 to be produced this year is well past. Not only was the major 2-day trials event in the way, but I engaged another major and immensely expensive project right at decision time. Mr. Gold became too much to think about for now :-0

 

[Motobene]

Last post updated.

 

[Motobene]

Just got a text inquiry from a friend who apparently also has a TRS and would like to do auto clutch on a trials bike.

I've long been a 250 man, as that size in the more spunky 250 bikes affords many advantages to the common man, not the least of which is
taking fewer points in competitions when 'bigger is better' and an over-spunky 300 repeatedly breaks traction. I passed up ordering that 280 Gold
so it may be past time to do so. The development work will thus take place on another bike. Maybe my 250.

On an auto clutch bike more displacement works auto clutches, as does also running tall in the final drive, and the greater torque from a touch more
displacement will go well with both. I just rode a new Vertigo 300 and that engine was the first 2-stroke 300 I'd not mind owning. It felt neither high inertia
(heavy), nor abrupt. Strange to have 4-stroke-like engine braking on a 2-stroke bike owing to FI setup. In the spunky TRS the 280 is a good engine size compromise.
And that magic button is, well, where they all should go.

When doing research on auto clutches recently I hit the following article on the former Rev-Loc clutches wherein there is 'getting it' regarding
how the controls can be simplified and how that simplification can enhance control for the majority of riders, as in those NOT doing super cross
or other extremes where departing from one's longstanding habits is deemed to risky to mess with success.

Interesting comment on moving the rear brake!

Those riders who tend to have the most problem with auto clutches and moving the rear brake tend to be those who over use the rear brake, under use the front brake (because it can be 'scary') and it's scary because those same riders also tend to sit or stand on bike un dynamically, like a sack of potatoes, and don't selectively weight the front wheel as they could. I've noticed they also tend to lean body with bike. That poor technique one can get away with riding big bikes off road or on, but in extreme situations that's dangerous, and in trials it leads to limiting out in the lower classes (who will volunteer for an ego killing flailing and dabbing away on a higher line?)

The most important factor in testing and adoption of something new is ones psychological flexibility, which even very smart people can fail at.

I found big advantages in safety and confidence on off-road bikes with auto clutch and only hand brakes. I talk about that as few listen or get it. That's entirely fine. The few will go there and like me, stay there or want to be there even in trials competition.

In trials it took me a long time to accept letting of of a manual clutch to gain the same whole package I discovered elsewhere. I'm dying to go there, but it will take maybe the rest of this year to attain, what with all my other grand projects That I chose to 'go there' with a bike with a fully modern clutch presents technical challenges which will take time to sort our, but I relish just that sort of thing.

 

[ZoomerP]

I found big advantages in safety and confidence on off-road bikes with auto clutch and only hand brakes. I talk about that as few listen or get it. That's entirely fine. The few will go there and like me, stay there or want to be there even in trials competition.

Cast in the opposite light, would a rider comfortable with LHRB & auto clutch want to convert their bike to RFRB & manual clutch?