[Dussey]

Here are pictures of the restoration of my 1954 BSA C-11, 250cc.
The restoration was carried out by my friend Shiva, who is also the owner of a war model Matchless G3L .The engine and frame assembly was literally done in his bedroom as you can see in the pics. There are two pictures of how the bike was before restoration. The transformation, as you can see , is from a duckling to a swan !

[theslayer]

My God is she beautiful! Mr. Dussey, you have done the world a great service

The shade and the chrome have been beautifully put back on the motorcycle! How does she ride?

I have a couple of queries though, please entertain me I'm having trouble with the details on this model, especially the tank and the head lamp. We reviewed Mr. Muthukumar's 1954 BSA C11G two years ago and the tank and headlamp housing was completely different.

This beauty is definitely not the C10 since we can see the engine does of course have the overhead valves, but I'm wondering if there is a possibility this might be an older C11 and not 1954? It definitely has to be after '51 since the plunger frame was added only then.

Again, thank you for the visual treat!

[Dussey]

Originally Posted by theslayer

My God is she beautiful! Mr. Dussey, you have done the world a great service

The shade and the chrome have been beautifully put back on the motorcycle! How does she ride?

I have a couple of queries though, please entertain me I'm having trouble with the details on this model, especially the tank and the head lamp. We reviewed Mr. Muthukumar's 1954 BSA C11G two years ago and the tank and headlamp housing was completely different.

This beauty is definitely not the C10 since we can see the engine does of course have the overhead valves, but I'm wondering if there is a possibility this might be an older C11 and not 1954? It definitely has to be after '51 since the plunger frame was added only then.

Again, thank you for the visual treat!

Thanks a lot for your appreciation. It certainly is a C-11, like you have suggested perhaps an older C-11. The RC papers are originals and it has been reflected as 1954 in the RC. Many a time, stocks which are older with the dealer, could have been sold subsequently and hence the RC may show 1954.
The C-11G has the speedo seperately and not in the tank as it is in this bike.
She rides beautifully well. In fact she did a trip to Pondicherry and back in Jan
when I had taken part in the Chennai to Pondicherry Heritage Rally together with my Triumph 3HW, pictures of which are posted in the other thread of my Triumph 3HW in the " Pre war " section.

Since you are from Chennai, you could see the bike in ' flesh and blood ' , by visiting my display . PM me and come over.

[harit]

Hi, lovely bike. It looks delicious.
But one comment, I believe buffing an engine housing is not a good idea. Maybe good for show, but should not be done from technical point of view. I don't know the real reason to explain in technical detail, but something to do with removal of imperfections while buffing having some effect on cooling. Maybe others can elaborate and take this as a debate forward.

Cheers harit

[voodoochild]

Originally Posted by harit

...but something to do with removal of imperfections while buffing having some effect on cooling. Maybe others can elaborate and take this as a debate forward.

Harit sir, wouldn't crankcase surface imperfections be too minor to allow a "finning effect" for better cooling? Anyway, a light buffing wouldn't really remove these. No harm done.
Theoretically the clearing up of alu oxide on the surface would better expose the surface to cooling airflow IMHO.

Cheers
Rahul

[Dussey]

Originally Posted by voodoochild

Harit sir, wouldn't crankcase surface imperfections be too minor to allow a "finning effect" for better cooling? Anyway, a light buffing wouldn't really remove these. No harm done.
Theoretically the clearing up of alu oxide on the surface would better expose the surface to cooling airflow IMHO.

Cheers
Rahul

Originally Posted by harit

Hi, lovely bike. It looks delicious.
But one comment, I believe buffing an engine housing is not a good idea. Maybe good for show, but should not be done from technical point of view. I don't know the real reason to explain in technical detail, but something to do with removal of imperfections while buffing having some effect on cooling. Maybe others can elaborate and take this as a debate forward.

Cheers harit

Thanks, Haritji for your appreciation.
The buffing was done since there were imperfections and lot of grime which made it very dull and it was such a contrast to the shiny engine/gearbox. Your point is certainly noted.

[harit]

Originally Posted by voodoochild

Harit sir, wouldn't crankcase surface imperfections be too minor to allow a "finning effect" for better cooling? Anyway, a light buffing wouldn't really remove these. No harm done.
Cheers Rahul

Originally Posted by Dussey

Thanks, Haritji for your appreciation.
The buffing was done since there were imperfections and lot of grime which made it very dull and it was such a contrast to the shiny engine/gearbox. .....

I am not sure about this subject, either ways, and would like to hear more. The above make a case for buffing, but I have also heard the opposite with conviction. Me not being much into bikes do not know what is the right approach. A buffed engine certainly looks nicer, what about the mechanical implication of it?

Cheers harit