OzVMX Forum
Marque Remarks => British (BSA, Greeves, Triumph etc) => Topic started by: firko on July 18, 2011, 12:39:15 pm
-
The 1995 Australian Classic Motocross Championships, held that year in the Barossa Valley's beautiful Tanunda were notable for a number of amazing performances, a brilliant track and the start of one of the most controversial dramas to emerge in our sports history. When Vern Grayson won the pre 65 class on his Cheney Triumph 500, a chain of events started that to this day still haven't been settled.
In 1998 I wrote a piece for Dirt Action magazine that both gave description of Vern's lovely bike and explained the eligibility controversy in which Grayson and his bike had become embroiled.
(http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-8/1062154/Vern%201.jpg)
(http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-8/1062154/Vern%202.jpg)
(http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-8/1062154/The%20single%20downtube%20Controversy.jpg)
-
Sadly vintage racing lost something that can never be measured or bought back because of this saga and it is still a disgracefully episode. I for one lost all interest in the pre 65 class because of this.
-
Does anyone have problems reading the 'controversy' part of the above post? If so how do I make it bigger? Any clues?
-
Vern is/was a hard man....but a good bloke who would go the extra mile for you and his involvment along with his lovely wife Averill in the vintage scene is sorley missed....it was great to see them at CD8.....most of the people riding at Nudgee wouldnt know but there was about a core of 1/2 a dozen people who built that track....sadly most dont attend any more.
-
the words are hard to read on the third page
-
Vern a bloody good Kiwi now Auzie,lets hope by 20yrs they will sort out rules.Great to see Vern doing laps on Blue J the metisse at classic dirt
-
I was there most every step of the way and here's some points;
Not one single picture can be provided of the bike or even one "similar" can be provided pre '65, however early 1970's magazines show almost identical Cheney's.
Many people were against the obvious modern looking rear suspension more than the bike as a whole - I offered to make Vern a new swingarm not actually knowing at that point that Vern himself was a boilermaker and totally capable of making one himself had he wanted to (personally I think that was pretty damning).
Ron Newitt, then Prez of MAQ, ran adverts himself in British bike magazines seeking validity of the bike.
Why is it that other cases of incorrect bikes or parts are a one off; "your bike is illegal" and people go away and fix the situation but this dragged on for years and years overtaking and ruining many a pre Oz Title and Brisbane Club meeting.
The rules are the rules and they are clearly written, either change them or abide by them or anarchy will prevail and 1970 frames in pre 65 or XR200 motors in pre '75 - I see no difference just because of the person who's sitting on the bike.
-
Does anyone have problems reading the 'controversy' part of the above post? If so how do I make it bigger? Any clues?
If we, the readers, right click on the image and save it into our Pictures, it can be easily blown up and read, Firko.
G'day, by the way ! ;)
Regards GD
-
Firko's articles describe the events re the Grayson Triumph pretty accurately, and Slakewell's post summed it up for a lot of people. Pre65 big bore took a big hit for a decade as a result, and while there was a lot of anger at the decision, it was the handling of the affair that generated the disgust. Interestingly,two of the leading agitators against Grayson have since been caught out cheating. There was/is considerable anecdotal and photographic support for granting of eligibility, but the absolute stubborn refusal of the very vocal opposition [of a few] to consider this material was staggering.I have correspondance from John Giles, Ken Heanes,& Terry Challinor
supporting the case for the bike.The common responce from the "anti" lobby--"we dont care what the English say, this is Australia" As Firko said,some of the most respected names in Classic MX were written off by our local gurus.
Initially it was the "single down-tube" that was the objection.Then when that argument started to look shaky,it switched to the "swing-arm", then it turned to the radious of the tube below the swing-arm mount. When I showed the "experts" photos of a bare frame in a 1964 English Green Horror and one I took at Cheney's factory in 2000, they couldn't tell which was which and resorted to "well it doesn't look pre65" What the!!
By the time it got to the final MA hearing there had been so much flak it was like a trial by media.
MA was on the spot and it bascally all came down to the definition of "replica"
-
Further to the above--Grayson denies that Mark ever offered to fabricate a swing-arm, however a swing-arm WAS made locally and is still on the bike. It has the shock mount further back, in the same position as a contempory BSA, not as in the photo in Firko's post.This was done on the advise of a Commissioner of the day who stated that if that mod. was made the bike would be acceptable Pre65. So much for that.
Yes, Ron Newett did obtain some material from UK, but my understanding is it supported the case for the bike.Like most supporting material, it didn't suit the knockers' agenda.
Grayson could have fought on, but became disilluisioned with the whole scene and went off to pursue other interests. The Cheney saga should be laid to rest before it festers again. We lost too many good men & bikes over this.
Now to the present. We had a "championship" class for each Pre60 & Pre65 at the DT Nats a week or so ago,the first for some years.
Our club [Brisbane] has about 10 Pre 60/65 bikes, Classic Scramble Club must have a bundle, and there must be a good number in WA.
-
Sorry folks--a bit more.
There seems to be a resurgence of interest in Pre60/65 ,and an increasing number of bikes such as Monark,Lito, Husky[4 str] etc,and even talk of a Hedlund.Metisse is of course always a factor.All this is great for the future,and with the split in the Nats for 2012 the time is ripe for greater support & encouragement for these wonderfull machines.
However it would only take another Grayson/Cheney episode to undo all the good prospects.
Having been through that sorry saga, raced in UK, Sweden & USA and studied the good and bad points, we should be able to avoid the pitfalls.
Should any of the above machines,[or replicas] ,including Metisse be exposed to the same blowtorch scrutiny,including millimetre accurate replica components, photographic evidence,
etc. as Grayson's bike,we can kiss it all goodby.When I asked Nils Hedland for a spec on a Hedlund frame his comment--"they're nearly all different" Same applies to most early "specials"
It's not about the rules,it's about commonsence and the "big picture"
-
HI
after some at length discussion with dave tanner i have now the parts and know how to build a pre 60 and a pre 65 ariel based dirttrack bikes.will take a while but i will get there
jim
454
-
Damn....I couldn't agree more with all of Superseniors above assumptions of the Grayson Cheney fiasco. He's articulated the case far better than I could.
The pedantic and vitrolic behavior of the 'anti' school when this case was being fought left a bitter taste in the mouths of much of the VMX community that saw a withdrawl of interest in the class that set it back a decade. It's disgraceful that two of the main protaganists have since been caught cheating themselves.... >:(
The pre 65 class is the true classic jewell in our sports crown. It's been a long hard battle to come back from the Grayson Cheney debacle but if the number of new bikes that are being built is an indication, pre 65 class is about to enjoy a well earned reinassance.
-
Now to the present. We had a "championship" class for each Pre60 & Pre65 at the DT Nats a week or so ago,the first for some years.
Our club [Brisbane] has about 10 Pre 60/65 bikes, Classic Scramble Club must have a bundle, and there must be a good number in WA.
mmmm.....NOt enough for the CMX nationals yet in either class - tell them if there serious to pull there finger out. ITs all talk till the entire are in and its too late when the entries close, no matter who you are......
4 weeks and closing
-
... photographic support ...
.. then lets end this thread early, post the pictures of that Cheney competing in the period - it really is that simple.
Heres my offering, a 1970 Cheney Victor which looks near as damnit to identicle down to the steering stops on the front downtube..
(http://b50.org/jimmy1.jpg)
-
It's disgraceful that two of the main protaganists have since been caught cheating themselves.... >:(
Its like cops being caught for drinking driving. Frankly I think quite a few people take themselves and the whole VMX thing way way too bloody seriously at the detriment of the sport. Vern's bike is every inch in the spirit of pre 65 and a very cool thing.
You need a whole new formula, I would take an example from the Poms and Kiwi's, create all British formula, allow as many bikes to run as possible, run a couple of classes, pre 70 would make more sense as keeps the short travel stuff together.
The Kiwis are having all British events now that get a lot of interest and have stars of yesteryear turning up in the same way that the replica Manx race bikes had Bazza and Wayne even Scwantz in the saddle.
-
Gee he used the same frame jig for 5 or more years fancy that.
That's almost like saying a DT 175 is not pre 80 because you can buy a 2010 model that's the same.
-
Listen if as much energy was used to improve the sport rather than enforcing the rules then we would be looking at something other than the demise of pre 65 due to lack of interest.
I mean its all very well churning over Vern's bikes issue from the comfort of your retirement village, but I think I am more interested in how to move forward. Hell I was born about the same time as these Brit bikes were raced, but doesn't stop me from being an enthusiast, I think better to spend our key board energy.... to develop the next generation of Brit bike racers, Kiwi's and Brits are totally on the way with their formulas.
-
Listen if as much energy was used to improve the sport rather than enforcing the rules then we would be looking at something other than the demise of pre 65 due to lack of interest.
I agree....The impending rule changes should make situations like the Grayson case a thing of the past.
I posted the article in answer the many who have asked about the case, little knowing that the usual subjects would still be harbouring bitterness all these years later. In reality it boiled down to a case of lets get Vern and use his bike to do it. Let's all look forward to the rebirth of the class instead of getting all twisted over something that went down 16 years ago.
-
Hear Hear Firko .... I mean the question to everyone is what they would do to really set things alight again.
I would like to see big twins taking on BSA singles with everyone running on alcohol with flames spitting everywhere.
-
Vern's bike is every inch in the spirit of pre 65 and a very cool thing.
that the replica Manx race bikes
Yes it is (other than the rear swingarm which a lot of people didn't agree with you), but Vern's isn't a replica that the rulebook requires and has no provision for "spirit" - change the rulebook.
Now I wonder if you can imagine what the field will look like if everyone is allowed to build bikes "in the spirit" using their own interpretations?
Gee he used the same frame jig for 5 or more years fancy that.
That's almost like saying a DT 175 is not pre 80 because you can buy a 2010 model that's the same.
No it's like saying show me the bikes that were made 5 years before 1970 on those jigs. Prove that he used the same jigs 5 years before, it really is that simple.
little knowing that the usual subjects would still be harbouring bitterness all these years later. In reality it boiled down to a case of lets get Vern and use his bike to do it.
Well since I'm the only one stating against you must mean me.
Bitterness? WTF? Bitterness over what? I have had many happy years and good times sharing VMX with Vern (and Averill) working towards a common goal. Vern was often the Steward at QVMX club days and always a welcome face. You weren't part of the Brisbane scene nor did you attend every club meeting and every race as Vern and I did so don't make comment on it, thank you.
"lets get Vern"?? MIB? CIA? ASIO??
(http://i620.photobucket.com/albums/tt289/mongrelexo/tinfoil.jpg)
Anyway lets end this thread guys with those period pictures .....
-
don't make comment on it, thank you.
On what? Vern and Averil happen to be a very dear, long time friends of mine and I had a lot to do with the case when it was going on so don't tell me what I can and can't comment on ::).
-
Cheapracer you go on about your the man at that club tell me again why you left it? Your such an expert your metisse if it gets going will be spot on hope your jigs are pre 65 "its that simple"
-
"many happy years sharing good times with Vern". Vern's responce to that was absolutely unprintable even on this open minded forum.
I agree with Cheapracer that this should close and we all move on.
We currently have an excellant commission, a resurgence of interest in the old bikes, and perhaps those not currently involved should butt out and let the positive thinkers get on with it.
-
I have thoroughly enjoyed the thread as it started with the information regarding this bike and the problems it has caused. A really good read, thoroughly ruined by personal opinions. Thanks for sharing this iconic case with us Mark and those who have brought more insight into the bike etc. To those who want to make it a slanging match, I'm sorry that's what ruins good interesting threads, a real pity
-
Cheapracer you go on about your the man at that club tell me again why you left it?
Your such an expert your metisse if it gets going will be spot on hope your jigs are pre 65 "its that simple"
Errr I was talking about BMCC but as for QVMX is moving to another country a reasonable answer?
Yep, will be spot on, indeed it's that simple - would you like me to prove that Metisses existed in 1964 also? Plenty of reference ..
What's this got to do with the thread topic by the way? - I can assassinate my own character without your help buddy but it doesn't change the truth about Vern's bike being illegal which is what this topic is about - do you have a technical comment to make about that?
-
I have no idea or comment on this, but after reading it over the last few days it still comes back to the same thing. A picture of it pre 65 or otherwise, and loose the late novation style arm.
I think with those 2 things covered its a race bike in every way. without them you race pre 68 until you can. Surely its not about smashing a class and winning ? if its about can the bike ride at the nats or not, im guessing if its about the riding and not the issues - i would have just ridden a class up and fork it, then you would have had a ride and you worry about the details to vcome back down a class when you have them.
Only person who knows if this bike was made pre 65 is the guy that built it and a photo of it ridden pre 65, thats the only proof you need. without its all he said she said.
-
Freaky how many 65's entered for the Classics ??
-
Freaky how many 65's entered for the Classics ??
2 x 250
2x 263 +
1x pre 60
may be more in the mail now as i wont be doing the entries for 2 weeks as they go to MA letter box and the lady in the office is away for a fortnight.
I have been told on crossed hearts to expect from SA/ Vic ( not including anything that comes out from WA - if at all )
6 pre 68 sidecar
3 pre 75 sidecars
6 pre 85 sidecars
( yet to see the entries but so far i have got 2 sidecar entries so thats a start.
-
(http://i620.photobucket.com/albums/tt289/mongrelexo/tinfoil.jpg)
what a happy cat, hes loving his foil cap !
-
Let's get the thread back on a positive note.
Vern's been spending the last few years nursing his lovely wife Averil through some tricky health issues and building this little aeroplane. The 'plane is nearing completion and Vern's looking forward to soon hitting the skies over sunny Queensland. It was great seeing him cutting laps on Jonesy's BSA Metisse at CD8 and he's promised us that once the 'plane's finished he'll bring the Cheney out for the occasional skid.
(http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-8/1062154/verns%20plane.JPG)
(http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-8/1062154/verns%20plane%202.JPG)
(http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-8/1062154/verns%20plane%203.JPG)
-
Cool plan, reminds me of them USA al-uminum bullet caravans ( trailerhome)
-
Wait, what?
You bring up one of VMX's most controversial moments, call people and I quote "pedantic, vitrolic and bitter" and then just end it as you wish?
Ok, sure, because not a scrap of physical evidence will ever be presented to support that bike ever existing in 1964.
-
Insert Quote
Wait, what?
You bring up one of VMX's most controversial moments, call people and I quote "pedantic, vitrolic and bitter" and then just end it as you wish?
Ok, sure, because not a scrap of physical evidence will ever be presented to support that bike ever existing in 19Insert Quote
Wait, what?
You bring up one of VMX's most controversial moments, call people and I quote and then just end it as you wish?
Ok, sure, because not a scrap of physical evidence will ever be presented to support that bike ever existing in 1964.
64.
Mark..for fu*k sake, please move on. The Vern case ended 16 years ago, I posted my magazine article purely for its historical reasons and to answer the many enquiries as to what it was all about. Evidentally you seem to still want to fight the battle. To be honest, this has never been about you but you seem to have taken on the role anyway. I was actually referring to the 'backroom boys' who worked tirelessly to get rid of Verns bike but you seem to take on threir role despite your claims of being Verns friend. You and I know very well that that was far from the case don't we Mark?
The only person on this thread showing "pedantic, vitrolic and bitter" behaviour is you my friend. Get over it and get back into the shed and start pumping out those Metisse replicas you've promised us.
-
(http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx172/mike52_photo/Many%20jiff/smiley-face-popcorn1.gif)
-
Agree to disagree and let's move on.
-
are flying and building those little planes an old bike rider thing? john walmsley-a mx rider of note in qld teaches people to fly them.i try and talk him into a ride whenever i see him
-
I posted my magazine article purely for its historical reasons and to answer the many enquiries as to what it was all about.
Are you saying only your version is right and only you can answer questions about this?
I had to bear every bloody BMCC meeting after another discussing this POS - that is one of the main reasons QVMX was started - lets not make ride dates or discuss track options, lets use the whole meeting talking about Vern's forking bike. As I said, I was there and you were not.
SuperSenor50, contact Vern and ask him if he actually gave a shit the effect his bike was having on others? Lets go for a 3rd denial in a row ....
You and I know very well that that was far from the case don't we Mark?
The only person on this thread showing "pedantic, vitrolic and bitter" behaviour is you my friend. .
Umm no "I don't know" - you've got me there, what case? ???
If you mean Vern didn't like that I stood up and supported the rulebook against his bike well, tough shit. If Vern is embittered towards me to this day because I supported the rule book against his bike - again, tough shit. All my conversations with Vern at the clubrooms and trackside were always friendly and amicable and on occasion Vern would come out to Veresdale on the Saturday to see where the track was going and as I mentioned he was there on the Sunday sometimes as a Steward so I don't know where your info is coming from. Again, as I said, I was there and you were not.
This is a forum and you raised the topic, I have every right to discuss it and I have no problem with my position on this bike, a position that was backed up by the rulebook and MA - it was illegal and you can huff and puff your guts out all day long along with calling me all the names you want to and that fact won't ever change.
See when you lose a debate you turn to personalities.
-
Vern use to race at Veresdale aswell.
-
Vern use to race at Veresdale aswell.
Vern raced everywhere including Beaudesert and Cunugra. My point was he elected himself to come along as a Steward, Vern put a lot of effort into VMX back then shame about the Cheney bullshit and a shame how both sides handled it. He was awesome to watch on the Bully.
-
hey mark is bamford there with you yet or have you sent him home
-
hey mark is bamford there with you yet or have you sent him home
Been and gone.
-
are flying and building those little planes an old bike rider thing? john walmsley-a mx rider of note in qld teaches people to fly them.i try and talk him into a ride whenever i see him
Walmsley is another ex Qld champ who would be a good addition to the legends lineup at Classic Dirt.
-
Hi Robin ;
Ive been back in Brisbane since friday, trying to recover from the evil Bei Zhou, clear sweet fragrant liquor , keep forgetting I can't drink like that anymore , I'll ring you tomorrow are you interested in a 53 Harley,
cheers
-
Now lets be nice. I don't want to carry on with any who's right or who's wrong pissing contest with you Mark because as I said.....it was 16 years ago and our attitudes have changed. Thankfully we've all grown since then and we can move forward in the knowledge that the upcoming rules for pre 65 will make situations like that a thing of the past. If you want to keep harping on your 1999 era argument Mark go right ahead but don't expect the new loving, caring and sharing me to get involved. I presented my opinion quite clearly in 1998 and have long since moved on. ;)
-
Hi Freaky,sent my entry --re your reply 29, I'll bring my twinport to follow the Pre65 field which gives you a championship class.
On the main thrust of this thread, I'll show you some Cheney photos when I see you.
-
I just read the story on the controversy - it brought tears to my eyes :'(.
Tears of frustration :-[. Without wishing to appear to take sides I can't blame Vern for turning his back on the sport.
It's a sad state of affairs when we can't get issues like this sorted amicable and without resorting to the legal eagles.
-
by the way did Vern win everything on this miracle machine ?, tell me there was some point to the whole Chimps Tea Party.
Nice article Firko, I think it is very cool bike regardless of the shock position being 1/4" out.
-
Marc you bra cups dont match, please address this matter...........
-
Marc you bra cups dont match, please address this matter...........
you know how it is Freaky.... I was young and it was the fashion at the time, like splat nylons and kiss mark seat covers
-
by the way did Vern win everything on this miracle machine ?, tell me there was some point to the whole Chimps Tea Party.
Nice article Firko, I think it is very cool bike regardless of the shock position being 1/4" out.
Vern won the pre 65 class in SA in the mid 90's , anyone who raced wheel to wheel with Vern will tell yeah he was bloody fast regardless of the bike.
-
may know some one who is looking for an old hoggly
-
definatly interested
-
Marc you bra cups dont match, please address this matter...........
you know how it is Freaky.... I was young and it was the fashion at the time, like splat nylons and kiss mark seat covers
I have some fluro splat style MX pants in 34" if your interested in reliving old times. (And no thats not with me sorry)
-
by the way did Vern win everything on this miracle machine ?,
Vern won the pre 65 class in SA in the mid 90's
Vern won the pre 65 class at the Tanunda Nats in '95 with no protests whatsoever. He competed in and won a lot of non championship meets throughout the following year and then, at the '96 Nats at Barrabool he was greeted with a well orchestrated protest which excluded him from the class which carried on for the next two years. The bike's hardly been seen since as Vern moved on to other pursuits and to care for his extremely ill wife Averil.
The only result from the whole saga was that many potential pre 65 punters were frightened off by the kerfuffle and the class saw no appreciable growth during the following 15 years. With the pre 65 class frame requirements being opened to allow a wider choice, the future of the class is looking so bright I've gotta wear shades ;D.
A quick review of what's currently in the pre 65 build stage that I know of. There are a couple more that are in the pre construction planning stage as well.
* Mojo made Arthur Harris framed G85 Matchless.
* 1959 Monark 500 GP (pre 60)
* Triumph 500 unit framed Mk4 Metisse
* Triumph 500 unit framed Sprite
* 250 Maico oval barreled Sprite
* ESO unit Metisse (Red Betty)
* Pre unit Triumph 500 Metisse
* Swedish HVM framed big fin Royal Enfield 500 Fury
* Egon Gustafson framed unit ESO
-
A quick review of what's currently in the pre 65 build stage that I know of. There are a couple more that are in the pre construction planning stage as well.
* Mojo made Arthur Harris framed G85 Matchless.
* 1959 Monark 500 GP (pre 60)
* Triumph 500 unit framed Mk4 Metisse
* Triumph 500 unit framed Sprite
* 250 Maico oval barreled Sprite
* ESO unit Metisse (Red Betty)
* Pre unit Triumph 500 Metisse
* Swedish HVM framed big fin Royal Enfield 500 Fury
* Egon Gustafson framed unit ESO
Just the sound of those on the grid would be enough!!!!!
-
I have some fluro splat style MX pants in 34" if your interested in reliving old times. (And no thats not with me sorry)
yes 34" is living the old times like 21 year old times that will never come again.
Well i predict an upswing of interest in pre 65 .... its a bit the same with road racing where some younger guys are caught up in the image of the era and just want the look and sound of pre 65 bike. Be bice to see the b44 out there similar to the UK for more variety and for the guys who can't budget an ESO.
I mean the BSA Victim is still a great affordable option and makes up a lot of the field at British Only race meetings. 3-4 grand will find you a good servicable B44.
-
Be bice to see the b44 out there similar to the UK for more variety and for the guys who can't budget an ESO.
Unfortunately Marc, even though the pre 65 frame choices have been broadened to allow more scope for punters wanting to enter the class, the B44 BSA is still on the outer. Even though the three commissioners are friends and have done a stellar job, this is one point in the class rules that I disagree with. Sure, the B44 didn't hit the shops until after the Easter 1965 Earls Court Show but the legally accepted Matchless G85CS wasn't released until 1966. Another example is the acceptance of MK 4 Bully Boattails and RT1 Yamahas into pre '70 even though they weren't released until after the cutoff in 1970. By allowing the B44 into the fold we'd open the class to a bike that's accepted almost everywhere else in the classic motocross world.
The B44's not on the radar right now however so for the time being we probably should concentrate using to more open rules we've got to rebuild the class (along with pre 60 and pre '70) as they are the classic classes in the true sense of the word.
-
By allowing the B44 into the fold we'd open the class to a bike that's accepted almost everywhere else in the classic motocross world.
Yes we have been over this subject heaps of times, class needs an entry level bike, lets face it the big twins are not within everyones budget. What made me think about this was your list of pe 65 bikes under construction, lot of exotica but short of prepping a BSA Bantam there is not much choice if you are looking for a no drama entry into pre 65 and lack the skills to assemble your own.
I mean I am sure the three amigos are friends and have done a stellar job, but they have not looked at the big picture.
-
A Mojo G85. mmmm. yum. Some one has very good taste. I would like to see that one come together.....
-
Sure have missed the boat not allowing B44, quickest way for dollar entry level and probably would instantly get fields up 25%
-
A Mojo G85. mmmm. yum. Some one has very good taste. I would like to see that one come together.....
This is Frank Stanboroughs new project. Anyone who's seen his Manx Metisse or NSU/Greeves pre 65 bikes will realise that this is going to be a doozie. I've seen it in the early stages and it's astounding already.
-
I can second that after drooling over "Mojo" and discussing motor,colour options etc this will be a sweety.
-
I was just going through my files looking for something else and found this sweet little Cheney B44 and its B25 brother. Note the similarity to Verns frame. Vern rang me last night and dispelled any bullshit about the swingarm. The swingarm shown in the photos broke and a new one was made with the shock mounts in the more period position. By the time the MA action took place the swingarm shown in the photos was long gone.
(http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-8/1062154/Bike10a.jpg)
-
Sure have missed the boat not allowing B44, quickest way for dollar entry level and probably would instantly get fields up 25%
Too true and the beauty of the B44 is you can still get all the bits you need fairly easily, plus you can warm one up pretty cheaply with b50MX liner swap and cam..... frame is a bit heavy stock but decent starting point and can be swapped for Faber or Cheney down the track.
(http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg71/marcFX_photo/IMGP0849.jpg)
-
If I could race a b25 in a nice Cheney frame with CZ running gear , I would be a starter at next years nats
-
Sure have missed the boat not allowing B44, quickest way for dollar entry level and probably would instantly get fields up 25%
I would disagree though. They were never available during 1964, there wasn't even a 65 model B44 and no one was racing them back in 1964 as they did not even exist then. So i dont understand why people would want to push to have them in pre 65 ???. There is the B40 for that and pre 68/70 for the B44. Its the equivalent of saying a 1976 RM250 should be allowed to race in pre 75.
-
Hold on to your hat's people, the show's about to start. ;D
Just for my 5c worth and I know I've already mentioned it before, several times.
I have plans to use a B40 engine that was very competitive in the Junior 350cc class in a slider frame on short circuit in the late 60's to early 70's.
Using a C15 frame with Ossa Betor forks a front wheel, haven't decided on the rear just yet, mainly on Dirt track but I'd like to be able to take it to events like HBB & CD.
Maybe to stop any debate they could just change it to pre66, but I have no doubt there would be some other make & model that would take over.
-
Maybe we need to drop the pre 65 name and call it something different
-
I thought of that too but then you get too many grey areas like evo if its not model year based i reckon. Could open a can of worms.
Changing it to pre 66 still does not allow it as the first model B44 was a 66 model and because the 67 is a round barrel too and virtually identical it would only make sense to make it pre 68. Remember when it comes to classes a bike fits in, its determined by the model of the bike, not when it was made or when you could first buy one or race one or when a factory rider was riding a pre production prototype. That rule (mfg date/date of availability) is for aftermarket parts and accessories. But really i dont think anything drastic needs changing. Currently as it stands the B44 is not a pre 65 machine. If people want to change something, get the Matchy G85 out of pre 65 and that would make it fair for everyone then.
-
Remember when it comes to classes a bike fits in, its determined by the model of the bike, not when it was made or when you could first buy one or race one or when a factory rider was riding a pre production prototype. That rule (mfg date/date of availability) is for aftermarket parts and accessories.
Well maybe the rules need changing before the last of the self funded retirees drop off the perch and you are left with no interest any more. Now the 441 was being raced long before 66 so the technology existed and that is the argument that has meant the that the forward thinking rest of the world allows the B44.
Maybe it is time to apply the electronic defibrilator to pre 65 before it finally flat lines..... call it Classic GP or similar, accept race bikes that are in the spirit of what was raced in the era. Like Vern's bike which classic example of what you could of run in the day when bikes were constantly being tweaked to work better. don't try to convince me that you could pop down to your ESO dealer pre 65 either and pick one upr, it was limited factory special .... hell there were probably far more 441 engines in the world than ESOs.
Call it Classic GP and run BEARS formula with no Jap shit, works everywhere else.
-
If it were changed to Pre68 instead of the existing Pre65, let in the new wave of big 2-strokes [ twinport 360CZ for me please] and that would really drive the coffin nails on the resurgence of Pre65 we are trying to encourage.
-
Now the 441 was being raced long before 66 so the technology existed and that is the argument that has meant the that the forward thinking rest of the world allows the B44.
It (the production 441 the public could buy and race) only came out middle of 1965 or just after the Earls Court show as Firko says. Every '441' before this were special works models built from modified B40/C15 parts initially and then pre production works bikes. They were not all 441cc either. The early works bikes were 420cc. Half way through 64 the 420cc special was made into approx 441 (there is no 100% definite specs) and they made stronger cases, and it was still a special one off/works engine, very far from being production model the public could race around on in 64!. These exact details are a little vauge as Jeff Smith himself and the guys that built his engines could not/dont 100% remember and the details are lost. I am only quoting whats in VMX mag. Only Jeff Smith had these BSA's. The public could not have one till half way through 65 and they were 1966 models. In my eyes the rest of the world is wrong in allowing them in pre 65. And the ones you do see racing, in UK especially are far from the B44's that were raced back then anyway.
So going on the fact that there was a couple works engines that were approx 441cc during mid way of 64, i dont think is any basis to push to allow production 66 model 441's to be in pre 65. It totally does not make sense to me if the idea of VMX is to re-create the period.
Yes i know what your saying supersenior.
Just some info to add above, the 441 prototype was shown at a earls court show in november 64. Jeff smith used a basicially standard 441 engine for the 65 season and had won the 65 championship by July 65. After that he used a standard GP (engine and frame) for the remaing GP's of 65 because he had already won and was offered a 'bonus' if he could win on a standard machine. So according to Firko the actual release to the public of the 65 model was easter 1965, when Jeff smith had just about wrapped up the World championship.
-
The elephent in the room that nobody ever adresses is that there are other bikes that breach the cutoff for "pre 65" but are allowed in with no questions asked, most notably is the Matchless G85CS. My argument is that the B44 fits in to the concept of the class equally as much as the big Matchy.
As I mentioned earlier, other bikes that are born after the cutoff are allowed into different divisions because they fit into the concept or "spirit" of what the class is about. The most obvious is the acceptance of the 360cc RT1 Yamaha in Pre '70 yet the bike wasn't released until well into 1970. Perhaps it's time that the B44 was given the same courtesy and is invited to compete where it most fits in ..pre 65.
Now we have a more liberal view on frame construction coming into the class,perhaps we should take a leaf out of the AHRMA book and abolish the strict December 31st 1964 cutoff and accept bikes for their conceptual suitability rather than their accident of birth. It seems a shame to bar a bike because it was released a few months too late for one class yet accept bikes with similar late releases in other classes, not forgetting the previously mentioned '66 model Matchless. I'm still not 100% tied to the B44/pre 65 thing but I think that it certainly needs to be discussed openly and rationally.
-
SO does that mean i shouldnt sell my 75 TM 250 just yet, could be just the pre 75 ticket.
-
I'm still not 100% tied to the B44/pre 65 thing but I think that it certainly needs to be discussed openly and rationally.
Define 'rational' - everyone has a different rationale/aim/motivation/expectation for being involved in VMX/restoring.
And their expectations will vary from time to time. And their expectations may not be clear in their own mind.
Me? I'm with Dick Mann, 'if he has an old bike in the ute, $10 in the pocket and a good attitude, let him ride' ;D.
The test should be; how many are on the track and how many are hanging over the fence ;).
My only other suggestion is maybe two trophies or recognitions at race meeting - a race trophy and a resto trophy.
-
See even this thread shows a huge divide and opinions in pre 65 why would any sane person get mixed up in this shit fight. The class is doomed to be just a handful of enthusiast until it dies along with them. It should be the Jewel in pre 78 racing not the red headed step child.
-
The new rules are to go via the Board of MA so until then Im not going to comment specifically on the new rules but I will comment on the B44.
Some years ago the commission created pre 68 unit and pre unit classes with the view to see if the take up of this class would foster and grow an alternative to the pre 65 arrangements and the fact is no one supported it until we took it out of the book. I would have to go back over the corespondance but I seem to remember that I have mail saying there isnt a snow balls chance in hell we are going to run that class - we want B44s in pre 65. The pre 68 rule was taken after a look at the UK experience and the success of same; why why why would we want to revisit that when there was an earthquake of non support for the attempt to create a new class that was so clearly rejected?
The new rules (should they be passed) will not cater for the B44 or any other bike that was made after the 1964 model year unless considered a follow on - a distributor B40 is an example of a follow on, a points B40 isnt.
That the proposal will allow a frame to be essentially free is an attempt to allow riders to get an engine, find some period hubs, forks, tripples and make a bike fit the suspension criteria. It should be possible to do this cheaply and easily as the biggest hitch in building a bike was always questions over frames. We have just had Australian Champion classes at the CDT nats in pre 60 and pre 65, there is growing support for these bikes. If I was going to build a bike I would build (say) a B33 make a light copy of a Matchless frame get an AMC gearbox, some Royal Enfield forks find an alloy tank, make a seat that works and go racing. In pre 60 and pre 65!
On the B44 matter - as I have said before - while ever the B44 remains at best the 1965 model it will not compete in pre 64.
On the back of the attempts to placate the B44 riders with things like the pre 68 class - rejected what are we to do? If the new rules get over the line it will need riders to support it, if no support I dont know what else to do.
211
-
Points ignition B40 not in pre65, bummer, there goes my plan.
-
Points ignition B40 not in pre65, bummer, there goes my plan.
Quite frankly it is these details I don't understand, and can't abide. You can use unseen technology that changes the bike's performance, but argumentative visual detail will have you castrated and ostracized ???. Or so it seems to me ::).
-
Points ignition B40 not in pre65, bummer, there goes my plan.
Quite frankly it is these details I don't understand, and can't abide. You can use unseen technology that changes the bike's performance, but argumentative visual detail will have you castrated and ostracized ???. Or so it seems to me ::).
The points ignition was made available for the 1965 season as a modification to the distributor B40 proir to its general inclusion on the 66 version - I could go on. There is a considerable advantage as the change also improved the clutch actuation so there are multiple advantages that were not available in 1964. Yes, from November 1964 jeff Smith was seen to use this on his works bikes - its the same arguement that the MX250B was made in 74 but remains the 75 model and isnt a pre75 bike because of that.
The fact is that I have been arguing the B44 issue for 12 years and looking for a solution that works - no one wanted the solution that works in the UK so WTF are we 'spose to do? For every arguement for there is one against and frankly I spent 12 months looking for a workable solution to the delima before the last commission meetings.
Frankly the pre 68 rules were designed to make the B44 the top of the food chain in that field and I can still hear indervidual responses to it telling me to go - well im sure you get the drift
-
Freaky how many 65's entered for the Classics ??
2 x 250
2x 263 +
1x pre 60
may be more in the mail now as i wont be doing the entries for 2 weeks as they go to MA letter box and the lady in the office is away for a fortnight.
Thanks Freaky- as we see the Dirt Track Nats are getting a resurgance and the Classic MotoX titles are still plodding,like the last 5 years with just the grid quota-6 !! :( Can it continue-CMX Split may help).
cheers A
-
I doubt it 247 unless they get more races as they dotn want to travel for 1 outfir and 3 rides. IF they have naother pre85 etc then they get 6 rides in.
who knows can lead a horse to water.............
-
Reading from the GCR's from 2009, has it changed since?
Quote- BSA all except B44 & B50.
-
SO does that mean i shouldnt sell my 75 TM 250 just yet, could be just the pre 75 ticket.
Should be pre 74 anyway .... given the trivial differences between 75
But staying on the subject, just because BSA stalled unveiling the production bike until Easter doesn't mean it didn't exist prior to that. If we applied a strict production rule then black Betty, Red Betty and furkin Beige Betty would be out. Is Rickman a production bike, hell no, but we are prepared to count from when Don first turned up on one..... in the same way Jeff Smith first turned up with the B44 in 64 well in time for the cut off point.
-
Marc you look better in the beige number, those mismatched cups detract from your eyes.
You crazy kids.
(http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d88/munchboxlive/pic21413.jpg)
-
Kerry, sending pictures of yourself to distract the original intent of this forum isnt going to stop it. Could you keep this stuff to your other social networks.
On the matter of the B44 again Marc, I would be very happy to continue with the Jeff Smith / B44 production version arguement in another post and point out the difference between the bikes if you want it out there for all to see, why dont you start that thread and I will get the files out and fill in the blanks for you?
-
In the end, arguing the toss over the B44 isn't going to change anything. There'll be differences of opinion 'til the cows come home but it isn't going to change things in the forseeable future. I reckon we should invest our brainpower and genius towards reinvigorating the pre 60, pre 65 and pre '70 classes. All five classes (250 and 500 in pre 65 and pre 70) offer some great challenges both in building a fun and competitive bike and on the track. Let's not kid ourselves that the pre '65 class is cheap to get into. To build or buy a competitive Metisse, Cheney or any of the exotics will give you little or no change from 10K but it doesn't have to be that way. Getting involved in pre 65 250 class can be an interesting adventure as there are a bunch of 2 stroke and 4 strokes from which to choose. The same story goes for pre '70, the bonus there is that you fans of Japanese brands get a look in with some easily prepared and competitive core bikes.
If you've got a good understanding of what's allowed and a savvy eye for a bargain a pre '65 bike can be built for similar money to your pre '75 Japanese bike. Mainline on this forum is slowly building a very low buck 350cc BSA B40 using eBay and swapmeet bargains and advice from a couple of older forum punters who've done it themselves in the past. The finished bike may not be the quickest machine on the track when its finished but I bet Mainline has a ball racing it.
Here's a couple of great forum threads that offers up some great low dollar alternatives to the pukka Metisse/Cheney stuff. http://ozvmx.com/community/index.php?topic=8968.0 (http://ozvmx.com/community/index.php?topic=8968.0) http://ozvmx.com/community/index.php?topic=7957.0 (http://ozvmx.com/community/index.php?topic=7957.0)
-
For reference. I dont see any 1964 model B44's. The larger capacity BSA Jeff rode half way through the 64 season was still a one off special built in the race shop and not a B44. As i said yesterday they only 'think' this was an early engine around 441cc after they increased the capacity from the 420 and made some new cases but no one can remember the exact specs and it was still far from being a production B44 that the public could be cruising around on during 1964. Its was from this that the factory started to gear up and decide to make a production 441 based on the works engines and then a prototype was shown in November 64. As far as we know this first one available during mid 65 was designated a 66 model. I have no info that suggests/backs up that there was a 65 model B44. I am only going by what Firko says was the release date (approx a little bit after easter 65) as i dont have any info on this, but i honestly think that the B44 probably was not availble to buy till the middle of the year. For me there is no case for an argument to say they should be allowed. If you really want have a big BSA then modify a 64 model or older B40 (or a follow on B40 model?) which is what the works engine builders did. I don't think allowing them would 'save' the pre 65 class either.
1963 MODEL
B40 - eng - B40-4056 frame - B40-5017
SS90 - eng - B40SS-180 frame - B40-5017
1964 MODEL
B40 - eng - B40-5275 frame - B40-6668
SS90 - eng - B40SS-426 frame - B40668
1965 MODEL
B40 - eng - B40F-101 frame - B40-7775
SS90 - eng - B40FSS - 101 frame - B40-7775
1966 MODEL
B40 - eng - B40F-1149 frame - B40-9973
B40 modified engine - eng - B40G-101 frame - B40-9973
B44GP - eng - B44-101 frame - B44-101
B44VE - eng - B44-101 frame - C15C-3137
1967 MODEL
B40 - eng - B40G-201 frame - B40G-201
B44GP - eng B44-131 frame - B44-267
B44VE - eng B44EA -101 frame - B44EA-101
B44VR - eng B44R-101 frame - B44R-101
1968 MODEL
B44 Victor - eng - B44B-101VS frame - B44B-101VS
B44 Shooting star - eng B44B-101SS frame - B44101SS
-
Points B-40's out !!! looks like me and my young bloke are out ! along with slide's and i think mainline's is also a points model from memory ? we mighten be making up the class but there's 3 out ! :-\
-
(http://i323.photobucket.com/albums/nn458/mx250syd/icons/caution.gif)
Marc you look better in the beige number, those mismatched cups detract from your eyes.
You crazy kids.
(http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d88/munchboxlive/pic21413.jpg)
Freaky, your posts need health warnings ;).
(http://i323.photobucket.com/albums/nn458/mx250syd/icons/caution.gif)
-
Nathan just about had me convinced to do a YDS3 or YM1 based pre65 8). Almost......... :P
(http://i323.photobucket.com/albums/nn458/mx250syd/YAMAHAASCOTSCRAMBLERJOHNSTEIN.jpg)(http://i323.photobucket.com/albums/nn458/mx250syd/YDS5/fumio2aLarge.jpg)
-
Points ignition B40 not in pre65, bummer, there goes my plan.
Quite frankly it is these details I don't understand, and can't abide. You can use unseen technology that changes the bike's performance, but argumentative visual detail will have you castrated and ostracized ???. Or so it seems to me ::).
I'll second that.
I'm not going to be racing my B40 at Nationals, or even be up the front at local races, but it seems more than a bit pedantic to be actively looking for reasons to exclude bikes/engines.
At some clubs/meets in the UK you have to apply to enter the race meet and depending on how early you apply/who you know, you may not get a ride. In this situation I can understand drawing a firm line in the sand and determining which bikes 'really' belong in which class. But when you have a race meet in Australia and 4 bloody bikes turn up it seems unbelievably stupid to try and exclude one because it has a part on it not available until six months after the class cutoff date.
Cutting off your nose to spite your face is the expression I believe?
I think those in the position to do something about these rules should tell the freaking trainspotters who oppose anything and everything to get a freaking life before we all end up riding 1989 cr250's (not that there's anything wrong with 1989 CR250's ;D)
-
And i'll second you Mainline
-
I'll third or fourth that.
Well said Mainline.
-
Hi Firko. I remember 1995 Nats very well as you would remember for me ;D. Vern was bloody awsome. 1996 I also remember not as fondly :'(. The main thing I rember of 1996 was the meeting on Friday night before the event even started. A guy stood up in front of all of us & said "If your bike past last year its ok this year except Vern's Cheney". I beleive this was the turning point & were all the S**T hit the fan.
-
(http://i323.photobucket.com/albums/nn458/mx250syd/YDS5/fumio2aLarge.jpg)
If you,re going to race one of these you might consider a different make of front rim ;D
-
Well spotted, son ! :o
-
Points B-40's out !!! looks like me and my young bloke are out ! along with slide's and i think mainline's is also a points model from memory ? we mighten be making up the class but there's 3 out !
I'm not going to be racing my B40 at Nationals, or even be up the front at local races, but it seems more than a bit pedantic to be actively looking for reasons to exclude bikes/engines
Calm down boys :o :o....The current rulebook says BSA: 'All except B44 and B50'. Which means that the B40 is legal whether it's got points or a dissy. I'm pretty sure nothing's going to change in the engine eligibility criteria.
-
That's how I read it so I'm going to stick with my project.
As said by several others, the B40 may not get me to the pointy end but it'll be a fun thing to ride.
-
That's the way i read it as well when i started the project(all but B44/B50) , but sounds a bit like moving goal posts to me ? iam going to put it on the road as first priority but was also piecing together scrambles kit for it ,it would be good to know for sure one way or another before any further expense ??? ps welcome back firko your knowledge and enthusiasm was missed :)
-
ps welcome back firko your knowledge and enthusiasm was missed
Thanks, it's good to be back....... ;D
The B40 is a great little entry level pre 65 bike. The engine isn't that different to the B44 and can be made to go pretty smartly, especially on methanol. When the old 350 class was a part of the dirt track scene, the B40 ruled the roost until the 350 Maico came along at the beginning of the seventies. You can pick B40 engines or complete bikes up reasonably cheap when compared to the B44 or Triumph 500. They can be taken out to 420cc or therabouts and the frame while being a tad heavy, a bit of hacksaw and Oxy acetylene engineering can achieve wonders. The Army used B40's so there's plenty of them out there and parts are pretty easily procured. I like 'em a lot.
-
My memory what's left of it tells me there were stories about the army B40's having a problem with the bigend bearing .Is that right?
cheers pancho.
-
Points B-40's out !!! looks like me and my young bloke are out ! along with slide's and i think mainline's is also a points model from memory ? we mighten be making up the class but there's 3 out !
I'm not going to be racing my B40 at Nationals, or even be up the front at local races, but it seems more than a bit pedantic to be actively looking for reasons to exclude bikes/engines
Calm down boys :o :o....The current rulebook says BSA: 'All except B44 and B50'. Which means that the B40 is legal whether it's got points or a dissy. I'm pretty sure nothing's going to change in the engine eligibility criteria.
all is calm ;D Actually Firko, I wasn't specifically referring to the points/distributor B40 engine scenario in my post. More the bloody mindedness that some have when it comes to the minute details of period correctness. I don't think the handful or so of spectators who turn up to watch the average vintage race meet really think they've been hard done by because someone is running a CZ rear hub with a bolt-on sprocket instead of a rivetted job, I've never seen anyone throw their bucket of chips to the ground and storm off.
If someone really wants to insist on accurately reproducing the era in a particular class, they'd better make sure they're wearing all the period clothing, and running crappy period correct tyres, and use some dodgy old mower oil in their engine.
-
I've never seen anyone throw their bucket of chips to the ground and storm off
You have hot chips at your meets..............wow
-
(http://i323.photobucket.com/albums/nn458/mx250syd/YDS5/racingyamahas600.jpg) ;) 8)
-
Stop talking about it Graeme & do it ;D
-
It's on the back, back, back burner ::).
I decided that particular project wasn't going to go smoothly ::). Beyond my patience, finances and engineering skills ;).
Still got the frame, wheels etc. If I get rid of enough junk and a complete motor jumped up out of the wood work, well............
(http://i323.photobucket.com/albums/nn458/mx250syd/YDS5/P5270073.jpg)(http://i323.photobucket.com/albums/nn458/mx250syd/YDS5/P5270077.jpg)
(http://i323.photobucket.com/albums/nn458/mx250syd/YDS5/P5270075.jpg)
-
I've never seen anyone throw their bucket of chips to the ground and storm off
You have hot chips at your meets..............wow
HOT CHIPS ,HAMBURGERS MILKSHAKES ,THE WHOLE SHOOTING MATCH ;D
-
They even ave a BAr and a canteen. thats 2 differant buildings and even a roped of area... farrrk they got tit all up there.