OzVMX Forum

Clubroom => General Discussion => Topic started by: hessam69 on February 29, 2008, 01:17:28 pm

Title: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: hessam69 on February 29, 2008, 01:17:28 pm
I was chatting to him today and he said because my bike's a late model (2003) it's not allowed.. It's completely out-of-the-box standard, I don't see it having much of a chance against the 125s anyway. Also the fact that it hasn't changed since 1981 or whatever means it technically is a 1981 it's just made later. He said to put a 1970s compliance plate on it but I don't see the point....

I was looking forward to it as well..  :-\   

Hessam
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Wombat on February 29, 2008, 02:47:21 pm
Hessam, I can see you're keen to race but it's called 'Vintage' for a reason. ;)
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: hessam69 on February 29, 2008, 03:39:18 pm
I know, but after all it is just a number  ???
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: magoo on February 29, 2008, 07:19:43 pm
I really don't understand why anyone would want to race a postie anyway. I just don't get it.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Noel on February 29, 2008, 07:26:19 pm
Hi,
the Honda CT range,from 1962 or there abouts  was just about the first mass produced  Japanese off road motor cycle ,therefore it should probably have as
much place in history as the DT1  :o
The posties frame and engine cases are the same as they were before 1969, the front forks of the 2000 on models changed to 1970's style of putting the springs on the inside of the fork tubes, visually the head and barrel look like they did when the first OHC engine came out in the sixties it is possible to tell them apart but not from 5 meters,
 
At worst it would be an "evo bike "( air cooled ,drum brake , none linkage suspension,) there fore eligible, ;)

I was using a different model pre 70 honda forks on mine in pre 70, and also raced this bike in pre 70 at Nepean,
I entered mine as 1969 K1B replica, about as original as a   brand new Metise replica ;D
I suggest you enter  pre70- and classic 125 and turn up a Clarence,

the only person that need's to get it is the rider.( It's got 2 wheels and an engine, and because you can) ;D
I started racing vintage on the postie and now have five "proper" vintage bikes, lets not "see "the forest for the trees

Noel
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: worms on February 29, 2008, 08:27:13 pm
just thought i would throw my two bobs worth in, the onus of proof lies solely with the rider not the scrutineer, he has to prove the machine is unchanged not just say it looks the same, and really i thought this was vintage motocross.

cheers Trev
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Bamford#69 on February 29, 2008, 08:42:06 pm
Dear Postman Pat,
Stop annoying those Vintage Motocross people,remember they aren't like us they have real Vintage Motocross bikes and like to go really fast, so get back to work ,you have to deliver those  VMX magazines asap,
signed
The Post office
LOL
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: husky61 on February 29, 2008, 08:50:29 pm
Yep

Get with the programe

Get a real bike and whilst your at it a bike that complies with the reg's (age that is ).

2003 is not December 84 , unless your watching back to the future.

Get with the programe and stop wasting peoples time.

Shoey  :o :o :o :o :o :o

PS: Noels postie should be registered with N A S A as it is a rocket. 8) 8) 8) 8)

Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: hessam69 on February 29, 2008, 09:01:09 pm

Yep

Get with the programe

Get a real bike and whilst your at it a bike that complies with the reg's (age that is ).

So what's this? A girly bike with a floral basket at the front?




2003 is not December 84 , unless your watching back to the future.

So what are you saying, my bike basically is a 1984, it's a bike that never changes, so why should I buy a 1984 model when it's the same bike




Get with the programe and stop wasting peoples time.

Alright I am not blind you don't have to repeat yourself twice




Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: husky61 on February 29, 2008, 09:11:44 pm
Yep your real fast on the up take buddy , What Im saying is get with the programe.

Correct me if Im wrong , but did you not state that the bike was manufauctured or the plate states that it is a 2003 model.

Get a real one fella and one that meets the requirements laid out , very clearly for every one to follow.

Oh no i feel a repeat coming on ,
get with the programe
.

Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Wombat on February 29, 2008, 09:17:19 pm
Hessam, as with my first comment, "I can see you're keen to race..."
Mate, your choice of bike is up to you and our leanings are very wide and varied.
However, the members on this forum are Vintage MXers and dirt enthusiasts through and through. I haven't been on the forum for all that long but the passion of the members struck me immediately.
A 2003 bike is nowhere near the vintage mark.
A postie bike is not a common beastie in VMX - and I think a rarity unless anyone can correct me?

But the sticking point is absolutely the 2003 thing.
Expanding the acceptable range of what constitutes 'Vintage', ie: when is the cut off year and what about this bike or that.....
The heated discussions over eligibility are sprinkled throughout the forum.
People get very heated over proposed changes to the 'Vintage' concept - and 2003 is really recent.
I have stains on my shirts older than that...

Don't be discouraged at all; but seriously, 2003 is not vintage no matter how it 'looks'.  
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Noel on February 29, 2008, 09:38:23 pm
I geuss I'm on the outer here.
but if you take this to the no sayers point of view,
 new  Replica HL yamaha's , or CZ replica' s, Metise replica's etc should not be allowed either
and don't put any new or re manufactured parts in your old bikes  ::) that would put them out of age range
Honda CT motorcycles are old bikes
they don't make them any better they just keep making them,
http://www.motorera.com/honda/h0055/trail105/trail105.htm
http://www.motorera.com/honda/h0090/trail90/trail90.htm
http://www.motorera.com/honda/h0110/trail110/trail110.htm
or do we want to become elitist  :'(
 :o
Noel
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: GD66 on February 29, 2008, 10:14:29 pm
 Noel you are splitting hairs and shitstirring to no good end. All those re-manufactured bikes you mention still don't have discs, linkages, or other recent developments, and they certainly don't have a 2003 compliance plate from a major manufacturer. Bloody hell, where do you draw the line ? If vmx has classes that expire in 1975 and 1985, and your bike compliance plate says 2003, MAYBE it's time to consider either buying a bike that fits the parameters of the sport, finding a sporting outlet that already caters for postie bikes, or getting a firmer grip on what is required on a motocross track. Ever ridden a postie bike round an mx track ? Get a grip, Hessam, and try to appreciate just what it is you're trying to propose here....
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: worms on February 29, 2008, 10:29:22 pm
here we go again ::) go get yourself a 2008 MA handbook and start reading, the guidelines are set out for a reason, if you dont like the guidelines get on a committee and make a positive contribution to the sport, whether its Classic or Vintage motocross. as i said before the onus is on YOU to prove it complies not this forum. sounds like your trying to take the piss out of the sport and have little respect for the many clubs that do their best at promoting a great era in motocross.

cheers Trev
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: hessam69 on February 29, 2008, 11:10:57 pm
My bike doesn't have a 2003 compliance plate
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Wombat on March 01, 2008, 12:17:50 am
Hessam, at the end of the day it's a 2003 bike and it doesn't comply to Vintage standards.
It's not "just a number" and it's not going to change; the Vintage bikes are from the last century....

Read again the replies over this thread and good luck with your racing.  
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: husky61 on March 01, 2008, 06:54:25 am
Noel
:o :o :o
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Noel on March 01, 2008, 09:54:38 am
How did your climb go , ;D

same old bikes, same old dirt, same old fun
(http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j41/Tento850/P7100064.jpg)
(http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j41/Tento850/postie2.jpg)
Noel
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: YSS on March 01, 2008, 10:49:47 am
Dear Fernando  I also have a 2008 follow on model of the CT 90  ( its the same engine , but 125 cc and fuel injected ) It has no complience plate . So think its only fair to let me race too. Please , please .

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: hessam69 on March 01, 2008, 11:24:34 am
Hey what's this? Ohhhhhh a postie bike?! How did that get in there?  :o
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: YSS on March 01, 2008, 11:33:09 am
I only use this until I saved enough to buy  the new CRF 150 to run in Vintage.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: hessam69 on March 01, 2008, 11:50:14 am
Well this is my last request to join heaven vmx..... If the next choice of motorcycle does not allow me entry to race then.. I will be giving up full stop
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: hessam69 on March 01, 2008, 11:51:56 am
Fear:



[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: matcho mick on March 01, 2008, 11:53:19 am
geezas no one mention "posty challenge"  ;),vinduro??,
(and for the record i've been passed on the outside by the posty at Nepean) ::)
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: hessam69 on March 01, 2008, 11:55:46 am
It is a 24 cylinder powered bike (each engine 79cc 2 stroke leaf blower motor) that puts out 5.3kW (127kW total) through a harley davidson 5 speed gearbox, top speed 260km/h

Just the thing for vintage motocross ay?

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: hessam69 on March 01, 2008, 12:13:20 pm
Protest? Hells yes  ;D
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: vandy010 on March 01, 2008, 12:23:53 pm
i think your lobby to MA should include a totally new class to cater for the lovely little postie bike,
each race consisting of 1 hot lap of no less than 50 mailboxes within the confines of a local suburbian setting with mail of 50grams in weight being delivered to each one, square edged {gutter style} jumps and a quality selection of dogs without leashes, parked cars in front of, around and sometimes on top of said mailboxes could make it a little more interesting from the spectator view as well, so don't count that idea out. and my personal favourite, an asian learner driver looking for her friends house whilst doing her driver training.
i'm sure MA will welcome this idea with open arms as it's long overdue,
now, where  do i get me a postie bike?
 ;)
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: hessam69 on March 01, 2008, 12:33:40 pm
If they ever did make that class, there's no doubt which team would take gold
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: YSS on March 01, 2008, 12:36:41 pm
Since MA is mainly interested in bums on seats (revenue) , they will cater a new class in no time.
"Classic VMX Posties, eligible only up to the year 2008."
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Doc on March 01, 2008, 12:49:10 pm
jeez you blokes..do I have to think of everything..all this hassle over a simple little 2000 model or whatever posty special..the fix is simple..get yourself an early chassis for next to nothing..no-one wants the frames  ;) Bolt all your stuff..engine, wheels etc. onto/into the early frame..presto!..you have a perfectly legit bike that can't be knocked back! It's obviously only the newer chassis number that's causing the issue cause the rest is the same  as the early critters ::) Walter, I reckon in that hypothtical VPX (Vintage Postycross) class you could safely include next years model too :D..1 may rightly ask themselves, where is VMX headed?  :D
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: hessam69 on March 01, 2008, 01:09:16 pm
I do have a spare 1993 frame...

But it is over 1985 right?




Oh well
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: YSS on March 01, 2008, 02:27:23 pm
All jokes aside Hassan , I think you have tree options that could make sense.
a) if you want to race the postie , then join the postie racers club. Thats good fun believe me.
   In Thailand where I work this class has a bigger following than normal MX .Its called Cycle cross.
   And you should see how they go!!!!
b) buy a classic bike , it doesent have to be a 10000.00 Dollar Maico.(although they are nice and bring back memories)

c) or just buy a modern and go full blast with the moderns .

Anything in between will never be right for you or the VMX ers. I don't know for what reasons you want race your bike in VMX , but keep in mind VMX is not just racing , its also preserving an era.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: hessam69 on March 01, 2008, 03:10:37 pm
There is no such thing as postie racers club anymore as the owner Warren Leadbeatter moved south and no longer holds events

Not everyone can afford a motocross bike which is why I own a postie

Unless someone wants to sponsor me to ride their bike?

I can be fast  ;D
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Rosco400 on March 01, 2008, 04:18:04 pm
jeez you blokes..do I have to think of everything..all this hassle over a simple little 2000 model or whatever posty special..the fix is simple..get yourself an early chassis for next to nothing..no-one wants the frames  ;) Bolt all your stuff..engine, wheels etc. onto/into the early frame..presto!..you have a perfectly legit bike that can't be knocked back! It's obviously only the newer chassis number that's causing the issue cause the rest is the same  as the early critters ::) Walter, I reckon in that hypothtical VPX (Vintage Postycross) class you could safely include next years model too :D..1 may rightly ask themselves, where is VMX headed?  :D

Pre 70, Pre 75,Pre 78 Evo all in one bid ;D ;D ;D


http://cgi.ebay.com.au/old-hondas_W0QQitemZ260216338857QQihZ016QQcategoryZ102690QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Doc on March 01, 2008, 06:40:40 pm
hessam69, for the amount a decent late model CT110 would sell for you should be able to buy yourself an MX bike that will fit. The 110 Honda's are very popular as a bolt in engine replacement/upgrade for 110cc pitbikes, if it's in good condition it will fetch a good price. Over $1000 is not unusual for a posty.. I have seen near complete and rideable RM125's, TM125's and YZ125's all selling for much the same or less this in the past few weeks. A PE or IT maybe depending what you like (apart from posty bikes)..most of my bikes come in well under $1000..sell the posty and find a good replacement ;) there's a nice incomplete (90%) '75 RM125 on ebay right now with a starting bid of $250 I'd be on the blower and attacking with venom if it were local..alas, as always it's not so I watch..throw another $500 or so at it and this bike would suit perfectly and be an ideal investment even if you did race it.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Nathan S on March 02, 2008, 03:58:14 pm
WTF!?

Carry-over model and/or parts = it's legal regardless of the date on the compliance plate.
This is no different to using a 1976 DT175 in pre-75, or a 1971 RT1 in pre-70, etc.

While I'm disagreeing with several people that I like/respect, there's some remarkably irrational, emotive responses in this thread:
If its good for the goose (HL500, Metisse, etc) then its good for the gander (CT110, DT175, etc).

If you think new HL500 replicas or 'new production' Metisses are fine for VMX, but are appalled by the idea of a pre-75 (or whatever) CT110, then I'd love to hear some reasoning behind it.


WRT Magoo's point ("Why!?") I kinda feel the same way as him. My best guess is that racing VMX bikes is fundamentally illogical - so of course it's gonna attract people who want to race illogical bikes.


Having said all of that, Doc's last post is a winner.



Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: YSS on March 02, 2008, 04:15:22 pm
You have good points Nathan, but I can not recall a postiebike class in 1974  or any year in that era .
Where I have to say the Metisses where definitely there and documented. So if anyone has documentation and photos of such configuration that could help Hassan with his project that would be great. I think that would save any arguments. However they did have a 50 cc and later 80cc MX class in Europe with the Zuendapps , Kreidlers , Hercules, etc. So what is right and what is wrong ? I believe the the first 110 came out in 82 and before they where 90 s and before that they where 70 cc. I am not sure of the exact years , but surely somebody on this forum would know with certainty.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: firko on March 02, 2008, 07:09:02 pm
Nathan you can't compare a 2003 CT110 Honda with a genuine replica of a bike that actually raced in its era like a Metisse or aN HL Yamaha. The CT110 was released in 1980 but it's stretching a long bow saying that an 03 model is identical enough to pass as a flow on model. The flow on models that are allowed like the '75 CR125 are practically identical and only one year newer. If we were to allow a bike 23 years newer than the introduction model we open up a can of worms that would introduce all sorts of challenges to the flow on regs. There are already some examples that really shouldn't be there like the RT1 Yamaha and certain Maicos being in pre '70 but as it stands right now  they are legal because the rule book says they are. If Hessam wants the 03 CT110 included as a flow on, he should lobby his club and commission rep to include the bike in the flow on list.
My advice for Hessam is similar to that given by Doc. If you are obsessed enough to want to race a postie bike in VMX, sell you newish bike for good money and buy a model that fits into the era you wish to race. If you want to race pre 75, buy a CT90 and trick it up. If you want to race Evo, get an 80-86 model. I don't normally criticise peoples choices of VMX rides but I have to question why anybody would want to race such a primitive bike when other more sensible choices are available. Shit, even an AT1 or a Jawa California are better choices than a CT110 whether it be a '63 model or an '03 model.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Nathan S on March 02, 2008, 08:51:17 pm
Nathan you can't compare a 2003 CT110 Honda with a genuine replica of a bike that actually raced in its era like a Metisse or aN HL Yamaha. The CT110 was released in 1980 but it's stretching a long bow saying that an 03 model is identical enough to pass as a flow on model. The flow on models that are allowed like the '75 CR125 are practically identical and only one year newer. If we were to allow a bike 23 years newer than the introduction model we open up a can of worms that would introduce all sorts of challenges to the flow on regs.

OK, two divergent paths here:
1. If the newer bike fits the carry-over model description, then who cares whether it is one, five or twenty years newer than the first model?
Yes, we can (and probably should) discuss the details of this specific case, but in the more general sense, it's both irrational and indefensible to argue that a 1975 model is an acceptable as a carry-over bike, but a 1980 or 1995 model is not, if they meet the carry-over criteria.

2. How many genuine HLs got raced in MX anywhere in the world? What about in Australia? While they're a cool and interesting bike from a historical perspective, their mark on the MX scene is about as relevant as the CT110's...
The Historic Touring car regs specify that if you want to race it, you've gotta prove that one raced in Australia, back in the day. If VMX is genuinely about recreating the era, then we should have a similar rule.
If nothing else, it'd cut the crap about MX400As and so on.
It would also breathe some relevance into the lists of acceptable bikes for the eras...
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: GMC on March 02, 2008, 09:14:27 pm
I can see the logic of some of your argument Nathan, but I think it is a bit like buying a new Mini Cooper to go classic car racing with. I don't know much about the postie bikes but I gather thier are some differences so it is not a true follow on model.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Graeme M on March 02, 2008, 09:49:53 pm
My take on this is we race VINTAGE MX. The whole carry on thing was brought in to cope with a couple of cases where a bike that was just like the previous years model was ineligible because of the year cutoff.

But look, arguing the toss about how far carry ons go is silly. We buy, restore and occasionally race dirtbikes that were made donkeys years ago. We are trying to celebrate, venerate and relive a particular time. The rules are aimed at supporting that.

So, any bike that is made in 2003 and MARKETED as a 2003 model is a 2003 model, it is NOT a vintage bike and it is not a carryover. End of story.

Trying to suggest that a 2003 model carried in a mainstream manufacturer's catalogue as a 2003 model is somehow the same as a replica frame into which a real live honest to goodness 1978 engine is placed is downright nonsensical.

I have to agree with the others on here. If there is a thing called Vintage MX and its purpose is to encourage people to race 30 year old dirtbikes, then why the heck would you buy a 2003 model and go try to race it?

And now my usual disclaimer. Naturally I couldn't care less really, if someone wants to do this, it's sure not gonna worry me, even if they beat me on my HL500 with their postie bike. But if there are rules, then there are rules. Don't like it, go lobby for a change and get it voted on. Just like Gezza did with his 86 CR250...
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: 090 on March 02, 2008, 10:16:51 pm
Hear hear ! It would be just as absurd to race it in the moderns, its a mobile road block. Either get a paper run or get a vintage bike of some description and come ride with us!!
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Tim754 on March 02, 2008, 10:21:37 pm
Hey hessam69 at least sell the agi farm postal delivery bike ( Oh the 2003 model you have is a 5 speed gearbox and they started much later as the early 90/110s had a dual range hi/lo type box so that being a "major component" precludes the follow on theory straight away) and get an SL100 or SL125 or even an SL70 as they pop up for sale all the time . Handle small worlds better, standard they are still a slug as you seem to want, are quite VMX legal and you can still buy lots of hot up bits and pieces that are VMX legal too. PS Don't try to run one on nitrous oxide, it makes the little four strokes howl but also bloody explode............ ::)Tim
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: firko on March 02, 2008, 10:31:32 pm
Nathan.......I'm blown away by the absurdity of your second statement. Surely you're taking the piss here? How can you say that an HL has as much relevance as a CT110 on the MX scene?

Oh, and remind me again what the crap with the MX400A is?
Jeez!!
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Nathan S on March 02, 2008, 10:58:32 pm
OK, it was obviously a generalisation, but while we all go on about how wonderful HLs are, what lasting, significant impact did that have on the MX scene? I'll wager that it is "virtually nothing".
Hell, hardly anyone even knew they existed until a few years ago... ::) And it's not like they were even the impetus for a competitor to make a revolutionary, historically significant bike.
They were an oddity at best - the fact that they sold a grand total of 400 worldwide, says it all.

That we look at them 25+ years later, and see them as a VMX-compatible version of the '98 YZ400F, doesn't alter their lack of meaningful impact on the history of MX.
Obviously their impact is greater than that of the CT110 - but for one bike to be so staunchly defended as a legitimate VMX bike while the other is so demonised, is beyond me.

The MX400A crap was, as I've had it explained to me, someone with a (pre-production or early production)  MX400B trying to claim that it was pre-75 eligible.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Nathan S on March 02, 2008, 11:25:25 pm
My take on this is we race VINTAGE MX. The whole carry on thing was brought in to cope with a couple of cases where a bike that was just like the previous years model was ineligible because of the year cutoff.

But look, arguing the toss about how far carry ons go is silly. We buy, restore and occasionally race dirtbikes that were made donkeys years ago. We are trying to celebrate, venerate and relive a particular time. The rules are aimed at supporting that.

So, any bike that is made in 2003 and MARKETED as a 2003 model is a 2003 model, it is NOT a vintage bike and it is not a carryover. End of story.

Trying to suggest that a 2003 model carried in a mainstream manufacturer's catalogue as a 2003 model is somehow the same as a replica frame into which a real live honest to goodness 1978 engine is placed is downright nonsensical.

I have to agree with the others on here. If there is a thing called Vintage MX and its purpose is to encourage people to race 30 year old dirtbikes, then why the heck would you buy a 2003 model and go try to race it?

C'mon Graeme... Getting away from the CT110 specific discussion, if a 2003 model is the "same" as the 1984 or 1977 or 1974 or 1969 bike, then it MUST be a carry-over model.
Previously we've had long and protracted arguments about how pre-85 and/or pre-90 is Bad because it's not re-creating an appropriate era. But now the argument is that newly manufactured bikes that accurately reflect an appropriate era are not OK simply because they haven't spent X-years on the planet?

Like I said, the argument is emotive and irrational. Fair enough if you don't like the idea of bikes being able to be carry-over models for 20 years, but at least take the step back and work out why you don't like it, and why you think its a problem.

Is a GMC HL500 frame with a late model SR400/500 engine, new fibreglass seat base, new Franks triple clamps, a new plastic replica 125C tank, and new everything else OK for VMX? If so, why?
What about Jiri Starec's new CZs?

There seems to be a common theme (in this thread and others), that most of us have a 'feeling' about what constitutes a legitimate VMX bike - and the core of that feeling is pretty universal.
But while that feeling is not spelled out in the rules, we can only go on what the rules actually say - and the rules say that a carry-over bike is a carry-over bike, regardless of whether it was made 2, 10 or 35 years ago.

If, as Tim has pointed out, a bike isn't a legitimate carry over model despite superficial appearances, then I wouldn't want it to be made legal for any particular VMX class, but that's not the point I'm trying to make.

Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: firko on March 02, 2008, 11:49:36 pm
I think a clue to why the CT110 is being "demonised" here is that is not a VMX bike. It has no place on a motocross track for so many reasons. You assume that a 2003 bike is an identical flow on from the 1980 model so therefore it should be allowed. Crapola! There are many changes but they are all red I suppose so let's turn a blind eye and no one will notice.
How do you come to the assumption that "hardly anyone even knew they (HL) existed until a few years ago" Nathan? Because you didn't hear of it you shouldn't assume that others shared that lack of knowledge. My motorcycle social circle were well aware of their existence as was anyone who has the slightest sense of MX history. The HL was an extremely revolutionary and trick bike in its day, won one GP and placed in others in its only serious racing season and would have won a lot more if Yamaha didn't withdraw development funding in favour of the two stroke program, which is the reason they only sold 400 units. It was the first 4 stroke to seriously challenge the 2 strokes in 20 years. "Virtually nothing" significant impact you say. I say "you're forking kidding". Check your facts Nathan. Even mentioning a CT110 in the same sentence as an HL Yamaha is ludicrous, let alone championing them as as worthy a VMX bike. I'll respect anyones opinion on what should be eligible or not eligible but when a flawed and judgmental argument is thrown into the mix to justify a dodgy submission, I arc up big time. I'll say it again......... A 2003 Honda CT110 has no place in Vintage Motocross..
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Nathan S on March 03, 2008, 12:37:12 am
You assume that a 2003 bike is an identical flow on from the 1980 model so therefore it should be allowed. Crapola! There are many changes but they are all red I suppose so let's turn a blind eye and no one will notice.

And there's that emotion again. Go back and re-read my previous posts, and you'll see that I've repeatedly made the point that I'm not talking specifically about any bike, particularly not CT110s - so I have no idea where you got that idea from. ???
 
How do you come to the assumption that "hardly anyone even knew they (HL) existed until a few years ago" Nathan? Because you didn't hear of it you shouldn't assume that others shared that lack of knowledge. My motorcycle social circle were well aware of their existence as was anyone who has the slightest sense of MX history.

C'mon... Hardly a solid argument that they were part of the mainstream knowledge... I'll ignore the condescending tone, and point to the minimal media coverage both in their day and in the earlier VMX days (that's VMX the sport, not the magazine). Bikes that really mattered, the ones that really made a difference, were referenced all over the joint (and often for years after).
 
The HL was an extremely revolutionary and trick bike in its day, won one GP and placed in others in its only serious racing season and would have won a lot more if Yamaha didn't withdraw development funding in favour of the two stroke program, which is the reason they only sold 400 units. It was the first 4 stroke to seriously challenge the 2 strokes in 20 years.

Yes, yes, and yes (erm, this is not meant to sound facetious or patronising, I agree with all quoted points). But the simple fact is that Yamaha withdrew the funding and it went nowhere, with virtually no bikes sold.
So my point is valid: Despite their good points, ultimately they're a historical curiosity, and nothing more. They live on the same rung of the historical ladder as the Noguchi AT1MX and the Ribi RC125: They did not re-define the direction of dirt biking, or even just it's MX offspring. Nor did they prove to be pivotal in  history of its maker.

The main thrust of my point is that the direction the rules take, and the application of rules, is often emotionally charged and therefore irrational.
If we want the rules to reflect that almost universal feeling about what makes a legitimate VMX bike, then fine. But we also have to accept that everyone will have differing opinions at the edges.
And while the rules are written as they are, then the written rule takes precedent over vague, undefined and possibly self-contradictory emotion.

Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: BETRIC on March 03, 2008, 06:16:57 am
HONDA MADE THE CT90/110 AS A FARM BIKE WITH A DUEL RANGE GEAR BOX THAT WAS AVALIBLE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC, THE CT110 POSTIE BIKE IS MADE FOR AUST POST ONLY A SPECIAL ORDER ONLY SO YOU CAN NOT BUY NEW FROM HONDA, WHEN WERE POSTIE BIKES FIRST MADE MID 80's???, I HAVE AN 87 MODEL, SO WOULD THAT MEAN THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO RACE A EARLY MODEL CT90/110 WITH THE DUEL RANGE BOX INSTALLED TO BE LEGAL ??? ???
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: All Things 414 on March 03, 2008, 07:44:42 am
You go away for one weekend and it all goes off! ::). I wish there had been more postie bike/CT's around when I was racing years ago. My dreams of world domination could have materialized! I think someone's taking the piss here.......
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: husky61 on March 03, 2008, 07:59:31 am
Nathan

Give it up will ya.

Not only did your reply sound facetious and patronising but also down right condescending.

Yeh Yeh , my couple of posts were not much better , but there is a programe and people should stick to it , so lets get with the programe . ::) ::) ::)

It , the 2003 model postie bike is  not a follow on model and never will be.

As Mark said , just because you were not aware of the HL and the HL programe , others were and they performed very very well when Yamaha were supporting the programe.

If people wish to use the trusting old postie in VMX , power to them for having a shot (Go Noel)  ::) ::) ::)
, but having said that it needs to be a year model that meets the requirements
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Hoony on March 03, 2008, 08:06:27 am
i don't know why you guys get wound up so much, as 414 said its a piss take and a joke thread.
 
"Nuff Said" 
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: YSS on March 03, 2008, 08:14:26 am
No Hoony , I thought it was joke first . But thats one month to soon. (1.April)
I think this will test the system.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: All Things 414 on March 03, 2008, 08:21:20 am
Testing some peoples medication I think.......
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: firko on March 03, 2008, 08:39:19 am
Nathan...Your blinkered view of motocross history astounds me. Now we find you are comparing two bikes that didn't exist as showroom releases (Noguchi and Ribi) with a legitimate production model. If you had read any of the bountiful selection of articles available to you on the HL history you'd know that the bike was indeed an extremely successful bike that garnered an amazing amount  publicity at the time. The minimal media coverage in the early days of VMX (the sport) may have had something to do with the small fact that VMX in those days was purely a pre 75 division. The HL is a pre 78 or Evo class bike so of course it wasn't mentioned much back then. 

Please accept the FACT Nathan that a 2003 Postie bike is not a flow on from a legitimately legal pre 1986 model. As Betric points out so accurately, the CT110 is not available to the public and is vastly different to the production Civvy model. It's not a flow on and it's not bloody legal.

I don't understand your paranoid fixation with defining the rules. They are not perfect and never will be but they have served us well for 20 years. To pedantically scour them looking for loopholes and mistakes rather than using them to guide Your race bike choice is not productive. Your reading efforts would be better spent learning a bit about the history of our sport and its bikes to prevent any further public displays of ignorance. ::)



 
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: firko on March 03, 2008, 08:45:51 am
I have to agree that this thread probably did start as a piss take as I also said in an earlier post. However when Nathan starts twisting the history of our sport to suit his own unfathomable philosophy I can't let it go without comment.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: YSS on March 03, 2008, 09:09:14 am
No Firko , this bloke definitely was serios when he rang Fernando. I thought it was a joke too , thats why I put up the pic of my fuel injected 125 Honda follow on model .
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Nathan S on March 03, 2008, 09:18:12 am
As I cannot let it go when you mis-represent what I've said.

I don't go looking for the holes in the rules - they come and slap us in the face every couple of months. But the stoic refusal to accept that the rules are anything but perfect, offends my fundamental sense of right and wrong.

Look at it the other way: If we were to revamp the way the rules are written, so that anyone with basic reading and comprehension skills could pick up the manual and know what was allowed and what was prohibited, would the sky fall in?
Why is it better that people have to get onto these forums and ask questions, to get 30 different points of view, and then still have to guess whether their bike will be legal?

And I repeat: Now that we know the later CT110s have 5-speed gearboxes rather than dual-range 4-speeders, the discussion about this particular bike is dead in the water.









Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: firko on March 03, 2008, 09:42:24 am
I am unaware of the situations that "slap us in the face every couple of months". I'm sure we'd all like to know what the problem bikes are. To enlighten us can you list the problem bikes and why they are anomalies please Nathan?

How do you think the rulebook can be inmproved Nathan? You've spent a lot of time over the last year or so sprouting your worries on our imperfect eligibility criteria so using the ample space available on this forum, give us a hint on your for a better rulebook. I'm the first to admit that there are some eligibility issues that need to be addressed so your suggestions might just be the catalyst for a new, more democratic eligibility criteria.
This isn't a sarcastic pisstake. I'm quite serious about hearing Nathans ideas on improving the breed.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: All Things 414 on March 03, 2008, 10:22:55 am
Come to mention it, my '08 Harobishi Banzai looks very Similar to Hakan Andersons '77 Works 360. I'm sure the Chinese were having a good look at motocross in those days and as mine doesn't have a compliance plate (the bike may be stolen, I did pick it up at Trash & Treasure), I reckon it could be a flow on from the '82 Hirochemo Crumple, a little known 65cc bike made popular by Phach Kit when he placed 85th in the 1982 World Overlocking Championships held in...........
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: bingil 6 on March 03, 2008, 10:50:54 am
I was going to stay out of this one but it's got the better of me , Ive been involved & interested in dirt / MX bikes since the early seventies & I can never recall a Honda Ag bike competing at any event or featuring in any dirt/MX bike magazine, so to me I don't think the have a place in VMX history , I do give Hessam69 credit for trying but I do get a bit annoyed when some people can't take no for an answer, if you and others are so determind in competing on these bikes do what was mentioned earlier in this thread and get together and lobby MA to get a class going & before you throw the Teddy in the sandpit because the bike you've bought doesn't fall into any of the classes catered for by the club you would like to join why not consult the club first you never know there might be someone willing to sell you a decent bike to get you started at price that you would probably spend on something that is not compatible
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: magoo on March 03, 2008, 02:21:10 pm
 ???
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: STW996 on March 03, 2008, 02:37:07 pm
Nobody can say it like Magoo can!!!!!!
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Gerard De Ruyter (Twistandshout) on March 03, 2008, 02:56:35 pm
gosh i love the crap we go on about here on good old ozvmx.  its bloody good entertainment, specially these flame up sessions.  couldn't write better fiction than this.

be remiss if i didn't try to keep the pot stirred.  i can't believe you'd turn away an 03 ct110.  i don't care if they did get the rip snorting benefit of a five speed box along the way or not.  as far as i know, the rest of the bike is still stuck in a late sixties time machine and so is good to go.  years are a metaphor for technology developments, and so are a useful yardstick most of the time (eg, to separate early LTS bikes in Pre-78 from mid LTS bikes in evo).   but not in a case like this one.  the postie bike got bugger all development so the bike stamped out in the twenty first century actually is a late sixties bike.

that's why for the new Old School class at ACTMCC, we went for technology - no USD or rear discs, all else goes - and i mean all else (but what else is there - know many modern mx bikes that had oodles of technology but for some reason left drum brakes on the back?)  easy peasy and fair.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: husky61 on March 03, 2008, 03:50:51 pm
 :o :o
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Hoony on March 03, 2008, 04:05:17 pm
yeah, for some very strange reason i can help but follow this. it must be the entertainment of it i suppose.

I'm off to see some kind of therapist.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: BETRIC on March 03, 2008, 04:53:15 pm
 ??? ??? ??? ??? ;D THIS DISSCUSION IS SO FUNNY, I BET IF HE TURNED UP WITH COMPLIANCE PLATE REMOVE FROM THE FRAME NO ONE WOULD HAVE A CLUE WHAT YEAR IT WAS BUILT, BOTTOM LINE IT IS STILL NOT LEGAL,
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: magoo on March 03, 2008, 05:43:10 pm
I just love the fireworks. My old sparring partner Nathan committed the mortal sin of questioning the integrity of the HL. That's like asking a muslim why they wear a towel on their head.
Ask and wear the consequences.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: STW996 on March 03, 2008, 05:43:46 pm
Hey Hoony, it is a Honda after all so I am half temped to support the cause, but if he was to beat me on it well >:( :'(
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Hoony on March 03, 2008, 05:47:18 pm
G'day STW,

Honda or not i am not buying into this dribble, i will read it funnily enough though.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Doc on March 03, 2008, 06:25:50 pm
remember kids..

(http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/ATA/24825BP~The-Simpsons-Homer-Trying-is-Posters.jpg)

so don't even try it!
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: DJRacing on March 03, 2008, 06:28:54 pm
Yep sure is a great read, so since I'm 44yrs of age and the human body hasn't had any modifications can I race in the over 60's class??  ;)
What about the bike I just built, what class(pre??) does it belong in? I'm calling it a YZ125"B"
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: paul on March 03, 2008, 06:35:54 pm
only if you have a tran plant from some one who is 61 . does hair count
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: firko on March 03, 2008, 06:45:31 pm
Yep it is dribble Hoony and I wouldn't have bothered even commenting on the Steppy eligibility question as it's not a thing I'd normally give a shit about. If you are mad enough to race one like Noel (no insult intended mate) go right ahead as long as it fits into the eligibility cutoff.

Then Nathan flew in there like a runaway garbage truck with yet another pompous epitaph on the inadequacies of our rulebook. That was like waving a red flag at a bull and I couldn't refrain from comment. Myself and very dedicated group of people spent a shitload of time researching and writing the rules those rules. For 20 years they have stood us well, with very few problems compared to other "vintage" or historic diciplines. Constructive criticism is a welcome thing but Nathans paranoid "loopholes everywhere" criticisms are annoying. There are some things that could certainly use a tuneup but all in all it's a simple, easy to understand and fair set of rules.  
Nathan, if you feel the need to fix our supposed eligibility problems join a club/comittee/commission and table your plan to save us from the evils that pour from the books pages. The commission is always looking for new input from competitors. Until then though, please inform us with your master plan to get it all back on track. It must be a serious situation if it "slaps us in the face every couple of months" so don't waste any time matey......... ;)
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Doc on March 03, 2008, 07:33:06 pm
DJ, about the bike you just built..it's pre '78 along with my TM125S ;) nice job by the way  8)
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Nathan S on March 03, 2008, 08:08:39 pm
I am unaware of the situations that "slap us in the face every couple of months". I'm sure we'd all like to know what the problem bikes are. To enlighten us can you list the problem bikes and why they are anomalies please Nathan?

How do you think the rulebook can be inmproved Nathan? You've spent a lot of time over the last year or so sprouting your worries on our imperfect eligibility criteria so using the ample space available on this forum, give us a hint on your for a better rulebook. I'm the first to admit that there are some eligibility issues that need to be addressed so your suggestions might just be the catalyst for a new, more democratic eligibility criteria.
This isn't a sarcastic pisstake. I'm quite serious about hearing Nathans ideas on improving the breed.

Without bothering to think of the examples overly thoroughly, the following legitimate questions have been on these forums in the last year or two, and their answers were not in the rule-book. They were typically answered through the knowledge of the other forum members - but in many cases, the answers given were nothing more than opinions and/or interpretations.

What do the Evo rules mean!?
How new can an Evo bike be if it meets the three criteria?
Is a 75 CR125 a carry-over bike?
Is a 75 TM250 a carry-over bike?
What's the story behind Vern Grayson's bike/Is it legal or not?
What's an MX400A, and is it pre-75 legal?
Where do the rules exempt pre-78 (and later) bikes from 18.5.0.8a, b and c?
Is a round section swing arm OK on a DT1/RT1 racing in pre-70?
Which 77 models are not eligible for pre-78 (as per 18.7.6)?
Can I change my handlebars to a modern type?
Is there a restriction on paint/plastic colours?
Do I have to use a certain type of wheel rim on my pre-70/pre-75 bike?
Are remote reservoir shock absorbers allowed on pre-78 (and later) bikes?

I'm sure there's more, but you get the point. To be fair, most of them weren't 'arse biting' episodes, but then again there's more than one every couple of months there...
A well written set of rules

The fixes are relatively easy:

1. List the parts that are considered to be major components (ie: the bits that define the bike as being of its era - frames, engine cases and forks vs lever assemblies, tyres and rims);

2. Re-format it so that the later classes are not just 'add-ons' to the original pre-75 classes. This can be done either by listing the common-to-all-era rules at the start and then have separate sub-sections for the individual eras' specific rules, or by incorporating them into the original format;

3. Make a blanket statement that either says "No modifications to major components are allowed unless permitted by these regs" or "Any modification is allowed unless otherwise prohibited by these regs". Ka-pow, you've killed all of the grey areas that create confusion/angst/protests/inadvertent cheats/deliberate cheats.
Alternatively, list each component and the mods/replacement available to it (but this is probably too laborious).

4. Clearly define what is an acceptable replica of a major component.

5. Make it clear whether the lists of acceptable bikes is 'some of the acceptable bikes', 'the ones you don't need to prove' or 'all of the acceptable bikes'. 18.9.0.3 (the equivalent list for sidecars) makes it clear (in that case its 'the ones you don't need to prove').

There's a lot of other small detail things too, but that's the meat of it.


I'm not trying to change the intent of any of the rules - in fact, the opposite is true. I simply want both the intent and boundaries to be clear to everyone with basic comprehension skills, without have to resort to finding and asking people who are 'in the know'.
 
Firko seems keen to take personal offence whenever I criticise 'his' rules, but whatever - it's certainly not my intention.
You'll notice that most of my suggested solutions relate to the alterations to the original regs (addition of pre-78 and Evo, for a start).

Simple version for those with short attention spans:
The rules as they stand are like an old weatherboard house, that's been extended with fibro in the past.
There comes a time when every house gets run down, and needs a spruce up.
Sure, you can keep living in the house with the peeling paint and the leaky taps, but nobody chooses to live in a run-down house simply because it was the best house around when it was first built.














Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: magoo on March 03, 2008, 08:44:03 pm
I've got the answer to all our problems. Nominations are open for the Vintage Dirt Sports Commission in N.S.W. and there are a couple of vacancies. I nominate Nathan to stand on the commission so he can rectify all that is wrong with our sport.

Do I hear a seconder?

Yes, Mr Firkin. Carried. Your application is accepted Nathan now let's get on with it and rectify all that is evil in this god damned mess.

Our first meeting will be in a couple of weeks so we'll see you there.

Thank you and good night!!!!!
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Noel on March 03, 2008, 10:22:00 pm
As My name heads this thread I feel the need to respond,

Unfortunate as it may be this is not a piss take thread

I am a teenager of the 70's, Rodger D being the name that was the Hero of my day,I rode home made mini bikes with mower motors,Gemini's then TM75,  Deckson eagles  etc.  at mini bike club , spent Holidays on Uncles farm fixing  and riding CT90's ,S90's .Did not race motor cross but went to Amaroo to watch the Mister motorcross series .
once I got my license I rarely rode dirt bikes,but owned road bikes.
when my kids were in their  teens and living in the suburbs we started going out to the mountains
with some like minded people and having social days ripping around paddocks  on postie bikes ,
as a Fitter Machinist  I could also perform modifications
 to cut the story short I ended up with a Garage full of modified postie bikes,
Kids move on
Did not know VMX existed,
While on the computer I turned up a web site promoting Vintage MX meeting "Crawford river Classic "
And read up on regs, they had a class that read.

 Evo "air cooled drum brakes non Linkage suspension " and at the time I read it " no year cut off dates"

I also had in the garage my commuter bike , an '82  DR250  Suzuki.
I entered a  modified postie  bored to 113cc and other internal engine mods with CR 80 forks and laided down shocks in evo 125
and the DR in pre 85.
the organisers did not tell me to piss off, they thought about the postie and thought that it fitted better in pre 78 125, as it probably had about five inches off rear wheel travel and 7 of front.
I had a ball that weekend and was made to feel welcome.
By the next club meeting I had found my self a "77  Honda CR125 ( yes you can see how uneducated I am)
and retired the Evo Postie,and set about finding a pre 75 bike
I also notice that pre 70 seemed to be struggling for entries.
my resources indicated that the postie frame had not changed since 1968,
in 1968 CT90 had 4 speed gear box with an over lay rear sprocket
in 1969 the CT 90 introduced  telescopic front forks with external springs( which as far as I could tell were Identical to the CT110 till after 1995) "clymer manual".
I had in the garage a motor that the major hot up component was a high top piston from a 1962 CB72 250 Honda" night mare "
It allowed 14;1 compression on methanol in a  bored out postie motor ,
with shocks in standard position ,maybe 3" of travel and external sprung forks ,3 1/2", a frame and engine that was 60's design
I entered this bike in pre 70 which in some cases put enough bikes on the grid for them to run as a class,

when the pre 75 meeting at Nepean was pleading for entries I took this bike as well as a budget pre 75 bike I had built
to this meeting

It has not been my intention to change the face of VMX or build a cheater bike,

I tried to  enter into what I perceived to be  the spirit ,

At no events that I have taken the posties have I personally  had negative responses
some people have even enjoyed watching me fight them around the track, and I have had fun riding them,

I do not really know Hessam although I have most likely met him in passing,
He posted here late last year and I have had  correspondence  with him and  suggested  he may be able to ride the postie at club events
Trying to encourage new people to  VMX.

No the postie does not have a history in Motorcross but probably a history in the introduction  of people to dirt bikes.

cheers
Noel





Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Nathan S on March 03, 2008, 10:51:45 pm
...
I nominate Nathan to stand on the commission so he can rectify all that is wrong with our sport.
...

 :D
I've never claimed that I can fix it all.
Rectifying the political maneuvering, the cliques, the grudges, the NIH factor, etc are way, waaay beyond my skill-set.



Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Graeme M on March 03, 2008, 10:54:15 pm
You know, I decided to finally sit down and read the rules as per the MoMS and although I completely understand the intent of the rules I think we do need some sort of over riding year cutoff. Maybe I don't get it, but I really believe Vintage MX is about getting an old bike, restoring it and racing it. Buying a modern replica of a frame is a little bit outside of that but I guess acceptable on the grounds the engines and other parts are originally of the period. A 2003 model simply is not a vintage motorbike, regardless of how much it looks like a 1973 model.

The relevant rules ARE a little vague on this point. As well, it isn't entirely clear which rule applies when.

For example, 18.2.2 does not include Evo or Pre 85 as a class, yet this is the 'umbrella' class rule for classic MX as a whole. Evo is defined later in 18.7.11 yet it is not a recognised class according to 18.2.2, and further it discusses components as being 'of the period' without there being any reference to what that period is.

All classes excepting Evo do have the follow on rule, yet in all classes other than Pre 78 and Pre 85 that rule is part of the table of machines clause and by my reading only those models identified in those tables may qualify, whether or not the follow on rule is invoked. Pre 78s on the other hand include the follow on rule in the more general preamble, and it is not clear whether the class is or is not limited to those machines in the table. Pre 85s have no limitations of any kind beyond the year cutoff and the follow on rule is applied.

The simple answer beyond a more complete rewrite is to include a year cutoff, or perhaps more exactly defining 'Classic MX' up front as being a class of racing in which the machine must have been manufactured prior to 1985, or in the case of replica frames that the frame is an exact replica of a frame within the year cutoff using an original engine from that period.

Again, I don't really think we need to worry that much as I will be serving a writ upon Nathan asking him to show cause as to why he should continue to be accepted into the ranks of the VMX Brotherhood and I doubt he'll be able to convince us satisfactorily. Additionally, I have a written affidavit from Honda Motor Corp which quite clearly states that they view a CT110 as being a thoroughly modern motorcycle representative of the full grandeur of Honda's technical innovation and hence it cannot be viewed as 'vintage'.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: firko on March 03, 2008, 11:59:09 pm

Now wasn't that easy Nathan. Your submissions are valid and make sense, if a little pedantic in places. Now all you have to do is nominate for a position on a comittee and table them or lobby someone already on the comittee to fight your case to have them introduced. This, of course must be done through your club.

I don't regard the rules as my rules, they are our rules. It's just that as one of the formulators and the only one who uses this forum (besides an occasional visit from Drakie) I felt it my duty to defend them when they are criticised without an alternative being offered. If you knew how much work went into the rules and how much opposition we originally copped from MA you too would be defensive.

I've just gone over the MA Manuals from 2000, 2001, 2005 (cant find 2007) and must admit that many of the definitions originally included have disappeared over the years. Formerly 'Major Components' were listed as frame, engine, brake hubs and forks but it has gone from today's rules. Below now are my interpitations based on my experience as an eligibility scrutineer using (from memory) definitions now missing from the MA manual.

What do the Evo rules mean!?
That is too abstract a question to answer here except for the usual 'No linkage, air cooled, drum brakes' criteria and adding that 'all major components, ie: Frame/swingarm, engine brakes and forks, must be from the same era or older. Of course that needs further explanation but you hopefully get my drift
How new can an Evo bike be if it meets the three criteria?
Not defined.
Is a 75 CR125 a carry-over bike?
There was once a list of flow on models for all of the eras but it's gone missing over the years as well. The '75 CR125 was considered a flow on but since the introduction of pre 78 it is included in that criteria.
Is a 75 TM250 a carry-over bike?
Same answer as for the CR125
What's the story behind Vern Grayson's bike/Is it legal or not?
Short answer..Legal for pre 70, illegal for pre 65. If that bike showed up today with a different owner it would most likely pass scrutineering for pre 65. The politics involved in that case prevent a simple answer.
What's an MX400A, and is it pre-75 legal?
No such bike
Where do the rules exempt pre-78 (and later) bikes from 18.5.0.8a, b and c?
Can't find current rule book

Is a round section swing arm OK on a DT1/RT1 racing in pre-70?
No. Once again the section has gone from the rulebook but the swingarm is considered a major component so therefore being pre 70 it must be a square section.
Which 77 models are not eligible for pre-78 (as per 18.7.6)?
Can I change my handlebars to a modern type?
I presume you mean pre taper style bars. Yes
Is there a restriction on paint/plastic colours?
That's a silly one. Of course not. I had a Pink Maico in 1990!
Do I have to use a certain type of wheel rim on my pre-70/pre-75 bike?
No, a wheel rim is not considered a major component
Are remote reservoir shock absorbers allowed on pre-78 (and later) bikes?
Yes.

Now, after perusing some of the recent rulebooks I realise that much of what was originally in the book has been removed. I hadn't closely looked at the book for years so I now realise why you are so pedantic. The stuffs not there. However in defence of whoever took the stuff out, perhaps that was their way of streamlining the criteria. Who knows. If all of the fiddly stuff you propose was included it would tend to overcomplicate the book possibly making it harder to understand. There are only so many pages we can use and if you checked you'd find that we have the largest section in the book already. Common sense covers many of the questions you raise.

I agree that the rulebook has suffered some damage in time and I had neglected to check because I hadn't needed to with my bikes, which raises a valid point. I am currently building two bikes, as is my mate Alan. All of these bikes are high end specials with many components from different parent bikes and manufacturers. We have built our bikes without the need for a highly defined rule book (or a rule book at all actually) as we are using common sense and a bit of historical research to build the bikes to an era, pre 65 and pre 70 in my case. You are welcome to go over both bikes at CD5 and will see that there are no dodgy out of era items used. Research and honesty are better tools than an overly defined rulebook.

In closing, you make some good points that need adressing but to continually whinge about it and raise obscure hypothetical points to 'prove' your point is annoying. You've now put your concerns on paper and if you are serious you will follow through and try to have them ratified. If you don't it'll be obvious that you are only raising this as a cheeky shit stir and are not as serious abour righting the supposed wrongs as you claim.


Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: GMC on March 04, 2008, 12:06:32 am


What do the Evo rules mean!?
18.7.12.3
No linkage suspension
No disc brakes
No water cooling
How confusing can that be?

How new can an Evo bike be if it meets the three criteria?
Yes, this isn’t defined which is why we are having this debate

Is a 75 CR125 a carry-over bike?
18.7.5.1  Acceptable for the  pre 75 class are machines built up to & including 74 models. The only exception to this rule is where the model remains unaltered after this date
Probably should be defined better.

Is a 75 TM250 a carry-over bike?
18.7.5.1  Acceptable for the  pre 75 class are machines built up to & including 74 models. The only exception to this rule is where the model remains unaltered after this date.
Probably should be defined better.

What's the story behind Vern Grayson's bike/Is it legal or not?
As I recall this was all about the change from single to twin front down tubes.
18.7.1.1  re: BSA single down tube only

What's an MX400A, and is it pre-75 legal?
If you think it is prove it & you can ride it

Where do the rules exempt pre-78 (and later) bikes from 18.5.0.8a, b and c?
Some paragraphs need rearranging to other chapters

Is a round section swing arm OK on a DT1/RT1 racing in pre-70?
18.7.4.1 re Yamaha AT1 DT1 CT1 rectangular swingarm

Which 77 models are not eligible for pre-78 (as per 18.7.6)?
Which pre 78 models can you think of that aren’t listed in 18.7.8.1 & 18.7.9.1 &18.7.10.1
Some models came out with more than 9” travel & so the rules state that suspension must be restricted

Can I change my handlebars to a modern type?
Nothing says you can’t, to list every possible accessory would make the book 3 times as thick

Is there a restriction on paint/plastic colours?
Surely you can’t be serious???

Do I have to use a certain type of wheel rim on my pre-70/pre-75 bike?
I can’t see anything that suggests you need to be concerned.
It only states that pre 60 alloy rims must be mud catchers 18.5.0.7


Are remote reservoir shock absorbers allowed on pre-78 (and later) bikes?
Some paragraphs in 18.4.1 need rearranging to other chapters

The fixes are relatively easy:

1. List the parts that are considered to be major components (ie: the bits that define the bike as being of its era - frames, engine cases and forks vs lever assemblies, tyres and rims);
They have already listed most of the models

2. Re-format it so that the later classes are not just 'add-ons' to the original pre-75 classes. This can be done either by listing the common-to-all-era rules at the start and then have separate sub-sections for the individual eras' specific rules, or by incorporating them into the original format;
Yes this needs to be done.

3. Make a blanket statement that either says "No modifications to major components are allowed unless permitted by these regs" or "Any modification is allowed unless otherwise prohibited by these regs". Ka-pow, you've killed all of the grey areas that create confusion/angst/protests/inadvertent cheats/deliberate cheats.
Alternatively, list each component and the mods/replacement available to it (but this is probably too laborious).

No way. Apart from clubs having to employ lawyers to write their regs you would then be up against different rules with every club you ride with. Let's keep it uniform please.

4. Clearly define what is an acceptable replica of a major component.
Must look the same. re frames see 18.5.0.1 & 18.5.0.2

5. Make it clear whether the lists of acceptable bikes is 'some of the acceptable bikes', 'the ones you don't need to prove' or 'all of the acceptable bikes'. 18.9.0.3 (the equivalent list for sidecars) makes it clear (in that case its 'the ones you don't need to prove').
The rules have been written to show what is acceptable but it has been left open ended so if you can prove it was available then you can use it.

Nathan, You have made the point before about some paragraphs being in the wrong spot, & you are right, this does need to be fixed, but I feel most of your other points are hollow.
You will get questions asked, that's what the forum is about but common sense is usually the best rule.
Meanwhile our NZ cousins wonder why we have any rules at all.

Disclaimer, All my quotes came from the 07 manual & it's late & I may have made some typo's
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: DJRacing on March 04, 2008, 12:48:07 am
For christ's sake its 2 in the morning and you all have me up reading this shite.
 * Why does a 1977 model with 9" of travel get kicked out of its class? If you could buy it like that in 1977 then it should race in that period, and then you let a 1978 RM400/YZ400 do battle against the last of the twinshock Huskies and you call that fair??

The Rules for KIWI VMX.
A bikes age will be determined by it's official year of release, not the year of manufacture. Bikes that were manufactured and/or released at the end of the year prior to the official release year will be aged by the release year of that bike.
Flow on models may be considered at the organizers discretion. Individual cases will be judged by the Kiwi Vintage Motocross organizers and their decisions on individual eligibility cases is final.

*Pre 1975 but including flow on models as listed: Bultaco Mk8 Pursang & Fontera, Can-Am MXI, CCM MC500 1975, CZ all Falta replicas, Honda CR125M1-2-3, CR250M1-2, MR175-250, XL pre S model, Husqvarna 360CR Mikkola Replica 1975, Kawasaki all steel swing arm & metal tank ‘75-’76KX, KTM MC & GS ‘75, Maico MC250-400-440 1975 Yellow fiberglass tank only. Montesa VA 125-250-360 & enduro, Suzuki TM sunrise models, ‘75 RH250 & ‘75 RM125s only, SWM 1975 MC & GS, Yamaha MX250-400B, YZ125-250-400C, YZ125X & MX125C.

*Pre 1981 Eligibility, all motocross, enduro or trail bikes manufactured during the year period. Maximum number of cylinders two, no water, no disc’s and no linkages.

*Pre 1986 Eligibility, all motocross, enduro or tail bikes manufactured before 1986 with original suspension and brakes, (no parameter frame, no upside down forks).

Bikes will be classed by the latest model performance enhancing part fitted to the bike. e.g.. 1982 forks in a 1980 model bike classes the bike as a Pre 86 entrant. Your bike will be checked for eligibility at some stage during each meeting. The spirit of the class era will be enforced. Please do not put us into a situation where we have to stop you from riding in the class that you intend.

Components such as late model brake discs etc are also considered to be performance enhancing over and above what was available prior to 1986. Please ensure your bike spec is within the spirit of the era of which you are entered to race.

A bikes age will be determined by it's official year of release, not the year of manufacture. Bikes that were manufactured and/or released at the end of the year prior to the official release year will be aged by the release year of that bike.

 

Flow on models may be considered at the organizers discretion. Individual cases will be judged by the Kiwi Vintage Motocross organizers and their decisions on individual eligibility cases is final.


Components such as late model brake discs etc are also considered to be performance enhancing over and above what was available prior to 1986. Please ensure your bike spec is within the spirit of the era of which you are entered to race.


Yes I have read the MA rule book (2008)
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: All Things 414 on March 04, 2008, 05:58:59 am
Geezuz. 85 posts and going. This is gunna catch noise emmissions. Some up and coming barrister would be getting sweaty palms about all this. Probably think you were negotiating the boundaries for some obscure European country in the UN. Maybe I should distract you all with another picture of some shocks......... :P
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: mboddy on March 04, 2008, 08:57:34 am

Where do the rules exempt pre-78 (and later) bikes from 18.5.0.8a, b and c?

18.7.7 Pre-1978 Classes: Technical Specifications overide 18.5.0.8.
Therefore, later classes are not bound by 18.5.0.8 either.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Gerard De Ruyter (Twistandshout) on March 04, 2008, 09:04:17 am
bugger all the stuff about rules, i want to tell noel how much i enjoyed reading about his heritage with the postie bikes.  and how much i've enjoyed seeing him rip (ok, burble - no, rip) around various heaven tracks over the last few years - and hope that continues.  i reckon bikes of all kinds, trailies, posties you name it, should be encouraged.  they're all part of our dirt bike heritage and if it gives pleasure to the rider (and fits the hopefully decent rules), join in.  the trouble is of course we mix vintage riding with vintage racing, which brings in all sorts of tensions that would just not be present if none of it were competitive (like viper social days).  

noel, i also started off on the little hondas - a stepthru 50.  and also went to all the amaroo rounds of mr motocross.  and made that stepthru do (in my mind) all the things i saw per and hans do.  i loved it!  it got me on two wheels!

and i still think its about design rather than year - his 110 might have been stamped out this century, but the guys who actually designed it are well into retirement in sunny okinawa and never even heard of long travel suspension etc.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Nathan S on March 04, 2008, 09:07:51 am
Geoff and Firko, thanks.

WRT the list of questions, they mostly weren't my questions. They were questions that have been presented to these forums by people who have obviously read the manual and still weren't confident to fit the parts.

The fact that your answers aren't identical shows that things could/should be cleared up. In some cases, my answers are different again...
I'm sure that - if we were in a situation where it mattered, like a protest at the Nationals - all three of us would staunchly defend our interpretations.

I actually reckon I could perform the re-write as I suggested, and end up with less words, not more. The re-write won't happen straight away (well, not if I'm doing it), but it will happen soonish, now that there's some support for the idea.
:)




Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Husky500evo on March 04, 2008, 09:39:38 am
The Kiwi rules seem a lot different from just about everywhere else in the world . Allowing a CR360 Mikkola Husky to run in pre '75 seems a bit strange, as it is virtually a works replica & would be way superior to a '74 Maico (or anything else in that class ). The CZ Falta would be a similar story in the 250 class . As the Kiwi pre '81 class seems to be the equivalent of the Oz evo class, does that meen that the '81 Maico , YZ465H & '83/4 Huskys would not be eligible ? I agree with the comment about the Oz 'pre '78 class 9 inch travel limit. The limit should be 10 inches to include every bike that was available in 1977 & the bikes should not have to be modified back to meet the lower standards of inferior models of that time. An example of a legitimate 1977 model bike that is not mentioned in the rulebook is the VB 250/360 Montesa . It has 10 inches of wheel travel, front & rear. Even the Yamaha YZ400D has 10 inches rear wheel travel , measured at the brochure.
      As for the Evo class rules in the MA rulebook, the first part :18.7.12.1 causes confusion . It states that all bikes will be O.E.M . To me , this  puts in doubt any bike that is a hybrid. I think that hybrids are interesting & should be encouraged .
      The 2003 postie bike should be legal for Evo 125 class from the way I see it , as Evo class has no year cutoff. Why you would bother is beyond me though .A 1988/9 model CZ type 514 is also legal , as it meets all the criteria.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: eno on March 04, 2008, 09:40:45 am
Good lord someone might as well have tipped a drum of fuel in here & lit it. All this fuss over a CT90/110, just ride the fuggin thing, if it was over here that poor lil' thing & rider would get so munted by our tracks You'd soon change rides. Mind you there has been times when racing in the slop I'm certain I could have gone as fast on such a thing, cooling fins would bog up quick tho.

Nathan have you ever considered getting into politics?
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: TM BILL on March 04, 2008, 09:42:59 am
bugger all the stuff about rules, i want to tell noel how much i enjoyed reading about his heritage with the postie bikes.  and how much i've enjoyed seeing him rip (ok, burble - no, rip) around various heaven tracks over the last few years - and hope that continues.  i reckon bikes of all kinds, trailies, posties you name it, should be encouraged.  they're all part of our dirt bike heritage and if it gives pleasure to the rider (and fits the hopefully decent rules), join in.  the trouble is of course we mix vintage riding with vintage racing, which brings in all sorts of tensions that would just not be present if none of it were competitive (like viper social days).  

noel, i also started off on the little hondas - a stepthru 50.  and also went to all the amaroo rounds of mr motocross.  and made that stepthru do (in my mind) all the things i saw per and hans do.  i loved it!  it got me on two wheels!

and i still think its about design rather than year - his 110 might have been stamped out this century, but the guys who actually designed it are well into retirement in sunny okinawa and never even heard of long travel suspension etc.

Very well said  :)
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: YSS on March 04, 2008, 09:46:11 am

IWhat's the story behind Vern Grayson's bike/Is it legal or not?
Short answer..Legal for pre 70, illegal for pre 65. If that bike showed up today with a different owner it would most likely pass scrutineering for pre 65. The politics involved in that case prevent a simple answer.
What's an MX400A, and is it pre-75 legal?
No such bike

its not the rules so much , that caused that problem , it was the gutless attitude of MA to let it come that far on the day . Its a shame that a commission can be lulled in by a permanent trouble maker from WA ,that only has one goal . That is to win at all costs and by abusing the rulebook to do so. Does one down tube make you faster then two? No, but if it means you can knock the opposition out ,its a great scape goat
Thats where the problem lays.
In the case of the CT 110 thats different , that is a road bike and needs severe mods from original to compet on a race track.
If that was allowed , I will ask GMC to build a frame for the RD 250 twin cylinder.....
 
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: TM BILL on March 04, 2008, 10:07:00 am
The Kiwi rules seem a lot different from just about everywhere else in the world . Allowing a CR360 Mikkola Husky to run in pre '75 seems a bit strange, as it is virtually a works replica & would be way superior to a '74 Maico (or anything else in that class ). The CZ Falta would be a similar story in the 250 class . As the Kiwi pre '81 class seems to be the equivalent of the Oz evo class, does that meen that the '81 Maico , YZ465H & '83/4 Huskys would not be eligible ? I agree with the comment about the Oz 'pre '78 class 9 inch travel limit. The limit should be 10 inches to include every bike that was available in 1977 & the bikes should not have to be modified back to meet the lower standards of inferior models of that time. An example of a legitimate 1977 model bike that is not mentioned in the rulebook is the VB 250/360 Montesa . It has 10 inches of wheel travel, front & rear. Even the Yamaha YZ400D has 10 inches rear wheel travel , measured at the brochure.
      As for the Evo class rules in the MA rulebook, the first part :18.7.12.1 causes confusion . It states that all bikes will be O.E.M . To me , this  puts in doubt any bike that is a hybrid. I think that hybrids are interesting & should be encouraged .
      The 2003 postie bike should be legal for Evo 125 class from the way I see it , as Evo class has no year cutoff. Why you would bother is beyond me though .A 1988/9 model CZ type 514 is also legal , as it meets all the criteria.

The Kiwi rules work great in New Zealand but thats not to say they would work elsewhere.

On the kiwi tracks Long travel suspension is generally a hinderence , the lower bikes corner way faster .

Kiwi tracks are marked out on natural terrain with only a few ski jumps .

Although paddocks are reused the tracks are usually different each meeting so your not riding in previous ruts etc.

Kiwi VMX is an extentsion of Kiwi life , dont take things to seriously and if you feel the need to cheat to win then your only bullshitting yourself.

At the risk of offending the winners its still only VMX racing and even if you win at the highest level its still only VMX racing , witch in the big picture comes just behind being the worlds tallest Dwarf  :)
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: TM BILL on March 04, 2008, 10:08:35 am
Good lord someone might as well have tipped a drum of fuel in here & lit it. All this fuss over a CT90/110, just ride the fuggin thing, if it was over here that poor lil' thing & rider would get so munted by our tracks You'd soon change rides. Mind you there has been times when racing in the slop I'm certain I could have gone as fast on such a thing, cooling fins would bog up quick tho.

Nathan have you ever considered getting into politics?

Eno you provide the Postie and i will race it  ;D
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: eno on March 04, 2008, 10:28:50 am
Careful what you wish for Bill...I have the worlds fastest CT90 hiding in my shed.  ;D
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: jimson on March 04, 2008, 10:41:00 am
Eno you could give Bill the Indian then he would be the worlds fastest Indian  ;D jimson
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: TM BILL on March 04, 2008, 10:55:08 am
Careful what you wish for Bill...I have the worlds fastest CT90 hiding in my shed.  ;D
So its on for Halcombe then is it  ;)
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: husky61 on March 04, 2008, 11:31:43 am
Correction required

Noel has the worlds fastest postie bike. Well , the fastest we have seen anyway.

(Until there is a drag off )

There's a new concept , postie drags . That would be a good thing to see at break time whilst we are up at eastern creek wacthing the top fuel drag cars.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: eno on March 04, 2008, 11:49:13 am
Hey I like the idea of postie dirt drags...heh heh, mine self destructs if it has anything less than methanol in the tank. Has a puny 6:1 comp' ratio...err thats because of the supercharger pumping at one atmosphere(15 psi).  :o
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: firko on March 04, 2008, 11:50:17 am
In the early days of Vintage Dirt Track we ran the "World Steppy Championships" every meeting at Nepean. The Joel Robert of the sport was a bloke named Billy Johnson with his legendary "Pink Thing", a sixties CT90 taken out to 130 or so cc and running on 90% nitro. Billy was also a legend in the now abandoned Midnight Steppy Parties that used to be held at various properties in the Blue Mountains every full moon. I went to one event, held on radio celebrity Doug Mulrays property, and there were at least 50 steppys running three classes under full lights. The modified class was for the fuel burners and Billy and the Pink Thing (named because everything including the engine and tyres were painted with Passion Pink house paint) were the stars. Seeing those nitro flames shooting a foot out of Pink Thing and Shane "Rocket" Randalls 12'' travel CT110s exhaust will say with me for ever. I even built a bike using a CB100 manual gearbox engine in a postie CT110 but I sold it before it was finished to finance something else.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Tim754 on March 04, 2008, 12:24:44 pm
Look read this and understand if possible economics. This comes from a reputable source The 2008 MOMs is actually smaller than some close preceding years, (I checked!it is!) as it was getting to bloody expensive to print and post!!! Buy trimming some fat , and the amount of pages reduced + costs MA ( Our license fees and Club charges) a lot less to print and to Post out!. Perhaps next year only Officials will get printed versions posted and all else will have to download it. NOW STOP SQUEALING as I know some of you are if you want every line rule placed in the Manual be prepared to pay VERY TOP Dollar as it covers many disciplines not just VMX.............. .
                      COME ON FOR F**KS SAKE USE YOUR COMMON SENSE and YOUR BRAINS. 
                IF YOU THINK YOUR BIKE MAY NOT COMPLY WITH WHATEVER CLASS YOU WISH TO BE IN
                                               IT MOST LIKELY DOES NOT!
..SO WORK ON IT TILL YOU ARE HAPPY IN YOURSELF IT DOES!!! AND REMEMBER THE ONUS IS ON YOU TO PROVE IT DOES.

Hessam take the 2003 bike to a meeting and all the proof you can find it meets requirement, and see what the scrutinizers judge. Me I am a recognized licensed scrutineer and your case and proof would have to be very strong for anything prior to EVO.
Hessam My racing VMX machines  are ALL converted road bikes, My pet VMX Honda754 still even runs the original main road frame with just a few extra gussets, but it is a stamped 1971 production model .  Tim754
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: YSS on March 04, 2008, 04:46:12 pm
There is your answer Tim  . look in the bible for 12.16.0.4
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Bamford#69 on March 04, 2008, 05:45:57 pm
This thread certainly has strayed ,
Dear Mark, are you saying that, scrutineers should or should not allow Vern's Cheney thru scutineering (into Pre 65)  depending on  who is riding it.
Please read the 2008 manual
Please take the word "PEDANTIC" out of your vocabulary,I have noticed that you dismiss any one who doesn't agree with you as pedantic ,
 Reading and knowing what really is in the current GCR's should be encouraged, see GMC's remarks,he can read and understand them, why can't others.


Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: bingil 6 on March 04, 2008, 06:39:50 pm
What class should I enter a Vespa 150 in ?
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Doc on March 04, 2008, 06:43:58 pm
here's somewhere to ride the posty specials.. :D

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=D_s5zvZIUJ0&feature=related (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=D_s5zvZIUJ0&feature=related)
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Bamford#69 on March 04, 2008, 06:46:30 pm
Dear VMX247,
That's Mr Vern Grayson to you,
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: crash n bern on March 04, 2008, 07:50:36 pm
I thought VMX was about scouring the trading post chasing you childhood dream. Finding an old clunker and haggling a good price. Then scouring all the swap meets chasing the holy grail of the  parts you need for $10 a piece. Sitting in the shed at nights and bringing your dream to life. Then turning up at a meet to show your handiwork off, and check out everyone else's. Talk bikes and swap tech tips. Fire the old girl up and do a few laps, who cares who comes first or last. But it strikes me that it seems to be more a political shit fight about rules.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Doc on March 04, 2008, 07:51:53 pm
a search on Vern Grayson might answer your questions VMX247. Vern for want of a better adjective is another 'Legend' I can only hope to partially emulate in my later years  ;)

nah crash n' burn..this is simply what we do when we're not riding..stir shit..happy little bunch of vegimites eh :D to be honest I don't recall of hearing many protests last year and come race day I'm far too worried about me and my bikes welfare to give a hoot what others are riding.. ;)
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Wombat on March 04, 2008, 07:57:15 pm
Time for an intermission break; let's all look at the nice girlie and take a big breath before we return to this epic discussion. ;)

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Doc on March 04, 2008, 07:58:02 pm
 8) looking looking!

damnation!! I can't quite read the number  :'(

here's another little vid..nor Ghost Rider..this is Phost Rider..simply senflippinsational!  :D

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=m44NiI2X3B0&NR=1 (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=m44NiI2X3B0&NR=1)
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: firko on March 04, 2008, 08:58:36 pm
Jikov....I only use the word pedantic when describing my mate Nathan. I overused the word in this thread NOT because I was pissed off because Nathan disagreed with my opinion but because I thought it was a nit picky (that better?) argument he was putting up. GMCs eloquent reply backs that up. Most of Nathans worries about the problems with the rules are covered pretty well once you get into it. My reply while being down on detail was similar in content to GMCs. Remember I had misplaced my MA manual and was going purely off memory. Nathan and I  have had a few of these "discussions" and I reckon that as well as being a bit of a bun fight, it gets some good dialogue happening. I'm certain there will be other "discussions" between us in the future but I'm sure we will both share a beer or two in the Kevlar Kompound at CD5 with not a hint of disagreement. I may be a bit stubborm but I don't hold grudges and I'm sure that Nathan doesn't either. How boring would it be if we all agreed on everything. I reckon this thread's been a bit more interesting than a never ending discussion on Suzuki footpegs or Maico 490s.
 In the end I am a crotchety old fart who doesn't like losing arguments when I think I'm right. I get especially revved up when the rule book is blindly criticised without alternatives being offered up. We put a tough year of formulation into that book and I get pretty defensive of it. Having said that Nathan came back with some good suggestions to smarten it up. If he would have posted that first up before the critique, this argument most probably wouldn't have happened........

MX247. What do you mean by "old school"? .....Vern Grayson was a pre 65 competitor who built a Cheney Triumph in the mid 90s that was declared illegal for the class at the '95 Barrabool Nats. The machinations of the case are too long to repeat here but the reasons for the disqualification were that MA deemed his single downtube Cheney frame to be illegal claiming that Cheney didn't build a single downtube frame prior to 1965. Letters from Eric Cheney himself, Jim Holt from the Pre 65 Club in the UK and numerous other technical experts failed to convince the Classic Motocross Commission so Vern took the case all the way to the High Court and still lost. This case has more dodgy characters, liars, backstabbers and fair weather friends than an episode of Law and Order. Vern was dudded by blokes who themselves are noted cheats and troublemakers who had once claimed to be his friend. One day, when the libel statute of limitations expires I'll tell the real story. Many of you know it already but this forum isn't the place to name names. Vern Grayson is a good bloke who built a superb motorcycle, one of the prettiest and most competitive the class has ever seen, who was very grubbily treated. I was (and still am) disgusted with the way this case was handled from the Barrabool scrutinnering right through to the final appeal. It was MAs blackest hour in my opinion.
Jikov (again),  I made the tounge in cheek remark about Verns bike being able to pass scrutinnering these days with another owner partly in jest but guessing that todays scrutineers wouldn't be so pedantic(there's that word again) and would see the bike for what it is, a legit pre 65 bike. If Vern took the bike to a meeting and tried to do the same, old wounds would reopen and I'm sure he would be refused or punted into pre 70.

The whole eligibility thing is important to those who think it's important. If you just want to turn up and race without any dramas, more power to you. But if you are one of those blokes who love to take the rules to the nth degree, the eligibility criteria should be your instruction manual.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: GMC on March 04, 2008, 09:31:39 pm
A lot of things get discussed here, & it’s a great place for it, but they are all just personnel opinions.

I think what may have irked a lot of people about the postie bike is that it insinuates that Vintage racing is nothing other than bucket racing and that you can race any old bucket in a similarly uncompetitive class.
I feel this way but I do tips me hat to anyone that can ride these things fast.

Is there a restriction on paint/plastic colours?
I’m glad then that this wasn’t one of your questions Nathan. These things may be asked by newbies but that doesn’t mean there has to be a rule for them.

Can I change my handlebars to a modern type?
Actually pre 65 components 18.7.3.1 lists - handlebars, all including alloy.
This is another case of “should be in the general section”
I came back from x,mas holidays & saw a similar thread & I was going to type up something about fixing the rules but never got around to it. I don’t think they need rewriting, just some paragraphs need to be shuffled around to make things clearer

While we’re at it I would like to clear up the riveted / bolted rear hub story too.

Never has a protest been lodged on the basis that rivets were replaced by bolts.

This story refers to the pre 65 CZ twinport which has a funny sort of one-piece sprocket / brake hub with a ¾ alloy hub riveted to it. By the late seventies they had the more conventional style hub with a normal style sprocket bolted on.
The bike in question at the Nats had the later hub in the earlier bike & this was the basis of the protest. Yes, it’still a very anal point as it clearly wasn’t performance enhancing but as the major part was from another era the protest was upheld.
The rider I believe was Boagy & he should have known better at a National but I don’t believe he was trying to cheat but simply swapped parts in order to keep a bike running.
He would be excused for taking his bat & ball & never returning but to his credit he copped it on the chin & still turns up with a tandem full of bikes & rides his tits off.


So ya  have a pre 75 bike,with new shocks (YSS sorry)and a new gmc frame (GMC sorry) and then the scrutineer lets ya though as a pre75....WTF.
I say who would want to be a scrutineer??? after reading this lot..
No offence taken 247 but the basis of the rules seems logical to me.
Ride any bike in its era & you have open slather with consumables such as shocks, ignitions, tyres, exhausts etc. & any replica part, be it frame or engine casing so long as it's a true replica.
Yes the book needs to be clear so the scrutineers know where thay stand.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: holeshot buddy on March 04, 2008, 10:12:55 pm
call me stupid but i always thought scrutineers were to check bike for
safety items not eligability

so the rider knows if his bike is illegal in some way
then he may be protested by another competitor ::) thats his problem ::)

should have nothing to do with scrutineers  8)


signed stupid ;D
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: firko on March 04, 2008, 10:16:49 pm
At the Nats and other open vintage meetings there is an eligibility steward, however the main onus is on the owner to prove his bike is legal if challenged. That proof may be anything from a magazine photograph, a letter from the maufacturer or anything that proves beyond question your bikes eligibility for a specific class. The eligibility stewards role is to make a decision on eligibility based on written proof and to offer opinion on specific eligibility.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Nathan S on March 04, 2008, 11:38:54 pm
Further to you PM, I couldn't let this one go by unremarked:
Maybe I don't get it, but I really believe Vintage MX is about getting an old bike, restoring it and racing it.

How does your Husky fit into that idea?

:P  ;D
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: firko on March 04, 2008, 11:50:48 pm
mx247..By old school I thought you may have been thinking it was from waaaayyy back. No reaction on my part other than wondering what you meant. You may have overreacted you wannabe newbie wanker.  :D
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Freakshow on March 05, 2008, 12:22:59 am
Talking of newbie wanna be wankers , Were the fuc was i during this thread ?   8)

i passed it off many time never opening it, as the topic mentioned postie scooters  ::)

and i didnt want to wast my time, little did i know of the ensuing verbal diarrhea ( theres that word again - bloody spell checker)  that this post would fill me with.   

For the last be it one hour i have laughed my guts up, frowned and then agreed to many of the posts.  Special mention goes to All things 414 for his well scribed post on page 5, that was funny as dude !

Come to mention it, my '08 Harobishi Banzai looks very Similar to Hakan Andersons '77 Works 360. I'm sure the Chinese were having a good look at motocross in those days and as mine doesn't have a compliance plate (the bike may be stolen, I did pick it up at Trash & Treasure), I reckon it could be a flow on from the '82 Hirochemo Crumple, a little known 65cc bike made popular by Phach Kit when he placed 85th in the 1982 World Overlocking Championships held in...........

anyway back to me......i hate to say it but some folk are defending the dead, some have no idea and others must be on drugs.

your honour in closing, my summation of this topic even though i missed out on all sordid commotion, the direction seems to be that the rule book needs love and some folk need to be educated on what is OK, I'm my humble opinion if it was raced in the world anywhere in 1975 and i could have brough it out here to race it was eligible then as much as now " FULL STOP", and yes that means disk brakes and special frames also, if someone sold em or could make me one back then based on the technology then, the process or skills then its in .... if its was made from new ideas, new products or resources not know then it should be OUT or it should be made to pass the group vote by current riders holding a national senior license.  how major components like programmable ignitions, gas shocks, emulators, any gearbox mods, reeds etc pass unchallenged confuses me , unless every one understands its a free for all and if its cool from 20 feet your okay on the day.  Other wise you need to sort out that rule book to ensure its period correct and that flow on stuff is a can O' worms.    if the book is to big you have a Historic register or addendum rule book which cover our classes thats not a hard thing to do.   IM still fighting with my local scrota who cant read a magazine, every race i pullout a article, a letter and other facts Leary showing among other thingsdisk brakes on a 1972 dirt tracker but because the rule book lays off the dirt derivative's he thinks it need to be a Rokon.  the book needs help.  remember some volenteers at the track are just that they are trying to help they arent all historic experts, to some it has bar ends, chain guard and no loose spokes anything else needs to be in the book.   AKA the stupid 96db rule that caught you all unawares  ::)

but i love you all  -even you uptight old school freaks  :-*
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Freakshow on March 05, 2008, 12:50:20 am
What class should I enter a Vespa 150 in ?

pre 75..  i had a factory paggio grass racer years ago, (should never have sold that be worth a mint now)   I shit you not that bike was actually a production racer and a bloody sexy unit. has big 10 inch nobblies, more  like the 67'  200cc sprints.

at one of the national scooter runs in marlo bout 85 ?  i set up a 150 super as a grass racer and it BANNISHED ALL BEFORE IT ON THE TRAILS was a hoot, it was the only bike to clear the bonfire at 12.01 pm on the saturday night TOO.   painted in full Fresian black and white 'the Cow' is still spoken of today amougnst the scooter community for its Jump over the fire.  ( infact i cleared it 3 times )  she now sits at the farm shed with the motor apart awaiting me to put in a new piston, i stupid let the old one rust up.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Graeme M on March 05, 2008, 06:32:02 am
Nathan, 'restoring' in this context means to return to its original glory if that's your bag or making it good enough to race. In the case of the Husky, it was 'restored' in a sense cos it was built up from parts. So it still fits, and it is definitely a bike from the period in question and thus a superb example of the whole VMX philosophy. And it didn't even have disc brakes.

However, you are partly right. I did realise that and so got rid of it and now ride a TM125 and RM125, both of which are true examples of restored bikes from the era. The fact I couldn't ride the 500 for nuts has nothing to do with it...

Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: All Things 414 on March 05, 2008, 07:55:24 am
We've passed noise emmissions. CD5 next......
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: mboddy on March 05, 2008, 08:19:06 am
call me stupid but i always thought scrutineers were to check bike for
safety items not eligability

so the rider knows if his bike is illegal in some way
then he may be protested by another competitor ::) thats his problem ::)

should have nothing to do with scrutineers  8)

signed stupid ;D

I have been a scrutineer for many years.
And for the past few years I have been involved in Historic Eligibility with PCRA.

The Scrutineer does not check your bike for safety.
He checks that it conforms to the rules in the MoMS.

It is up to you to prove that your bike is eligible.
You must have your proof with you at each race meeting.
If you are protested at a race meeting you need to use this proof to prove that your bike is eligible.
If you cannot prove it then the protest stands.

In Historic Road Racing you apply for a Historic Log book to assist you to prove that your bike is eligible.
You provide photos and details of the bike and details of all changes from the original specifications.
You send this to MA with your proof and if they are satisfied that it is eligible then they issue you the log book.
The log book is checked at each race meeting by the scrutineer who updates it with any further changes you have made to the bike.
You still need to bring your proof to the race meetings.

Prior to them bringing in the Historic Log Book I had my own 'Log Book' for each bike.
I'll be doing the same thing with my IT250. And I'll bring my proof with me to race meetings.

The rules must be tightened up to avoid the possibility of a farce at a Title meeting.
For example, they need to state that changes to Fork Internals (including Gold Valves and PD valves) are ok.
This is because at the Titles everyone at the front of the pack will be using them.
You do not want the Titles won by someone on a postie protesting the top placed finishers.     
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: firko on March 05, 2008, 09:09:23 am
I think it's pretty obvious that the rulebook needs some tidying up. I wonder who is going to do it? Who is going to spend their precious spare time going through every sumbission, checking the press of the day to verify if submissions are in fact legitimate and to reword the whole thing so that even the dopiest among us can follow it?

Sure there are some glaring mistakes that often come to our attention. I ask however, have any of you who race vintage dirt track or vintage motocross ever had what they felt to be an unjust eligibility decision based on whats written in the MA Manual? Have any of you been protested because you innocently built an illegal bike or entered the wrong era or class? If so you have a damn good reason to complain but I'd be willing to bet that very few, if any of you have ever had any problems.

I've been both a scrutineer and eligibility steward at numerous National and State titles in previous years and can't recall any cases were a racer was harshly done by as far as eligibility. Many situations arise that call for the scrutineer to make a judgement call, one being a flat tracker with disc brakes at the 98 Nepean Dirt Track titles. I made the call that the single spot Airheart brakes fitted were indeed period and as they offered no performance advantage (they are fairly ordinary in performance) we let the guy race. On the other side of the coin I have found many racers who have ignored the class restrictions in the rulebook and deliberately tried to decieve their fellow racers and the scrutineers. 99% of racers however have no problems with eligibility as I feel that 99% of the situations are covered.

The way some people are reacting to this is a little worrying. For most situations our rulebook has done us proud. We have relatively minimal eligibility problems compared to other diciplines including the modern divisions. Most racers see the rulebook for what it is, a guide to help you select and build the right bike for the right class. If your particular case is one of the few that went through to the keeper when the compliance list was being compiled, come to the races with published proof of your claim and if it's legit, the scrutineer must let it through. An example of this was at the 2000 Nats at Ravenswood. Brad Lewis turned up with a 1974 KTM 250 Enduro with factory laid down shocks restricted to 4'' travel. The scrutineer, Peter Drakeford initially knocked the bike back citing that it was a '75 model as the '74 model had conventional shock placement. Brad to his credit produced a mountain of published proof that while the '74 motocross KTM did in fact have conventional rear suspension, the enduro version had laid down rear suspension with increased travel. Drakie had no option but to pass the bike. This was a good example that if you can prove the rulebook wrong with strong evidence, the scrutineers have no option but to pass it. Fortunately these situations rarely arise.

At the risk of repeating myself, the rulebook is indeed in need of a revision but to call for a wholesale overhaul is not needed. A little tidy up is all that's warranted.


Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: firko on March 05, 2008, 09:22:04 am
I agree with Mboddys assumption on the PD valve/Gold valve situation. Emulators are a reasonably recent product that hadn't been thought of when the rules were formulated. I don't care either way whether they are allowed or not. Whatever is decided it must be plainly shown in the rulebook. VForce style reeds might be another thing to look at as well.
Programable ignitions....and so on.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: husky61 on March 05, 2008, 12:25:54 pm
Agreed

The rule book at best needs a few minor touch ups and revisions.

The rule book has for a very long time served us very well and it is real shame in some respects when it is referenced at meetings.

The basic overview is that most people honour the context of the rule book and probobaly have minor enhancements on their rides that probably in the real sense would not comply.But in real terms the enhancements would not give the bike an unfair advantage .

Given that many parts are no longer available and you sometimes have to make do , there is really not alot you can do to get a signifigant advantage. There are many great and i mean great back yard engineers making do and that is clearly shown on this forum on a regular basis. Just look at some of the work that Doc's turning out. That i beleive is what the whole movement is about. Check out some of the recent completions from NZ. Nice work and again remember this is a hobby sport.

As we all know you could have the best bike in the world or all the sneaky non complying go fast parts you can get your hands on , but if cannot ride the thing well its no good anyway.

How may times have you seen a gun rider turn up at a meeting on a shitter , real shitter and flog the field , more times than i care to remember , driving home thinking i spent all this money on this great looking (complying machine) and get done by 20m by an original shitter that came straight from the chock shed. You cant buy skill no matter how much doe you got.

So all in all it doesnt really matter cause the gun's going to win ,but its great fun giving your best chase.

So just remember next time if your skillful enough to get a place or maybe a win , how good is this and if you dont , man there is always next time.

Dont protest , rejoice in the fact that you restored it , scored it from the chock shed , or got it from elsewhere, remember your blessed with the oportunity to ride it with your mates and try harder next time. Have fun ;D ;D

Dont loose the focus , old guys on old bikes having fun or young guys on old bikes having fun , diitto for the girls.

PS: If you have emulators good luck to you .

Shoey
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Wombat on March 05, 2008, 06:38:41 pm
414, I notice you're counting?
The topic 'Where have all the old boys gone' had a fair swag - 151 posts and read nearly 3500 times.
I'm not sure which topic holds the record but 'postie' must be creeping up on it.
Freaky knows how to check these things; which topic got the most reads and posts pls Freaky?

I love this forum; what seemed a simple observation (of course it's not Vintage if it's 2003!!) has become a truly interesting debate!

Let's have another intermission before we squeeze out another nine pages...

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Hoony on March 05, 2008, 07:15:34 pm
Nice Doubles !
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Graeme M on March 05, 2008, 07:22:17 pm
All the stats are here, and it's CD5 that's the winning topic so far...

http://ozvmx.com/community/index.php?action=stats
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: All Things 414 on March 05, 2008, 08:15:14 pm
That truely is a tall building. Round of applause for Freaky breaking the 1000. On with the bitchin'. C'mon boys! Don't run out of puff now.......
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Freakshow on March 05, 2008, 09:08:41 pm
Thanks 414 its a pleasure to have reached the 1,000 post milestone against stiff competion espiecially paul who must work from his morning paper and the dictionary to think up another post :O)

I just hope that in all this great posting we back up al the good stories, you can cull the shitters , but the techinical and historical posts need saving and protecting less we have a repeat of that shameful day the turks raided out forum and brought it to its knee's.   IM not sure how it can be funnel but i reackon some threads need to be archieved onto a new partition in case we loose all that tasty information every again.

and yes for the record CD5 is infront with the dark horse or should i say dark sheep 'my new project' coming a very credible 3rd !
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Freakshow on March 05, 2008, 09:24:29 pm

The Scrutineer does not check your bike for safety.
He checks that it conforms to the rules in the MoMS.
  

really.......pffft ..... then why does my scrut push my bar ends, tings away at my spokes with his spanner, shake the shite out of my swing arm bearings, stamps on my brakes, amougnt other things, are you saying he expects my proof of eligbility to fall out from under the tank or somewhere ?  :D

thngs must be differant up there..............................  :o
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: mboddy on March 06, 2008, 08:26:52 am

The Scrutineer does not check your bike for safety.
He checks that it conforms to the rules in the MoMS.
   

really.......pffft ..... then why does my scrut push my bar ends, tings away at my spokes with his spanner, shake the shite out of my swing arm bearings, stamps on my brakes, amougnt other things, are you saying he expects my proof of eligbility to fall out from under the tank or somewhere ?  :D

thngs must be differant up there..............................  :o

I have now reread the MoMS and my notes from my Scrutineers course.

The Scrutineering Manual from my course states:
Quote
The express purpose of scrutineering is to ensure that machines and riding equipment comply with the requirements of the G.C.R.s
and that the manufacturer’s standards of mechanical integrity have been maintained.
Under no circumstances is scrutineering to be considered, or referred to, as a safety check.

 

Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Rosco400 on March 06, 2008, 10:50:30 am
Quote
The express purpose of scrutineering is to ensure that machines and riding equipment comply with the requirements of the G.C.R.s
and that the manufacturer’s standards of mechanical integrity have been maintained.
Under no circumstances is scrutineering to be considered, or referred to, as a safety check.

  So if I have a bike with a couple of missing spokes and flogged out wheel bearings etc, it is still OK to ride at a race meet ???
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Freakshow on March 06, 2008, 12:21:36 pm
If ya get a scrutinner that has sat the MA course(training) at your entered event, I don't think you will get too far.
Well lets hope he picks it up for the safety of yourself and others on the track. ::)
Or at least some one has a camera to film ya going end over/ass up on the track.


heheh dam right sista !
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Nathan S on March 06, 2008, 02:44:29 pm
The "it's not a safety check" thing sounds like legal arse covering rather than anything else.
The vague thing about 'ensuring original standards are maintained' acheives the same, but the use of weasel words stinks of lawyer alert...

I've done the CAMS Scrutineering course, and they have similar wording.

Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: mboddy on March 06, 2008, 05:55:54 pm

So if I have a bike with a couple of missing spokes and flogged out wheel bearings etc, it is still OK to ride at a race meet ???

No, because the manufacturer’s standards of mechanical integrity have not been maintained.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Freakshow on March 06, 2008, 11:51:15 pm
thats crap i heard all those euro bikes where made by little old ladies in a sweat shop and they were reemed by hand........... they came out sloppy

i hear even stranger things about those red bikes
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: GD66 on March 07, 2008, 08:01:47 pm
 I have scrutineered both roadracers and mxers for knockin' on for 40 years, long before all the litigation and duty of care to cover mindless idiocy rules were invoked, and I still scrutineer the same way - to check to the best of my experience that the bike is fit to race for the safety of its' rider and others.
 Imagine my surprise when I sat an MA scrutineering course, with a very nice morning tea.... hours of rulebook knowledge, dealing with conflict and reconciliation, and finally, 20 minutes spent looking around a bike. The MA way is to run scared of any possible litigation or controversy, but they regularly drop the ball. What Mark says, is how it is, but that doesn't make it right. I maintain : Scrutineers should check ONLY bike safety, and eligibility will take care of itself through the battle between optimism and acceptance....
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Freakshow on March 08, 2008, 10:11:20 pm
true, i think scutineers is best used to cast a fresh eye over your bike incae you missed somthing or left somthing off in the race to get ther eon time,  the rule book ( as obsures as it is) should be help up to be the  eligibility ruling and the  clerck of course to enfore it.

Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: YSS on March 08, 2008, 10:43:15 pm
Yes , thats the theory . But I have been there where the clerk of cours and the stewart get pushed over by well spoken  shit stirrers , ( see example Vern Grayson). And thats the big turn off, and thats when I arc up big time. :(
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: paul on March 12, 2008, 09:21:31 pm
here you go build what ever you want
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/Honda-Postie-Posty-bike-CT90-CT110-C50-C65-C90-C-90-110_W0QQitemZ140214979606QQihZ004QQcategoryZ35230QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Wombat on March 15, 2008, 10:54:24 am
Forgive me pls for a hijack here but it appears not all are getting the 'noise emmisions' debate.
Another thread has appeared in the Competition page as 'Decibels'.
This is serious. Fatboy advises it all comes to a head when the Board meets on 26 March.
I'm cutting and pasting from that thread into a couple of the high interest threads (like this one) in the hope some will respond to the noise emmisions issue:


Jeez fellas, Fatboy says MA have received only six or eight responses to the noise limit debate!
That is tragic - and hardly a groundswell of dissent.
How many members are on this Forum......?

Given the volume of written traffic on this Forum can we pls all make an effort to send a letter to MA?
Fatboy has provided the link (and it's no different to posting on this Forum).

 [email protected]

We have eleven days left before the Board meets on 26 March.
Pls send a few lines ASAP.
Title: Re: Noel: Fernando said I can't race the postie! :o
Post by: Rosco400 on March 14, 2009, 12:01:04 am
Top description ::) :D


http://cgi.ebay.com.au/Honda-CT110-Postie-Bike-factory-race-replica-fmx-rad_W0QQitemZ400036198823QQcmdZViewItemQQptZAU_Motorcycles?hash=item400036198823&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2|65%3A1|39%3A1|240%3A1318


Few 80's bikes on the forum at the moment- so thought I'd throw this ebay awesome buy up  ::)
alison