OzVMX Forum
Clubroom => General Discussion => Topic started by: 211kawasaki on September 15, 2011, 11:14:29 am
-
You will all notice a big change in the rules for 2012; the split has now taken place and there is now Classic MX for Pre 78 and older and Post Classic MX for pre 90. There are a few points that should be made so here we go
Classic MX;Everything remains effectivly the same except we are adding acceptable follow-on machines and 2 examples are the DT250B and TS400 center port models. Why? these bike are essentially the same as pre 75 bikes and cheap and available; there must be ways for people to get entry level bikes and this move is designed to make it accessable and cheap to get a bike and go racing.
In the pre 65 and pre 60 please note the frame section that will allow you to build a special easily but keep in mind you will still need period engine, forks, wheels etc and the bike can not be made using components from a later era. For example you cant use a head stock from a YZ80 in your made up frame or triple clamps from a 73 Canam.
Post Classic MX;
Pre 90 is in
Age racing in EVO
Otherwise the same as it was
Brisbane has the Classic MX Championship for 2012 and Tasmania the Post Classic
Canberra has put in for the Dirt Track and it may well be negociated to run a combined meeting for the DT alone.There is strong interest for the MX Nats for future years but as yet no proposals for the 2013 and onward events
The section 18 of the rule book has been removed and completly replaced with simpler rules that should make it a lot easier to understand
211
-
All good news.
Do we have any dates for either of the 2012 MX Nats events? Even a ball-park or proposed?
-
at this stage the Pre 78 will be the June long weekend (confirmed and not the May date previously anounced) and Post Classic around September
-
Cool, thanks. :)
-
I like the sound of all of that. Although just an example, I am a bit confused by the DT250B thing. The C was the same wasn't it? And June long weekend for the Pre 78 Nats. Hmmmm....
-
What happens with the sidecars Dave, do we spit same as the rest, pre65-75 to classic and pre85-90 to post classic?
-
I like the sound of all of that. Although just an example, I am a bit confused by the DT250B thing. The C was the same wasn't it? And June long weekend for the Pre 78 Nats. Hmmmm....
Graeme, - not sure of the C but Im sure someone will comment.
-
What happens with the sidecars Dave, do we spit same as the rest, pre65-75 to classic and pre85-90 to post classic?
Popeye
sidecars remain the same, pre 68 and pre 75 in the Classic and pre 85 in the post classic. There was not a submission to put pre 90 in the rules but nothing stopping you doing it if you want to stick up your hand and make the proposal.
211
-
I like the sound of all of that. Although just an example, I am a bit confused by the DT250B thing. The C was the same wasn't it? And June long weekend for the Pre 78 Nats. Hmmmm....
Graeme, - not sure of the C but Im sure someone will comment.
i'll comment.
same bike different colours.
i'd be ok if it was included.
-
A-B -C all the same bike sort of the MXA with a head light and blinkers ( removable at your option i reckon ) ;)
So does that mean now are follow on model in the pre 75 class.
-
Can we asume that because it's engine is very different to the previous 360, the DT400 B won't be included in the flow on Dave? If the 76 TS400 is now allowed, are the '75 'Sunburst' TM 125/250/400 allowed as well (as long as the rear suspension is brought back to '74 specs)?
I've been giving this flow on thing a bit of thought and I reckon a few more post '75 bikes are worth considering because they offer little or no technical advantage over their pre '75 predecessors.
*In the USA they allow '75 4 speed 400/440 Maicos as long as they're retro fitted with '74 external spring forks and limited rear suspension. The 250 is not included because the '74 4 speed trans has been replaced by a 5 speed. As it is right now the '75 Maico is in a kind of no-mans land as it's too primitive for pre '78 yet too new for pre '75 despite almost identical engine and suspension specs (except for the forks)
*'75 MX2 Can-Am 125/250 as long as the suspension is brought back to '74 MX1 specs.
*'75 Husky 250 Mag.
*'75 Kawasaki KX125/250
*'76 Honda XL250/350 Centre Port.
There are many more bikes that deserve to be considered for eventual inclusion. With the Classic Pre '75 era about to undertake a rebirth of sorts, I reckon we need tro make bike selection as open and varied as possible to aid attracting newcomers.
-
so dave same weekend as classic dirt?
-
Surely not, MA are smarter than that ??? ??? ??? then again.
-
Classic Dirt is moving to a different time slot to better suit the weather conditions of the new venue ;).
-
Its cool Bazza; I have the inside running on CD secret squirrel.
-
Mark,
the point with the DT250 and the TS is that they are all but being the same, more importantly the shocks are conventional and I take the point with the 75 TM but the difference there is the suspension and the comparison between the DT and TS in my opinion is quite different. The TS and the DT are in no mans land really and we wanted to bring them and others in from the cold.
The point is to find cheep wheels for guys to ride not modify later models to fit the footprint. The DT and the TS are examples of what was considered suitable follow on bikes and the principal of that has to be about offering like bikes that are plentiful. Neither will require suspension mods.
Over the next years Im sure we will tweak it some more.
Note that we have pulled the full section 18 from the 2011 GCRs, MA policy is to show removed rules with a line crossing them out; I dont think that the impact of what we have done will be seen untill guys see it in the book and compare it to the 2011 version.
-
I love the idea of more bikes eligable for pre 75. One thing that seems to stop some older riders from riding the nats is that in the bike size classes they have to ride with the youngsters. With the inclusion of more bikes, the turnout for this years nats and a more relaxed time frame with the split event, maybe class sizes eg 125 etc could be split into age groups aswell. Not sure but was this the way it once was. Great to see changes to keep the sport moving forward. ;)
-
In the 2012 Classic Nats Pre75 125, 250, & 263+ will all be in age groups.
There will also be a Pre 75 all powers support class for ladies.
-
In the 2012 Classic Nats Pre75 125, 250, & 263+ will all be in age groups.
There will also be a Pre 75 all powers support class for ladies.
Halelujah baby jesus!....the sport fell in a big hole when the age groups were devalued. Good work chaps.
-
Correct. There will always be a core of cat's-bum faced naysayers who resist change of any sort, but the split will refine both sides of the sport to help maintain interest and support at a time when it looked to be in danger of waning.
Hopefully we will get to see the amazing Col Metcher wearing an "I Told You So..." t-shirt at future nats... ;)
-
Great news, Centre port Ts400 being built for 2012 Nats, as be speak.
-
Great news, Centre port Ts400 being built for 2012 Nats, as be speak.
would you have done that if it were not for the new rules?
-
All good news for the sport I reckon. Thanks Col and the others involved for making it happen.
Will pre-78 be in age groups also?
-
Not in the 2012 rule book. The stats tell the story, using Crystal Brook figures, total Pre78 entries 34--in Pre75 age groups there were 32 riders in 40-49, 32 in 50-59, and 16 in 60+.Total Pre 75 age group entries approx 105, the balance being under 40 yrs.
There would be a case for say Pre 78 over 40 to be run with the Open but pointed separately as a support class. We'll look into that for the Qld Nats.
I guess the answer is for the Pre78 enthusiasts to work and build up the numbers and put in a submission to MA for 2013.
-
Kawasaki 211, I am building a Ts 400 for pre75, it is centre port, I was looking for a TM400 frame, with the new rules I will leave it as is, I do have a spare TM 250 engine so I may look for a rolling 74 250 Frame to build up a 250 as well.
-
Hopefully we will get to see the amazing Col Metcher wearing an "I Told You So..." t-shirt at future nats...
Col Metcher rang me this morning for a chat and to give me a run down of the Crystal Brook Nats and his enthusiasm for that event and for the sport in general really sparked me up. For one of the older members of our sport, Col has the enthusiasm and vigor of two blokes a quarter of his age. Besides being the brains behind the 2012 Nationals split, he's also the author or co-author of much of the rule reform in the 2012 book.
As well as this political involvement, Col also finds time to race a number of different classes at most major VMX and VDT events, has raced vintage motocross in the UK, USA, Sweden, New Zealand and who knows where else, and is the man behind the promotion of next years inaugural Classic pre '78 Nats. Not bad for a bloke well into his seventies who's had a couple of bad health bouts in recent times.
Colin Metcher....we salute you. :-*
-
HEy Col, i think with the split the pre 78 will grow to take age groups, even if its under 40 and over 40.
I think the reason we had the number at CB was that they were already riding every other class. So onces the pre78 stands alone with the other stuff now in 2012 it will be the premium class for the split as far as it finding its own place in time.
I would certainly suggest with the split the punters will start building pre 78 bikes again, and with the age split you will be able to cut the classes up into bit sizes so if your like you and me and ride all over the place in era and sizes, it means you can - rather than having 7 back to back races which will be important to work out in the new program so bike number dont fall off and guys end up only bring 1-2 ridesbecause of it
I know its a long way out to be thinking, but i suggest strongly with the new split it would be good if a mock program of events can be written up with a proposed race list for your event and that is released with the supp regs ( orders etc always pending final numbers) but what that will allows entrants is plenty of time to chose the era/bikes they want to ride ,so they can pick there spaces and avoid back to back rides. ( also meaning they only have them selve to blame if they do - be less grumbling)
Doing that early in the peice will allow them to build new rides, finish old ones or even leave bikes at home and take a chance on a new class, riding up and so on, so they can get the maximum value from the event and i think you'll find increasing the number of bikes entered.
What i found at crystal brook was we had a static number of rider but we where able to put a program together that meant they could ride lotsa bikes, with laps they could handle, and the flow on for spectators was good cause the races all looked full and built up the atmosphere. ( all 25 Race classes made Aussie title status which i think is important.)
IF you can only attract so many rider to enter, creating more options for them to fill your event is the next best thing.
I think the split is a good thing, we just need to manage it smartly and support entrants for it to be succesfull and make the next step forward.
-
I would like to see a clear list of models that will be eligible for pre75 and pre78 this will help new comers entering into the sport for the first time.
-
I would like to see a clear list models that will be eligible for pre75 and pre78 this will help new comers entering in the sport for the first time.
this is an interesting point - we considered that listing what you can have was not as valuable as listing follow on models or fence sitters and to that end we took out the list of eligible machines.
The over arching point is the first rule in every class that the class is open to machines built up to and including...... etc except for pre 78 which is only open to 75,76,77 models.
In doing so you know if you have a 74 version or older your away but now the follow on models are listed so there is more available machines.
The table of machines was a nightmare to be honest and had stuff that should have never been there.
211
-
So whats the status of the YZ250B given that 75 TM250 in inelegible. ?
-
YZB is a 1974 model, so not an issue.
-
YZB was available in March 74, you only have to restrict the rear wheel travel to 4 inches....they are a heavy pig though....that monoshock and frame added 10kg's plus to the bike.....Cool bike. 8)
-
Should be the same as it is currently. the 74YZb is what is is, an A with a braced rear arm. there not out there smashing the pre 75 feilds so its in the right place i think, The TM is a 75 model with its own identity, many argue its more like the Rm than a TM so its fine where it is too, but that up to dave. A TM won the Aussie title in the 250cc class so all the pre 75 bikes seems to be fairly evenly placed to be at the pointy end.
-
some YZBs don't need to worry about the extra bike weight - it's more the rider that is a concern ;D
-
(http://www.bmwphotography.com.au/wp-content/gallery/australian-classic-motocross-crystal-brook-sept-9-to-11-2011/classicmotox_210.jpg)
-
As I see it a Tm 250-1975 can either be raced as it is ( manufactured ) or up graded with parts from a 76 -77 RM ..... in other words you can build a bitsa
-
Despite the constant rumblings from the doom and gloom merchants that the pre-75 division is on the down hill slide to oblivion, it appears that once again, the pre '75's had the strongest representation at the Crystal Brook Nats. This of course is good news for the future of the Classic side of the 'split', starting with the Harrisburg Nats in 2012. I think that a 150-160 entry level is quite achievable now that the age/capacity classes are to be reintroduced. Because older riders tend to favour the pre 75 and earlier classes, I predict that many older racers should be drawn back to national competition by the opportunity to race amongst their age peer group.
Col Metcher has announced that the often overlooked pre-60 class will be highlighted at Harrisburg. This division has struggled in recent years, mainly because of an aging owner/rider demographic but the news that the class will be showcased has already prompted some shed action from owners of these old war horses. As I've mentioned elsewhere, Alan Jones has indicated that he'll step up the build process on his exotic 1959 Monark 500 GP and Frank Stanborough could be encouraged to enter his lovely little Greeves/NSU. Former pre '60 class hotshot John Selva might be tempted to bring out his old Ariel HS 500, as might current class racer Des Heaney and his similar Ariel. I know of a couple of Sydney based BSA Goldstars, and a very cool period pre unit TriBSA whose owners should be encouraged to enter. These old bikes are the very essesnse of our sports history so to see them in action will evoke some great memories.
The slow but continuing growth of the pre 65 class is encouraging but the big problem in the past has been to get them all to the same paddock on the same weekend. There's some nice pre '65 tackle being built in Sydney and I'm sure elsewhere so let's hope we can encourage their owners to get them to Harrisburg on the Queens birthday weekend.
Since its inception a few years ago support for the pre '78 division has been a disappointment. I'd have thought it'd be the ideal crossover class but the entries have traditionally been low in all capacities. I don't know the reason racers have ignored pre '78 but I reckon it's an ideal entry level class for younger guys who don't want to deal with the 7"x4" suspension of the older bikes. Pre '78 bikes are comparitively plentiful, there's many to choose from and in many cases they're cheaper than their pre '75 or Evo equivalents. With the split now in operation the pre '78 has room to grow and develop and it has the potential of becoming the premier clas in the Classic division.
-
YZB was available in March 74, you only have to restrict the rear wheel travel to 4 inches....they are a heavy pig though....that monoshock and frame added 10kg's plus to the bike.....Cool bike. 8)
Yeah I thought suspension travel would be an issue ...... so this means that if you move the suspension to 74 spec then 75 TM is eligible.
-
it would be great to see pre 65 as the "marquee" at classic dirt and would boost class
-
so this means that if you move the suspension to 74 spec then 75 TM is eligible.
Apparently not Marc, that's the question I asked Dave but he knocked it on the head. I disagree with Daves take on it as I reckon the '75 TM is much closer to the '74 TM in concept than a '76 TS. For the very reasons the committee has allowed the DT250 B/C and centreport TS400 Suzuki, I think the '75 TM should also be included. The idea is to open up the choices for potential newcomers to the pre '75 division so in my mind the starburst TM is an ideal candidate. It's not the least bit competitive in pre '78 so the poor old thing is stuck between a rock and a hard place...not really usable in either division. I may stand corrected but I believe that the rear suspension to be the only major difference between the legal '74 and ilegal '75 models. If a 'blind eye' is shown to Mk8 Bultacos racing in pre '75 as long as they use a '74 swingarm, why not offer the TM Suzuki fan the same option?
I'll accept the decision of the ref because it doesn't directly affect me and I don't want to contradict Dave and the comittee who've otherwise done a magnificent job. However if you feel strongly enough about it I think it'd worth formalising a submission calling for the bike's inclusion in th 2013 rulebook.
-
For what it's worth I agree with Marc and Firko, the '75 TM's are definitely nothing like an RM. The swingarm is a little different but the rest is essentially the same. If it wearn't for the swingarm and tank stickers you'd never spot the difference. Stew, as much as I love modified bitsa's you could really go to town with a '75 TM250 but without mega work it'll still fall far short of a '76 RM250A in comparison. It's like lining up a TM400 against an RM370, there is no contest.
-
YZB was available in March 74, you only have to restrict the rear wheel travel to 4 inches....they are a heavy pig though....that monoshock and frame added 10kg's plus to the bike.....Cool bike. 8)
Yeah I thought suspension travel would be an issue ...... so this means that if you move the suspension to 74 spec then 75 TM is eligible.
That will be a no.
-
so this means that if you move the suspension to 74 spec then 75 TM is eligible.
Apparently not Marc, that's the question I asked Dave but he knocked it on the head. I disagree with Daves take on it as I reckon the '75 TM is much closer to the '74 TM in concept than a '76 TS. For the very reasons the committee has allowed the DT250 B/C and centreport TS400 Suzuki, I think the '75 TM should also be included. The idea is to open up the choices for potential newcomers to the pre '75 division so in my mind the starburst TM is an ideal candidate. It's not the least bit competitive in pre '78 so the poor old thing is stuck between a rock and a hard place...not really usable in either division. I may stand corrected but I believe that the rear suspension to be the only major difference between the legal '74 and ilegal '75 models. If a 'blind eye' is shown to Mk8 Bultacos racing in pre '75 as long as they use a '74 swingarm, why not offer the TM Suzuki fan the same option?
not that its any indication of anything really as im a Bunny, but i road my bike as a 75 TM in the pre 78 and came home 4th only by one point to 3rd, after a round one stack, so i reckon that any pre78 bike would be compeditive on the track. lets see what people actaully enter and race before we move the goal posts just yet.
-
Mark,
there were two Mk8 Bultaco's at the Nats, both dsq from Pre 75.
On the TM250M there are some differences, the frame is different at the top shock mount, and the swing arm is a different thing altogether but otherwise apart from the tank paint they are the same. Allowing 1975 bikes in pre 75 starts to make pre 75 look silly. Why the TS400 and the DT250B were included is more that they are conventional frame wise, the shock positions are the same as the pre 75 stuff and the differences minor by comparison.
Allow TM 1975 models then says that the 250m1 Honda, the Mk8 and others that are not pre 75 can race and that will dilute the pre 78 section.
Being a racer in pre 78 there are those bikes competing in that class.
Pre 75 should mean pre 75 with some concesions like the M1 125 Honda, the TS400 and the DT250B and it would seem C. These bikes have no place in pre 78 but fit pre 75 in my view.
211
-
Its all good.
-
Suspension top mount on Tm 250 75 model has been moved forward by approx 25mm and the swing arm mount has been brought forward by aprrox 80 mm and this is the problem.
Yes I have a 75 model TM 250 and will ride it as a 75 model because that's what it is ( and I like the look of them )
Chris look outside of the square, there are shit loads of old Ts 125 -185 - 250 and so on that will all fit in this bracket, with a angle grinder and a bit of patience you have a cheap racer.
I think this is the point DT is trying to put across.
-
While I disagree, I won't be digging through the drawer looking for sharp implements, I'm cool with the refs decision ;D. However, if someone feels strongly enough about making the '75 TM legal for pre '75, it's their perogative to do it through the official proposal process.
Wait until you see what Yamaico and I have up our sleeves for the next forum project. It fits right into what this discussion is about ::).
-
I live outside the square Stew :D Are you certain the swingarm pivot is fwd by 80mm? This would need the motor to be moved forward 80mm also as the engine cases are the same. I still believe the '75 TM250 is well out of it's era in pre'78 and this puts the model in no mans land in both desirability or practicality. I don't race so for me it's all about perception of what fits where and why. A TM250M still looks and performs like any other TM250, a far cry from any RM.
-
There's probably a few bike's fit in that no man's category doc, including 75' maico's - look closer to the 74' than the 76'
-
oops , was supposed to read "swing arm shock point"
Is that frame still up for grabs....
-
Pre-78 will never have huge fields, for two main reasons:
1. There's a limited number of eligible bikes (and I mean bikes, not models), due to the relatively short period that eligible bikes were made.
2. The vast majority of 75 models are significantly inferior to the vast majority of 77 models, effectively further restricting the bikes that people want to race, to the 77 models and some 76s.
Pre-85 is in a similar position, for similar reasons. Being the book-ends to the legislative oddity of Evo makes this inevitable.
Pre-78 is a great class and deserves better support from the punters.
-------------------
211, does this mean that the big conical hub of the DT-B is legal for pre-75?
-
no worries Stew, I should have better interpreted what you meant and yup, the frame is still on offer to dissect at your leisure :D
So bottom line on the TM250M, it's just the top shock mount and the lower shock mounts that are the defining factor. Hardly a justifiable excuse to exclude the bike as a flow on thus apparently placing it out of era. If travel is adjusted accordingly where lay any real world difference, they are as close as they get. There were more changes being made in the era between '73 and '74.
-
Hey look, a whole new Pandora's box. ;D
P.S. I should add that both Col & Dave have done a fantastic job and thanks.
Shame that Evo didn't have age titles up in Briz, I would have won one. ;)
-
211
Interested to know why the Mk8 (250's) were dsq from the nats? they had too much travel or because of their serial numbers.
-
Interested to know why the Mk8 (250's) were dsq from the nats? they had too much travel or because of their serial numbers.
I'd asume that it's because the Mk8 is a 75 model. The same reason the TM M is not allowed.
-
rules are rules , I would love to ride my MXb 250 and 400 in pre 75 but the rules say no . Iainyz
-
rules are rules , I would love to ride my MXb 250 and 400 in pre 75 but the rules say no . Iainyz
Weren't you in Les Miserables? :)
-
211
Interested to know why the Mk8 (250's) were dsq from the nats? they had too much travel or because of their serial numbers.
They were 75 models, were asked to ride the 78 class and not the pre 75 class, they didnt want to do that.
-
Pre-78 will never have huge fields, for two main reasons:
1. There's a limited number of eligible bikes (and I mean bikes, not models), due to the relatively short period that eligible bikes were made.
2. The vast majority of 75 models are significantly inferior to the vast majority of 77 models, effectively further restricting the bikes that people want to race, to the 77 models and some 76s.
Pre-85 is in a similar position, for similar reasons. Being the book-ends to the legislative oddity of Evo makes this inevitable.
Pre-78 is a great class and deserves better support from the punters.
-------------------
211, does this mean that the big conical hub of the DT-B is legal for pre-75?
Yes
-
no worries Stew, I should have better interpreted what you meant and yup, the frame is still on offer to dissect at your leisure :D
So bottom line on the TM250M, it's just the top shock mount and the lower shock mounts that are the defining factor. Hardly a justifiable excuse to exclude the bike as a flow on thus apparently placing it out of era. If travel is adjusted accordingly where lay any real world difference, they are as close as they get. There were more changes being made in the era between '73 and '74.
Doc, the swingarm is different, the frame at the top mount is different and this gave the 75 250 6 3/4" travel. Where do you stop? The same arguement is with the 75 Honda 250 and I just think that there will always be fringe dwellers weather the pre 75 class or the pre 85 - shit pre 65 has classic examples of exactly this and there has to be a cut off somewhere.
On the TM250 75 model - I just want one and its well known that I have been looking for a good one for years. I would race it in pre 78 - even Freaky can get 4th on one so they cant be all bad ;D
-
Funny enough the pre78 250 class at CB was a 75 cr250. Even tho this is not a lot different in suspension travel to the 73/74 cr an a far cry from 77 model bikes it goes to show that whos on it probable makes the most difference. So i think if want an edge in a class buy or build a bike that is at the leading edge of that class or just ride what you have. Changing elidgability for certain bikes, the argument will just go around in circles. The cut off at the moment pre75, pre 78 is still the best cut off to make it as fair as possible. As long as you dont have to push the thing its all fun even if your last.
-
For better or for worse, the vast majority of VMX racers nowdays are there to race.
This means we'll want to be as competitive as possible for our riding ability - so its unrealistic to expect people to race hopelessly out classed bikes like DT-B in pre-78.
-
Age format is the only fair way do do it and I'm talking bikes not riders.
A bikes capability shouldn't come into the equation, if you want to be at the pointy end, choose another mount, it's never been any different and never will.
If that's the category your bike falls into, then that's it.
-
211, Dave, The '75/'76 RM's are where you stop. With the TM250 it's only a minor change that can be easily adjusted to conform to the travel limit rule. The rest of the bike is deadset of pre'75 design. I'm not out to stir up an argument nor do I wish to offend anyone and I don't know a lot about the '76 CR250 or MX250's but, if the CR or MX is excluded due to the same rear wheel travel issue and nothing else then they too flow on and belong back in pre'75. Maybe it's time the travel rule was looked at more seriously. It's a shame as these bikes are out there but can't/don't or won't be raced by many simply because they are classified as noncompetitive when lined against the popular pre'78 models. To change either rule wouldn't decline the numbers from pre'78 but it may well swell the numbers in pre'75. End of my whining ;)
-
211, Dave, The '75/'76 RM's are where you stop. With the TM250 it's only a minor change that can be easily adjusted to conform to the travel limit rule. The rest of the bike is deadset of pre'75 design. I'm not out to stir up an argument nor do I wish to offend anyone and I don't know a lot about the '76 CR250 or MX250's but, if the CR or MX is excluded due to the same rear wheel travel issue and nothing else then they too flow on and belong back in pre'75. Maybe it's time the travel rule was looked at more seriously. It's a shame as these bikes are out there but can't/don't or won't be raced by many simply because they are classified as noncompetitive when lined against the popular pre'78 models. To change either rule wouldn't decline the numbers from pre'78 but it may well swell the numbers in pre'75. End of my whining ;)
The '75- '76 CR250 has a lot of changes from the '74. The frame is different with moved up top and bottom shock mounts, the cylinder has the exhaust port on the opposite side, the cases are different, it has an up pipe, longer travel front forks etc.. I wouldn't call it a flow on model.
I think the problem with the '75 TM250/400's is the frame is different because of the moved forward top and bottom shock mounts, pretty much all the other flow on models have the same top shock mounts as the '74 models.
-
For better or for worse, the vast majority of VMX racers nowdays are there to race.
This means we'll want to be as competitive as possible for our riding ability - so its unrealistic to expect people to race hopelessly out classed bikes like DT-B in pre-78.
If you want to race pre '75 and be competitive you wouldn't race a DT anyway.. you'd buy a 1974 motocross bike!
-
For better or for worse, the vast majority of VMX racers nowdays are there to race.
This means we'll want to be as competitive as possible for our riding ability - so its unrealistic to expect people to race hopelessly out classed bikes like DT-B in pre-78.
I don't agree that the majority buy a bike that is the most competitive. From what I have seen, quite a few don't want to go look outside the square when it comes to different makes. Fear of the unknown in a different brand. Also for the love of a certain brand. Not to mention the ' I had one back in the day so I bought another'. I think I'm a minority that actually does that. In most cases any way.
FWIW I'm not too excited in the new rule changes ( either way). With the ease of getting bikes from the U.S., the prices they are now fetching ( cheaper) and the amount of people importing them here makes buying a real mxer quite an easy and relatively cheap task.
Also the tracks that we ride on ( at least the majority) would not make a tm at that much of a disadvantage.
-
They were 75 models, were asked to ride the 78 class and not the pre 75 class, they didnt want to do thatcolor
.
I know the MK 8 250 is a 75 built bike.You didnt answer why the bikes were excluded,travel or serial numbers?
The reason I ask is because I believed that if the MK8 suspension was adjusted to 7 & 4 then it was classed as a flow on model. Is this correct?
I have been racing(including a nats) a Mk7 250 look alike(Mk 8 numbers) for over ten years without eligibility problems in pre 75 250. I have examples of these frames/engines and I know the Mk 8 when in Mk 7 trim has no measurable improvement over the Mk 7.Only the numbers changed.
-
I know the MK 8 250 is a 75 built bike.You didnt answer why the bikes were excluded,travel or serial numbers?
I answered with what I figured would be Daves answer. Sorry for butting in with an opinion. ::)
For what it's worth, I've never knocked back or have seem anyone else knock back a Mk8 250 as long as it's fitted with Mk7 swingarm for the reasons you state. I personally think they should be allowed but that's merely my take on it, not anything official. There are a number of bikes currently not eligible that I feel should be allowed in pre '75 because they offer no advantage over the earlier model. I wasn't aware that the TM250 M had a different upper shock mounting position so that being the case, perhaps the committee has grounds for not allowing it. Having said that, I think that the differences between an TM L and a TM M frame are far less than the differences of a '76 twin downtube, centre port TS to the '74 TS. I think they all should be allowed. I think that the same criteria that allows that centre port TM should be used to allow the centre inlet port XL250/350...a bike that's also stuck out there in no-mans land.
I understand and support the comittees reforms on eligibility but I believe some more candidates for flow on eligibility could have been considered. Maybe next year?
-
If you want to race pre '75 and be competitive you wouldn't race a DT anyway.. you'd buy a 1974 motocross bike!
[/quote]
Yeah, I know - it was beyond my enthusiasm to type it all out on my phone, but:
The DTs are clearly out-classed as pre-75 bikes, but at least they're vaguely in the right ball-park. They can also be easily/cheaply brought up to MX-A performance, which puts them solidly into the 'worth having' category for the average club rider.
No amount of money is going to make them worth having against the RMs and YZ-Ds and Euro bikes in pre-78.
--------------------------
More generally, the discussion about DT250Bs is a storm in a tea-cup. All that's changed is that they're now officially recognised as a legitimate carry-over model, which says it all: The differences are trivial, so they should race with the bikes of 'their era'.
Different front hub, two extra frame gussets, and a radially finned cylinder head were the only things stopping them from being automatic carry-over models anyhow.
The 400s have a significantly different motor to the 360s (no balance shaft), so that rules them out.
--------------------------
The Yamaha MX250B is essentially a YZ250B frame with an MX250A motor in it - you could build a 100% pre-75 legal "MX250B" if you were prepared to hack a YZ-B frame. There's no parts or technology in the 1975 MX250B that didn't exist in 1974 (except for the radial cylinder head).
The 75 CR125 Elsinore is an accepted carry-over model because you could build one in 1974 - surely the same should apply to the Yamahas?
--------------------------
How many times have I said "We need to go with technology OR dates"?
How many times have I been pooh-poohed?
All of the 'tricky' questions about the Mk8 Bultacos, MX-Bs, DT-Bs, V75s, TM250Ls, etc etc go away if you use one or the other.
-
For what it's worth, I've never knocked back or have seem anyone else knock back a Mk8 250 as long as it's fitted with Mk7 swingarm for the reasons you state. I personally think they should be allowed but that's merely my take on it, not anything official. There are a number of bikes currently not eligible that I feel should be allowed in pre '75 because they offer no advantage over the earlier model.
Thanks for your views on this Mark. 211,Dave, can you enlighten us with your official view please.
-
Pre 78 is one of the smallest classes and needs the '75 models in there for numbers. Also PRE75 is just that. If you want to ride pre '75 specifically, buy a '74.
If you are a mid packer in pre 78 and think it's because your bike is out classed. WRONG. It's because you aren't fast enough..... You will be a mid packer in pre '75 too.
-
It's not so much about winning or losing.
Point is about the collective placement of bikes of similar build and technologies. My original post was in regards to a '75 TM250. No matter how you look at them they are a TM250 and nothing like an RM in design. The TS400 example as stated..from '75-'77 they evolved from the single cradle frame to the twin downtube, went to centre port exhaust as well as other styling changes. They are deemed perfectly legal yet the TM250 which only changed the rear shock mounts and nothing else are not. It's like putting lemons with oranges and saying they are all oranges. You wouldn't see anyone bother with a TS400 in pre'78 and it's much the same view with the TM250M. Can't lose numbers in pre '78 because the numbers barely exist in the first place. Limit the rear wheel travel then they fit perfectly with there blood brothers and people would be more inclined to drag them out and race them.
As Nathan said, stick to the year cut off and all issues instantly disappear. Makes perfect sense when presently there seems a little hypocrisy.
-
If it isn't about winning or losing they would front up and ride where the rules state they can. That is more for the mk8 owners that want to run pre 75.
I also agree with you point of view regarding the TS. It should not be included seeing there are so many differences to the earlier model as you pointed out.
-
We can all put foward our points until the cows come home, but we'll get nowhere because the discussion is about philisophies.
I agree completely with Doc, though: "Point is about the collective placement of bikes of similar build and technologies" - perfectly said.
The pre-75 designation was always meant to represent the short-travel era of bikes, not the year 1974.
The wording of the Evo regs, and the blurb about pre-78 shows that those classes are not supposed to be about specific years, either.
-
The Mk8 like the TM are essentially 74 models with a bit more travel.
With travel reduced,they belong in Pre 75.
I can't see too many people bringing them out to be outclassed in Pre 78. Isn't the goal to get more bikes onto the track? Not all people have a money tree to just "buy a 74"
The rules want to exclude certain available,competetive fringe models in pre 75 yet include the TS Suzukis which have major differences.Hard to see the logic in that. ???
-
If you put these bikes into pre 75 then there value would go through the roof so to speak, so using pre 75 bikes as too expensive to buy is a load of crap.....as Brad said...in our sport the bloke who is going to win is the better rider, not the better bike.....RM125S and YZ125C are both 75 model bikes and very capable of winning pre 78 (and do).....one the fastest blokes in QLD in pre 78 250 rides an MX250B....75 model.....MX400B and YZ400C are basically MX A's with a bit more travel (and weight)....they go very hard...I'm building at the moment a YZ250B which will be a pre 78 race bike...they came out in Feb/March 74...does it worry me? no, am I sooking...no.... theres no reason you cant make a 75 TM250 competative in pre78, afterall, a 75 RH250 is just a copy of a TM250 ;D
-
The Mk8 like the TM are essentially 74 models with a bit more travel.
With travel reduced,they belong in Pre 75. But are 75 models.The end.
I can't see too many people bringing them out to be outclassed in Pre 78. Isn't the goal to get more bikes onto the track? Not all people have a money tree to just "buy a 74" Not just bikes on the track. It's era racing and the rules were set in the beginning.
The rules want to exclude certain available,competetive fringe models in pre 75 yet include the TS Suzukis which have major differences.Hard to see the logic in that. ??? Pre 78 they should all stay.
Pre 78 only includes three years which is the least of all of the classes and adds to the reason that there are small fields. Surely taking more bikes away from a struggling class to put in a class that is (especially at national level) doing well is not a positive move.
I will be running my '75 Suzuki 250 when I finish restoring it in pre '78. ;)
-
RM125S and YZ125C are both 75 model bikes and very capable of winning pre 78
Davey the bikes in question aren't the 125's. I agree 100% the '75 RM125 is where it belongs due to it's design. It's not a TM125 and shouldn't be in the same class. Not saying people can't win on '75 models nowdays just saying the TM250M isn't representative of the transitional design that occurred in the pre'78 era. It does have the shocks moved forward a tad but even the '75 RH250's were sold at a reduced price new as no-one seriously wanted to race them when it was completely outdated overnight with the pending introduction of the production RM250. Whatever will be will be but the TM250 design is primarily from pre'75 and not indicative of the transitional era it's placed in. For better or worse that's my whole argument.
-
I suppose there in lies another issue. With what you have just said, a '75 rh should be considered as well seeing as it is out classed by an rm. Of course not really but just a classic push your own wheel barrow type scenario. Even though you are correct with the design / look Doc, it will still shrink the pre 78 pool. What about all the poor '78 models that resemble '77 models more than 80/81 models?Maybe it should be pre 76 and pre 79....
-
I dont know why you get a bee in your bonnet over certain things Doc when you dont even ride/race....a 75 TM250 is a cool looking bike and theres no reason you cant modify one with say RM forks and tripples, longer rear shocks....bla, bla, and have a great bike.....shit, they would have done mods to them in the day....every bike was modded.....cheap RN lookalike....look at maRc fx's 74TM250....dont tell me that wouldnt be a hoot to ride (hey marC, can I book it for the Johnny old next year?)...Ali's little boy Ben won the all in pre75 250 at Crystal Brook on a Tm250. 8)
-
mk8 bully is a l/h shift not r/h some people cant deal with a right hand shift so having a l/h gives an advantage,forks have more travel,from memory dont the rules say you cant retro engineer to make a bike fit into a class
-
That's Evo.
-
I've been giving the flow on issue a bit of thought over the last few days with the result being that I'm taking a big J curve in my opinion. My initial thoughts that the '75 TM should be allowed along with a number of other "almost" bikes were based on my belief that all that needed to be done was to fit a '74 model swingarm and it'd be the same as the '74 model. The revelation that the top shock mount is in a different place puts a very different take on it. I now believe that unless a bike is absolutely identical to its 1974 predecessor it should not be in the pre '75 class. That goes for Mk 8 Bultacos and any other machines that officials have turned a blind eye to in the past. Bikes such as the '75 Honda CR125 M1 which have been accepted as identical flow ons in the past should remain. My take is that if a later bike has to be modified in any way to meet the class requirements it dips out because it opens a veritible can of worms making the scrutineers job even harder than it is now.
Unfortunately there are some bikes that will be stuck in that 'no-mans land' where they're too new for Pre '75 and technologically too old for pre '78. It's the unfortunate price we pay for going with a firm year cutoff. I understand the philosophy behind the commissions inclusion of such 'no-mans land' bikes as the '76 TS400 and '75 DT250B but I'm now starting to believe that their inclusion in pre '75 creates more problems than it solves. The main situation that arises from the selection of those particular bikes is that the criteria used to allow them in pre '75...that they're technologically pre 75 by design...can also be used to justify a large number of bikes that fit the criteria more even directly than the '76 TS400 and DT250B.
If a centre port, twin downtube TS400 is considered OK, why not a '76 XL250/350 Honda which is currently excluded because it has a centre port inlet tract as opposed to the earlier model side port. Why not allow the Mk8 Bultaco Pursang when the only difference to it's predecessor is the placement of two shock mounting brackets. The very discussion here on the forum would indicate that there are other 'grey area' bikes that people might be seen as more eligible than the committees chosen pair. To prevent any of this 'fudging' of history, it's probably wiser to accept no exceptions to the pre '75 cut off, including the current new admissions.
In reality, the pre '75 class has been the leading division in our sport for 23 years and it's still going pretty well. With America becoming our vintage MX'er supermarket and many eligible bikes still being uncovered locally, I really don't see why we need to invite newer bikes into the fold when legitimate pre '75 bikes are still reasonably easy to find.
.
-
My real concern is the viability of pre '78...the last couple of Nats I have been to, that have had pre '78, have shown very poor fields...except for pre 78 Open class at Broady....certainly the allowance for as many bikes as possible for pre 78 should be considered...I know that the years available to choose bikes is limited to 75-77....and I understand that this clas is to showcase the "first generation" of LTR bikes... from my observations it is difficult to see the Pre 78 class lasting very long... :(
-
My real concern is the viability of pre '78...the last couple of Nats I have been to, that have had pre '78, have shown very poor fields...except for pre 78 Open class at Broady....certainly the allowance for as many bikes as possible for pre 78 should be considered...I know that the years available to choose bikes is limited to 75-77....and I understand that this clas is to showcase the "first generation" of LTR bikes... from my observations it is difficult to see the Pre 78 class lasting very long... :(
Dito. What is really frustrating is the fact that they are a really good era bike to ride. Old school look and feel with a bit more suspension so you can ride them harder too. Short enough to feel comfortable in the corners yet tall enough to soak up the bumps and jumps. Maybe longer term '78 models should be included. That wouldn't be a silly idea.
-
There are lots of great pre 78 bikes, TT 500's were thick and fast at Harrisville last weekend and even the fields in 250's and 125's had 20 odd starters at just a club day.
-
I dont know why you get a bee in your bonnet over certain things Doc when you dont even ride/race
Nah :D that's where you're wrong in some respects Davey, Sure the racing part of things doesn't overly appeal to me but I do ride and I don't have any bee's in my bonnet, I'm quite allergic to the little buggers.
If the bike remains in pre'78 that's fine, I'm just putting up the case that the bike is from an earlier era design than 98% of the bikes it's pitted against and I enjoy a good debate. I simply don't believe it's a genuine reflection of the era. Sure the top shock mount is moved 20 or 25mm that but what's wrong with running it as they do with the AHRMA, change the swingarm, limit the rear travel to 4 inches and it's classed an eligible like-design 1975 model, same with the Bulty Pursang. It worries me not ;) just seems out of place.
Brad, the proddy '75 RH is in the same ball park as the RM125M/S, it is a transitional model with long travel suspension and frame design quite different to the '74 RH ;)
-
If its just about getting out there and riding and not worrying about how competitive your bike is, then why do we even have classes? Why do we even have VMX?
-
Maybe longer term '78 models should be included. That wouldn't be a silly idea.
Here's a few of your quotes used previously. I won't use the childish red pen.
But are 78 models.The end.
It's era racing and the rules were set in the beginning.
Pre 78 they should all stay.
No double standards here ???
Surely taking more bikes away from a struggling class to put in a class that is (especially at national level) doing well is not a positive move.
Your theory didn,t work at the nats. The two Mk 8 riders chose not to ride pre 78 and I can understand why.
The nats is only one event per year.Including more bikes for club level is what we should be aiming for.
-
After another 20 odd replies i could write reply 60 again here. After pondering over this for a few days, leaving the bikes in each class as it is already seems to be best answer. If the cost of buying a pre75 bike is to much for some then the oportunity to buy a cheaper pre78 bike came along Im sure they would jump at it. Pre 78 will grow for many reasons.
1-cost of bike
2-smaller class appeals to some as more chance to be closer to the front
3-better ride for older bodies
4-cost of parts to maintain bike
With the split of the nats could also be a bonus for pre78 as everyone loves more ride time, so maybe more bikes will find there way out of the garage as theres less classes they can ride. As this would create more interest in this class, interest creates more interest and so on. I hope time doesnt prove me wrong. What ever changes the powers to be make, Im shore not everyone will be happy. What ever the rules, just get the bike out the shed and enjoy the ride along with the culture VMX is. :P
-
also be a bonus for pre78 as everyone loves more ride time, so maybe more bikes will find there way out of the garage as theres less classes they can ride
I think that will be another important positive the key to the split MORE RIDE TIME and more class's to achieve in.....
The fast/younger(under50) one's filled there daily race schedule as much as possible at the CBrook Nats,plus they were encouraged too before hand,of course you need an on the ball thinking knowledgable Race Sec. ;D
cheers A
-
It would be nice if it did grow so age groups could also be introduced for bike sizes in pre 78, could only wish. The efforts to get riders in more classes at CB didnt go unnoticed and probably made a few bodies after the event stiffer than normal.
-
Yes its going to be interesting how the hosting clubs/race sec implements the class's in both the pre78 and pre 85/evo Nationals next year (sorry thats Classic and Post Classic) . ;D
We think the new rule book minutes read very easy to get around..and it will leave plenty of day light to run all the class's...
Evo has age races so that will pic up numbers also...
Its our showcase event, so now just to get riders to ride at this level :P everyone a potential winner ;D
cheers S&A
-
Maybe longer term '78 models should be included. That wouldn't be a silly idea.
Here's a few of your quotes used previously. I won't use the childish red pen.
But are 78 models.The end.
It's era racing and the rules were set in the beginning.
Pre 78 they should all stay.
No double standards here ???
Surely taking more bikes away from a struggling class to put in a class that is (especially at national level) doing well is not a positive move.
Your theory didn,t work at the nats. The two Mk 8 riders chose not to ride pre 78 and I can understand why.
The nats is only one event per year.Including more bikes for club level is what we should be aiming for.
The 'childish' red pen ::) It so wasn't so you could see where your writing finished and mine started.
Okay so do you have a mark 8? Or a '75 TM? Or a mate with a mk8? I would like to know why you are pushing for them to be included other than you feel they fit in pre75 more than pre 78.
No double standards from me. Pre 78 is pre 78. My suggestion was that maybe the WHOLE class should have been/ should be pre 79 instead of pre 78. And MAYBE it should be pre 76 instead of pre 75. I don't think that is a stupid suggestion but it would be too major to change.
I personally don't understand why the mk8 riders chose not to ride. Pre 75 is more competitive than pre 78.
-
35 Elsinore, you've hit the nail on the head boyo....something all positive instead of all negative. :)
-
I didn't see any negatives John..merely just observations from different people with different ideals or perspectives. Ride what you like where you like and it's all good ;)
-
I didn't see any negatives John..merely just observations from different people with different ideals or perspectives. Ride what you like where you like and it's all good
Me either...I haven't seen any negatives at all, this has been a very positive thread with a lot of informed opinion.
I like the pre '78 division because it represents the third major era of change in our sport, the first long travel suspension era. Bike development snowballed during that three year period to the point that a '77 model motocrosser was a vastly more sophisticated machine than what had been the state of the art three years earlier. I think that the difficulty in gaining numbers might have a lot to do with both the short three year time span and the vast engineering gap between '75 and '77 models. On a level playing field, a '77 should theoretically hammer a '75 model, thereby narrowing the choice of truly competitive bikes for the class. I know however that in the real world that makes little difference and that rider ability is the major factor for success, but human nature being what it is, we all want the edge. That's why you see way more '74 models than '71 models in pre '75.
I wonder if another facet of the slow uptake of entries for pre '78 might have something to so with the suspension being restricted to 9"? I remember reading here that the '77 Montesa is not eligible because it has 10" of travel. Are there any other bikes that fit the age cutoff but feature more than 9'' of suspension travel?
-
montesa is legal if limited to 9`` believe cr250 husky,ktm are more than 9``
-
I believe cut off dates should be changed, this would solve a problem.
pre 79-78-77-76
Pre 76 -75-74-73
pre 73-72-71-70
pre70-69-68-67
pre67-66-65-64
pre64-63-62-61
pre60-
-
Pre 76 -75-74-73
Which would put my TM400 in against the RM370a....not good
pre67-66-65-64
Which would place Mk4 Metisse, Mk3 Metisse and B44 BSA together....not bad
-
i dount you would get the fields to even run that many splits yet alone control them in sign in.
-
Sorry fellas, maybe negative was too harsh.
-
Pre 76 -75-74-73
Which would put my TM400 in against the RM370a....not good
pre67-66-65-64
Which would place Mk4 Metisse, Mk3 Metisse and B44 BSA together....not bad
74TM has said in pre 76 you would have models up to an inc 1975 not inc 76 so that would mean the RM370A which is a 76 model would not be against the TM400. 76 models would be in pre 79 according to his suggestion.
-
It would be easier to list the 77 MXers that meet the nine inch travel rule...
I believe all of the Montesas, KTMs and Huskies are out, along with the 250+ Yamahas and Suzukis.
That's gotta account for at least half of the pre-78 entries at any race meet.
-
74TM has said in pre 76 you would have models up to an inc 1975 not inc 76 so that would mean the RM370A which is a 76 model would not be against the TM400. 76 models would be in pre 79 according to his suggestion.
Picky, picky ::)...OK, lets go with my TM250L V RM250A then....still a stacked deck. Putting '73 models in the same class as '75 models defeats the whole purpose of the era split. The current era split works well, the numbers weren't just plucked out of the air, they represent the technology leaps motocross machinery went through fairly accurately.
Pre 60: The era of stripped down road based bikes.
Pre 65: The first transition from road based bikes towards purpose built motocrossers.
Pre 70: The first steps of the two stroke revolution and the last gasp of the 4 stroke.
Pre 75: The sports first golden era, the advent of the affordable and reliable production motocross bike.
Pre 78: The beginning of the suspension revolution.
Pre 85: The beginning of the water cooled, linkage suspended disc brake revolution.
Pre 90: The further sophitication of linkaged suspension and the 500 class horsepower wars.
Evolution: A technology inspired class for bikes with air cooling, non linkaged suspension and drum brakes.
A surrogate pre 80 class of sorts.
-
i like it ... lets go with that then. :D
-
Nah walter, Just everyone is now finally getting on the right page.
-
In 1973 we were laying rear shock down, so a 75 model would be no better than a 73 model, they where producing about the same horse power, it comes down to the jockey. My dates would work.
-
Now I don't know a lot about pre 78 and even less about pre 75, but as I see it the gist of this topic is to specifically list carry over models in pre 75 that wouldn't be competitive in pre 78 and too somehow boost numbers in pre 78, by the same or other methods.
I don't think that having more classes is the answer, it would just create more work for officials, administrators etc and possible dilute competitor numbers across the classes, unless of course competitor numbers in one or two classes supports a further split (did I just contradict myself there :-\)
My understanding currently is that and pre 75 bike with more than 4" of travel must either be adjusted or compete in pre 78, and any pre 78 bike with more than 9" must be adjusted or compete in evo? What if the suspension travel rules were removed, how many more models would would then be able to compete in their correct year of manufacture class and would this cause any great shift in the current competiveness within the classes?
If pre 78 was changed to pre 79, to boost the number of available bikes, are the 78 model bikes (i assume currently evo class bikes) that would be then competing significantly faster than the 75-77 bikes that it would cause the same problems that these rule changes are trying to sort out?
Just a couple of thoughts from someone who doesn't have much of a clue about these particular classes/bikes ;D
-
It would be easier to list the 77 MXers that meet the nine inch travel rule...
I believe all of the Montesas, KTMs and Huskies are out, along with the 250+ Yamahas and Suzukis.
That's gotta account for at least half of the pre-78 entries at any race meet.
You can add the '77 Maico to that list.
The '75 Model Bullies seem competitive in Pre78 to me. Last Sunday I had a great race with one on my (restricted travel) '77 Montesa. Pre 78 is restricted to 9'' travel for better or worse, this makes most of the '75 reasonably competitive. There will always be less competitive early models in each Era it is the nature of the beast and applies to whatever cut off you apply. The YZ400C is not competitive with a YZ400D on paper but they are a neat bike just the same. Personally I see the Pre78s as the most interesting due to the rapid changes taking place during those years. I can remember some models being almost out-dated before you had them ran in!
Another problem with adding ’75+ models to Pre75 is that it makes ’70-’72 models even less competative. Maybe we should move them into Pre70 ::) but then the '65 & '66 models and on it goes.
-
quick comment, pre'76 would include the RM125S which isn't really in the spirit :-\...unless you owned an RM125S of course ;D
-
I think they should stay at pre 75 and pre 78. If you dont like to have a bike that is the oldest in the class and supposedly not competitive then upgrade to the newest bike in each class. No matter how hard you try to shift things around and make some bikes less disadvantaged, all it does is just shift the disadvantge onto other bikes like montynut said. I think 090 had a good comment a while back something along the lines of in the end it will come down to rider ability.
-
and what o9o said is the truth Leith, I witnessed a younger guy named Adrian McIntyre demolish near all comers in all pre'78 capacities at the Coff's Nats in 07 onboard Dodgee's stock RM125S :o
The reasoning for my ideal in regards to the TM250M was more about keeping like models with like models and not about what's the best bike to win or disadvantaging anyone, God knows whilst the TM250's might/do win now, back in the day they wearn't looked upon the hot setup ;)
-
Doc, youth was on Young Adrians side ( 18 YO from memory ) and yes he was quick. does he still ride ?????
-
Changing to pre '79 wouldn't be a smart idea.. The '78 CR250RZ will stomp the rest of the field with it's 12'' of suspension and rocketship engine, it's one of the best Evo bikes around.
Leave it like it is.. no matter what you do some models will suffer.
-
Changing to pre '79 wouldn't be a smart idea.. The '78 CR250RZ will stomp the rest of the field with it's 12'' of suspension and rocketship engine, it's one of the best Evo bikes around.
Leave it like it is.. no matter what you do some models will suffer.
Yeah exactly. I was just saying that to Tatey before. The system is good as it is and will be flawed no matter which way you cut the eras off.
-
At last !! FFS lads, the main issue in historic roadracing is well-intentioned blokes building machines that to them represent their past, or a favourite era...then turning up, discovering they're outside the parameters of the MA rulebook, packing the sh*ts and disappearing, to never be seen again.
The vmx guidelines are not only pretty simple and straight-forward, but have been tuned by patient, intelligent men : bottom line is, if you wanna race vmx, study the rulebook first, THEN AND ONLY THEN make your decisions about what you wanna race...
And go your hardest... :)
-
As a newcomer to the sport I don't normally get involved with things I don't know much about.Having said that I rode the pre78 125 class at Crystal Brooke and had as much fun as I can remember on a dirt bike for a long time.I was never near the pointy end but I had my battles nonetheless.My friend took out the pre78 250 class win on an old bike because he is a good rider,and I'm pretty sure the Smith Brothers would have won and placed in the pre78 125 class on a 1970 model bike,it's just the way it is.Me I'm going to sell or retire my Evo bike ,buy a pre 75 ride a heap of races at next years Nats and have a good time
-
Johnny Os post sums it up exactly :) leave it the fock alone ;) no matter what there will always be what are considered by some orphan bikes .The rule book has had a tidy up and thats great but dont even think of messing with what is a great set of eras . The Poms now run what they call Circa 74 and circa 77 (i think ) this is great in concept and it appears to work great in the UK but would not nesserceryly work elsewhere.
Pre 78 is a great era :) if people feel they have to have a 77 model bike to be competitive then 95% of them are bullshiting themselves ::)
in most cases it would take a personality transplant to be competitive ;).Ride what you like to ride and enter that bike in what ever class the GCRs say it fits into and enjoy yourselves :)
congratulations to the commisioners for having a sort out of the rule book and flow on models :)
-
Pretty hard to argue with GD66 on that one.
-
That's pretty much it in a nutshell.
-
We put a lot of time into selecting the right year cutoffs back in the late 80's and I think we've got it pretty right. Even Evo makes more sense to me as the years move along. At the time I'd have preferred a pre '80 class (there was no pre '78 class at that stage) instead of Evo but it's worked out pretty well in the end. If it ain't broke, don't fix it ;).
-
At last !! FFS lads, the main issue in historic roadracing is well-intentioned blokes building machines that to them represent their past, or a favourite era...then turning up, discovering they're outside the parameters of the MA rulebook, packing the sh*ts and disappearing, to never be seen again.
You Aussie are always throwing your toys in the corner, bunch of bloody shirt lifters.... first rule of NZ Historic Racing is if it is made in Japan it is not eligible ;D ;D ;D ;D .... once you get that out of the way then it is pre 63 and class is decided on what performance mods you have made and if you can afford a Manx
-
Changing to pre '79 wouldn't be a smart idea.. The '78 CR250RZ will stomp the rest of the field with it's 12'' of suspension and rocketship engine, it's one of the best Evo bikes around.
Leave it like it is.. no matter what you do some models will suffer.
RZ is 79?
-
You Aussie are always throwing your toys in the corner, bunch of bloody shirt lifters.... first rule of NZ Historic Racing is if it is made in Japan it is not eligible ;D ;D ;D ;D .... once you get that out of the way then it is pre 63 and class is decided on what performance mods you have made and if you can afford a Manx
Only problem with the NZCMRR "No Jap Crap" rule Marc, is when they run out of ideas/money every few years, and make an exception to top the coffers up at their annual Pukekohe festival : I refer to the Post-Classic display they ran a few years ago that featured the Robert Holden-ridden Plastic Fantastic Roberts Suzukis, the Croz XR69, a couple of TZ750s, Mike Pero's TZ350 etc : the Virgil Ehlings-owned ex-Hailwood Lyster-framed 500 Honda on another occasion : the 125cc Yamaha V4 owned by Ferri Brouwer and ridden by Hugh Anderson couple of years back, and so on : if you're a racer with a Japper, piss off...but if you're a legend with a Japper, enter and sign in please.... ::)...pretty ironic when you consider that founder NZCMRR member Hugh Anderson won four world titles and 25 Grands Prix on SUZUKI, and Ken McIntosh made a career and a breadline based on the success of his Rodger Freeth-ridden McIntosh SUZUKI... ::)
-
Doc, youth was on Young Adrians side ( 18 YO from memory ) and yes he was quick. does he still ride ?????
Stew, yes he still rides, has 2 RM-Z's now and he moved to Karratha, West Australia. If you remember he didn't fair so well in the pre'78 races as he was riding a slightly sub-standard RM125S. When he was put on Wayne's bike, which I had raced, at the end of the day he blitzed. The races were very short, to me it wasn't so much youth being on his side but more-so it was his home track and he applied the modern style of riding to the old bikes, it worked perfectly. Reckons he'd love to do another vintage event ;)
(http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-1/923869/314259_2288367618872_1539392044_32478739_1108069_n.jpg)
-
RZ is 79?
'78/'79
-
CR250R/RZ essentially the same and the major reason why it shouldn't be pre79 or 80 - you could then call it the CR250 class.
Freaky - thats it mate - we were all wrong, you were always right and now we have come around ;D Luv your work!
-
At last !! FFS lads, the main issue in historic roadracing is well-intentioned blokes building machines that to them represent their past, or a favourite era...then turning up, discovering they're outside the parameters of the MA rulebook, packing the sh*ts and disappearing, to never be seen again.
The vmx guidelines are not only pretty simple and straight-forward, but have been tuned by patient, intelligent men : bottom line is, if you wanna race vmx, study the rulebook first, THEN AND ONLY THEN make your decisions about what you wanna race...
And go your hardest... :)
I hate it when glen says something I actually have to agree with!!! damn
-
RZ is 79?
'78/'79
CR-RZ is78 build, 79 model. It would not be eligible for a pre-79 class.
-
CR250R/RZ essentially the same and the major reason why it shouldn't be pre79 or 80 - you could then call it the CR250 class.
Freaky - thats it mate - we were all wrong, you were always right and now we have come around ;D Luv your work!
See and i knew you too would come around....... ps the clubman awards looking prity good on the wall, i can even tell if its going to rain !
-
you deserved it buddy - some mighty good competition for the award also I must admit.