OzVMX Forum
Clubroom => General Discussion => Topic started by: Rossvickicampbell on May 11, 2010, 02:04:24 pm
-
Gents - just after some info - not trying to shit stir (this time!). Am I correct in thinking EVO class is basically post 78 pre 85 but as stated no linkage, no water cooled, no disc brakes. Which for Honda would mean up to and including the 80 model CR250R but for some of the European brands goes later?
ta
-
Talk about dumb,even I know this answer!!
yes mate Evo is non linkage non watercooled DUH!!
-
EVO is not defined by date nor age of the machine. If a Chinese factory was to copy (maico 490, for example) and sell it as a 2010 model, it is EVO legal. In my personal opinion, herein lies the problem with EVO
-
So Bahnsy you are saying that a dutch twin shock ( cr480 for example) would be legal then?
Which is certainly not the case. And that is because common sense and fair play are to be factored in which seem to be left out of most discussions on the internet. Pushing a 2010 model up to scruitineering at an actual vmx meeting would see it being put back on the trailer. A cr480 modified to twin shock would be able to run where it belongs in pre 85.
Not knowing all the models, but there is a Husky(as late as 84) and a Monty that are later models allowed in.
I think the real reason its called evo instead of pre 80 or pre 81 or pre 82 is because the cut off of this era obviously wants to encompass all bikes with two shocks, be air cooled and have drum brakes. Discs, water cooling and single shocks were not at a single year, they were all over the place. For me the perfect name for the class. Pre 85 takes bikes with one or all of the later upgrades.
The way I see it, evo is only a problem in cyber space or if you don't want to follow the rules as they were written. Not saying that you are either Bahnsy.
-
Brad, you have hit the nail on the head, with your description.
-
Craig - wanker again - the answer doesn't look like it is that simple eh! Mind you - I wasn't after an interpretation just what it is supposed to be ???
So please gents - no hybrids, 2010 models etc. As it was intended to be - in the Honda range Brad it would finish at the 250RA - yes?
thanks
Rossco
Geez - Craig...............some days! Why don't you come over for our Anniversary meet this year?
-
Yes mate, RA.
-
Dutch twinshock cr480, does not come into the equation as the bike started out life as a linkage bike. As stupid as it sounds, there is nothing (other than officials) stopping you from fronting a start line with a 2010 Honda CT110 postie bike as it is air cooled, drum braked & non-linkage. Taking the maico scenario a step further, there is a lot of web traffic around the 490 being re-introduced as a replica model. Given the vin system, it would be homologated as a 2010 model. As noted before the gcr's don't put EVO into a date or age category.
-
evolution has no cut off date.so you can get a current model and race it.one hot ag 200.yes it maybe a ag but you can get parts. keep looking as there are more.Bahnsy you forget the other problem OEM.the late great Magoo hated with a passion
-
You had to raise OEM!
If i had a $ for every discussion on OEM I'd be a rich man
-
Geez - Craig...............some days! Why don't you come over for our Anniversary meet this year?
Sorry Rossco I didnt realise you were so thin skinned re your mental handicap!
Jokes mate jokes, love you long time in a non threatening hetro sexual way,not in a Honda riding dancing boys way like Lady Bradalota and his evil apprentice Shane.... :-* :-*
Any way screw Evo and twinshocks its all linkages and kettles for me here on in!
-
Craig - you haven't had one of those rare caring/sharing moments have you where you feel I take note of your comments??? ;D
-
rossco, you are not on your own mate, l talk in date , this evo talk, sure had me scratch-in my head too.
-
just out there in the left.what is to stop someone building a new copy evo bike(any type)as long as it is a copy on the outside it must be able to race.the example in australian racing is brand new manx norton road racers and g50s,they line up next to gen pre62 bikes and sometimes win.if it can be done in 1 form of ma leagle racing why not in an other.but it has to be a copy as they were in the day.
some people just have to much money.when i was classic road racing in the early 80 a guy in sa was aready making manx stuff and even made a v twin jap.
-
Bahnsy is 100% right: The ONLY requirements of the Evo class are drum brakes, air cooling and no-rear linkage.
The rest is smoke and mirrors.
Jim's hypothetical reproduction bike is definitely acceptable. Even a modern design bike that meets the criteria is Evo-legal. It would be outside the intention of the regs, but within the rules.
-
just out there in the left.what is to stop someone building a new copy evo bike(any type)as long as it is a copy on the outside it must be able to race.the example in australian racing is brand new manx norton road racers and g50s,they line up next to gen pre62 bikes and sometimes win.if it can be done in 1 form of ma leagle racing why not in an other.but it has to be a copy as they were in the day.
some people just have to much money.when i was classic road racing in the early 80 a guy in sa was aready making manx stuff and even made a v twin jap.
It's already being done, GMC HL replica's are an example that pops to mind and a company in the U.K. are remanufacturing Mega 2 frames and swingarms.
-
Its only an issue on this forum.
-
just out there in the left.what is to stop someone building a new copy evo bike(any type)as long as it is a copy on the outside it must be able to race.the example in australian racing is brand new manx norton road racers and g50s,they line up next to gen pre62 bikes and sometimes win.
Those replica road racers are really only replicas in looks, the works bikes of the time would be underpowered slugs in comparison. Thats why classic roadracing holds no interest for me unlike forgotten era where the bikes are generally hot rods not trying to pretend they're something else
From spectating at the Johnny Old meeting it looks like we run open twinshock with non linkage bikes allowed in there as well which sounds a lot like evo just with a different name
-
we have been racing evo up here for over
10 years with no problem
everyone rides the correct bike for the class
;)
-
we have been racing evo up here for over
10 years with no problem
everyone rides the correct bike for the class
;)
Like Brad said...the problem only exists on this forum.
-
Why on earth do some folk just keep grinding away at this EVO thing. Evo is pretty well exlained in black and white in MoMs
-
nothing wrong with the evo rules, just how some people read them ;D
-
Gents - just after some info - not trying to shit stir (this time!). Am I correct in thinking EVO class is basically post 78 pre 85 but as stated no linkage, no water cooled, no disc brakes. Which for Honda would mean up to and including the 80 model CR250R but for some of the European brands goes later?
ta
I think you have it bang on with this statement, and to put it in other words... In The Spirit of the Era......
even though what some of the other guys are saying is correct that EVO isnt within a time frame, the bike itself has to be manufactured from new as ... no linkage ... no watercooling ... no disc brakes.
... In The Spirit of the Era...
-
just leave the evo class alone and for god sake get rid of this bull s!@# in the spirit of the era.
-
Its only an issue on this forum.
Unfortunitly it's not.
nothing wrong with the evo rules, just how some people read them ;D
Again, if the rules are written in such a way that there is such polaristaion in the interpretation, then there is something wrong.
-
All I wanted to know was what bikes it applied to ::)
-
just leave the evo class alone and for god sake get rid of this bull s!@# in the spirit of the era.
The guy asked a simple question about the evo class, would you prefer that his question isnt answered? He wasnt asking about changing rules or anything like that, just info.
As for the for god sake get rid of this bull s!@# in the spirit of the era.
I would have thought all VMX was in that vein, or do you think else-wise?
If VMX isnt in the spirit of the era, what the hell is it then?
-
Am I correct in thinking EVO class is basically post 78 pre 85 but as stated no linkage, no water cooled, no disc brakes.
Essentially that is the mindset of the majority of the VMX community.
However under the current GCR's, any bike produced prior to and post 1978 (regardless of when it was built) can be entered in the class as long as it is was originally manafactured (this is where the OEM comes in) with drum brakes, an air cooled engine and the rear suspension was of a non-linkage design.
Which for Honda would mean up to and including the 80 model CR250R but for some of the European brands goes later?Correct.
-
Just my humble opinion but I think It would make things a LOT easier, less complicated and save a whole heap of arguments if they just made the clasess pre 65 , pre 70 pre 75. pre 79 pre 82 and pre 85 (and pre 90 for those inclined), don't shoot me - just my opinion.
-
Insert Quote
Quote from: 090 on Today at 06:58:15 PM
Its only an issue on this forum.
Unfortunitly it's not.
Where has there been a problem that you have come across?
Do you you have a condensed solution?
Just my humble opinion but I think It would make things a LOT easier, less complicated and save a whole heap of arguments if they just made the clasess pre 65 , pre 70 pre 75. pre 79 pre 82 and pre 85 (and pre 90 for those inclined), don't shoot me - just my opinion.
Pre 82 puts single shock with twin shock which isn't what its about. Maybe twin shock air cooled drum braked up to pre 85.
I stand behind what I said earlier. Only a problem on here or if you want to do something that the rules have set out not to do.
-
Rossvickicampbell asked a simple question and that where it should have ended, with a simple answer.
If anyone is interested in off-line discussion, please send me a message (or) if you will be @ CD7 then we could discuss over a beer or 10 :)
To answer that last 2 questions;
Where has there been a problem that you have come across?
eg: CR450 - RM465/500 forks and clamps fitted to a eg; 1980 CR250 79/80 RM400's. They are out there if you look.
Individuals assume that because they are drum braked and conventional, then they are o/k, however they came from a bike that was not an OEM EVO bike within the definition of the GCR's.
The crazy thing is that a YZ465 front end which is all but identical in construction is o/k.
Personally i dont care, but the GCR's are the GCR's.
Do you you have a condensed solution?
Kinda, but at the moment this is not the place nor the time to discuss given the current process that MA Classic Commission is going through.
-
point being is that I don't think that a '78 model Cr250 is remotely competetive against a '84 model Husky 250
You're kidding aren't you?? The Evo class is full of '78 '79 hondas and barely a Husky in there.
If the Husky was such a good bike the class would be full of them.
Truth is the '78 honda was ahead of it's time and the '84 husky was a lemon in it's day and the performance difference between the 2 is not that much.
All the different makes of bikes in the Evo class are fairly close in performance and that's largely the reason the class is so successfull with a big variety of competitive bikes.
-
talking about single shock bike, l know a bike that is sitting a shed, and l have known of this bike for about 14 years, the manufacturing date is on the head stem and it is in large print
1979, moto villa 250 single shock, only 2 came into the country in that era.
-
To answer that last 2 questions;
Where has there been a problem that you have come across?
eg: CR450 - RM465/500 forks and clamps fitted to a eg; 1980 CR250 79/80 RM400's. They are out there if you look.
Individuals assume that because they are drum braked and conventional, then they are o/k, however they came from a bike that was not an OEM EVO bike within the definition of the GCR's.
The crazy thing is that a YZ465 front end which is all but identical in construction is o/k.
Personally i dont care, but the GCR's are the GCR's.
I wouldn't think that is an issue with the rules. That's a matter of thinking they can get away with it as its a smaller demeanour seeing as it still looks right.
-
Brad, the point is that there ARE grey areas in the rules. It doesn't matter if 99 riders out of 100 interpret the rules in one particular way - if one rider interprets them differently and cannot be proven wrong, then we have a problem.
Stuff like the 'drum brake forks from a non-Evo bike' is probably the most obvious example. I know that my interpretation was more restrictive than most people's interpretation - but I can't prove them wrong either...(and it doesn't matter that much to me either).
-
Yeah, I don't think anyone thinks that the rules as they stand aren't flawed. I also personally think, that as it already has happened, these areas will be addressed at ground zero( at scrutineering) as time goes by. Having a legal bike is becoming more of an issue and so it should. That's what era racing is all about ( even though there are flaws in that if you look hard enough and if you WANT there to be).
interpretation
= what can I get away with.
We can't get away with much up here anyway, with the Nazi's we have aka Mr Bamford and master Vandy! :D
I think that no matter how tight the rules are written, there will always be a minority that will try and get around/ blatantly cheat and think that they are clever by doing so. As humans are fundamentally flawed, unlike me, myself and I . Got to go , myself wants a turn on the computer....
-
interpretation
= what can I get away with.
I know you're at least partly tounge-in-heek, but its been said many times on this forum and I actually think this is a really dangerous attitude.
The idea that anyone who's understanding of the rules is different to yours is a cheat (or a rule bender, at the least), is hardly going to encourage sensible discussion...
-
Hmmm.
cr250 rz with cr450 forks...no for me. Or any other specific bikes with pre 85 front ends .
2010 ct110 .... no for me (and you would be a dick head for turning up with it imo and honestly, who would?)
Brand new Maico 490... yes for me . The new ones for sale in the UK aren't right as they need to have the correct motor over here ( they use an '83 motor), so with the correct motor, yes.
'84 Husky twin shock...yes and I think its a given but I can't think of many more scenarios that would be an issue.
China bike...no on principle and good taste. It wouldn't get past a scrutineer and I for one would chastise a guy that even tried to ride one at a vmx meet.
What else is there?
-
We can't get away with much up here anyway, with the Nazi's we have aka Mr Bamford and master Vandy! :D
kind of like the two Michaels :D
that amazing comical group from the 70's... :D
i've only just skimmed through this thread but it's an unfortunate fact that newcomers to our sport hear/read all this whats right and whats wrong stuff and it scares them away from our sport.
being a scrutineer can be tricky as people think your supposed to know it all.
my motto is to get the bikes on the track.
if it's not right/legal or whatever, it'll all get sorted in the wash.
i'm more concerned about handlebar plugs and the like...
{although the paperwork side of things takes up more time anyway}
it's all good.
-
Hi, Michael,
It's always nice to see the work of the scrutineers recognised, :D, we are always amazed at the excuses the riders can come up with when we show them their leaking fuel tank or cracked frame ,
see you Sunday
-
i understand the EVO class, but I can't understand why we have it. based on back in the day the YZ,RM, KX,CR etc raced against each other no matter what they were. If you were able to do a modification then, it was good luck to you.. As long as the mods are in line with the era what';s the problem.
Only an opinion and not one to say get rid of EVO, just confused got up this morning and the wife offered me sex, been walking round in a daze since!!!!
-
kind of like the two Michaels :D
Is that like the 2 Ronnies only not as funny ::)
-
i understand the EVO class, but I can't understand why we have it. based on back in the day the YZ,RM, KX,CR etc raced against each other no matter what they were. If you were able to do a modification then, it was good luck to you.. As long as the mods are in line with the era what';s the problem.
Only an opinion and not one to say get rid of EVO, just confused got up this morning and the wife offered me sex, been walking round in a daze since!!!!
Tossa,
The evo class was introduced years ago, before pre 78, before pre '85 and pre '90 as a class for people with bikes older than pre '75.
I could only assume that at the time it would have been considered the last class to be introduced to vintage.
It's very easy today to say, "they should have done this" or "they should have done that" but hindsight is a wonderful thing.
-
interpretation
= what can I get away with.
We can't get away with much up here anyway, with the Nazi's we have aka Mr Bamford and master Vandy! :D
I think that no matter how tight the rules are written, there will always be a minority that will try and get around/ blatantly cheat and think that they are clever by doing so. As humans are fundamentally flawed, unlike me, myself and I . Got to go , myself wants a turn on the computer....
[/quote]
Unfortunately I can attest to Vandy's eye for detail. At last years Classic Dirt (a non-competitive event!) he scoured the grounds until he found an expert, then dragged him back to where myself, Hilly, and the Human Water-diviner were stationed. While we were busy trying to fashion a replica DG muffler out of an old sausage, Vandy had the aforementioned expert point out that I was using a non-oem clutch gasket on my YZ125. Hilly and the other one can verify I speaketh the truth.
-
Evo is pretty good just as it is, and I love riding Evo class, however a bit of common sense should prevail. If it's air cooled, drum brake, non linkage, it should be OK. Who cares and what performance advantage would a set of 43mm CR480 or YZ490J forks have over a set of YZ465H forks? None, but the rules count the first two out as they are from a single shock bike. You would see a lot more bikes on the track if the basic rules were adhered to without being under the microscope. Here's a common scenario I would imagine: I want to race my CR250 RZ, but the forks are bent and rusty. To have them repaired costs time & money at about $500, but I'm on a budget. The local wreckers has a really good CR480 front end complete with wheel for $250, fantastic! Oops can't use that because it'll put me in the pre '85 class as they are from a single shock bike and someone is sure to complain, especially if I beat them and I'll be called a cheat if I use them in Evo. Even though he came 9th and I came third, it must have been the forks, not my better riding skills. Oh well can't afford and don't particularly want to spend $500 on the rusty old forks, leave the bike in the shed and go fishing instead. Same old story with guys who want to build a big bore Honda Evo bike, OK to use an '84 Husky CR500 engine but not an '82 CR480 engine. Seriously what's the difference other than giving a rule racer some grounds for a protest?
K
-
Probably because the next person will take it to the next level. For a stupid example, I have a 1990 cr motor sitting on the bench at home. I have no money so I want to put it in a cr250 rz roller I have that only cost me a carton. I am pretty handy and the cr480 air cooled barrel and head sitting on the other bench I could make fit ( full compliment of hammers to do this) to the 1990 bottom end. So it will look right and fit the air cooled drum brake scenario. The other guy over there has a later cr front end on and I think he has a 480 motor in it. So why cant I do this? Hey and Im poor, so let me do it or I will go fishing instead, then where will you guys be. That wasn't a stupid example, more like a ridiculous one. Purely to make a point.
I think the more guys in vmx the merrier. But if you and I can get into the vmx scene and ride appropriate bikes, why can't the next guy?
Being poor is a 'poor' excuse for anyone to use, to go outside the rules.
Talking about taking it to the next level. There has been an instance where a 480 was converted to twin shock that I know about wanting to race in evo. There have probably been more. Some guys just want to do those sort of things. I must say that there are plenty of grey areas, but not just in evo. I think it would be safe to say that just about all era's have their own grey area.
Evo is pretty good just as it is
I agree.
You would see a lot more bikes on the track if the basic rules were adhered to without being under the microscope.
Would you not think that there would be some Frankenstein bikes out there? A dutch twin shock type of bike fits the criteria.
I think you fall down in expecting others to be as fair about it as you are.
My posts are getting too long. I really hope work picks up soon!
-
a bit longwinded, like your trophies, they go on, and on, and on ;D ;D, get to the point will ya
cheers Trev
-
The dutch twin shocks are totally different than putting a 30 year old air cooled 480 engine in an RZ (pain in the arse) or RA (easy) as they are single shock bikes coverted back and cannot be called EVO. An original twin shock chassis with a 30 year old air cooled engine, and conventional forks which had drum brakes originally (not converted 50mm Magnums) should IMO, be OK. The one bike which no-one objects to (here I go again) are those frickin HIDEOUS HL replica's which have nothing old on them except a fuel tank and engine, yet are evo legal. You can't buy a legit HL, so if you want one, (something I can't understand), you make one using all new the new shit you can get your hands on, and away you go with a pat on the back for doing a good job. You can't buy an RC450/500 but if you make one using a 30 year old chassis, engine & components, you get bagged for cheating. The rule legal way is to use a YZ465H or Husky 500 engine, but then you don't have your Honda. What's the difference between 30 year YZ465 and CR480 engines anyway? Nothing other than one of those bikes has a linkage in the rear suspension, I'm still at a loss at how that affects the engine. Personally I don't really care, or maybe I do, but the day the rules are eased up, is the day the numbers at the nationals will increase. Air cooled, non linkage, no disc brakes, should be that simple. Alas it's not.
K
-
(http://www.wideopenflatout.com/artwork/DATE%20CLASS.jpg)
-
Tossa,
The evo class was introduced years ago, before pre 78, before pre '85 and pre '90 as a class for people with bikes older than pre '75.
I could only assume that at the time it would have been considered the last class to be introduced to vintage.
It's very easy today to say, "they should have done this" or "they should have done that" but hindsight is a wonderful thing.
[/quote]
Where was that? Where I come from an Evo class was first run in 1997 in the VIPER series .Pre 78 ,pre 80 and pre 85 had already existed for some years. In the beginning the Evo class was a single allpowers class that ran as well as the 3 pre 80 capacity class's. The Evo moto's were like the Elite class where all the best riders from the pre 80 and pre 78 class's entered.
-
I'm with evo550, in Qld the evo class came in before pre 78 and way before pre 85.
-
Where was that? Where I come from an Evo class was first run in 1997 in the VIPER series .Pre 78 ,pre 80 and pre 85 had already existed for some years. In the beginning the Evo class was a single allpowers class that ran as well as the 3 pre 80 capacity class's. The Evo moto's were like the Elite class where all the best riders from the pre 80 and pre 78 class's entered.
I actually think viper brought in the evo class later than '97.
I rode the thumper nats at Barrabool in '97 and ALL the Victorians were on pre '80 bikes, while all the rest of us doing the series were on Evo bikes.
-
I actually think viper brought in the evo class later than '97.
I rode the thumper nats at Barrabool in '97 and ALL the Victorians were on pre '80 bikes, while all the rest of us doing the series were on Evo bikes.
[/quote]
Nope it was 97 .Scott Henshaw won it . In 96 my brother started on a 77 yz250 .He won the pre78 and got second to Scott in pre80 250.In 97 my brother won both those classes - he didnt race against Scott becuase Scott choose to do the Evo class that was introduced. The guys that were in the Evo class and at the TNats were as you said on pre 80 bikes , as that what the best riders in the series were already running. The Evo class was supposed to open up rides for guys that had post 79 bikes that were also twinshock etc.Before the Evo class there were afew 80/81 bikes that got turned away.A friend of mine was getting into it a a sweet 425G and was told he wasn't eligible so he quit.There were a few like that.Once Evo started a few 81 Maico's etc entered but you didnt see any post 79 Evo bikes at the TNats because in the beginning the guys serious enough and good enough to ride the TNats already had pre 80 bikes but Evo class and some bikes did exist in VIPER in 97/98.BTW I can't remember who won on what bike every year since then but the ones that I do remember ,except for maybe one,were all on pre 80 eligible bikes.
-
Here are the winners and bike sthat I can remember
Scott Henshaw 79KX,79CR 97/98
Noel Clarke 79 360Mugen 99 or 00
Malcolm Watson TT500 0 omething
Shawn Baker 79RM, ??Maico early 0's
Simo (??Simpson) 79 RM EARLY 0's
at some stage the EVO class was dropped and pre 80 was run until 08 when pre 80 was dropped and EVO in 3 capacities and grades came in . The last two EVO expert winners were Nick Smith 79CR and SimonHealy 79 KX .I think Jody Smith won it in 07 on an 80 Mugen.
-
I know Scotty well, raced against him a lot in T Nats.
Noel Clarke won the series on my old '79 250RZ, think he bought it about '99?
Victoria must've got the other classes well before us.
In '96-'97 Qld only had pre '75 and Evo, the sport was small here then.
-
Gee whizzzzzzzzzzz ...slow down...we only just got pre85 ;D ;D ;D
-
I know Scotty well, raced against him a lot in T Nats.
Noel Clarke won the series on my old '79 250RZ, think he bought it about '99?
Victoria must've got the other classes well before us.
In '96-'97 Qld only had pre '75 and Evo, the sport was small here then.
I was spectating with a mate at Albury in 98? That was an awesome 2 motos with you Scotty and Geoff and yes you guys were on bigbore evos ,scotty on the 79 250.
Noel had a cr250 at first but he won the titlle on the mugen which was a sponsored ride .He might have won it on the 250 and then the 360 the following year but I only witnessed the mugen win .It was Mick Downeys bike and the first Mugen in the series.
-
Yeah Albury '97 that was a good race, Scotty always rode hard.
Mike Downey bought my 360 Mugen but that was after the first one he had that Noel rode, mine was the Fox bike. Sold all my good bikes to Victorians!
Some of the best races i ever did were the Evo's at the Thumper Nats, too bad that died.
-
Scott Henshaw 79KX,79CR 97/98
Noel Clarke 79 360Mugen 99 or 00
Malcolm Watson TT500 0 omething
Shawn Baker 79RM, ??Maico early 0's
Simo (??Simpson) 79 RM EARLY 0's
Didn't Dave Simpson (Simo) win the series on a Montesa 360 VB hybrid thing one year? I remember Noel Clarke racing a really trick Mugen owned by Mike Downey. I went to a meeting billed as the ViperNats in what must have been '98/'99 at Broadford that was held on dustbowl called the "Channel 10 Track". The meeting was canned after one race because of dangerous dust. Prior to the Vics running Evo they introduced the pre '80 class around '94/95, maybe earlier. I went to Ravo to race and they had a pre 90 class tacked onto the pre '75 meet. I think Peter Bowen won on a Magnum Maico.
Scotty Henshaw sure was fast too. I saw him hammer Jummy Ellis at one meeting down there and Ellis was on good equipment (I think it was an MX6 CanAm)while Scotty was on a pretty ordinary KX Kawasaki.
-
Yeah Albury '97 that was a good race, Scotty always rode hard.
Mike Downey bought my 360 Mugen but that was after the first one he had that Noel rode, mine was the Fox bike. Sold all my good bikes to Victorians!
Some of the best races i ever did were the Evo's at the Thumper Nats, too bad that died.
The Fox bike is still around and in good shape.The first Downey mugen went OS im pretty sure and the 3rd one ,the RA went to ? Qld I think.
-
Which of Mike Downeys Mugens had the LOP swingarm? That's the one I did the feature on.
-
Didn't Dave Simpson (Simo) win the series on a Montesa 360 VB hybrid thing one year? I remember Noel Clarke racing a really trick Mugen owned by Mike Downey. I went to a meeting billed as the ViperNats in what must have been '98/'99 at Broadford that was held on dustbowl called the "Channel 10 Track". The meeting was canned after one race because of dangerous dust. Prior to the Vics running Evo they introduced the pre '80 class around '94/95, maybe earlier. I went to Ravo to race and they had a pre 90 class tacked onto the pre '75 meet. I think Peter Bowen won on a Magnum Maico.
Scotty Henshaw sure was fast too. I saw him hammer Jummy Ellis at one meeting down there and Ellis was on good equipment (I think it was an MX6 CanAm)while Scotty was on a pretty ordinary KX Kawasaki.
[/quote]
Yer I remember that Monty /HL500.It went like a rocket but didnt last the sesion from memory .That was around 01 .I turned up for my first VIPER race after helping my Brother for a few years and there was Simo and Ron Dinsdale tearing up Blue Rock on the Monties.Ron had a normal 360VB.Dave switched to an RM400 the year that I saw him win it .
Dont remember Scotties KX being too ordinary , we raced against that in 96 and its was fast ,looked quite stock but... even had well disguised Ohlins in the end but mostly Scott was fast . I think my brother beat him once in 2 years on a muddy day at Colac.
Wish we still had Colac on the calendar.
-
Which of Mike Downeys Mugens had the LOP swingarm? That's the one I did the feature on.
That was the first one.The one that Noel rode in a deal with Mick and Tony from Retroracing. Thats the one that I think is now a door stop in somebodies NewYork appartment
-
The one bike which no-one objects to (here I go again) are those frickin HIDEOUS HL replica's which have nothing old on them except a fuel tank and engine, yet are evo legal. You can't buy a legit HL, so if you want one, (something I can't understand), you make one using all new the new shit you can get your hands on,
Been beaten by too many HL’s recently BigK ;D
Original HL’s are around so I find it odd than you think a replica doesn’t cut it for the rules but you think any custom bike built from parts from any era is.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
I agree the cut off can be frustrating at times, in that major parts must come from an original equipped Evo bike.
I bought wheels & forks from a 490 J for a project (don’t ask you wouldn’t like it ;D). I was under the impression that the J forks were the same as the H.
Research has shown that the upper triple clamp, fork inners and front and rear hubs and front backing plate are Evo legal, however the rear backing plate and fork outers & lower triple clamp aren’t Evo legal.
It’s a very fine line to draw but I do believe we need to draw a line somewhere.
As for using CR480 motors etc, you are right that they are old school aircooled engines but the Evo class is also about 78 models. Allowing bikes to be updated with the later open class engines can alienate the older bikes in the class. Whether they would be more competitive or not doesn’t come into it as much as the physiological advantage that may turn others away.
I would argue that if guys are holding back from riding the Nationals because they can’t use their specials then they are in Vintage racing for the wrong reasons.
I thought Evo was being used in Heaven & elsewhere long before Vic adopted it.
I think Vic was the odd one out there for a while by running Pre 80.
-
Yet to be beaten by one of those montrosities Geoff, maybe if there were some sheep on the tracks they would fair better being glorified farm bikes, and IMO the totally contradict the rules when you start with a new frame & swing arm (major components) built out of new steel and alloy, yet you can't use or modify 30 year old steel or alloy to build the other bike. I really shouldn't care as I ride bog stock Huskies well within the rules. However I personally believe that the rules are ambiguous at best, and open to protest no matter how trivial a matter by any disgruntled competitor. I doubt I will ever ride a national meeting as I couldn't cope with the BS of getting protested because of something stupid like a rubber handle bar mount let alone a part from an "out of era" model. I'm sure there are others who think the same, and it means less riders at national meetings. VIPER & VCM get upwards of 80 riders a meeting, all "in the spirit" and hell fun, but without the trivial eligibility BS, yet the nationals struggle to get decent numbers. Convince me it's not a factor.
On a different note, I'm sure spectators would love to see the trick factory replicas on the track, maybe there should be a stand alone class catering for works style bikes. It's been talked about before "EVO ultimate", if it's air cooled, drum brake, non linkage it's in. Bring on the RC, SR & OW replica's!
-
Plenty of new steel, alloy and plastic out there besides HL's.
Many old frames have been repaired with new steel too.
It's the new designs that are frowned upon
-
Bengt Aberg certainly was an exceptional rider to win a GP on a farm bike.
I don't think there's anything wrong with the eligibility of a HL, it's a remade frame from the period just like remade pipes, shocks etc.
I think a lot of the reason for poor numbers at the Nats is the cost of entry on top of spending 3 days at the venue for a couple of 3 lap races per day. Certainly was a major factor for me not going.
-
I believe HL replicas are as legitimate as any Metisse or Cheney replica so long as the components used are from within the era the bike is being raced. If I was to build an HL I'd be building it for the pre '78 class using 38mm forks and period pre '78 hubs and 9" travel shocks, similar to the bike Aberg rode.
As far as the "works replica" thing? Bring 'em on only if they're actually replicas. A CR450 engine in an RZ frame doesn't make an RC Brad Lackey replica, despite 'sorta, kinda' looking like one from 40 metres and nor does an HL with 43mm forks, TLS brake and 12"travel Ohlins make an Aberg replica.
-
[quote .
As far as the "works replica" thing? Bring 'em on only if they're actually replicas. A CR450 engine in an RZ frame doesn't make an RC Brad Lackey replica, despite 'sorta, kinda' looking like one from 40 metres and nor does an HL with 43mm forks, TLS brake and 12"travel Ohlins make an Aberg replica.
[/quote]
Well said Mark i think that sums up this replica buisness :)
The original HL Abergs were a very cool bike 8) but a long way removed from the god awfull gangly creations people pass off as replicas these days ::) replicas of what ??? a school kids mechano project :D
An HL built with new frame etc built to pre 78 specs would make a cool if not particulary competitive pre 78 open classer.
The RZ framed CR 480 should surley fit into EVO for all the reasons mentioned in the above postings :) however to call it an RC replica is a bit laughable :D The RCs of Lackey, Noyce and Mallherbe were true factory bikes built to win World championships. Im sorry but a few bits from the production parts bin does not make a factory replica ::) Nice bike ( and iv'e seen a couple ) and i believe Evo legal but no more a replica than a TM 250 with a fibre glass airbox is a replica of Joels bike :)
-
[quote .
The original HL Abergs were a very cool bike 8) but a long way removed from the god awfull gangly creations people pass off as replicas these days ::) replicas of what ??? a school kids mechano project
but no more a replica than a TM 250 with a fibre glass airbox is a replica of Joels bike :)
Hell I resemble those remarks. ::)..... its interesting in road racing, the replica Norton Supermonos are also kind of gangly mechano replicas, but they got the likes of Kevin Scwantz, Wayne Gardener and number of past greats out there and really lifted the profile of the sport and attendance to meetings. Now you have Patons, MVs, XR69 replicas taking it a step further.
Maybe we need more exotic replicas out there to stir up some interest. i would like to see a light weight RH250 frame replica for a start.
-
but a long way removed from the god awfull gangly creations people pass off as replicas these days ::) replicas of what ??? a school kids mechano project :D
Not only do they look awfull but I think the riders are due some credit as I'm buggered if I know how anyone could get one around a corner without killing themselves! :P
-
Yeah bring on the RH replicas theres not enough of that stuff around, i'am thinking of building my bits and pieces RM-A along those lines,the originals sure turned heads,very trick ! ;)
-
[quote .
The original HL Abergs were a very cool bike 8) but a long way removed from the god awfull gangly creations people pass off as replicas these days ::) replicas of what ??? a school kids mechano project
but no more a replica than a TM 250 with a fibre glass airbox is a replica of Joels bike :)
Hell I resemble those remarks. ::)..... its interesting in road racing, the replica Norton Supermonos are also kind of gangly mechano replicas, but they got the likes of Kevin Scwantz, Wayne Gardener and number of past greats out there and really lifted the profile of the sport and attendance to meetings. Now you have Patons, MVs, XR69 replicas taking it a step further.
Maybe we need more exotic replicas out there to stir up some interest. i would like to see a light weight RH250 frame replica for a start.
Shit that sounds like a pop at you Marc :-[ not the case or anyone in particular just an opinion :)
A lightweight RH /RN frame to accept a TM motor would be great :) Are you there Geoff ;)
-
Shit that sounds like a pop at you Marc :-[ not the case or anyone in particular just an opinion :)
A lightweight RH /RN frame to accept a TM motor would be great :) Are you there Geoff ;)
[/quote]
Don't worry Bill I didn't think you were having a go ;D. Yeah we have been kicking round the idea of light weight RH rep frame for TM250/400 for a while.
OR I have often thought of the motors you could slip into a GMC CZ frame. Whose first to do a light TM400 Falta.
-
If I was to build an HL I'd be building it for the pre '78 class using 38mm forks and period pre '78 hubs and 9" travel shocks, similar to the bike Aberg rode.
Yeah, I’ve changed my mind since I bought those J parts, I’m now going to build mine for pre 78, I just need to find some D model forks and triples.
The fact that some fit later stuff and choose to ride Evo is their choice, everybody wants to build the hot-rod of their visions.
I was speaking to the guy from Falcon shocks many years back and he told me the original length of the shocks was 15 ¼”
Apparently he supplied shocks for the UK built bikes.
Not long after I was speaking to Cramer for a quote on Ohlins, when I asked for 15 ¼” shocks for a HL he told me they were the wrong length and not to listen to the guy making those frames as he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
He went real quiet when I told him who I was :o.
The Pro Fab frames in the states sometimes had 2 shock mounts and I think the longer shocks needed for the rear mounts gets quoted for all models.
I have seen some with 17” shocks and they do seem to tall for my liking.
Tony McMahon’s bike also had 17” shocks, but then he is quite tall as well.
A lightweight RH /RN frame to accept a TM motor would be great :) Are you there Geoff ;)
Too many projects, not enough time
But if you can drop a RH frame over i will have a look at it. ::)
One thing that makes the HL's popular is the ease of finding parts to complete the package.
I reckon a RH frame would really need a RH motor as well
-
GMC
I think the main difference between the "H" and "J" forks is the external compression damping adjustment fitted to the '82 forks.......and the fact they came from a bike with linkage suspension. ;)
-
An observation about some of the things said re HL500s and 480s in RZ frames etc. The significant difference is that back in the day, you could have bought an HL frame kit and built it in largely Pre 78 form, but at a later date upgraded the suspension as things moved forward. If you were sufficiently attached to the bike, it could evolve along with the rest of the world. To me, that fits the spirit of 'Evolution'. On the other hand, in 1980, no-one was fitting an 82 engine in a 79 frame, and by 82/83 I doubt anyone would have been retro fitting a current engine into a twin shock chassis. Rather, they'd have tried to make the single shock chassis work. So to do that engine swap is not 'Evolution'.
-
On the other hand, in 1980, no-one was fitting an 82 engine in a 79 frame, and by 82/83 I doubt anyone would have been retro fitting a current engine into a twin shock chassis. Rather, they'd have tried to make the single shock chassis work. So to do that engine swap is not 'Evolution'.
Well put I reckon'... ;)
-
On the other hand, in 1980, no-one was fitting an 82 engine in a 79 frame, and by 82/83 I doubt anyone would have been retro fitting a current engine into a twin shock chassis. Rather, they'd have tried to make the single shock chassis work. So to do that engine swap is not 'Evolution'.
Well put I reckon'... ;)
Graeme has hit the nail on the head. If you were sitting in your garage in 1977 or 79 could you have built it?, if not then it doesn't fit the class and you move up one.
Otherwise we end up like the Euro twin shocks with a bunch of Pre 85 open bikes being cut up to build twin shockers. .
-
but a long way removed from the god awfull gangly creations people pass off as replicas these days ::) replicas of what ??? a school kids mechano project :D
Not only do they look awfull but I think the riders are due some credit as I'm buggered if I know how anyone could get one around a corner without killing themselves! :P
Yep, they don't go round corners fast at all, but the bloody things usually have huge horsepower so you get hosed off down the straights & up hills.
HL replicas are the giraffes of motorbikes. ;D
Still reckon you can't go past a Maico 490 for looks. 8)
-
An observation about some of the things said re HL500s and 480s in RZ frames etc. The significant difference is that back in the day, you could have bought an HL frame kit and built it in largely Pre 78 form, but at a later date upgraded the suspension as things moved forward. If you were sufficiently attached to the bike, it could evolve along with the rest of the world. To me, that fits the spirit of 'Evolution'. On the other hand, in 1980, no-one was fitting an 82 engine in a 79 frame, and by 82/83 I doubt anyone would have been retro fitting a current engine into a twin shock chassis. Rather, they'd have tried to make the single shock chassis work. So to do that engine swap is not 'Evolution'.
Yes well said Graeme. There shouln't be a issue with any HL's built today using later than pre 78 running gear. The original HL as featured in MXA march 77 had Marzoochis and Bilstiens for around 9" travel fr &rr and a modded Husky frame .I don't know alot about HL's but going by the pics by the time it was a complete fabricated frame and raced By Aberg in 77 it had Ohlins and Cerianis of works Yamaha forks with alot more ravel than the original.Also there were different frame kits made in different countries with different running gear .The Profab framed bikes that Johnson and Liechen raced in the 4 stroke Nats had a full 12" and 43 mm forks. So a guy building a HL today just needs to choose which class he s building it for .Like Goeff is .No Problem
-
Below is a shot of the original HL 1977 prototype and the Swedish team responsible for it, Bengt Aberg in helmet. Note much lower 9" travel and more sensible stance. The photo's not clear but this bike may be the modified Husky framed original bike. GMC may have more insight into the bike in the photo.
(http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-8/1062154/bengtabergreplica.jpg)
-
yes that is the original Husky framed HL bilstiens an marzoochis . picture would be in northerm hem. winter 76/77 . this picture is on the first page (59) of the motoxaction mag feature.
-
I race EVO in Viper and I love it, and this is what I think.
Just say back in 79 there were no RM or YZ400's, would we be putting RM465-500 air cooled's in 79 RM250 frames or a YZ490 air cooled in a 79 YZ250 frame be a nice EVO weapon, or would we be happy racing 250's ? Why is service honda putting a 2T CR500 engine in a aluminum frame "CR500AF",
because Honda didn't. My point CR450RZ the production bike Honda should have built. They look the good's, and LOOK's isn't that the reason we spend 10G on a reno. I don't mind HL's either.
-
I agree with your point Firko that an actual 'Aberg Rep' would be a Pre 78 bike with the shorter travel. But the fact is that the ProFab frames in particular were used till much later with all sorts of mods to keep them competitive. I think some guys do go berserk and make the things look pretty gangly, and maybe even silly. But this bike looks the goods to me:
(http://www.ozvmx.com/images/forum/protec500_2_lge.jpg)
Still, this is starting to go off-topic, so I'll leave you guys to get back to arguing about what is Evo...
;D ;D
-
Below: The Profab framed HL showing 9" travel and lower stance.
(http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-8/1062154/HL500_profab_750.jpg)
Not differences to Gary Benns ex UK Yamaha works bike (below)that's been fitted with OW forks and works Ohlins suspension. This seems to be the bike that the "stepladder" HL fans and builders mistakenly hold as an example of how they all were.
(http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-8/1062154/NewOldSchoolopener03.jpg)
-
I think Gary Benn's bike is much too tall in the rear.. I like the #17 Rick Johnson bike, it's about on the limit for height.
The ridiculously tall ones getting around here would be bottoming the shocks with the tyre 3" from the rear guard.
-
That first aberg is the the bike i modeled my xt 500 off back in 77',and raced in open moto a few times ,pipe, guard extension etc bog standard shocks,it was a hoot for the holeshot and about half a lap,a far cry from what their running today,the pro-fab bike looks right to me :)
-
Here is another with Fox Airs and aftermarket works type KYB's. I agree with the others about the modern replicas. I would like to see someone build one that looks like some of the few above with period suspension and not so high.
(http://public.blu.livefilestore.com/y1pfZft5YPrhMvRdo6uq_f7bwV7HTu8mZlxPqYuy6lwOEulNBzmOZa7XnYw15I36zOQL6S8HBZJ9NE1k5gGFmb12g/HL0033.JPG)
-
I think Gary Benn's bike is much too tall in the rear.. I like the #17 Rick Johnson bike, it's about on the limit for height.
The ridiculously tall ones getting around here would be bottoming the shocks with the tyre 3" from the rear guard.
Agree for sure but that could be said about alot of bikes,not just HL's, that have mix and matched forks,shocks and swingarms.
-
Those poor old things have been pounded big time with the ugly stick. No style or taste gone into them. Frickin horrid! If they were a women, you wouldn't look twice, (I wouldn't) they'd be big, fat arsed and loud. YUK! YUK! YUK! Yeah I don't like HL's.
K
-
That's so unkind BigK. HLs are beeyootiful.
I rocked up to an Amcross on mine once. The guy on the start grid looked long and hard, then winked at me and said "That's a sheep in wolf's clothing, mate".
Prick...