Britbike forum Forums British Motorcycle specific Brands Triumph bulletin board 1969 T100C Trophy, production year differences

I have a 1969 T100C project that is a really early model year specimen, and it seems to have the 66-68 style tank emblems, and also the 68 front brake. Chassis number is T100CH662** Could this be correct? The threads appears to be UN all over and not CEI, and it has the steering head lock as well as the wider 1969 fork crown.

Hi,

Welcome to the Forum.


As far as I know, no. '69 C-range (unit 350 and 500 twins) had substantial changes '68-'69, so I cannot see that there would have been any reason to bolt '68 parts on - particularly when something like the '68 brake would normally have a shorter axle to suit the narrower '68 forks. Also, a T100C would have had a 7-inch diameter front brake originally - the "68 front brake" on your bike is more likely 8-inch?

Otoh, nearly fifty years have elapsed since the bike was made; plenty of time for someone - best-case, to have fitted "66-68 tank emblems" (they bolt on to a '69 tank) and mixed-and-matched '68 and '69-on brake parts to assemble the front brake - worst-case, to have crashed the bike and replaced damaged '69 bits with '68 bits?


Certainly according to the parts book, while most of the engine threads are UNF or UNC (the head bolts into the cylinder block are still CEI), there are more CEI threads on the cycle parts - for example, the engine mounting studs have the very useful feature of standard-hex.CEI nuts at one end and 'small hex.' (one standard hex. size smaller) at the other end - then you don't need two spanners/wrenches the same size to loosen or tighten them. :bigt

Hope this helps.

Regards,

Conflicting info, 68 is H57083 to H67331 so H662** is a 68 by some sources but a 69 by others eg 1968 H57083 to H65572, one set of data is wrong but which one ?

Model year changes were not 100% at a set number, old left over parts were sometimes used until the part bins were empty. Sounds like yours is a 69 but with some 68 parts, but a front end accident would mean a new front end so it may have been repaired with 68 parts including the tank.

I have reason to believe that the fork has not been replaced. The threads in the lower legs are UN and the stanchions is of the 1969 type, the crown is the wide 1969, and the wheel has the longer 1969 axle, the brake is 7", but with the SLS setup, not the TLS.

Regarding the dating, it was titled as a 1969 model in California. According to The Trophy Bible by Harry Woolridge the number also checks out as a 1969 model, built in somewhere between august 22 and the 9th of september (H66124-H66976). In this book Mr Woolrigde claims that from XC07583 the brake is replaced with the TLS setup, that would be December 1968. My bike appears to be built just in the beginning of the 1969 run, and before that change. That is why I have come to think that maybe these first 69:s, looked more like the 68 models. unfortunately the exhaust pipes are lost, but I have the mufflers and they are the correct ones. I believe that they were the same in 68, right?

I would be interested to know if there is anyone out that has a similar machine from this first August-September production, with the earlier type of numbering system, to find out if there are other early 69:s with 68 emblems. It is of course entirely possible that the emblems has been replaced at one time on my bike.

H662** is prior to XC07583 in the build sequence, as the factory went from using H to a month/year 2 digit combination which XC is during 68, so SLS front brake on your bike is correct according to Harry Woolridge's information.

Twin digit code explained

The first letter indicates the month of manufacture as follows:-

A - January
B - February
C - March
D - April
E - May
G - June
H - July
J - August
K - September
N - October
P - November
X - December

The second letter indicates the season year of manufacture as follows :-

C - 1969
D - 1970

So XC is a 69 model year bike made in Dec 1968 a few months after your bike.

Note the season typically ran Aug to Aug, so 69 model year would likely have ran Aug 68 to Aug 69.

So your bike was made Aug 68 to an early 69 Model year spec and there looks to have been mid year changes to add the TLS and there were no doubt other changes too.

Interestingly enough there was a misunderstanding in January 1969, when the first engines was marked with "AD" (pretty logical for the people on the floor, since they were instructed to stamp the engines with XC for December 1968) but after a month the leadership informed them that 1969 should be "C" actually, so about 800 engines were wrongly stamped in January, until they started to stamp the february motors with "BC and so on.

Those were the days...

Hi,


No "conflict", this is wrong.


No possibility of this with the '69 C-range; as I posted above, there were substantial changes for '69 - new crankcases, crankshaft, bearings, etc. '69 C-range started at H65573.


In addition to 2200-odd C-range to '69 specification numbered in the H-range, Meriden also built several thousand '69-spec. 650's numbered in the DU-range; as far as I can tell, Meriden did not use the two-letter date code until October 1968. Meriden continued to build 650's until 10th December 1968, when the factory switched to T100R's; T100C's were begun on 30th December 1968.

The 1970 season is known to have begun in July 1969.


You are extrapolating incorrectly. Not all C-range engines built in January 1969 were stamped "AD", many hundreds - including a batch of Tiger 90's that ended up with the Irish police - were stamped "AC" correctly.

Hope this helps.

Regards,

Post photos of your engine #'s

According to http://www.triumph-tiger-100.com, Mr Justin Harvey-James, Oxford in writes about the 1969 models:

"The Factory made an error in the coding of 1145 machines built in January 1969 as these were given the year code D instead of C.
All machines in the range AD7780 to AD8884 are 1969 Models."

"T100C models prior to AC 9210 will show the earlier single leading shoe brake rather than the twin leading shoe version" - (Yet another machine number than Woolridges.)

What interests me the most is which tank emblems was used on the very first 1969 T100C production bikes?

I have been checking the mufflers I have, and they are as far as I can see of the 1969 variety, not the 68 type.

Judging from the production numbers my bike was around the 150th bike built of the 1969 T100C model range. My bike bike appears to have been abused from day 1 in California, where it was sold new. As far as I can see with no mods whatsoever except for some flat black paint, ridden until the alternator blew up. The bike then was stored outside for some time, subsequently taken over by a California car collector that hanged it on a wall for many years, he later disassembled it and lost a few of the parts, until the owner before me bought it and imported it to Sweden in 2016, where its current location is.

Hi,


I have used Justin's site (also available as http://www.triumph-tiger-90.com/) for many years. He has added the '69-on information only recently; while it is and will be welcome, regrettably, at present, compared to his pre-'69 information, it contains a substantial number of errors:-

. Engine / Frame Numbers NC100-JC23789 is misleading. Firstly, all numbers with two-letter date codes are always five-figure, so the first one was and is either NC00100 or NC00101. Secondly, the range indicates over 23,000 motorcycles; Meriden simply did not produce over 23,000 500's and 350's when the factory's best total annual output rarely exceeded 30,000 units, of which far-and-away the greatest number were always 650's.

. From 1969 the Engine and Frame Numbers for all models change to include a two letter Month and Year Code, ... Prefixes are no longer used is simply wrong. As the 1968 section of the website indicates, H65572 was the last '68 C-range; this is coincidentally one before H65573 - the number on the front page of the '69 C-range parts book ...

. You have noted already that your T100C's engine/frame number is in the 1969 T100C range detailed by Harry Woolridge in The Triumph Trophy Bible. The larger H65573 to H67731 range is detailed as 1969 models in John Nelson's Triumph Tiger 100 And Daytona.

. H65573 onwards cannot be considered '68 models because they have all the '69-on modifications - you have already found the wider forks and Unified threads, you should be able to find the crankcase and crankshaft changes both Justin and I have posted, you should see the oil pressure switch in the leading edge of the timing cover (that Justin mentions has been changed internally to transfer oil to the new crankshaft). You are also likely to find that pushrod cover tube seals on your bike's engine are as shown in the '69 parts book, different from '68 - this also means that the tappet guide blocks, pushrod tubes and cylinder head are different from '68. By the way, the seals require further modification and additional parts to actually seal. but that is another story.

. The oil pressure switch now with UNF Threads is also wrong. The thread is 1/8"NPT - (American) National Pipe Tapered.

(Again by the way, if you have not come across pipe threads before, the "1/8-inch" can appear confusing, because the maximum outside diameter of the male thread is 0.405" - the "1/8-inch" is a nominal pipe internal diameter.)

. The switch ... is wired to a red indicator light in the headlamp which acts as both Ignition and Oil Pressure warning light. Justin is ... confused, as this is not possible, Pre-'69, the Red "ignition light" is illuminated all the time the ignition is switched on; '69-on, the Red lamp is connected only to the oil pressure switch, should be illuminated when oil pressure is below a very low level (Justin posts "7 psi" but modern switches might be lower) and should be extinguished above the switch pressure. Unfortunately, according to the workshop manual, tickover pressure is 20 psi and normal running pressure (above 3,000 rpm?) is 60 psi; so seeing the light illuminated any time the engine is running simply warns of imminent substantial bank account depletion ...

. A left hand thread is introduced for the Rev-counter drive. If you are not familiar with this, either the drive internal "Securing screw" (or the blanking bolt in the drive-side crankcase) is turned clockwise to unscrew it. The left hand thread is 1/2"UNF; pre-'69, it is 1/2"BSF normal right-hand.

. the Clutch Cover now shows the Triumph logo, While I think Justin means the alternator rotor cover in the primary chain cover, this was first fitted in '68.

. almost all of the thread sizes within the engine are UNF - UNC, being into aluminium alloy; UNF are restricted to steel parts - for example, the cylinder barrel base studs taking the new-for-'69 12-point 3/8"UNF nuts.

. The Factory made an error in the coding of 1145 machines built in January 1969 as these were given the year code D instead of C.
All machines in the range AD7780 to AD8884 are 1969 Models. As above, AD07780 to AD08884; it is how a '69 "AD" is differentiated from a '70 "AD" - because Meriden continued with the same number range for '70, bikes built in January 1970 have five-figure numbers starting with a "2" or "3".


Mmmm ...

. XC07583 also appears in the Triumph booklet Changes To Ranges, with "7in Twin leading shoe front brake (T100C, T100R)"; certainly we know that the 7" tls was never normally fitted to the T100R.

. If you read the complete '69 entry in The Triumph Trophy Bible, you will see Harry says several changes happen from XC07583. This appears to be the first T100C built on 30th December 1968 but, as I posted earlier, it is not the first of the second '69 batch of 500's - according to John Nelson in Triumph Tiger 100 And Daytona, Meriden built T100R's from XC06279 on the 10th December 1968 (probably until the factory closed for the Christmas break?).

I hope Justin posts more about the SLS brake on T100C's - AC09210 seems very late to be still fitting this brake, when Meriden had the better-known 7" version of the tls.


Both Harry Woolridge (in The Triumph Trophy Bible) and John Nelson (in both Triumph Tiger 100 And Daytona and Bonnie) have written that the tanks and badges were changed for '69. If your bike's tank has the top grid, or screw holes to mount it (possibly filled under the "flat black paint"?), chances are it is not original; on the other hand, no traces of holes, chances are a previous owner simply liked the earlier badges?


Specifically DU85904 to DU90282, the first number being detailed on the first page of the '69 650 parts book and the range being detailed in Bonnie. While the '69 650's did not need a new crankshaft or crankcases, they did gain the same wider forks, Unified threads, oil pressure switch and wiring modification, new pushrod tubes, seals, tappet guide blocks, cylinder head, tachometer drive thread, etc. as the C-range.

Hope this helps.

Regards,

"H65573 onwards cannot be considered '68 models because they have all the '69-on modifications - you have already found the wider forks and Unified threads, you should be able to find the crankcase and crankshaft changes both Justin and I have posted, you should see the oil pressure switch in the leading edge of the timing cover (that Justin mentions has been changed internally to transfer oil to the new crankshaft). You are also likely to find that pushrod cover tube seals on your bike's engine are as shown in the '69 parts book, different from '68 - this also means that the tappet guide blocks, pushrod tubes and cylinder head are different from '68."

On my bike all these changes are present.


Regarding my tank, I am sure it is the 69 model, it has no holes for a grid and under the flat black you can see the 1969 metallic green colour. It is of course possible that a previous owner preferred the earlier emblems, but there is no other modifications to the bike whatsoever, It seems strange (but possible, of course) that the owners would have bothered about tank emblems, when they haven't bothered about anything else that had to do with the bike. It has just been run to the ground completely, but from toking at the crank, and the engine internals not so many miles. I have a totally broken speedo that appears to be the original one, and I will try and check the mileage - it has to be disassembled to accomplish this.

Hi,



In addition to the 2,000+ H-numbered '69 500's, Meriden also made over 4,000 DU-numbered 650's; as you have posted already, your bike is in the middle of the T100C's, which are numbered in the middle of the run of 500's. Why would your bike have been fitted with 1968 badges when, as far as I know, none of the earlier '69 bikes were?

On the other hand, Forum contributors who were Triumph dealers in the US 'back in the day' have posted several times that they routinely customised standard bikes to suit local preferences, by adding, changing or removing parts, before even putting the bikes on sale. It was also normal practice, supported financially by both US importers, to customise a bike to a prospective owner's requests. Or one of the previous owners lost one or both original badges? Even just losing a screw - original screws were/are not very long and, being 2BA, not easy to obtain in the US - the first owner might have just removed the original badges and forgotten them?

All sorts of non-standard reasons why, nearly a half-century after it was made, your bike might have pre-'69 badges.


Risking telling you something you know already, if you are planning to reproduce the original colour, it was/is known as a "candy" (abbreviated from "Candy Apple"). The colour you see is a combination of two coats - a "ground coat" (CA term) with a translucent lacquer over. In '69, Triumph called the colour "Lincoln Green", the 'ground coat' was Silver, the lacquer was, obviously, green. If you use the Forum Search to look for posts By Display Name "benny jensen", he has posted pictures of his 1969 T100R restoration; also, there is this restoration online.

But it is your bike, make it how you want it?

Hope this helps.

Regards,

"your bike is in the middle of the T100C's, which are numbered in the middle of the run of 500's. Why would your bike have been fitted with 1968 badges when, as far as I know, none of the earlier '69 bikes were?"

I am not claiming it was delivered with 68 emblems, I just wondered if there was any other evidence at all that early 69 500:s could have been delivered with the 68 emblems. If not, that is no problem for me.