classic motorcycle forum

He's being overly negative.
 M20s etc parts aren't dearer or more elusive than any other old classics' and they're on Ebay all the time.
If you wanted it finished quickly then you'd likely end up paying too much, but providing you wait it out and pick up bits as they appear, and just enjoy the rebuild for what it is, then there's no reason to think you'd pay over the odds, unless you want catalogue perfection. To get it complete and a runner wouldn't be hard, especially if you're happy to use wrong year bits etc.
This is surmising you enjoy the greasy rebuilding process, of course; some don't.
"Scrap" indeed. What tosh. It's no worse than  my current project, a 37 Empire Star.

I doubt it's in bits and also doubt it's still in the UK.
In the South we get vans of Eastern Europeans opportunistic "scrap hunting" several times a day. So far, they taken kids' walking aids, garden swings and even Portsmouth's bronze WW2 dead scrolls from a memorial.

Gotta love that EU....

Two points to consider there, Johnny-
1) The Law of Diminishing Returns, explained to me by the case of Bantam tuning vs Z1 tuning. It would be relatively easy and cheap to increase the Bantam's output by 10%, but next to impossible to do the same with the Z1 as Kawa have already done all the obvious and easy mods.
Therefore a good design in a lowish state of tune (MAC for example) is better than an OK design highly tuned (Z1) and despite what MCM may have spouted endlessly in the 1970s/80s the old British factories' engine designers were just as savvy of the principles of power as any from Japan.

2) Had the Japs etc really tuned the UJMs it wouldn't necessarily have been great for reliability, longevity, or even rider comfort. Not everyone rides at ten tenths, and most never do; that's why a true Goldie was such a pain in the arse on the road way back when, and why Golden Flashes were far more popular..

Ah well, that's good to know it survived.
How has it been customised then?

I don't think that. I just think how lucky you are to have some nice bikes. After all, stamp collectors don't have just one stamp, do they?

Personally I like to hear what others think of my bikes, but I don't get upset by anything negative. We all like different things, and some are naturally acidic towards others; it's often another symptom of the old green-eyed monster......

MZ 150s? Not so long back you couldn't give them away....
Best of luck with it, but I was never impressed with MZ build quality.

The strapped forks were the WW1 era "Trusty" bikes etc where the fork action was "fore-and-aft" at the top and liable to a spring break, but the TT like yours had more of a conventional girder action. I have the same style of forks as yours on a Model P bitsa, and a very similar CTT style (complete with identical top and bottom links) fitted to another Triumph bitsa, since sold.

The previous post re rigidity- the yokes are very substantial on this design, and take the role of the side links in a Webb-style fork. The fork "sides" are still located by three spindles though; two through the yokes, and the wheel spindle. I found the fork action to be very nice.

Don't think it "stands" for anything, as such. More to do with the model designation ie S for the sporty model, and R for road (as opposed to C for competition, etc)

Must admit I thought the SR moniker was for the US 500s only, rather than the 650s.