OzVMX Forum
Clubroom => Tech Talk => Topic started by: Snowy 76 on February 13, 2012, 05:09:31 pm
-
Are Simons forks pre 78 legal,??? not relly sure when thay become available????
-
Yes they were available in 1977 but you'll have to restrict the travel to 9"
-
Yes they were available in 1977 but you'll have to restrict the travel to 9"
yes what was available in 77 isnt legal in pre 78 competition , almost every Euro bike from 77 , YZ's RM125's and almost all aftermarket forks and fork kits from 1977 are not legal for our pre78 class. Phhhffft!
-
Thanks for the Reply`s , So I have a Yes and No????? :), would hate to build a bike and have drama`s at a Aussie title
-
whats the point of this class!!!!! if nothing that came out of the factory standard is compliant?? so how does one go about unmaking what the factory did to satisfy the nob jockey hierarchy?? are emulators etc banned??
-
Yes they were available in 1977 but you'll have to restrict the travel to 9"
yes what was available in 77 isnt legal in pre 78 competition , almost every Euro bike from 77 , YZ's RM125's and almost all aftermarket forks and fork kits from 1977 are not legal for our pre78 class. Phhhffft!
I think you'll find that's not correct Brent, all 1977 model mx bikes are legal for pre '78. (i've just double checked the rule book)
I'm also sure Simons forks are ok as long as they are restricted to 9".
-
hey jonny o is it correct to assume that all suspension no matter what is deemed legal as long as it is within the period and set to 9" travel?? and what of emulators n shox that were made last week??
-
hey jonny o is it correct to assume that all suspension no matter what is deemed legal as long as it is within the period and set to 9" travel?? and what of emulators n shox that were made last week??
Yeah pretty much except emulators are not legal, the parts used for pre '78 have to have been available in that era.. Simons forks were available emulators weren't.
Shock selection is open to anything available now as long as it has no more than 9" wheel travel.
-
Yes they were available in 1977 but you'll have to restrict the travel to 9"
yes what was available in 77 isnt legal in pre 78 competition , almost every Euro bike from 77 , YZ's RM125's and almost all aftermarket forks and fork kits from 1977 are not legal for our pre78 class. Phhhffft!
I think you'll find that's not correct Brent, all 1977 model mx bikes are legal for pre '78. (i've just double checked the rule book)
I'm also sure Simons forks are ok as long as they are restricted to 9".
Did they change it ? It used to specify that you had to limit the travel on husky's etc and VB'S weren't allowed. all bikes had to be limited to 9" .All that I wrote above has more than 9" travel.I refer to MOMS 18.7.7.1 c
My Steve Wise replica will never race the NatsIN PRE 78.Nor my MC5 or my YZ400.
-
Yes i think they must've changed it.. it even says the VB Montesa is legal with travel restrictors
-
Yes i think they must've changed it.. it even says the VB Montesa is legal with travel restrictors
Have you got 011 or 012?
-
Emulators and modern shocks are legal in all eras as they are internal and not visible. Fork and shock internals are free the same as engine internals otherwise many many bikes could not be kept on the track.
VB 250 & 360 Montesa models have been listed for three years now (I think certainly two years).
All bikes are restricted to 9' total travel. I agree that it should be more say 10.5' front and rear as several makes had more than 9" travel in '77 but the rules say 9".
-
Emulators and modern shocks are legal in all eras as they are internal and not visible. Fork and shock internals are free the same as engine internals otherwise many many bikes could not be kept on the track.
VB 250 & 360 Montesa models have been listed for three years now (I think certainly two years).
All bikes are restricted to 9' total travel. I agree that it should be more say 10.5' front and rear as several makes had more than 9" travel in '77 but the rules say 9".
I haven't got the latest but 2010 says "VB montesa's see Grand prix classes" same as last few years.Pretty interesting since we have never had a GP class over here. It also says early 9 "Simons forks are allowed but doesnt mention the later Simons ,and says the that FOX are not allowed.
Pretty ridiculous IMO , unless you have a stock KX,CR,RM250/370 or CZ you need to detune you bikes suspension to suit the rules.
-
Emulators and modern shocks are legal in all eras as they are internal and not visible. Fork and shock internals are free the same as eng.
I haven't found that clause in MOMS yet , still reading. ::)
-
Emulators and modern shocks are legal in all eras as they are internal and not visible. Fork and shock internals are free the same as eng.
I haven't found that clause in MOMS yet , still reading. ::)
Exactly no were in the rules does it say they can not be used. It does not say you can put new springs in your forks made out of the latest alloys or a 2010 model piston in your engine if it fits but it is perfectly OK. Is a Prox rod kit designed and built yesterday for a '77 RM250 legal? 100% legal but the rule book does not say it is legal ::). CZs, Maicos did not come with modern programmable ignitions? 100% legal.
But you can not fit a '78 RM125C upper triple clamp to '77 RM125B as it technically contains a visble performance gain of offset bars and rubber mounted bars. Go figure
VB 250 360 Montesa models added in 2011 it appears as I wrote the submission in late 2009 for discussion in 2010 through MNSW to have them included as no one seemed to know what the hell the 'GP Class" as all about ::)
-
With the rules mentioning "GP class" it would seem the pre-78 rules were modeled after AHRMA's Historic class. Our rules have some peculiarities also. I've always thought the rule should read must have less than 10" of travel.
???
-
[/quote]
But you can not fit a '78 RM125C upper triple clamp to '77 RM125B as it technically contains a visble performance gain of offset bars and rubber mounted bars. Go figure
[/quote]
I would have thought that the clue was PRE 78 so parts from a 1978 RM 125C are out ::)
I suppose this goes back to the Conondale titles where people were running complete 125C front ends in their B models and a couple of blokes were running C models with B tanks .
The pre 78 rules are pretty straight forward. However i struggle with the stupid rule about having to limit travel on certain models ::) .If it was built in 1977 and designated a 1977 model then let it in , the fact that some manufacturers had more travel in the day than others is the way it was ::)
If it was an advantage then it should be an advantage now ::)
Bolting parts on from later models though is bullshit , if Suzuki B models had 9" travel in the day then thats what should be allowed , if you could buy Simons , Fox , Acme , or woolworths forks with 15" of travel in 1977 then they should be allowed in
Easy you could buy it in 1977 let it in if not its out (consumables excepted )
-
I don’t agree with the 9” restriction for Pre 77 either but one thing about it is that it makes the 75 & 76 models more feasible.
You don’t hear owners of 75 & 76 models complaining about the rule. :D
Allowing 10.5” travel would pretty much make 75 models obsolete in the class
And yes I know a good rider will do well on anything but anyone looking for a bike will overlook any model they feel will disadvantage them.
I thought the oddities in our rules being caused be using AHRMA rules as the basis was common knowledge
-
I don’t agree with the 9” restriction for Pre 77 either but one thing about it is that it makes the 75 & 76 models more feasible.
You don’t hear owners of 75 & 76 models complaining about the rule. :D
Allowing 10.5” travel would pretty much make 75 models obsolete in the class
And yes I know a good rider will do well on anything but anyone looking for a bike will overlook any model they feel will disadvantage them.
I thought the oddities in our rules being caused be using AHRMA rules as the basis was common knowledge
I hear you Geoff :) but why call it pre 78 when a number of bikes from the factory cant be entered without reducing the technology that the manufacturers sold them with ::)
Make it a pre 77 class ;)
-
I hear you Geoff :) but why call it pre 78 when a number of bikes from the factory cant be entered without reducing the technology that the manufacturers sold them with ::)
Im with Bill, what ever happened in 77 stays in 77, so if the 77 Montys had a little extra travel under their skirts more power to them. If this gives a VB a distinct advantage then we should see mobs of em at the sharp end which is fine with me. Besides suspension travel is over rated, quality suspension however is not, set of modern Ohilins and 'tuned' forks will make much more of a difference than an extra inch... well in the suspension game anyway.
-
With the rules mentioning "GP class" it would seem the pre-78 rules were modeled after AHRMA's Historic class. Our rules have some peculiarities also. I've always thought the rule should read must have less than 10" of travel.
???
Yes ,so it seems .The issue I have with our rules are that they have straight copied the AHRMA's reg's but only half of them ,leaving big holes in the regs over here.
-
Marc - he he he ;D. I agree - I suffer in the pre 75 on the suspension restriction also and as Geoff knows I need all I can get. JO - I am not arguing with you as it may have been in an older MOMS but wasn't it either FOX or SImons that were specifically listed as not being acceptable - or maybe just the later versions which makes sense.
cheers
-
[/quote]
I hear you Geoff :) but why call it pre 78 when a number of bikes from the factory cant be entered without reducing the technology that the manufacturers sold them with ::)
Make it a pre 77 class ;)
[/quote]
no problem but what then would you do with all the 77/78 models with 9" + suspension ? Put them up against EVO bikes with about 3" more travel and other mechanical advantages like tls and fat forks?
-
tm bill seems to have it covered if it was made then why can't it run??? i'm pretty sure the stewards of the day never banned any bike or person for having initiave,,if so we'd still have 4"of travel.. it doesn't really matter what suspension travel is or isn't allowed the point is how do you justify emulators n late model shox.. is the concept outta sight outta mind prevailing.. so if i modify a set of cartridges to fit thats intirely legal ??? in that case 5" will suffice..
-
wasn't it either FOX or SImons that were specifically listed as not being acceptable - or maybe just the later versions which makes sense.
cheers
Fox turned up later so not pre 78 legal ..... plus they are modern 43mm forks so even with reduced travel would still offer quite and advantage. Nothing too special inside the Simons, they are just well made.
(http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg71/marcFX_photo/MACpsimons20001.jpg)
-
wasn't it either FOX or SImons that were specifically listed as not being acceptable - or maybe just the later versions which makes sense.
cheers
Fox turned up later so not pre 78 legal ..... plus they are modern 43mm forks so even with reduced travel would still offer quite and advantage. Nothing too special inside the Simons, they are just well made.
(http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg71/marcFX_photo/MACpsimons20001.jpg)
The MOMS specifically state that the Fox's are not legal , they also state that "early model simons are with 9" travel" and stae that nothing over 38mm is legal .Later Simons are over 38mm and have 10"+ travel.
-
The Simon's are pretty much the same as maico forks of the same era .
78/79 maico springs fit straight in
-
The point that '75 and '76 models are disadvantaged apply in every ERA. A '71 model in many cases are not as competative as the '74 model. In Pre75 there is also a travel limit which disadvantages some bikes as they had far more back in the day. Those few models would if allowed to run with full travel make everything else uncompetative.
If you allowed a '77 Montesa or Maico to run with 10.5" travel many people would then modify other bikes to the same just as they did in the day so why change.
The reason I say 10.5" as that was the amount of travel the Montesa, Husky, Maico along with anything that had Marzocchi forks had in 1977. Other bikes had more than 9" of travel either front or rear.
The rules are what they are either go through the process of change or live with them.
-
[(http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/af5/ee61/1978AMX390-2.jpg)][/img]
77 390 auto , non standard but has Simons with maico fork springs
-
[(http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/af5/ee61/1978AMX390-2.jpg)][/img]
77 390 auto , non standard but has Simons with maico fork springs
not early model Simons
-
Well there you go then ,learned something new today . Snowy post a pic of the Simons you have.
-
The answer to the question is yes, they are legal to run. I have a set on my rm125b and are restricted to 9". The Simons are all the same except for the length of the dampening rod which determines the travel (how far it extends). The staunchings are all the same length. Fox forks were not available in '77 so naturally not legal.
And what Tm Bill said. Even those husky forks may be legal if the travel has been restricted.
-
Well there you go then ,learned something new today . Snowy post a pic of the Simons you have.
nice bike anyway
-
Thanks , i like it
-
The answer to the question is yes, they are legal to run. I have a set on my rm125b and are restricted to 9". The Simons are all the same except for the length of the dampening rod which determines the travel (how far it extends). The staunchings are all the same length. Fox forks were not available in '77 so naturally not legal.
And what Tm Bill said. Even those husky forks may be legal if the travel has been restricted.
If Simons are all the same why does the MOMs copied from the US AHRMA specifically state "early model Simons" that are restricted to 9" travel ? and not just Simons that are restricted to 9" travel?
-
Maybe they are referring to early simons forks as pre USD Simons forks.
-
Maybe they are referring to early simons forks as pre USD Simons forks.
Makes sense :) and those rules were written in A Maori car, home of the brave land of the lawsuit ;D They would need to be word perfect and cover all bases ::)
A Maori carn rules are probably not the best template for countries like Australia or NZ where common sense is used rather than call 0900 sue my arse off when things go pear shaped :)
-
I'm pretty sure all the Simons forks are the same other than the amount of travel. I've got a set of 11" travel Simons that are still 38mm, maybe the stanchions are longer but I could still restrict them to 9" travel and use them.
-
Emulators and modern shocks are legal in all eras as they are internal and not visible. Fork and shock internals are free the same as eng.
I haven't found that clause in MOMS yet , still reading. ::)
I was under the impression emulators were not legal in pre 78 because it's a performance enhancing mod that was not available in the day...
-
def agree with TM
http://www.ahrma.org/ahrma_pdfs/Forms/resources/rulebook/sec12.htm
-
IS my 79 SWM ok for pre 78 if i put 77 forks in ,so if it look likes the 77 model?
-
Why wouldn't you can all the bull and blanket fix the lot ! pre 75' = 7"&4" or 8"&5" with 35/36mm tubes ,pre78' = 9"&9" or 10"&10"with 38mm tubes -factory/aftermarket or restricted ! :-\
-
Thanks for the Reply`s and info,so looks like it`s all go ;D ;D ;D time to hurry up the powder coater . Thanks Birko.
-
I'm pretty sure all the Simons forks are the same other than the amount of travel. I've got a set of 11" travel Simons that are still 38mm, maybe the stanchions are longer but I could still restrict them to 9" travel and use them.
length of the dampening rod is the only difference. I had three sets apart at once to compare.
-
I'm pretty sure all the Simons forks are the same other than the amount of travel. I've got a set of 11" travel Simons that are still 38mm, maybe the stanchions are longer but I could still restrict them to 9" travel and use them.
length of the dampening rod is the only difference. I had three sets apart at once to compare.
Interesting... did you shorten the rods or put spacers on them to lessen the travel?
-
I'm pretty sure all the Simons forks are the same other than the amount of travel. I've got a set of 11" travel Simons that are still 38mm, maybe the stanchions are longer but I could still restrict them to 9" travel and use them.
length of the dampening rod is the only difference. I had three sets apart at once to compare.
QUOTE :-
c) 35mm leading-axle Husqvarna and Betor forks are allowed, provided travel is limited to a maximum of 9 inches. Early 9-inch-travel Simons forks are allowed. Fox Factory Forks are prohibited.
d) 38mm is the maximum diameter of fork tube allowed for the Historic classes. -: un quote
it doesn't say Simons forks provided travel is limited ,like it does for Husky and Betors(should include Marzocchi)
Its says early simons with 9" travel and its says that 38mm is the max.
The forks being discussed here are 1.5" diam and originally came in a 10" version not 9"
MXA JUNE 77 Qoute:-the travel is a fully controlled 10" with provisions for an increase in the future to 11 or 12 inches......(goes on ) forks are 1 and a half inches in diameter.This is slightly larger than 38mm and the largest in the industry. un quote.
I missed a set of early Simons on ebay a few years ago, they were 9" travel versions with 1" 3/8 tubes and less extended past the axle.
-
IS my 79 SWM ok for pre 78 if i put 77 forks in ,so if it look likes the 77 model?
Can't see that being a problem , as long as your over 70 and accompanied by both parents to events ;)
-
The forks being discussed here are 1.5" diam and originally came in a 10" version not 9"
MXA JUNE 77 Qoute:-the travel is a fully controlled 10" with provisions for an increase in the future to 11 or 12 inches......(goes on ) forks are 1 and a half inches in diameter.This is slightly larger than 38mm and the largest in the industry. un quote.
Hmm 1.5" eh, that changes everything, anyways whether they are 38 or 38.1mm seems like the Simons were available in 77. Plus Simons seems to have had a few dampening dampening rod lengths available, I have a pair that have 9" of travel, not sure if they are a custom dealio or original rods. But I would say they are legal.
-
LOG BOOKS ::)
-
Lozza its not the first time you have thrown out the log book sugestion .
I for one know sweet FA about log books , perhaps you could give us a detailed run down on how log books are used and how they would benefit Vintage MX .
Remember though that im sure im not the only one on here to whom log books are completly alien , so start at the begining ;D
Probably best start a new thread on it though .
-
LOG BOOKS ::)
whats the point of a log book? the rules say "regardless of original specification"
I think one reason that the pre 78 isn't more popular is because people are not allowed to build up a bike that mimics the state of the art in that period .In the EVO class you can do as much as you want for the period and end up with the trickest bike of what ever model you have .The pre 78 class doesnt have too many trick bikes because they have taken regs that were originally for a specification regulated class and applied it to a period regulated class. Doesn't work for me . I just read the 77 Hangtown race report where privateers , Ritcher,Wise and Ogden kicked butt .Guess what? Today those bikes , not works bikes, stock bikes fitted with state of the art components are not legal for pre 78 competition. To my liking the 76/77 period was one of the most interesting times for trick bikes but we dont see too many restored versions out there today.
-
LOG BOOKS ::)
whats the point of a log book? the rules say "regardless of original specification"
I think one reason that the pre 78 isn't more popular is because people are not allowed to build up a bike that mimics the state of the art in that period .In the EVO class you can do as much as you want for the period and end up with the trickest bike of what ever model you have .The pre 78 class doesnt have too many trick bikes because they have taken regs that were originally for a specification regulated class and applied it to a period regulated class. Doesn't work for me . I just read the 77 Hangtown race report where privateers , Ritcher,Wise and Ogden kicked butt .Guess what? Today those bikes , not works bikes, stock bikes fitted with state of the art components are not legal for pre 78 competition. To my liking the 76/77 period was one of the most interesting times for trick bikes but we dont see too many restored versions out there today.
Absolutley +1 :)
-
LOG BOOKS ::)
whats the point of a log book? the rules say "regardless of original specification"
I think one reason that the pre 78 isn't more popular is because people are not allowed to build up a bike that mimics the state of the art in that period .In the EVO class you can do as much as you want for the period and end up with the trickest bike of what ever model you have .The pre 78 class doesnt have too many trick bikes because they have taken regs that were originally for a specification regulated class and applied it to a period regulated class. Doesn't work for me . I just read the 77 Hangtown race report where privateers , Ritcher,Wise and Ogden kicked butt .Guess what? Today those bikes , not works bikes, stock bikes fitted with state of the art components are not legal for pre 78 competition. To my liking the 76/77 period was one of the most interesting times for trick bikes but we dont see too many restored versions out there today.
Here is my pre '78 RM.. i built it up with a lot of aftermarket parts from the era and no one has ever protested it because it's 100% legal. There's nothing stopping anyone else from doing the same
(http://i1208.photobucket.com/albums/cc374/JohnnyO31/Vintage%20mx%20bikes/RM370fox019.jpg)
-
Very nice bike
-
LOG BOOKS ::)
whats the point of a log book? the rules say "regardless of original specification"
I think one reason that the pre 78 isn't more popular is because people are not allowed to build up a bike that mimics the state of the art in that period .In the EVO class you can do as much as you want for the period and end up with the trickest bike of what ever model you have .The pre 78 class doesnt have too many trick bikes because they have taken regs that were originally for a specification regulated class and applied it to a period regulated class. Doesn't work for me . I just read the 77 Hangtown race report where privateers , Ritcher,Wise and Ogden kicked butt .Guess what? Today those bikes , not works bikes, stock bikes fitted with state of the art components are not legal for pre 78 competition. To my liking the 76/77 period was one of the most interesting times for trick bikes but we dont see too many restored versions out there today.
Absolutley +1 :)
Happy Valentines day TM , I don't feel so lonely now :-*
-
forks??????
-
Very nice bike
Ha thers always an exception , nice bike for sure JO
-
forks??????
They are RM125B forks with a Fox kit limited to 9" travel..
-
That is a lovley example of one of my favorite models :) looks even better in the flesh :)
-
forks??????
They are RM125B forks with a Fox kit limited to 9" travel..
ie . detuned to 9" . Steve Wise's stock forked SX RM 250 had a fork kit and foxshox and swingarm for about 10" travel, 10.5 in the final 77 version .His 77 Cliff White CR125 had 10" and 10.5 .
Any stock 77 250/400 YZ has more than 9" , with a period correct alum swingarm ( 35mm longer) it has even more .
-
Yeah Brent i agree with you about the travel limits and i'd rather have 10' front and rear like back in the day but it's easier to go with the flow and build it by the rules so i can race it with no hassles.
If it wasn't for rules i'd be building a 480 engined CR250RA for the Evo class! :)
-
hey johnny o any chance you can send me a close up pic of the chain tensioner,, i need to make one,,are they originally made by dg?? i,ve seen photo's of a few on dg arms.. thanks..
-
It's a Protec tensioner mate they come up on ebay sometimes. I can send you a pic but i won't be near the bike for a few days so you'll have to remind me...
-
I drool every time I see that RM John. It's as trick as they come without going overboard. Those Pro-Tec tensioner's are pretty good things. I found four of them in a clear out bin in a bike shop in Penrith a few years ago. They still come up on eBay from time to time.
-
Lozza its not the first time you have thrown out the log book sugestion .
I for one know sweet FA about log books , perhaps you could give us a detailed run down on how log books are used and how they would benefit Vintage MX .
Remember though that im sure im not the only one on here to whom log books are completly alien , so start at the begining ;D
Probably best start a new thread on it though .
Pretty easy Bill the thrust or essence of it is the onus of proof of eligability is with the competitor/entrant, by having a log book someone has looked at your log book and bike and signed off that the bike matches the pic in the log book. Mind this is not really a issue at club level more aimed at crushing eligability related protests at National titles.
I'll give you a couple of examples,remember I pestered a you for pics of a RA 125's racing in 1980. What I was trying to establish was that a full floater water cooled RM125 raced in 1980. That would allow the build of a Period 5 road race bike based on the RA125. Doc had a mag dated March 1980 with a pic of such a bike. 'Suz125' rang Ross Martin and explained this is what we want to do, Ross said that was fine by him so long as we had the proof that such a bike raced within the period. The exercise became moot when the cut off date change to 1982.Another time I rang Ross and said I have a lot of evidence a model was freely available in 1990 though being a designated a 1991 model. Ross asked what were the changes to that model, I outlined the changes and got a firm NO. The baseline rule was 'Is it a big enough difference to make a difference?' if yes then the application would have been unsuccessful, even though it meets the criteria for pre90 racing.So before we built the bike we made sure we were going to comply with the rules.
So what happens when you send away for a log book, someone who might not know anything about VMX looks at your log book application and your evidence and says yes or no. If you have a stock bike , the application will just say , "as per showroom" or completely standard. If you have modified the shit out of it you list the modifiactions and show proof that the modifactions are within the rules and period, IF there is a eligability protest the log book is the first thing checked, if your bike is not as per the log book, well I'm sure you can join the dots.
Fact is it has stamped out 99.99% of eligability issues with HRR.
So lets look at the example of Johnny O's RM with the Simonds forks, if Johnny applies with a swag of magazine articles with adverts, race reports, pics and tests using these forks. That is good enough, however if the rule states no more than 9 in travel Johnny would have to show a pic/drawing of how he limited the travel. Log book granted.So if that bike goes to the Nats and someone protests that it has more travel than 9 in, it is very quickly and easily sorted. Either it has or hasn't, either it complies with the log book or does not. There is no grey area. Not many have stumped up the protest fee after log books were introduced , due to the fact any protester is arguing with someone who made a judgement on the evidence that was presented. Also just because someone else gets a log book with a trick part does not mean that component is automaticaly eligable each and every applicant must present their own evidence if they want to use that component.
Main thing is there is no debate, no yeah but's.. Log Book= Period eligable.
-
(http://i1199.photobucket.com/albums/aa474/090bvb/renoandcd8bikes011.jpg) Period correct and um legal.
-
(http://i1199.photobucket.com/albums/aa474/090bvb/renoandcd8bikes011.jpg) Period correct and um legal.
Hate to be a pain in the arse but it is period correct but according to the rules not legal . The rules say early model Simons and also not bigger than 38 mm , if those forks were legal the rules would say not bigger than 38.1 mm.
-
I still don't get you. They are 38mm
-
I still don't get you. They are 38mm
They're actually 1.5 inches.. American built and a fraction over 38mm..! ;)
-
the maniac is beein facetious but also obviously correct as the good ol us of a is imperial remember so convert 1.5inch to metric n i'll be 38.1 rules say 38 .. who's checkin anyway..
-
I still don't get you. They are 38mm
They're actually 1.5 inches.. American built and a fraction over 38mm..! ;)
::) You can't be serious.
-
I still don't get you. They are 38mm
They're actually 1.5 inches.. American built and a fraction over 38mm..! ;)
::) You can't be serious.
We won't tell anyone... :D
-
I drool every time I see that RM John. It's as trick as they come without going overboard.
Needs a decent swingarm ;D.... are those Simons ignition covers pre 78
(http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg71/marcFX_photo/IMG_5279.jpg)
-
I drool every time I see that RM John. It's as trick as they come without going overboard.
Needs a decent swingarm ;D.... are those Simons ignition covers pre 78
(http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg71/marcFX_photo/IMG_5279.jpg)
Fark..What's that thing connected to the back wheel that the shocks are bolted to, looks like part of the Sydney Harbour Bridge!! ;D
Very nice bike Marc.. good job :)
-
I still don't get you. They are 38mm
They're actually 1.5 inches.. American built and a fraction over 38mm..! ;)
::) You can't be serious.
simple question Brad .Are those forks early Simons with 9" travel and not more than 38mm in diam . Or did you modify them to restrict the travel to 9" travel and are they over 38mm ?
-
Its quite possible the the reference to 38.0 mm includes the 1.5''(38.1mm) simons.
It would be very easy to qualify the position by asking the question of the relevant bodies as it looks like its technical a oversite.
It would be a hard call to protest the .1mm or for relevant bodies to dismiss the use of the forks based on .1mm.
.1mm in the diameters we are discussing could not be considered performance enhancing no matter which way it was presented.
I think you could say .1mm until the cows come home but it would be considered a poor argument.
How much easier would it be if all nations just used the metric system. It would make my actual profession very much easier to work in.
-
sarcasm what sarcasm!!!
-
I still don't get you. They are 38mm
They're actually 1.5 inches.. American built and a fraction over 38mm..! ;)
::) You can't be serious.
simple question Brad .Are those forks early Simons with 9" travel and not more than 38mm in diam . Or did you modify them to restrict the travel to 9" travel and are they over 38mm ?
they are restricted 11" Simons. As I have stated several times they are all the same in staunching length and every other way. The only difference between all lengths are the dampening rod length. Rather than cut the damper rod down I decided to put a spacer in case I wanted to put them on another bike. I think you would be the only person that would say 38.1mm forks. No one would get pulled up on that one. Period correct and allowed to be on the bike.
-
I'm pretty sure all the Simons forks are the same other than the amount of travel. I've got a set of 11" travel Simons that are still 38mm, maybe the stanchions are longer but I could still restrict them to 9" travel and use them.
length of the dampening rod is the only difference. I had three sets apart at once to compare.
QUOTE :-
c) 35mm leading-axle Husqvarna and Betor forks are allowed, provided travel is limited to a maximum of 9 inches. Early 9-inch-travel Simons forks are allowed. Fox Factory Forks are prohibited.
d) 38mm is the maximum diameter of fork tube allowed for the Historic classes. -: un quote
it doesn't say Simons forks provided travel is limited ,like it does for Husky and Betors(should include Marzocchi)
Its says early simons with 9" travel and its says that 38mm is the max.
The forks being discussed here are 1.5" diam and originally came in a 10" version not 9"
MXA JUNE 77 Qoute:-the travel is a fully controlled 10" with provisions for an increase in the future to 11 or 12 inches......(goes on ) forks are 1 and a half inches in diameter.This is slightly larger than 38mm and the largest in the industry. un quote.
I missed a set of early Simons on ebay a few years ago, they were 9" travel versions with 1" 3/8 tubes and less extended past the axle.
I repeat.Why does it not say leading axle husqvarna,Betor and Simons forks are allowed provided the travel is limited to 9"? Instead of seperating the Simons and nonimating early model Simons with(ie made with 9" travel)? over.
ps when another set of early 9" Simons come up on Ebay or a swap site I will post.
-
I don't make the rules so I have no idea. I'm getting confused now as you originally said Simons were illegal hence my post at the start. You actually said all period parts of that era are illegal which prompted johnnyo and myself to post a pic of our bikes that are ridden as you see them .
-
The OZ Pre-78 rule was copied from the AHRMA rule book. I was on AHRMA's Post-Vintage rules committee for 2 years. 38.1mm is considered same as 38mm by AHRMA. There has never been a protest of pre-78 (AHRMA Historic Class) for a bike using Simons forks here in the US. While I agree it was poorly written, the intent of the rule was to prevent technology developed in the next era from creeping into the earlier class. Simons were available in 1977 and considered 38mm.
Some folks read the letter of the law and some interpret the intent of the law. There will always be two sides and at different times each can be right.
;)
-
So a pair of 10" travel forks , restricted to 9" of travel would be considered an advantage as the sliders extend less, thereby having more overlap and are therfore more rigid..... which was part of the original plan... scarcasm... ;D
-
The OZ Pre-78 rule was copied from the AHRMA rule book. I was on AHRMA's Post-Vintage rules committee for 2 years. 38.1mm is considered same as 38mm by AHRMA. There has never been a protest of pre-78 (AHRMA Historic Class) for a bike using Simons forks here in the US. While I agree it was poorly written, the intent of the rule was to prevent technology developed in the next era from creeping into the earlier class. Simons were available in 1977 and considered 38mm.
Some folks read the letter of the law and some interpret the intent of the law. There will always be two sides and at different times each can be right.
;)
So I gather from that that you guys included the words "early Simons forks" so as to insure that someone didnt turn up with an M2 Honda fitted with 60mm USD Simons and smoke everyone with the unfair advantage - even though you had it covered with the 38mm spec .LOL
The rules are supposed to be there so as everyone knows whatswhat and there are no misunderstandings.How would someone build a house if you couldn't go by the plans and specs ?Did you mean this measurement or bigger?LOL
-
I don't make the rules so I have no idea. I'm getting confused now as you originally said Simons were illegal hence my post at the start. You actually said all period parts of that era are illegal which prompted johnnyo and myself to post a pic of our bikes that are ridden as you see them .
Did I say that? I'll have to check back.I thought I said that you cant build a "state of tha art" model because of the restrictions in the rules.Hell you can't even enter a of th e floor stock original , you have to detune it to comply. As nice as your bikes are they are not state of the art for 77 . Our pre 78 class isnt even a period class its a period class in name only .The rules are mostly specification related like our EVO class with the added designation of a start and cut off date(over 3 years) which EVO doesn't have (or you could say is over 6 or 7 years).Our pre 78 class is actually a new era or pre 77 class that allows detuned pre 78 bikes and detuned components from 1977. I wish that I had a bunch of stock 77 YZ swingarms to sell to everyone that called me wanting to do the Nats but too scared to leave their trick Al. arms on for fear of non compliance to the rules.
This year in local pre 78 comp I raced againts some YZ's, a 77 Husky,a 76 Bultaco, a few 77 Aw's an RM
with B forks and some 4 bangers with different forks and shocks.Most if not all would need to be changed to comply with the class rules.I dont know if anyone went to the trouble and I don't care .I am just pointing out that the pre 78 class is not actually pre78, its something else and it just maybe why people are seemingly overlooking it for the EVO class.Like I said before it was a great era for trickness , in some ways even more so than EVO.
-
Pre '78 is a good class but i think the problem is the group of people who drew up the rules really didn't know enough about the bikes or era.
Alloy swingarms were originally banned yet they were available over the counter in '76, most '77 Euro bikes have 10" travel standard and most racers fitted aftermarket shocks or fork kits to their bikes in '77 which gave them 10" of travel!!
And to think that genuine alloy Suzuki swingarms are banned which were available as an optional extra in '77 yet it's now ok to run a DG or similar alloy arm..WTF??
And what about the Shinobi water cooled head that riders were using in '77 and was available to anyone, i've got one but i can't run it!
The rules really need to be revised by people who raced in back '76/'77 and remember how it was.
-
Simons forks restricted to nine inch travel are perfectly legal for pre 78.
I look forward to running recently purchased 77 Montesa VB360 this year in VCM series, I find it odd that i have to restrict the suspension travel on a standard bike.
The pre 78 rules require some fine tuning so put pen to paper and send rule amendments to MA.
-
get them in before march 1st give dave tanner and boys something to do.
-
We really want way more pre 78 bikes out racing. Personally, I have not had to bounce any pre 78 bike from tech yet( some 5 years now). IMO a 78 RM125 offers little real advantage over a b model-or the 78 yz for that matter. The 78 Maicos and 78 Honda cr250 as I have said before offer real advantage with rear countershaft-and able to use the rear travel sans chain issues. I do know of the alloy Suzy arm issue-I disagree IMO a C or C2 arm is not a big deal either.
-
We really want way more pre 78 bikes out racing. Personally, I have not had to bounce any pre 78 bike from tech yet( some 5 years now). IMO a 78 RM125 offers little real advantage over a b model-or the 78 yz for that matter. The 78 Maicos and 78 Honda cr250 as I have said before offer real advantage with rear countershaft-and able to use the rear travel sans chain issues. I do know of the alloy Suzy arm issue-I disagree IMO a C or C2 arm is not a big deal either.
78 Maicos are a complete new bike , 78 cr250's are also and are the same basic design as a 79 or 80 model which is the last of the EVO models for Honda .
The pre 78 class should be either a specification designated class like EVO or a period designated class with some carry over models like pre75 .Not both.
-
What I meant was IMO it could be max 10.5 in travel( approx 266 mm) and allow all 78 models except the Husky, Maico Magnums and 78 cr 250s-btw the 80 cr250 was very similar to 78-79 but a centerport and some were built in US. .....really whatever it would take to get more pre-78 aka GP1 aka historic era bikes on the tracks-at least you in Oz seem to have way more of them racing and appreciate this era of machines. Shit, I think I'll also run my 77 390 Husky in the pre 85 500s just to get it seen more.
-
-btw the 80 cr250 was very similar to 78-79 but a centerport and some were built in US. ....
yer my CR's are like that
-
As soon as you make it 10.5 inches travel, all the 75 and some 76 bikes will go into the scrapheap, what you've picked up at one end you've thrown away at the other and when you leave out certain models you will have those owners spitting the dummy....all you have done is moved the goal posts. The rules as they stand now are pretty simple and the main objective is to showcase the beginning of long travel. At the end of the day, a good rider will win on anything, everyones forgetting the main objectives.....having fun weather its restoring, collecting, racing, talking shit and/or all of the above. I personally love the pre78's, there still a real vintage bike with that little bit more suspension to make it easier on our bodies......anyone who hasnt riden a pre78 do so if you get the oppotunity....you will be very surprised. cheers big ears.
-
As soon as you make it 10.5 inches travel, all the 75 and some 76 bikes will go into the scrapheap, what you've picked up at one end you've thrown away at the other and when you leave out certain models you will have those owners spitting the dummy....all you have done is moved the goal posts. The rules as they stand now are pretty simple and the main objective is to showcase the beginning of long travel. At the end of the day, a good rider will win on anything, everyones forgetting the main objectives.....having fun weather its restoring, collecting, racing, talking shit and/or all of the above. I personally love the pre78's, there still a real vintage bike with that little bit more suspension to make it easier on our bodies......anyone who hasnt riden a pre78 do so if you get the oppotunity....you will be very surprised. cheers big ears.
I agree with that.. you're never going to please all the people all the time.
Pre 78 works fine as it is and so does Evo!!
-
As soon as you make it 10.5 inches travel, all the 75 and some 76 bikes will go into the scrapheap, what you've picked up at one end you've thrown away at the other and when you leave out certain models you will have those owners spitting the dummy....all you have done is moved the goal posts. The rules as they stand now are pretty simple and the main objective is to showcase the beginning of long travel. At the end of the day, a good rider will win on anything, everyones forgetting the main objectives.....having fun weather its restoring, collecting, racing, talking shit and/or all of the above. I personally love the pre78's, there still a real vintage bike with that little bit more suspension to make it easier on our bodies......anyone who hasnt riden a pre78 do so if you get the oppotunity....you will be very surprised. cheers big ears.
I agree with that.. you're never going to please all the people all the time.
Pre 78 works fine as it is and so does Evo!!
Except 9 out of 10 pre 78 bikes are not legal without alterations from the original specs and almost all aftermarket gear is outside the rules .So what you end up with is a 75/76 class when hardly any 75/76 models are actually out there.At the end of the 77 season everyone was running 10-10.5".As it is now the EVO class has the trickest bikes , pre78 is almost a stock class, thats why IMO why there aren't more pre78 bikes out here.People like to build up bikes either a stock originals or as trick as possible, pre78 doesn't allow that as it stands.
-
You need to come to QLD moto......plenty of trick pre78's up here...we have nearly evey color/shade of bike made back then racing.... std....modified.......theres a bloke up here with a 1975 MX250B that would smoke most riders on newer bikes....your a bit of a scratched record on this subject.....sure there are some people with dodgy parts on there bike but thats in every class.....dont just pick on pre78.
-
You need to come to QLD moto......plenty of trick pre78's up here...we have nearly evey color/shade of bike made back then racing.... std....modified.......theres a bloke up here with a 1975 MX250B that would smoke most riders on newer bikes....your a bit of a scratched record on this subject.....sure there are some people with dodgy parts on there bike but thats in every class.....dont just pick on pre78.
I'm concerned about pre 78 because its rules are not actually written for our pre 78 class, they are copied from a class in the US an applied to our pre 78 class, and very poorly.On the other hand our EVO class is pretty straight forward with the rules and isn't so restrictive that you cant build the best bike using the best parts that were available at the time.
Who is the guy on the MX250 b ? There was some out of stater at CD4 on a C and he was absolutely flying.
Post any up coming race series or rce's in QLD and I'll think about it if it doesn't conflict with our series down here.
-
.. you're never going to please all the people all the time.
Pre 78 works fine as it is and so does Evo!!
[/quote]
The only reason that pre '78 & Evo class rules work fine is because everybody turns a blind eye and they don't want to upset the applecart by protesting at a title meeting. If you protest, then everybody thinks you are an arsehole in a sport that is supposed to be all about fun. The '77 model Yamaha YZ250D & 400D are probably the most common pre '78 class bikes and they have 250mm of wheel travel (measured at the sales brochure), but I doubt if anyone puts a travel limiting spacer in their monoshock to bring it under the 9 inch travel limit. Same thing in Evo class, where I see guys using YZ490 forks (off a linkage bike) on Maico 490s ;).
I have posted here before that I wouldn't comment on rules again, because I am too lazy to put pen to paper and put in a submission that will most likely be rejected anyway. But I just can't help myself. The pre '78 rules should have a 10 inch travel limit, which would then allow pretty much every '77 model bike without having to modify them backwards. I think that Evo class rules should allow any conventional forks that came off a bike originally fitted with drum brakes. But I also think that Evo class rules should allow the use of any aircooled motor ..... full stop. I don't agree with fitting twinshocks to a single shock bike, like the Dutch twinshock guys do, but I think that you should be allowed to use any frame that was originally manufactured with twin shocks, fitted with any aircooled motor. Don't the Pom's use similar twinshock class rules to this a the VMXDN at Farleigh and it seems to work ok ?
-
No more than (250mm) 10 inches of travel, 38mm forks max and a separate class for 1975 bikes. ;)
Oh and no flat-slide carbs. (Just had to throw on some petrol.) ;D
-
[/quote]
The only reason that pre '78 & Evo class rules work fine is because everybody turns a blind eye and they don't want to upset the applecart by protesting at a title meeting. If you protest, then everbody thinks you are an arsehole in a sport that is supposed to be all about fun.
[/quote]
::)
-
I don't think most people could be bothered protesting someone if they had '82 YZ490 forks instead of '81 YZ465 forks in Evo or 10" travel instead of 9" in pre '78.
The advantages are basically nil and the race results will be exactly the same either way.
I rode my RM250B with 10" travel then restricted it to 9" and couldn't feel any difference at all.. our tracks are not very demanding for it to make a difference.
My pre '78 bikes are trick with plenty of period aftermarket bits and i'd be more than happy for someone to protest them just to prove a point because i know they're not going to find anything that's not legal
-
Pre '78 would have to be my favourite era in VMX racing. The bikes have enough suspension to be comfortable on everything except very rough tracks. My only gripe with pre '78, other than poorly written rules, is when an older guy that doesn't race anymore decides to put the local young gun "A" grader on his bikes for one or two big events for the year. The younger guy probably has no connection with the older bikes and all I think this proves is that a younger fast guy will beat an older slow guy, no matter what age the bike is. This may sound like sour grapes ( because it has happened to me before), but I think it is bad for the sport . Because there are less rider numbers in pre '78 classes, there is unlikely to be rider age group divisions, so older guys that are passionate about the bikes are probably going to travel a long way only to have their arses kicked by some young bloke who couldn't care less about the bikes.
-
.. you're never going to please all the people all the time.
Pre 78 works fine as it is and so does Evo!!
but I think that you should be allowed to use any frame that was originally manufactured with twin shocks, fitted with any aircooled motor. Don't the Pom's use similar twinshock class rules to this a the VMXDN at Farleigh and it seems to work ok ?
[/quote]
So that would be building a bike that didnt actually exist back in the day ? I only want to build bikes that did actually exist back in the day.
-
I don't think most people could be bothered protesting someone if they had '82 YZ490 forks instead of '81 YZ465 forks in Evo or 10" travel instead of 9" in pre '78.
The advantages are basically nil and the race results will be exactly the same either way.
So why can't the rules be written to cover this ? I think that most people would agree that YZ490 forks (or any other forks that came from a bike with drum brakes) offer no real advantage over YZ465H forks. I just find it a hassle to limit the travel on my '77 model bikes down from how they were manufactured, while plenty of other people don't even bother.
-
So that would be building a bike that didnt actually exist back in the day ? I only want to build bikes that did actually exist back in the day.
There are already plenty of bikes out there racing that didn't exist back in the day (that are also mostly legal by the Evo class rules). Evo class is not a history lesson. It is a technology based class with different year model bikes that probably never raced against each other back in the day. Everyone seems to have their own idea of what a HL500 should look like, while others have DR motors in RM400 frames etc. But the coolest Evo bike that I have seen, that never existed back in the day, would have to be Simon Healy's Husky 510 in the A5 Kawasaki frame. To me, bikes like this make the sport more interesting.
-
I have 2 pre 78 bikes both have more 9" of fork travel both are factory standard , I will not modify them and if someone needs to protest me because they think that's the reason I beat them its a very hollow victory.
-
I don't think most people could be bothered protesting someone if they had '82 YZ490 forks instead of '81 YZ465 forks in Evo or 10" travel instead of 9" in pre '78.
The advantages are basically nil and the race results will be exactly the same either way.
So why can't the rules be written to cover this ? I think that most people would agree that YZ490 forks (or any other forks that came from a bike with drum brakes) offer no real advantage over YZ465H forks. I just find it a hassle to limit the travel on my '77 model bikes down from how they were manufactured, while plenty of other people don't even bother.
I think it would be a good idea to give the pre '78 and evo rules a tweak but like you i don't have the time or desire to go through the process of trying to change the rule book.
I have so much other stuff on my plate that i can't get done...
-
So that would be building a bike that didnt actually exist back in the day ? I only want to build bikes that did actually exist back in the day.
There are already plenty of bikes out there racing that didn't exist back in the day (that are also mostly legal by the Evo class rules). Evo class is not a history lesson. It is a technology based class with different year model bikes that probably never raced against each other back in the day. Everyone seems to have their own idea of what a HL500 should look like, while others have DR motors in RM400 frames etc. But the coolest Evo bike that I have seen, that never existed back in the day, would have to be Simon Healy's Husky 510 in the A5 Kawasaki frame. To me, bikes like this make the sport more interesting.
Yes but dr400's and RM400 frames, A5kaw's and husky 510's,and imitation HL500's are all using EVO components and not not half evo and half pre 85 .
-
Hi,
If you are thinking of entering on a Pre 78 bike that has more than 9 inch suspension ( for the Aus Nats at Qld Motopark) , make sure you bring a comfy chair , you won't be protested , because you won't be riding,
Make it easy on yourself, and the Scrutineers, abide by the GCR's ,correct suspension travel, no missing spokes , no missing sprocket covers , Bar Pads etc ,
If you have a disregard for the GCR's as they you are, its easier for all concerned, for you just to be a spectator ,
The Nats aren't the place or time , if you have an "axe to grind".
cheers
-
Hi all
Just to clear up the pre 78 suspension travel. The current 2012 MOMS states in Rule 18.5.5.2. the following:
Front wheel travel will not exceed 229mm (9 inches) rear wheel travel will be limited to 229mm (9 inches) measured at the axle. Rear shock obsorbers will be in the original position using the original mounting points.
The previous MOMS 2011 same rule was 18.7.7.1c and had more detail regarding betor and Husqvarna forks not exceeding 9 inches and also maximum diameter of fork being 38mm.
This Rule is not new and those people who have competed previously in Australian vintage titles would have been aware of the reduction of travel in such bikes for example Husqvarna 250 and 390 CR's.
The Australian CMX titles shall adhere to the 2012 MOMS sport, suggested changes to the rules should be submitted through appropriate channels before the 2013 MOMS are finalised.
It is in the spirit of the sport to be on the same machinery level.
Glenn W
Aust CMX Committee
President BMCC
-
Hi,
If you are thinking of entering on a Pre 78 bike that has more than 9 inch suspension ( for the Aus Nats at Qld Motopark) , make sure you bring a comfy chair , you won't be protested , because you won't be riding,
Make it easy on yourself, and the Scrutineers, abide by the GCR's ,correct suspension travel, no missing spokes , no missing sprocket covers , Bar Pads etc ,
If you have a disregard for the GCR's as they you are, its easier for all concerned, for you just to be a spectator ,
The Nats aren't the place or time , if you have an "axe to grind".
cheers
By the sounds of this doesn't seem much point turning up as both my bikes which are factory standard and don't comply with your rules.
Its how rules are in-forced that makes the difference. As you suggest Ill just stay home and ride my own track or come and watch.
-
It is in the spirit of the sport to be on the same machinery level
Yes it's always been in the 'spirit of the sport' (racing) for manufacturers to give the opposition a level playing field. ::)
-
How is it in the "spirit of the sport" to require modifications from how the bikes actually were back in the day? Jeez...
-
How is it in the "spirit of the sport" to require modifications from how the bikes actually were back in the day? Jeez...
it's an old arguement thats been beaten to death many times before this thread (and similar ones) even got off the ground.
if you're a holder of a current or recent MA competition licsense then one would also have a current or recent copy of the MOMS (Manual Of Motorcycle Sport) or access to it through your club.
we are not racing "back in the day", we are however racing old bikes in the "present day" and like them or not, the MOMS is the rule book that our sport is required to abide by.
i also agree that some of those rules are not quite perfect and can make things a little difficult for some owners of certain models of bikes, yet we still see a healthy supply of Vmx enthusiast's that just get on with things without all the fuss.
if that means lobbying to change a rule then give that a go, through the correct channels of course.
but as has been stated before, this forum is a great place to talk about these kind of issues but it's not the place to change them.
cheers,
Vandy.
-
Thanks Vandy. I have no problem with complying with the rules if one has to race under them, obviously. I just wonder where the idea came from that such a rule was in any way necessary. If (for example) the 1977 Husky 390CR had more suspension travel than the competition in 1977, then why handicap it for "pre-78" in 2012? It just seems odd to me. Sorry if the discussion has been done to death before, I missed it.
Cheers, Richard (in NZ, with no such restrictions!) ;D
-
Rule making is a tough and thankless business. :(
The '75 bikes and some '76 models are what make coming up with the rules, so difficult. The first LTR bikes just need to have their own class. They do not fit with bikes that have 230mm of travel (give or take 20mm), just as the later 300mm+ bikes need their own category. Limiting pre-78 or "Historic" here in the U.S., to 230mm was done to protect the '75 models.
What is the over-riding factor that distinguishes pre-78 from post-77? (It's the same one the distinguishes Pre-75 from Pre-78.) So, what should be the number one rule for a pre-78 class?
We all know what it is, but the devil is always in the details.
A. Limit all bikes to 230mm max
or
B. Run all bikes at the stock travel specs
Both A & B are unpopular when some bike owners in the class, but I think a third option is the best.
C. Run '75 and like design bikes in their own class and run Pre-78 at stock specs
But then you bring in the "we already have too many classes" and "it will make the racing day longer" crowd, so you can never win. Just put the spacers in and have fun racing these great old machines and sharing beers with your buddies!
;D
-
Rear shock obsorbers will be in the original position using the original mounting points.
Glenn W
Aust CMX Committee
President BMCC
Well thats a new one :o , so no modified TT's,CZ's ,75/76 KX's and CR250's must race with the original rear end ?? :o
-
Rule making is a tough and thankless business. :(
And often a tough and pointless business, any rules that have you shortening the stock travel on a bike that was available pre 78 like the Husky, or Maicos in pre 74, strikes me as very short sighted in a sport that needs to attract people not alienate them.
I am with Richard in NZ, don't have a so many restrictions, I think start by running a ruller through every second line in the MOMS, you will never miss them and stop playing cops and lawyers with the riders.
-
It is in the spirit of the sport to be on the same machinery level
Yes it's always been in the 'spirit of the sport' (racing) for manufacturers to give the opposition a level playing field. ::)
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
I just wonder where the idea came from that such a rule was in any way necessary. If (for example) the 1977 Husky 390CR had more suspension travel than the competition in 1977, then why handicap it for "pre-78" in 2012? It just seems odd to me.
Cheers, Richard (in NZ, with no such restrictions!) ;D
If you go through the whole thread you will see that the pre 78 rules were copied from the ahrma's historic class .
My question is if the idea to restrict the travel of the later model pre78 bikes to a lower common denominator then why is the same not applied to EVO rules ? Why are the later model Evo bikes with 12" travel not restricted to a less amount of travel so that they are closer to the many 78/79 model bikes with 9 - 10" or less travel?
if it is "in the spirit of the sport to be on the same machinery level"
-
Before i start crating bikes can somebody in Officialdom please explain how you will be measuring travel at the up coming nats ???
I would like to make sure my bikes comply but to do so i need to know how you will be measuring so i can pre measure in the same way .
On the rear of the bike do i have to pull back my rear wheel to its furthest point in the chain adjusting slot prior to measuring ,as i believe this affects wheel travel ???
A couple of Nats ago in QLD I was told my new (used once ) $600 Shoei helmet purchased in Australia was not compliant by those who wave the big stick ::) I was told to get a rule book and prove it was compliant . As an overseas cometitor i dont have an Australian rule book , Rule enforcer and stick waver was not prepared to let me look at his book . Another competitor lent me a book to point out to stick waver the stds marking in .
I also pointed out the MA sticker on the helmet from the one previous event i had used the helmet at , only to be told that the bloke who put that sticker on did'nt know what he was doing :-\
Big stick waver did'nt even bat an eye lid when i told him it was him who put the sticker on the helmet in the first place ::)
I do have respect for officials and vollenteers and officals but if you are going officiate then FFS have a complete Knowledge and understanding of the rules .
These great rules are fantastic on paper but i believe unless the officials explain pre event how they will be measured and enforced then they are a crock of shit ::)
-
I'm sure there is a great one liner in here about it's not the length .. it's how you use it ;D
-
Bill, I've been to three out of the last five Nats and have never seen any bike be measured for suspension travel.
Back in the day, I saw five blokes lean on the back of a pre-75 bike, while the sixth bloke measured from a seat bolt to the rear axle.
I totally agree with your sentiment too... You should try rallying in the ACT if you want to meet some scrutineers with big sticks and small dicks... can't say I've had any dramas at VMX, but then again, I'm a much easier to get along with bloke than you are... :D
-
If I cant turn up and ride my standard bikes without any hassle to put it simply I just wont bother to enter.
Rules are rules but a big part is how they are enforced. I've had to many shit fights over the years to bother fighting this type of attitude from oficaldum. Sounds like this years Nats might be best to stay home.
Scrutineer for safety and let people ride. If some nong is cheating badly they will get protested.
-
If you dont accept the rules that everyone does , just stay home, we don't need your bull shit at these meetings ,
Change the rules if you want, there are ways to do it ,if everyone agrees to have longer travel ,get off your arse and make it happen ,
-
Nathan, Jikov has already stated that quote "If you are thinking of entering on a Pre 78 bike that has more than 9 inch suspension ( for the Aus Nats at Qld Motopark) , make sure you bring a comfy chair , you won't be protested , because you won't be riding" end quote .
Fair enough but seeing as jikov has made the statement maybe he can explain how HE is going to measure the travel so others can measure in the same way PRE EVENT so there is no confusion at the event .
Lucien i have no problem with rules ::) I have a HUGE PROBLEM with little blokes who use the rule book as a penis or riding ability substitute .
If you are going to enforce rules then be open about how you interpret the rule PRE EVENT .
I dont agree with the ridiculous rule of altering bikes that were available in 1974 or 1977 but i have no intention of trying to change the rules either .
I will agree to disagree and abide by all the MA rules . But it would be nice to turn up to an event having been given in advance the Official ( is there even such a thing or is it another gaping hole in the system ) formula that will be used to measure suspension travel so as we are all on the same page .
Quote Lucien “ we don't need your bull shit at these meetings “ unquote
No mate but you need numbers or you aint got an event ;) and the majority of the bullshit comes from untrained and unfamiliar with the rules officials who want to make a name for themselves (I can think of a few ) making it up as they go along .
Its the bullshit ambiguity and amateur attitude of some that keep people away from these meetings , so Lucien ole mate you might just get your wish
-
ie . detuned to 9" . Steve Wise's stock forked SX RM 250 had a fork kit and foxshox and swingarm for about 10" travel, 10.5 in the final 77 version .His 77 Cliff White CR125 had 10" and 10.5 .
Any stock 77 250/400 YZ has more than 9" , with a period correct alum swingarm ( 35mm longer) it has even more .
So I have just read most of this thread because I am considering entering the pre '78 Nationals this year on my 77 YZ250 but if I'm reading right I can't in it's stock standard form? I actually have to limit the original suspension travel to 9 inches !!!
Is that right? Is there someone that can give me a definitive answer here? Someone I can call or that can check the bike before I go to anymore trouble and expense preparing it for the event?
I must be wrong .. that can't be right can it?
-
If you dont accept the rules that everyone does , just stay home, we don't need your bull shit at these meetings ,...
Really?!
Bill's bullshit is usually amusing and interesting, even on the rare occasions he's wound up about something (like when people say nasty things about Bindi Irwin).
The fact that about half of the 1977 model MX bikes came standard with more than 9" of suspension travel has been discussed many times - but nothing has ever come of it, because everyone knows it's a bullshit rule* and eveyone 'forgets' to check on the day.
Every Nats I've been to has had lots of stern words about compliance with the rules beforehand, but when it comes to it, the event organisers aren't stupid enough to stop people riding over trivial crap like having standard suspension in your bike...
The threats are empty.
If it was more than an empty threat, Bill's question would have been answered clearly and concisely by now. The thing is, there's no specified way to measure the suspension travel, so anyway that the scrutineers choose measure travel will have significant room for dispute... You'd be very, very brave (ie: Stupid) to send someone home from a National Title event because you measured their stock pre-78 bike at 9.75" of travel, using an unspecified method. (ref: the Vern Grayson incident and the damage it has caused).
Hell, if Jikov was serious, he would have threatened to bump the guys with too much travel into Evo, not to make them sit out the event.
So let's return to normal programming: Lots of chest-beating that will come to nothing on the day, provided you don't make too much of a fuss now... ;)
*Remembering that the rule was cut and pasted from the AHMRA regs - and AHMRA have since changed their rules to reflect reality.
Its different to the pre-75 7/4" rule which was specifically affects two models of bikes (1974.5 Maico and YZ-B), which arguably were outside of the basic intent of the pre-75 class (ie: short travel bikes).
-
ie . detuned to 9" . Steve Wise's stock forked SX RM 250 had a fork kit and foxshox and swingarm for about 10" travel, 10.5 in the final 77 version .His 77 Cliff White CR125 had 10" and 10.5 .
Any stock 77 250/400 YZ has more than 9" , with a period correct alum swingarm ( 35mm longer) it has even more .
So I have just read most of this thread because I am considering entering the pre '78 Nationals this year on my 77 YZ250 but if I'm reading right I can't in it's stock standard form? I actually have to limit the original suspension travel to 9 inches !!!
Is that right? Is there someone that can give me a definitive answer here? Someone I can call or that can check the bike before I go to anymore trouble and expense preparing it for the event?
I must be wrong .. that can't be right can it?
Good luck with that Simo ::) Jikov has thrown down the Gauntlet ::) so im sure he will have the answers we all desire ;)
-
If you dont accept the rules that everyone does , just stay home, we don't need your bull shit at these meetings ,...
Really?!
Bill's bullshit is usually amusing and interesting, even on the rare occasions he's wound up about something (like people say nasty things about Bindi Irwin).
The fact that about half of the 1977 model MX bikes came standard with more than 9" of suspension travel has been discussed many times - but nothing has ever come of it, because everyone knows it's a bullshit rule* and eveyone 'forgets' to check on the day.
Every Nats I've been to has had lots of stern words about compliance with the rules beforehand, but when it comes to it, the event organisers aren't stupid enough to stop people riding over trivial crap like having standard suspension in your bike...
The threats are empty.
If it was more than an empty threat, Bill's question would have been answered clearly and concisely by now. The thing is, there's no specified way to measure the suspension travel, so anyway that the scrutineers choose measure travel will have significant room for dispute... You'd be very, very brave (ie: Stupid) to send someone home from a National Title event because you measured their stock pre-78 bike at 9.75" of travel, using an unspecified method. (ref: the Vern Grayson incident and the damage it has caused).
Hell, if Jikov was serious, he would have threatened to bump the guys with too much travel into Evo, not to make them sit out the event.
So let's return to normal programming: Lots of chest-beating that will come to nothing on the day, provided you don't make too much of a fuss now... ;)
*Remembering that the rule was cut and pasted from the AHMRA regs - and AHMRA have since changed their rules to reflect reality.
Its different to the pre-75 7/4" rule which was specifically affects two models of bikes (1974.5 Maico and YZ-B), which arguably were outside of the basic intent of the pre-75 class (ie: short travel bikes).
Thanks Nathan and thats my point >:( it really forks me off when people like Michael who do hold a position of authority at these events comes out on a forum and makes big arsed statments like that when he has no proven way of enforcing what he spouts ::)
Is it scaremongering (trying to drive people away from title events ?) or a miss guided attempt at getting people to not turn up with obviously illegal bikes ?
Forking stupid rule that needs to be addressed asap but i dont see that happening anytime soon with all the beaurocratic hoops one has to jump through just to be heard .
Would make more sense to THINK a rule through thoughly and all its potential ramifications before putting it in the rule book to start with ;)
you gotta love that Bindi :-*
-
I always thought no more than 9 inches could legal be interpreted as less than 10 inches, since it doesn't say 9.0 ::)
-
If you dont accept the rules that everyone does , just stay home, we don't need your bull shit at these meetings ,
Change the rules if you want, there are ways to do it ,if everyone agrees to have longer travel ,get off your arse and make it happen ,
Pull your head in.. They are asking a legit question. Attitudes like this don't help anyone
-
I always thought no more than 9 inches could legal be interpreted as less than 10 inches, since it doesn't say 9.0 ::)
Red thats one interpetation :) but what we need is what the big stick wavers interpretation is and how they propose to measure it ;)
-
ie . detuned to 9" . Steve Wise's stock forked SX RM 250 had a fork kit and foxshox and swingarm for about 10" travel, 10.5 in the final 77 version .His 77 Cliff White CR125 had 10" and 10.5 .
Any stock 77 250/400 YZ has more than 9" , with a period correct alum swingarm ( 35mm longer) it has even more .
So I have just read most of this thread because I am considering entering the pre '78 Nationals this year on my 77 YZ250 but if I'm reading right I can't in it's stock standard form? I actually have to limit the original suspension travel to 9 inches !!!
Is that right? Is there someone that can give me a definitive answer here? Someone I can call or that can check the bike before I go to anymore trouble and expense preparing it for the event?
I must be wrong .. that can't be right can it?
Yes the YZD had more than 9" in fact the list is shorter to find 77 models that didn't have 10'
-
Nathan - whilst not being checked for travel my YZB has been checked to ensure it had a limiter installed at a recent Nats? Wouldn't be nice to go all that way and incur expense to not get a ride - but lets not shoot down these Nats either before they get off the ground?
Rossco
-
Interesting to know that, Rossco. :)
If the idea is to make these Nats successful (and I'm all for that), then perhaps the event organsiers might want to rethink how they communicate with the punters?
-
I like to think a common sense approach to this issue would be a joint statement from the club and MA stating that standard bikes with standard forks will not be knocked back.
As this is the first time the spot light has been put on the pre 78 class because of the split this issue has reached boiling point for sure and MA should address the issue ASAP. It would be tragic to see pre 78 class die a death like pre 65 did because of overzealous rule enforcement. We should be enticing people to enter not beat them with the rule book over 1’ of fork travel.
-
Hi,
Would any of you guys be interested in become an MA Official for the weekend to help make sure the meeting runs without any dramas,
cheers
-
It's easier to just ride EVO where "anything goes"....... :D
-
For the record i really hope this nats kicks arse :) but but statements like michaels are destructive no matter how well intention ed ::) many people will travel long distances to support this event .So if you are indeed an official at this event then instead of scattergun statements why not try to help the punters to comply buy explaining whats required .
Might not achieve that power fix, but it might just help people understand whats required and increase participation at the event ;)
What i would like clarified is the 9" rule not to be confused with the fitting of components from later models :)
-
Hi,
Would any of you guys be interested in become an MA Official for the weekend to help make sure the meeting runs without any dramas,
cheers
Normally the events would run with a lot less drama if the MA officials stayed at home. I remember organising events in Australia and you would get some idiot turn up who had never seen an MX bike and just start shagging people around over their helmets because thats all they could grasp..... no added value whatsover in my experience except to project the power of the all oppressive MA.
-
Hi,
Would any of you guys be interested in become an MA Official for the weekend to help make sure the meeting runs without any dramas,
cheers
YEP where do i sign ;)
Michael you made the big arsed statement , why not instead of sarcasm explain how you will be measuring bikes travel ? and is your system the official MA system ?
-
there's no specified way to measure the suspension travel
The way to measure rear wheel travel is at the centre of the rear wheel axle in a straight line between the fully compressed and fully extended positions. To achieve an accurate measurement any bottom out bumpers should be removed , unless they are made of solid rubber which doesn't allow itself to be compressed.
Any other methods out there?
-
If you dont accept the rules that everyone does , just stay home, we don't need your bull shit at these meetings ,
Change the rules if you want, there are ways to do it ,if everyone agrees to have longer travel ,get off your arse and make it happen ,
So what are the rules that everyone accepts ?
No modified rear ends?
No more than 9" front and rear.Measured how?
No bigger than 38mm ? Or no bigger than 38.1mm?
Does original rear shock mounts mean no aftermarket swingarms for longer shocks?
How about some clarification from those who will be having the final say instead of leaving everyone confused and then making accusations of peoples bullshit?
TM Bill has asked and got nowhere.
How many repeated goes do you want?
-
there's no specified way to measure the suspension travel
Any other methods out there?
I mean you really should remove the springs to get the real suspension travel, trying to compress them on the day with 2 fat bastards pushing down on the bike is a travesty. Then you would check the vertical movement of the axle in relation to a fixed point I guess....... I think it has been mentioned but if you wanted to build real cheater at the moment you could create a bike with 12" of chain adjustment.
Its funny when these bikes were actually being raced they just tinkled your spokes, flipped your pegs and checked you had 10 cent pieces in your bar ends. Life was so much simpler then.
-
there's no specified way to measure the suspension travel
Any other methods out there?
Then you would check the vertical movement of the axle in relation to a fixed point I guess....... I think it has been mentioned but if you wanted to build real cheater at the moment you could create a bike with 12" of chain adjustment.
Except the start and finish points of travel are never vertical , since a swingarm travels further above horizontal than it hangs down when the shocks are uncompressed.
You measure the travel with the axle in the centre of adjustment but yer take your point there.
-
there's no specified way to measure the suspension travel
The way to measure rear wheel travel is at the centre of the rear wheel axle in a straight line between the fully compressed and fully extended positions. To achieve an accurate measurement any bottom out bumpers should be removed , unless they are made of solid rubber which doesn't allow itself to be compressed.
Any other methods out there?
To be very boring about it, there needs to be a specified load for the travel measurement.
A standard rubber bump stop will compress fairly easily to about half it's original length, then it gets radically stiffer. By the time it's down to around a third of its original length, it's damn near solid - and flexy old 1970s frames and swingarms will be giving more "travel" than the shock absorbers.
Foam rubber bumpstops typically give more useable travel relative to their free length (the exact amount varies considerably, depending on the design and material used) but are also typically longer...
Also, those old rubber mounted shock eyes will provide a noticeable amount of extra movement at the wheel, particularly with forward mounted shocks.
If you want to dismiss these factors as irrelevant, then I'll point out that they make about the same difference as the extra travel of a '77 Montesa, Husky, KTM, YZ, etc etc...
I'd also argue that if you're measuring travel, then it has to be measured with the chain adjusted to the same position that the bike will be/was raced in. The obvious cheat (if this shit made a difference, which it doesn't) would be to modify the swingarm to offer lots of adjustment, and actually run it a lot further back for racing.
Tea-storm-cup.
-
Do you honestly think no one will protest you over an extra 1” or even ½” of travel ???, think again. People will protest over the smallest things.
What about CZ rear sprockets, should have been riveted not bolted on …( that’s got to make you quicker by at least a minute a lap ) … protested.
Remember Conondale … handle bar rubber mounted triple clamp instead of solid ( there’s a good 30 second a lap advantage) … protested.
At this moment right now, people say they won’t protest you, ( but we know they will )… they don’t want to be petty, what’s an extra 1”, it doesn’t give that much advantage, but wait till race day and you beat someone who didn’t have that extra 1”.
They finished out of the points because you had 10” not 9”… protest, protest, protest … gimme that trophy.
Sorry, got carried away again.
If you don't want to be protested for having more travel than you should, or you're not worried about the rules, just ride around at the back of the pack.
No one would pay $70 to protest you out of 15th place....you hope.
-
Bullshit Al. Your bike sat higher than any other RM125C on the start line. The wrong top triple wasn't the source of the protest, it was just the easiest/clearest thing for you to be protested on - rather than going down the painful path of measuring the travel of your forks (PE175N or whatever they were).
The protest was successful and you did not appeal, so don't complain about it three years after the fact.
Edit: I had nothing to do with the protest. Your bike probably would have been ignored if not for the two RM-Cs at the same event...
-
:D :D :D :D pretty sure when we raced these bikes back in the day the guard seemd to be the bump stop,, or didn't you guys ride em??? 9 odd inches measured from full droop to guard!! pretty sure unless you have frictionless plastic the tyre rubbin on it will slow you down,, simple easy!!! any way it doesn't really matter how much travel one has if your fork /shox are modified!!! who checks the rules on that?? pretty sure if you put stock suspension on reed, stewart, voloputo etc bikes one of em would break there neck on the first lap,, n they run same length.. rule should read 9" or to manufacture's spec,,you supply data sheet sweet of ya go race son..
-
Except the start and finish points of travel are never vertical , since a swingarm travels further above horizontal than it hangs down when the shocks are uncompressed.
But shouldn't you measure the bike sitting in the air from the extended shock until the fully compressed shock, but seriously I am not sure a practical method has ever been devised that could be carried out in the pits before a race, it is very fanny by gas light.
Of course you can always force everyone to use the shitful original shocks and like TMman so rightfully noted the available suspension travel will be dramatically reduced. OR heres an idea....only allow cheap Chinese shocks comparable with the Japanese fly wire door closer ones of the period..... no Ohlins or external dampening adjustments.
-
easier to change the class to pre 77 and let the bikes in question run with evo ::),,
as far as I know accepted method for rear is to remove one shock and measure axle to fixed point on bike vertically above axle with rear wheel off ground then compress and measure distance between same 2 points
-
Is it the vertical movement of the axle, or do we include the extra distance of the arc?
European or African swallow?
-
Nathan,
you and I had to sit around while they sorted a protest that we weren't involved in ,
Just trying to help out here ;D
Personally I prefer African swallows
Noel
-
This has gone off track a little ::) but
My problem is that an official from Qld, Michael Bamford aka Jikov made a statement on this forum
"If you are thinking of entering on a Pre 78 bike that has more than 9 inch suspension ( for the Aus Nats at Qld Motopark) , make sure you bring a comfy chair , you won't be protested , because you won't be riding"
Then when asked to clarify the best he can do is add a sarcastic comment ::)
Personally i could spend 5k shipping bikes from NZ plus all the other cost to come to the nats , only to be tripped up buy some power mad officials formula dreamed up in his own head . There needs to be full disclosure and clarity pre event .
These pre 78 rules are ambigous at best, yet an official with a lot of experience starts waving his dick in the air but has fork all to back it up with when challenged ::)
I dont know if Michael has an official role at the nats or not ??? but going by his statement i can only assume he does .
This is not a personal witch hunt , but if you are going to be an official at events then act like one FFS . How can anybody take officials seriously when they spout off crap that when challenged they have no rebuttle .
This is a serious issue that Michael has raised , if he cant answer it can someone else please do so, then we are not left hanging till the event when the great formula is unleashed and all is revealed .
-
there's no specified way to measure the suspension travel
To be very boring about it, there needs to be a specified load for the travel measurement.
A standard rubber bump stop will compress fairly easily to about half it's original length, then it gets radically stiffer. By the time it's down to around a third of its original length, it's damn near solid - and flexy old 1970s frames and swingarms will be giving more "travel" than the shock absorbers.
Foam rubber bumpstops typically give more useable travel relative to their free length (the exact amount varies considerably, depending on the design and material used) but are also typically longer...
Thats bullshit , how can you assume a specified load ?Every rider will put their bike under different loads on the track and it is not allways that the fastest will inflict the greatest load. What is a standard rubber bump stop? Bump stops on fox airs and fox mono airs are 6mm and compress about 1 mm if you are lucky.Alonger bump stop on anarrower shaft might compres abit more.Fox twin clickers for single shock bikes are about 12mm thick ,have much more load at full compression than any nonlinkage bike and still dont compress to half their thickness.The foam bumpstops compress to about 2/3 to 1/2 ,anymore and they would be destroyed after one long moto.
(http://Also, those old rubber mounted shock eyes will provide a noticeable amount of extra movement at the wheel, particularly with forward mounted shocks.)
(http://Also, those old rubber mounted shock eyes will provide a noticeable amount of extra movement at the wheel, particularly with forward mounted shocks.)
If they have any noticable amount of movement they need to be replaced, you might as well count loose swingarm and rearwheel bearings free play as travel if you are going to count that.
-
as far as I know accepted method for rear is to remove one shock and measure axle to fixed point on bike vertically above axle with rear wheel off ground then compress and measure distance between same 2 points
I don't know Noel might work with the twin shocks in outer Pomgolia but taking the shock off a YZ will be a challenge. ;)
-
Thats bullshit , how can you assume a specified load ?Every rider will put their bike under different loads on the track and it is not allways that the fastest will inflict the greatest load. What is a standard rubber bump stop? Bump stops on fox airs and fox mono airs are 6mm and compress about 1 mm if you are lucky.Alonger bump stop on anarrower shaft might compres abit more.Fox twin clickers for single shock bikes are about 12mm thick ,have much more load at full compression than any nonlinkage bike and still dont compress to half their thickness.The foam bumpstops compress to about 2/3 to 1/2 ,anymore and they would be destroyed after one long moto.
(http://Also, those old rubber mounted shock eyes will provide a noticeable amount of extra movement at the wheel, particularly with forward mounted shocks.)
(http://Also, those old rubber mounted shock eyes will provide a noticeable amount of extra movement at the wheel, particularly with forward mounted shocks.)
If they have any noticable amount of movement they need to be replaced, you might as well count loose swingarm and rearwheel bearings free play as travel if you are going to count that.
Don't look now, but you're agreeing with the point I was making.
-
Hi Nathan S …
1: I never said you had any thing to do with the protest.
2: my bike sat higher as it has new firmer springs not the sacked out stockers.
3: an appeal would have cost $750 … way over priced.
4: the triple clamp was the source of protest as was the air caps. (that’s what it states on the paperwork)
5: My bike would have been ignored if I didn’t finish 3rd.
6: I’m not complaining three years later, I simply stating a fact, no matter whether the item is performance based (eg: motor/ suspension), visual appearance ( eg: wrong back ground/wrong font), big, small, whatever, people at a national event will protest.
I have yet to hear of any protests at local events.
This thread started off about trying to find out about Simon forks in pre 78, then sort of got miss directed to the titles, protests and measuring points.
"If you are thinking of entering on a Pre 78 bike that has more than 9 inch suspension ( for the Aus Nats at Qld Motopark) , make sure you bring a comfy chair , you won't be protested , because you won't be riding" end quote .
Simple, if you don’t like the rules, get together and have them changed, but if you like them, fine, run 9" or put those spacers in.
-
Is it true they are giving out protest vouchers as prizes this year ;D
-
So I have just read most of this thread because I am considering entering the pre '78 Nationals this year on my 77 YZ250 but if I'm reading right I can't in it's stock standard form? I actually have to limit the original suspension travel to 9 inches !!!
Is that right? Is there someone that can give me a definitive answer here? Someone I can call or that can check the bike before I go to anymore trouble and expense preparing it for the event?
I must be wrong .. that can't be right can it?
Yes the YZD had more than 9" in fact the list is shorter to find 77 models that didn't have 10'
I've got to say I'm fuggin shattered. I thought I would be able to ride my stock friggin standard (ooh except for my new dead sexy PFR pipe) 1977 YZ250D at this event and as it's only a couple of hours away I was really looking forward to it. It would have been my first (and maybe only??) Nationals but now it seems I shouldn't even bother showing up unless I bring a comfy farken chair!!!!
Oh hang on .. I can spend more money and limit the bikes standard, showroom travel to under 9 inches .... I wouldn't have a clue how many inches it has standard ..... and nobody can decide exactly how is that is measured??
FOR SALE YZ250D ... race ready stocker but only good enough to ride in the Evo class apparently .....
Signed
Disillusioned ::)
-
So I have just read most of this thread because I am considering entering the pre '78 Nationals this year on my 77 YZ250 but if I'm reading right I can't in it's stock standard form? I actually have to limit the original suspension travel to 9 inches !!!
Is that right? Is there someone that can give me a definitive answer here? Someone I can call or that can check the bike before I go to anymore trouble and expense preparing it for the event?
I must be wrong .. that can't be right can it?
Yes the YZD had more than 9" in fact the list is shorter to find 77 models that didn't have 10'
I've got to say I'm fuggin shattered. I thought I would be able to ride my stock friggin standard (ooh except for my new dead sexy PFR pipe) 1977 YZ250D at this event and as it's only a couple of hours away I was really looking forward to it. It would have been my first (and maybe only??) Nationals but now it seems I shouldn't even bother showing up unless I bring a comfy farken chair!!!!
Oh hang on .. I can spend more money and limit the bikes standard, showroom travel to under 9 inches .... I wouldn't have a clue how many inches it has standard ..... and nobody can decide exactly how is that is measured??
FOR SALE YZ250D ... race ready stocker but only good enough to ride in the Evo class apparently .....
Signed
Disillusioned ::)
As already mentioned ,measured by the sales brochure they are 250mm each end, just take out 21mm each way.Atleast you are lowering the bike evenly at both end.Try taking 10-20mm out of the forks and see how she goes down fast straights ::)
-
Don't look now, but you're agreeing with the point I was making.
[/quote]
Don't look now but I didnt agree with anything that you said.
To measure travel under a specified load is a waste of time. If you are setting up something new for rear suspension you need to install the shock minus the spring and bump stop to check clearance's at full travel , although its not so necessary with a rubber bump stop on non linkaged bikes as they don't compress that much.
To consider movement or addition travel from older style rubber bushes in shock eyelets is just stupid, they also hardly move .If they do they should be replaced as its uncontrolled(undampened )travel and will make your bike handle like shit similar to uncontrolled movement in loose wheel and arm bearings.
-
As already mentioned ,measured by the sales brochure they are 250mm each end, just take out 21mm each way.Atleast you are lowering the bike evenly at both end.Try taking 10-20mm out of the forks and see how she goes down fast straights ::)
Right .. thanks for clearing that up motormaniac. I honestly didn't know how much travel it had. I purchased the bike last year because I wanted a pre 78 bike that I could run in the pre 78 class .... I though that was what I had. Not a pre 78 bike that had to be modified to 76 standards to be eligible to run in pre 78. Lol, how stupid does that sound .. or am I the only one that finds that freakin ridicuous??
Easier to just not bother to be honest. Got plenty of other competing priorities and this sort of crap just takes the fun out of it for me. Couldn't be bothered with any such rubbish .. spent too many years (a long time ago now so I do have th erose coloured glasses firmly fitted) racing post classic road bikes to even bother going down that path. At least with road racing in post classic, classic, period 5 etc all you had to do is prove the technology was "of the day" and you were right to run it. Sometimes not as simple as I make that sound but you get the drift. Certainly if the bike was factory stock (as is my YZ) then you had absolutely no problems.
In fact one of the reasons I liked VMX is that there was, to my knowledge at the time, none of that sort of crap. But I guess all that shows is my ignorance and that I need to do more research. Nah I won't be bothered ... I've got Jikov's and Lucien's message loud and clear. Thanks.
-
Well the same crap rule has been there since the beginning. Nothing new here. Yet all this bitching on the forum and around the camp fires. If you don't like it, do something about it or suck it up. Yes it is a crap rule.
Dave Tanner told me how to measure the rear when I asked. Take one shock off and take the spring off the other. On the stand a fixed point at the rear of the bike to the centre of axle . Drop on the ground and re measure. Work out the difference. Its been a while but I'm pretty sure that is how it's done. I would also go from the rear of the swingarm and see what you come up with being the furthest point.
There was a Husky checked at scrutineering in Broadford .
There was also a yz250D at Conondale that ran 2nd in stock trim. No protest.
For me, if you turn up with a stock suspended bike they would/ should turn a blind eye. BUT! If you turn up with a bike that has been modified with later model parts or worse ( it happened at Conondale ) a thinly disguised later model bike then you SHOULD be jumped on.
-
Don't look now but I didnt agree with anything that you said.
To measure travel under a specified load is a waste of time. If you are setting up something new for rear suspension you need to install the shock minus the spring and bump stop to check clearance's at full travel , although its not so necessary with a rubber bump stop on non linkaged bikes as they don't compress that much.
To consider movement or addition travel from older style rubber bushes in shock eyelets is just stupid, thye alos hardly move .If they do they should be replaced as its uncontrlled(undampened )travel and will make your bike handle like shit similar to uncontrolled movement in loose wheel and arm bearings.
You're trying too hard to disagree, and you're missing the point.
Let's go with the old theory of taking a spring off and measuring the travel. Seems easy and will give a clear-cut answer, right?
What happens when the shock hits the bump-rubber as you compress the shock?
Do you stop trying to compress it and take the measurement then? If so, every cheating prick will fit 3" long "bump stops" made out of airfilter foam and score a stack of additional travel without breaking the rules...
Or do you stop when the bump rubber is fully compressed? How much load does it take to "fully compress" a bit of rubber? Just the weight of the bike? Or five big blokes?
What if the rider claims that the spring is what limits travel? Obviously it would be a bad set-up, but how do you prove whether a spring gets coil bound (particularly a fork spring)?
What about the forks with a top-out spring in them? Do you extend the forks to completely flatted the top-out spring and then completely compress them? (FWIW, that's how Yamaha measured the travel of the DT200R forks, even though you'd never access the extra ~20mm of travel from the top-out springs being fully compressed...).
My basic point is that without a published way to measure travel, scrutineers would be mad (and doomed to failure) if they tried to reject a bike for having less than an inch too much travel, particularly in the rear.
-
Well the same crap rule has been there since the beginning. Nothing new here. Yet all this bitching on the forum and around the camp fires. If you don't like it, do something about it or suck it up. Yes it is a crap rule.
Dave Tanner told me how to measure the rear when I asked. Take one shock off and take the spring off the other. On the stand a fixed point at the rear of the bike to the centre of axle . Drop on the ground and re measure. Work out the difference. Its been a while but I'm pretty sure that is how it's done. I would also go from the rear of the swingarm and see what you come up with being the furthest point.
There was a Husky checked at scrutineering in Broadford .
There was also a yz250D at Conondale that ran 2nd in stock trim. No protest.
For me, if you turn up with a stock suspended bike they would/ should turn a blind eye. BUT! If you turn up with a bike that has been modified with later model parts or worse ( it happened at Conondale ) a thinly disguised later model bike then you SHOULD be jumped on.
If that YZ250D you mention at the Conondale Nats was Muz from Darwin he would have flown through scrutineering. I spent quite a bit of time working out a simple way to limit that bike to 9" front and rear (and we kept the standard geometry) to make sure there was no way he could be disqualified. He didn't like the rule but it is there and he adhered to it.
There was no point in taking chance on this issue when the guy had travelled from Darwin. He should be there again this year
Just re-read this, I'm not having a go at you here Brad. Muz's bike does look stock.
My view is there are three choices here.
Build your bike to the rules
Follow due process and get the rules changed
Don't race
-
Well the same crap rule has been there since the beginning. Nothing new here.
Like I said .. my ignorance and shows the fact I should do more research before buying a certain bike .. self admission no need to be told again although until I read this thread today I was blissfully ignorant of the "issue. I am only recently new into VMX so I have much to learn I suspect. That's why I subscribe to forums like this and take interest in threads like this. It's all a learning curve to me .. sorry if I don't know the history behind everything but you've got to start somewhere eh?
If you don't like it, do something about it or suck it up.
So what can I do about it exactly?? Do you suggest I write a letter to MA?? Yeah right .... what would a letter from a nobody like me do .. that's right ... nothing ... because I don't matter.
Of course, as you suggest I could suck it up .... but what does that mean exactly?? Does it mean entering the event and hoping I get through scrutineering?? Or lowering my bike to suit their rule that sees a stock pre 78 bike excluded from the pre 78 class??
Hang on you forgot my 3rd option ... the option that I could also choose not to enter .... or is that just a part of sucking it up??
Yes it is a crap rule.
No argument here .. in fact I agree but how could this rule seriously still be standing? I mean what sort of people are making and enforcing these rules? Makes you wonder doesn't it.
Dave Tanner told me how to measure the rear when I asked. Take one shock off and take the spring off the other. On the stand a fixed point at the rear of the bike to the centre of axle . Drop on the ground and re measure. Work out the difference. Its been a while but I'm pretty sure that is how it's done. I would also go from the rear of the swingarm and see what you come up with being the furthest point.
I don't have the pleasure of knowing Dave Tanner. Is he someone that has the final word on this topic? I googled his name but had plenty of responses ranging from football coach to construction person. Sorry I'm taking the piss a bit but this is a genuine question, is he someone that we should all be listening to on this topic?
But thanks, finally something in your post that might be helpful although I'm not sure which shock I should take off my YZ ... oops there I go taking the piss again :)
There was a Husky checked at scrutineering in Broadford .
Okay ??
There was also a yz250D at Conondale that ran 2nd in stock trim. No protest.
Now that's interesting. Was there no problem because it is a genuine pre 78 bike (as is mine .. no later model bits bolted onto it ... or into it) or just common sense on the day? I genuinely ask because that may matter if I go to the trouble of entering, travelling etc etc and then get told I should have brought a comfy chair with me.
Or should I lash out on a second set of suspension that has been lowered (modified from standard .. lol .. the irony is killing me) to suit??
For me, if you turn up with a stock suspended bike they would/ should turn a blind eye. BUT! If you turn up with a bike that has been modified with later model parts or worse ( it happened at Conondale ) a thinly disguised later model bike then you SHOULD be jumped on.
Ab\solutely agree 090 ... but that sounds waaaay too much like common sense .. and if it genuinely prevailed I suspect this thread would not have gone on for so long. In fact I would not have bothered commenting in this thread (aside from my earlier crack about size not mattering) except I then read that an official by the name of Jikov (no idea who he/she is) has commented so strongly about rule enforcement that I suspect common sense is not going to apply in this event. Am I alone in that thinking ... judging by some of the other comments probably not.
Maybe I'm wrong .. not the first time and won't be the last for that.
But back to agreeing with you for a moment ... a thinly (or not so thinly) disguised later model bike should definately be excluded .. no question. Why? Because that is against the rules ... isn't it? Although the same rules seem to also exclude legitimate factory pre 78 bikes .... oh dear .. now I'm all confused again.
-
If that YZ250D you mention at the Conondale Nats was Muz from Darwin he would have flown through scrutineering. I spent quite a bit of time working out a simple way to limit that bike to 9" front and rear (and we kept the standard geometry) to make sure there was no way he could be disqualified. He didn't like the rule but it is there and he adhered to it.
There was no point in taking chance on this issue when the guy had travelled from Darwin. He should be there again this year
So Brent .. how much to make my YZ legal because I have NFI how to do it. Stoopid me .. I thought I purchased a legal pre 78 bike.
Seriously though would you do that .. for a fee of course?
-
Nice one Brent. I was under the impression and i was told it was stock. Good on him for having the right attitude towards it. I personally would have no problem if it was actually stock. Someone that has a bike like this will surely sort the rule out eventually. Simo, I wasn't specifically talking to you. This has been around lots of times before and I am talking more to the people that know all this already. Like you , I had started off blissfully unaware and had nearly stuffed up due to just not knowing the rules. The Husky point was for Nathan S as he was talking about people getting pulled up at scrutineering or lack of. I need to get back on a pc as it is a bit harder to post from an iPhone and am leaving too much out! Certainly nothing personal mate.
-
Let's go with the old theory of taking a spring off and measuring the travel. Seems easy and will give a clear-cut answer, right?
What happens when the shock hits the bump-rubber as you compress the shock?
Do you stop trying to compress it and take the measurement then? If so, every cheating prick will fit 3" long "bump stops" made out of airfilter foam and score a stack of additional travel without breaking the rules...
Or do you stop when the bump rubber is fully compressed? How much load does it take to "fully compress" a bit of rubber? Just the weight of the bike? Or five big blokes?
What if the rider claims that the spring is what limits travel? Obviously it would be a bad set-up, but how do you prove whether a spring gets coil bound (particularly a fork spring)?
What about the forks with a top-out spring in them? Do you extend the forks to completely flatted the top-out spring and then completely compress them? (FWIW, that's how Yamaha measured the travel of the DT200R forks, even though you'd never access the extra ~20mm of travel from the top-out springs being fully compressed..
You'll figure it out.
FWIW thats how 77/78/79 YZ forks are measured and also conventional Simons which happen to have the longest top out spring imaginable
-
Geez you blokes, have a rest, ol' TMBill is trying to sleep and is having nightmares about Bamford's statement, he's rang me twice today (Taupo Towie Time)....poor buggers ready to bungy jump off the cliff ( and he's shit scared of heights after clipping that pine tree at Wanganui last year on the KX).....theres a pretty easy answer to this question....if you get caught speeding in your car doing 70 in a 50 zone, you get a ticket...no if's, no buts, even though your car will do 70...rules are rules wether you like it or not, pre 78 is the same....9 inches front and rear...simple....now I think I'll go for a spin in my Ferrari. ;D
-
Well the same crap rule has been there since the beginning. Nothing new here.
Like I said .. my ignorance and shows the fact I should do more research before buying a certain bike .. self admission no need to be told again although until I read this thread today I was blissfully ignorant of the "issue. I am only recently new into VMX so I have much to learn I suspect. That's why I subscribe to forums like this and take interest in threads like this. It's all a learning curve to me .. sorry if I don't know the history behind everything but you've got to start somewhere eh? Okay a bit easier now on a pc. Like I just said. This statement is for the guys that have known it for ages, not yourself.
If you don't like it, do something about it or suck it up.
So what can I do about it exactly?? Do you suggest I write a letter to MA?? Yeah right .... what would a letter from a nobody like me do .. that's right ... nothing ... because I don't matter. This is for anyone that complains about the rule time and time again. Complaining on here just won't get it sorted.
Of course, as you suggest I could suck it up .... but what does that mean exactly?? Does it mean entering the event and hoping I get through scrutineering?? Or lowering my bike to suit their rule that sees a stock pre 78 bike excluded from the pre 78 class?? I reckon suck it up, limit the suspension and have a go.
Hang on you forgot my 3rd option ... the option that I could also choose not to enter .... or is that just a part of sucking it up??
Yes it is a crap rule.
No argument here .. in fact I agree but how could this rule seriously still be standing? I mean what sort of people are making and enforcing these rules? Makes you wonder doesn't it.
Dave Tanner told me how to measure the rear when I asked. Take one shock off and take the spring off the other. On the stand a fixed point at the rear of the bike to the centre of axle . Drop on the ground and re measure. Work out the difference. Its been a while but I'm pretty sure that is how it's done. I would also go from the rear of the swingarm and see what you come up with being the furthest point.
I don't have the pleasure of knowing Dave Tanner. Is he someone that has the final word on this topic? I googled his name but had plenty of responses ranging from football coach to construction person. Sorry I'm taking the piss a bit but this is a genuine question, is he someone that we should all be listening to on this topic? Again sorry, this was more for TMBill asking how to measure his bike.
But thanks, finally something in your post that might be helpful although I'm not sure which shock I should take off my YZ ... oops there I go taking the piss again :)
There was a Husky checked at scrutineering in Broadford .
For Nathan S
Okay ??
There was also a yz250D at Conondale that ran 2nd in stock trim. No protest.
As Brent pointed out, I was talking through my arse!
Now that's interesting. Was there no problem because it is a genuine pre 78 bike (as is mine .. no later model bits bolted onto it ... or into it) or just common sense on the day? I genuinely ask because that may matter if I go to the trouble of entering, travelling etc etc and then get told I should have brought a comfy chair with me.
Or should I lash out on a second set of suspension that has been lowered (modified from standard .. lol .. the irony is killing me) to suit??
For me, if you turn up with a stock suspended bike they would/ should turn a blind eye. BUT! If you turn up with a bike that has been modified with later model parts or worse ( it happened at Conondale ) a thinly disguised later model bike then you SHOULD be jumped on.
Ab\solutely agree 090 ... but that sounds waaaay too much like common sense .. and if it genuinely prevailed I suspect this thread would not have gone on for so long. In fact I would not have bothered commenting in this thread (aside from my earlier crack about size not mattering) except I then read that an official by the name of Jikov (no idea who he/she is) has commented so strongly about rule enforcement that I suspect common sense is not going to apply in this event. Am I alone in that thinking ... judging by some of the other comments probably not.
Maybe I'm wrong .. not the first time and won't be the last for that.
But back to agreeing with you for a moment ... a thinly (or not so thinly) disguised later model bike should definately be excluded .. no question. Why? Because that is against the rules ... isn't it? Although the same rules seem to also exclude legitimate factory pre 78 bikes .... oh dear .. now I'm all confused again.
So much crap goes on in here which amounts to so little in the real world of vmx. I have learn't that a long time ago.
-
Simo, I wasn't specifically talking to you. This has been around lots of times before and I am talking more to the people that know all this already. Like you , I had started off blissfully unaware and had nearly stuffed up due to just not knowing the rules. The Husky point was for Nathan S as he was talking about people getting pulled up at scrutineering or lack of. I need to get back on a pc as it is a bit harder to post from an iPhone and am leaving too much out! Certainly nothing personal mate.
No worries Brad, no offence taken (It was nice to meet you at Nudgee/Northgate a couple of weeks back by the way). I don't want this to be a personal issue. I just want to ride my bike and enjoy it and the company of the like minded people around me. Sounds simple and it should be simple.
I know this thread has gone rather off topic (and I apologise to the original poster for my part in that) but is there something that a group of us could do about this? Would a group action be possible .. sort of like a petition sort of thing? Some have already mentioned doing something about it and whilst I suspect it's all too late now, is there something we could do about it?
Could we petition MA or the appropriate governing body to allow legitimate stock pre 78 bikes? Or am I over simplifying it?
-
So Brent .. how much to make my YZ legal because I have NFI how to do it. Stoopid me .. I thought I purchased a legal pre 78 bike.
Yeah mate WTF were you thinking that your pre 78 bike would be legal in pre 78 .... but its a technology class based around our efforts to reduce suspension travel prior to 78. ::) .... I think the people who dream this shit up need to do a little more research before imposing their will on the masses .... maybe they should pull up a comfy chair ;). BTW anyone who is throwing their Simons in the pre 78 bin at 38.1mm just send em to kiwi land and we will take care of em.
-
Thats pretty good for someone who doesnt race mArc ???....where you come from they race 78 Maico 400's in pre 75....what the?
-
Simo, I'll try and find the notes I made when I did Muz's bike. It may be on an old computer downstairs.
A couple of Nylon spacers under the damper rod heads and I think we replaced the top out springs with shorter ones. he runs fork springs of about 24lb/in and I think it was Motomaniac that mentioned the travel had to be reduced by 21mm, that rings a bell.
Due to the difference in travel between the rear axle and shock I think we put a 14mm thick clamp on the shock shaft under the bump stop.
I don't have the time to make the parts for you but I'll pass on the info, hopefully by the weekend.
And we did measure the rear travel with the axle as far back as possible.
-
Simo, I'll try and find the notes I made when I did Muz's bike. It may be on an old computer downstairs.
A couple of Nylon spacers under the damper rod heads and I think we replaced the top out springs with shorter ones. he runs fork springs of about 24lb/in and I think it was Motomaniac that mentioned the travel had to be reduced by 21mm, that rings a bell.
Due to the difference in travel between the rear axle and shock I think we put a 14mm thick clamp on the shock shaft under the bump stop.
I don't have the time to make the parts for you but I'll pass on the info, hopefully by the weekend.
And we did measure the rear travel with the axle as far back as possible.
Thanks Brent, that sort of assistance would be greatly and sincerely appreciated. If it's not too hard then maybe even this old fool can do it (although the irony is still niggling me a bit but I'll build a bridge .. one day soon I promise ) :D
-
Thats pretty good for someone who doesnt race mArc ???....
Doesn't mean I havn't raced and don't intend to when I am back in the world .... not everyone races every season of their life times ....and not everyone checks out their mates gear at the urinal but I heard you have done it on a few occasions. :D :-*
-
You'll figure it out.
FWIW thats how 77/78/79 YZ forks are measured and also conventional Simons which happen to have the longest top out spring imaginable
Right, so how much 'real' travel do they have? Gotta be less than 9", right?
How many pages ago did I say that it was all a non-event?
-
Why do people love to play the devil's advocate so much with this stuff.
Jikov is so easy to point out sort comings but can you offer solution other than turning away half the potential entries with bring a chair type statements.
Can someone like Col Metcher jump into here.
-
Jikov is so easy to point out sort comings but can you offer solution other than turning away half the potential entries with bring a chair type statements.
Jikov was just beating his chest and probably regrets being confrontational.....or not
-
Why do people love to play the devil's advocate so much with this stuff.
Jikov is so easy to point out sort comings but can you offer solution other than turning away half the potential entries with bring a chair type statements.
Can someone like Col Metcher jump into here.
Cmo'n Michael , Jikov or Mr MA scrutineer whatever hat you have on today give these people some answers , You stirred all this up If your post was well intentioned then say so, all we have had as a response is sarcasm ::)
Brad 090 I totally agree that before every major event there is a mountain of shit that goes no where on this forum ::) But when the shit stirring is started by an official then confidence is quickly lost .
-
Now you've upset TMBill even more, he has now sent the "Asasin" over to clean up the mess...the asasin, AKA the buzzard, AKA the bomb thrower, AKA the Kati kati cooper killer has left the building and will arrive in Brisbane toomoroow, this bloke makes Sacha Baron Cohen look like an ammature.....you wont know what he looks like, Jikov had better start running. ;D
-
I think I liked it better when you guys talked politics ::)
-
Now you've upset TMBill even more
Wait until he finds out he can't wear his spoofy helmet ;D Anyway looks like everyone is going to have a great relaxing day and I am only sorry I will not be there to attend..... 59 days to go
-
Hi,
Remember back in the old days when Pre 75 VMX started , we had the same "discussions" about 4 inch rear suspension , the Mag Huskies , 74.5 Maicos , Yam YZB's were all complaining about having to restrict their (Standard Factory)suspension travel,
those who wouldn't comply went elsewhere, the others sucked it up and played by the rules and went on to enjoy their racing ,
I think there is a message there for all of us ,
cheers
-
Hi
Sorry , I have changed my "sign in", so that people will know me off and on the track .
ps;
There is a MAQ Clerk of the Course/Stewards course 14 April, and Scrutineers course on 28 April, vacancies still open, (for those who care enough to make a difference in our sport).
Imagine this! Michael Bamford Level 4, Steward/Clerk of the Course ,Level 4 Scrutineer, doesn't that just bring a big smile to your face , I wonder how I can become a Historic/Classic Eligibility Commissioner?.
cheers
-
Imagine this! Michael Bamford Level 4, Steward/Clerk of the Course ,Level 4 Scrutineer, doesn't that just bring a big smile to your face , I wonder how I can become a Historic/Classic Eligibility Commissioner?.
cheers
Edited: I don't know you from a bar of soap Michael Bamford but you really do sound like a power hungry person to me. You may well be a very nice person but based on what I've read of your posts, that's how you come across to a perfect stranger.
More power to you .. I hope you use it for good and not evil ;)
-
Michael thanks for responding
But are you going to answer the questions raised by your earlier comment
Regards Bill.
-
As I said earlier in the thread, I have no problem with obeying the rules if you want to race in the class. I just do not understand the rationale behind them. A 1974 Husky Mag 250 is undoubtedly Pre-75, but the rider is put to the disadvantage - having one of the best bikes in the class - of having to limit its travel. Perhaps call it the "Pre-75-with-73-suspension-class"? I repeat that I understand that the rule exists and must be observed; I do not understand WHY it exists.
Cheers, Richard in NZ
-
Hi
Sorry , I have changed my "sign in", so that people will know me off and on the track .
ps;
There is a MAQ Clerk of the Course/Stewards course 14 April, and Scrutineers course on 28 April, vacancies still open, (for those who care enough to make a difference in our sport).
Imagine this! Michael Bamford Level 4, Steward/Clerk of the Course ,Level 4 Scrutineer, doesn't that just bring a big smile to your face , I wonder how I can become a Historic/Classic Eligibility Commissioner?.
cheers
So out of the 20 odd pre 75 model just 3 needed to be modified (personally I don't think they should)
Out of the 20 odd pre 77 models probably only 3 dont need to modified to fit the rules
That is the difference.
-
Imagine this! Michael Bamford Level 4, Steward/Clerk of the Course ,Level 4 Scrutineer, doesn't that just bring a big smile to your face , I wonder how I can become a Historic/Classic Eligibility Commissioner?.
cheers
Whats a level 4 scrutineer, does that mean you bring your own screwdriver?
-
Imagine this! Michael Bamford Level 4, Steward/Clerk of the Course ,Level 4 Scrutineer, doesn't that just bring a big smile to your face , I wonder how I can become a Historic/Classic Eligibility Commissioner?.
cheers
Whats a level 4 scrutineer, does that mean you bring your own screwdriver?
na just a better chest beater it seems.
Still no forking answers , have fun up there people.
-
So out of the 20 odd pre 75 model just 3 needed to be modified (personally I don't think they should)
Out of the 20 odd pre 77 models probably only 3 dont need to modified to fit the rules
That is the difference.
Aye.
So what stock 1977 model MX bikes are legal under the 9/9" rule?
YZ125D
CR125M3
RM250/370B
What else?
The bigger YZs and RM125B are apparently out, all of the bigger Euro stuff is out... Really comes down to the Euro 125s?
-
most 75 and 76 models except the bigger Bultaco forks (I think) ,
77 model rm250's 370's ,77 cr125/250's, CZ's,stock TT500's. ....
-
Alevel 4 scrutineer maRc means if you show up with your abomination of a swingarm of the gods....he is allowed to cut it in half!!!
-
Simo, I'll try and find the notes I made when I did Muz's bike. It may be on an old computer downstairs.
A couple of Nylon spacers under the damper rod heads and I think we replaced the top out springs with shorter ones. he runs fork springs of about 24lb/in and I think it was Motomaniac that mentioned the travel had to be reduced by 21mm, that rings a bell.
Due to the difference in travel between the rear axle and shock I think we put a 14mm thick clamp on the shock shaft under the bump stop.
I don't have the time to make the parts for you but I'll pass on the info, hopefully by the weekend.
And we did measure the rear travel with the axle as far back as possible.
So you lowered the front by 21mm but left the back as it was and, restricted the back wheel movement at the end of the travel by shortening the shaft travel externally...
How did that go? :o
-
suzuki rm250 370 had 8.25" according to dirt track u/s in the day so i might have to strech mine out to make it!! wank wank!! if bamford "69" HOW ORIGINAL has been down this road apparently then he should have the ideal solution?? after all were your words not become a scrutineer/clerk n make a difference!! cross up swing arm's are legal if dg etc are!! i'm goin to run a factory optional ally arm complete with original short brake stay!! hopefully this won't end up with me getting banned from another sport..
-
davey will watch news tonight to see how the Kati Kati Killer/Bomber behaves in Brisvegas
-
Simo, I'll try and find the notes I made when I did Muz's bike. It may be on an old computer downstairs.
A couple of Nylon spacers under the damper rod heads and I think we replaced the top out springs with shorter ones. he runs fork springs of about 24lb/in and I think it was Motomaniac that mentioned the travel had to be reduced by 21mm, that rings a bell.
Due to the difference in travel between the rear axle and shock I think we put a 14mm thick clamp on the shock shaft under the bump stop.
I don't have the time to make the parts for you but I'll pass on the info, hopefully by the weekend.
And we did measure the rear travel with the axle as far back as possible.
So you lowered the front by 21mm but left the back as it was and, restricted the back wheel movement at the end of the travel by shortening the shaft travel externally...
How did that go? :o
Restricting the back at the end of the stroke kept the back at the same height when extended. Muz had his fork tubes above the top triple clamp so we slid the forks down by the amount the travel was reduced.
As I said in my first post we kept the standard geometry.
How did it go? He ran second to (I believe) “Johnny O” twice and beat him once for second overall at the Nationals at Conondale.
He’s ridden the bike with the standard 9.8” and the reduced 9” of travel and said he really can’t tell the difference.
-
Alevel 4 scrutineer maRc means if you show up with your abomination of a swingarm of the gods....he is allowed to cut it in half!!!
Mate you almost have to cut it in half yourself to fit shock absorbers to it, adequate spring clearance was not part of the design brief.
But it is true running a tricky alloy arm opens up a whole new bunch of opportunities to get scruted.
-
Lets get out the rule book in the understanding that the 2012 rule book applies to this years nationals. The overiding consideration is to make your bike fit the rules not try and manipulate the rules to fit because you dont agree.
Its the crap like this that keeps me off this forum
If you have a specific question send me a PM and I will be glad to help.
Shane Fraser is the Eligibilty guy at the nats - its his gig, everyone else is an assistant to his decision making.
211
-
Since we've determine that this portion of the original rule was probably taken from an AHRMA rulebook, a similar method of measuring rear travel may have also been copied. Here is AHRMA's method:
The field check for rear wheel travel, where applicable, is as follows: 1) Both shocks are removed from the bike, then one bare (without spring) damper unit is reinstalled. 2) The machine is supported in such a fashion that the rear suspension is at maximum extension, and a measurement is taken from the center of the rear axle to a point marked directly above the axle on the rear fender or subframe. 3) With both wheels on the ground, the rear suspension is fully compressed by the examiner with the rider aboard to compress any rubber bumpers; a measurement is again taken from the center of the rear axle to the same marked point above. 4) The measurement obtained in step 3 subtracted from the measurement in step 2 is the wheel travel.
I'm setting up an AHRMA Historic bike for the 2012 season and I'm going through the process of getting the forks to the 9 inch limit and putting a spacer in the rear shock. It is a '77 bike and came from the factory with more than 9 inches of travel on both ends. I'm taking it as a challenge to see just what it takes to be in compliance. I raced an RM125B for two seasons with stock forks and Works Performance shocks, that were the stock length and never thought I could have been protested, but maybe I just got lucky. Rules are rules, but I don't think 20-25mm of travel would be what beat someone you on the track. Quality of travel is a bigger deal. I would take the latest Ohlins piggybacks with 8.5 inches of travel over rebuilt shocks from the era with 10 inches.
Restoring and racing these great old machines is much more fun than arguing over 25mm or dealing with jerky comments. I'm going to be 51 yo soon. My father past away when he was 52. That fact and the posts here about Magoo make me realize how trivial some of this stuff is. Get your bikes into compliance and then together figure out how to change a bad rule.
Life is short, have fun!
-
That method assumes the spring would not go coil bound before the full stroke is taken up.
-
Since we've determine that this portion of the original rule was probably taken from an AHRMA rulebook, a similar method of measuring rear travel may have also been copied. Here is AHRMA's method:
The field check for rear wheel travel, where applicable, is as follows: 1) Both shocks are removed from the bike, then one bare (without spring) damper unit is reinstalled. 2) The machine is supported in such a fashion that the rear suspension is at maximum extension, and a measurement is taken from the center of the rear axle to a point marked directly above the axle on the rear fender or subframe. 3) With both wheels on the ground, the rear suspension is fully compressed by the examiner with the rider aboard to compress any rubber bumpers; a measurement is again taken from the center of the rear axle to the same marked point above. 4) The measurement obtained in step 3 subtracted from the measurement in step 2 is the wheel travel.
I'm setting up an AHRMA Historic bike for the 2012 season and I'm going through the process of getting the forks to the 9 inch limit and putting a spacer in the rear shock. It is a '77 bike and came from the factory with more than 9 inches of travel on both ends. I'm taking it as a challenge to see just what it takes to be in compliance. I raced an RM125B for two seasons with stock forks and Works Performance shocks, that were the stock length and never thought I could have been protested, but maybe I just got lucky. Rules are rules, but I don't think 20-25mm of travel would be what beat someone you on the track. Quality of travel is a bigger deal. I would take the latest Ohlins piggybacks with 8.5 inches of travel over rebuilt shocks from the era with 10 inches.
Restoring and racing these great old machines is much more fun than arguing over 25mm or dealing with jerky comments. I'm going to be 51 yo soon. My father past away when he was 52. That fact and the posts here about Magoo make me realize how trivial some of this stuff is. Get your bikes into compliance and then together figure out how to change a bad rule.
Life is short, have fun!
Red i think all people want to do is comply ;) but how can you comply when no body in officialdom will tell you how travel will be measured ::) Thankyou for your AHRMA system description but what the potential competitors at the Aussie Nats would like to know is what is the official MA measuring system ?
It was an MA scrutineer who made the big statement, but the best he can come up with is sacasm and a forum name change ::)
Yet he wont come forward and explain the official measuring system ::) is it really that difficult ???
-
Lozza,
The whole mess is imperfect. I was just trying to give the probable method for those that were waiting for something from the higher ups.
Someone has to decide if it is a "Spec Class" or an "Era Class". If you could look down the start line in September 1977 (or whichever month was prior to the 78 models being in dealer showrooms) and see the bike you are inspecting, then it should probably be in the Pre-78 class. If you want to limit bikes to 229mm travel, then it should be called the "229 Class" and 78-79 bike owners, who are willing to limit their travel, can run the class if they choose.
The rules are what they are right now and if I were going to a great expense to travel to a National I would have my bike in compliance. I would also piss and moan to anyone who would listen in order to try and get the rules changed for the following season. Give the under 178mm bikes their own class and a bike with just less than 255mm doesn't look so much like a Cheater Bike.
:)
-
That method assumes the spring would not go coil bound before the full stroke is taken up.
I guess if you coil bind then that is the natural limit of travel, but the bare dampener unit would be the starting point. I assume without having a copy that the MA provides some such procedure. I mean finally as a rider you also have some rights to the correct information and guidelines from the MA....they are quick enough to take a bite out of your entry fees. You pay them to provide a service which includes adequate information before you turn up.
-
That method assumes the spring would not go coil bound before the full stroke is taken up.
99% of off road shocks built by the manufacturer won't coil bind. Shock suppliers i've dealt with always make sure the spring has more 'travel' than the shock absorber.
-
That method assumes the spring would not go coil bound before the full stroke is taken up.
99% of off road shocks built by the manufacturer won't coil bind. Shock suppliers i've dealt with always make sure the spring has more 'travel' than the shock absorber.
That right , probably more than 99%.If anyone is riding with springs that coil bind best of you fix that unless you have a death wish
-
Then all you need to do is measure by the AHRMA method. That method is simple enough to do.
-
Then all you need to do is measure by the AHRMA method. That method is simple enough to do.
But is it the accepted MA way ;)
-
Then all you need to do is measure by the AHRMA method. That method is simple enough to do.
But is it the accepted MA way ;)
yes. Dave Tanner told me the same.
-
Then all you need to do is measure by the AHRMA method. That method is simple enough to do.
But is it the accepted MA way ;)
yes. Dave Tanner told me the same.
Thanks Brad, finally something to work with. I have gathered from reading the other posts on this topic that Dave Tanner is someone that is in authority on this so will now make the necessary changes to my YZ250D to make sure that I can't be "pinged" in scrutineering by any chest beating, power tripping scrutineer. And I say that with all due respect to the many perfectly fine scrutineers that I have had the pleasure of dealing with over the years.
-
Wow i saw this post on page one and now passing through again its on like 15....
Any event i scrutineer at i use one rule if it looks right it is, if i think it dont look right then it probally isnt. So i will grab the front or the rear and pull the crap out of it till it get full " useable" travel if its less than 9 or 4 or what ever the class it is in - then its ok, you shouldnt have to diassemble a bike to find out travel numbers. Unless your in the TOP 5.
Travel should relate to what you can Actually use out on the track. not what when diassembled is theoretical. And i would suggest 99% of scrutineers would do the same thing to apply this RULE. If there is a method in the 2012 rule book that specifies the way it is measured then use it, if not then refer above.
And yes im a level 4 and if i am asked to assist at the 75 nationals with safety checks or whatever that is the method i would be using. The cheif scutineer has the final say and no doubt would probally use the above methods, at sign in. or UNLESS you are protested in the Top 3 and then employ there measuring method. PM Dave tanner for the approved method employed by him if he is the cheif Scutineer for the nats you attending, or whoever is published as such at the event you entering.
-
yes. Dave Tanner told me the same.
If it ain't published, it's not MA's method.
;)
-
Travel should relate to what you can Actually use out on the track. not what when diassembled is theoretical. And i would suggest 99% of scrutineers would do the same thing to apply this RULE.
Yep but you always get that 1% that won't. The method of measuring should be clearly posted, a sticky on the forum even, so that people can make sure they are in the right and avoid an ugly confrontation, or the costs associated with being rejected on the day.
-
yes. Dave Tanner told me the same.
If it ain't published, it's not MA's method.
;)
Hallleluyah ma brother ;D
-
Travel should relate to what you can Actually use out on the track. not what when diassembled is theoretical. And i would suggest 99% of scrutineers would do the same thing to apply this RULE.
Yep but you always get that 1% that won't. The method of measuring should be clearly posted, a sticky on the forum even, so that people can make sure they are in the right and avoid an ugly confrontation, or the costs associated with being rejected on the day.
Exactly ;) and why would those in positions of power share the word ::)
Like all walks of life dissapointing as it is there will always be those who get a kick out of holding that bit of power ( no matter how small ) over others ::)
-
Simo, I'll try and find the notes I made when I did Muz's bike. It may be on an old computer downstairs.
A couple of Nylon spacers under the damper rod heads and I think we replaced the top out springs with shorter ones. he runs fork springs of about 24lb/in and I think it was Motomaniac that mentioned the travel had to be reduced by 21mm, that rings a bell.
Due to the difference in travel between the rear axle and shock I think we put a 14mm thick clamp on the shock shaft under the bump stop.
I don't have the time to make the parts for you but I'll pass on the info, hopefully by the weekend.
And we did measure the rear travel with the axle as far back as possible.
Hi Brent. I just wanted to say a big thank you for sending me that information via email. I will review what you have suggested and see if I can ensure my 250D makes the 9 inch cut. I wouldn't want to leave myself open to that 1% of scrutineers that thrive on POWER ::) so I will make the necessary changes so I don't feel like a dirty cheatin' bastard ;)
-
for your daily insight into human social interaction google stanforn prison experiment!!!! they even made a movie of it.. and it has been done in every country with the same results.. there's always 1% out there!!!
-
Wow i saw this post on page one and now passing through again its on like 15....
Travel should relate to what you can Actually use out on the track.
Great! When I finish my Steve Wise replica pre 78 bike and I get queried I'll just come back with a - yer but can't prove that I used all that travel "
-
Great! When I finish my Steve Wise replica pre 78 bike and I get queried I'll just come back with a - yer but can't prove that I used all that travel "
Are you seriously building one Brent? I've just bought a Mugen kit from the UK and now have all the bits to build a replica of his '77 CR125..
-
I am honoured, Slakey actually invited me to jump on to his thread. Maybe it's in the vain hope that when you become a Supersenior you automatically gain wisdom [WRONG]
I have no official capacity and am just the guy trying to pull an event together to give everyone a good time and fair racing.The instrument that determines what is fair for this meeting is the 2012 Manual. The person charged with initial interpretation and adjudication is the Eligibility Scrutineer for the meeting.Advice on interpretation on these rules can be sought from the Classic MX Commissioners.
So, to avoid hassles for yourself and others on the day ensure your bikes comply.
If your Pre78 suspension exceeds the rule and you don't want to change it I'm sure they would love to see you in the Evolution class at the Post Classic Nats.
Personal attacks on this forum are most unhelpfull, and in some instances libellous.
My observation is, yes we have experienced over pedantic scrutineers at times, but in the vast majority of cases the dramas are caused by entrants trying it on.They get caught out then rant and rave about the scrutineer or "the stupid rule"
Don't like the rule? Change it through the proper channels
-
I am honoured, Slakey actually invited me to jump on to his thread. Maybe it's in the vain hope that when you become a Supersenior you automatically gain wisdom [WRONG]
I have no official capacity and am just the guy trying to pull an event together to give everyone a good time and fair racing.The instrument that determines what is fair for this meeting is the 2012 Manual. The person charged with initial interpretation and adjudication is the Eligibility Scrutineer for the meeting.Advice on interpretation on these rules can be sought from the Classic MX Commissioners.
So, to avoid hassles for yourself and others on the day ensure your bikes comply.If your Pre78 suspension exceeds the rule and you don't want to change it I'm sure they would love to see you in the Evolution class at the Post Classic Nats.
Personal attacks on this forum are most unhelpfull, and in some instances libellous.
My observation is, yes we have experienced over pedantic scrutineers at times, but in the vast majority of cases the dramas are caused by entrants trying it on.They get caught out then rant and rave about the scrutineer or "the stupid rule"
Don't like the rule? Change it through the proper channels
Col i do believe with age comes wisdom , in most cases :) and im sure your Nats will be a huge sucsess ;D
All we want to do is comply , but NOBODY IN OFFICIAlDOM will say how the suspension is measured ::) We have had advise on how the AHRMA system works but no OFFICIAL word on how the MA system works .
WHY is it such a big secret ??? or is it because there is no official system and if not why not ???
Remember it was Mr bigshot official who started this debate ;) Call it personall attacks libell or what you will , but if your gonna take an official role then come out with big arsed statements , then be professional enough to provide answers when questioned or retract your statement .
How can any competitor at any event have confidence in the officials when they behave in this manner ???
Ole mate would do well to remember that it is better to say nothing and let people think you are an Idiot , than open your mouth and prove them right ;)
Col you will run a kick arse event and i believe the spilt nats you worked hard for are the best thing that has happened to the sport in a long time . It would be nice to go into the new era with no old baggage , but this sort of thing wont help .
Please dont confuse whats being asked with blatent rule breaking or even those who want to push the boundries, i have no time for that . But the reality is that for sure on the competitor side there will be that element and on the official side there will always be one or two over zealous officials with their own agendas .
All we are asking for is Clarity
Can anybody in officialdom please explain how suspension travel is measured the official MA way ???
Regards Bill.
-
I'll agree with most of what TM Bill has said above and I think some things have been posted in this thread that maybe , given a few moments to consider them, shouldn't have been.
From my perspective I wasn't even aware my standard YZ250D didn't comply with the rules in relation to suspension travel. And to be honest, I never bothered to look into it because I naively thought I had a pre 78 compliant bike.
I only bought into this discussion when, through this thread thankfully, I became aware that I might have an issue at the pre 78 nationals if I presented my stock bike. I have never been one to push any technical boundaries (read: cheat) for any reason particularly not to gain an advantage over a fellow rider or riders and will endeavour to present my bike to scrutineering in a manner that it will comply.
I will admit to being somewhat annoyed that I have to spend time (and maybe money) to do that because I previously believed I didn't have an issue with meeting the GCR's or whatever they are called these days (people keep refering to MOMs??). But that is only because I thought my bike was already compliant. Now I know it's not I will remedy that.
Like I said, from my perspective there would never be an intention to cheat or present a bike that won't pass scrutineering either on a condition or technical viewpoint. I don't, for a second, believe that I'm a good enough rider to be able to exploit the YZ's characteristics beyond it's standard potential so a modified bike (aside from my new PFR pipe that will hopefully smooth it's power only .. not increase it :)) isn't something I would pursue.
I purchased this bike as I just want to ride in the pre 78 class because that, evo and pre 85 are the eras that interest me.. nothing more. Maybe it's because I'm also a muscle car collector but like them, I prefer my bikes totally stock standard. But at the end of the day if I have to modify the bike to make it eligible that then I guess I just have to suck it up (didn't someone tell me that earlier in this thread :D) and make the suspension modifications.
-
Jikov’s statement came after some other statements that they would not change their bikes for the Nats.
Bill, you have asked a perfectly legit question and have been given some legit answers. You seem to have won a moral victory, you have pointed out another failing in the manual as I’m not aware of where it says how to measure travel.
Most of us already knew of such failings in the manual but I am always amazed at some of the trivial things some of you guys keep raising on this forum.
38.0 v 38.1 Who the hell would have thought of that when writing the rules?
MoM’s isn’t perfect and never will be.
As for Pre 78, it was intended as a class for the first evolution of long travel bikes.
MoM’s even says this.
A definition of 9/9 was used to determine what is early long travel and what is late long travel
It seems to me that rather than restrict the class to 2 years of models (75 & 76) someone decided it would be a good idea to let 77 models run as well if they could adhere to the 9.9 rule.
Logical when you consider that a lot of 77 models are the same as 76 models except for travel.
A good idea in theory but a bad idea in practice as it is awkward for the rider to comply and for the scrutineer to check.
Some choose to take this class as a literal Pre 78 class and some choose to accept it as a class meant for early design long travel bikes.
It’s more a case of a class that was badly named.
Pre 78, to steal a line for the Pirates of the Caribbean, is “More of a guideline really”
Personally I couldn’t give a fat rats arse either way if the class is 9/9 or 10/10 but if there are so many that don’t like it then do something about it through the right channels.
Don’t shoot the messenger when you get to the event.
-
Can we put this to bed and move on?
1 Michael Banford is not the Chief Eligibility Scrutineer for this event, so don't use that as an excuse for not entering or continuing the personal attacks.
2 The onus is on the entrant to prove compliance.If you need advice ask Dave Tanner, Chairman CMX Commission [see post203]
3 Simo63 Reply 204 asks "What sort of people are making these rules--" People just like you Simo, and it is people just like you who have to actually initiate change through your club, state body etc.,if you think thereis need for change.
4 The definitive measurement system as given by both the CMX Commission Chairman and the Chief Eligibility Scrutineer for this event is:-
Rear--Remove both shocks,with rear wheel suspended.
Remove spring from one shock and re-install.
Measure vertically the difference at the axle between fully extended and fully compressed with the rider's full weight (incl normal compression of the bump stop)
Same for single shock bike.
Front With bike suspended, remove top caps and measure difference between fully extended and fully compressed.
It's not complicated.
If in doubt about your machine check it before you leave home so you can enjoy your racing with peace of mind.
-
Can we put this to bed and move on?
1 Michael Banford is not the Chief Eligibility Scrutineer for this event, so don't use that as an excuse for not entering or continuing the personal attacks. Don't know the guy but based on his posts in this topic I think that's great news
2 The onus is on the entrant to prove compliance.If you need advice ask Dave Tanner, Chairman CMX Commission [see post203] Do you have his email address?
3 Simo63 Reply 204 asks "What sort of people are making these rules--" People just like you Simo, and it is people just like you who have to actually initiate change through your club, state body etc.,if you think thereis need for change. I disagree. If it were people like me then common sense would prevail so that a stock standard 1977 model bike would be eligible without needing to limit it's suspension. If that means that some bikes are better suited to the class then fine .. that's exactly what it meant back in the day as well.
4 The definitive measurement system as given by both the CMX Commission Chairman and the Chief Eligibility Scrutineer for this event is:-
Rear--Remove both shocks,with rear wheel suspended.
Remove spring from one shock and re-install.
Measure vertically the difference at the axle between fully extended and fully compressed with the rider's full weight (incl normal compression of the bump stop)
Same for single shock bike. Are you suggesting that I might be required to dismantle my bike at scrutineering because from as you have already stated, the onus is on me to prove it complies?? I'm in it for fun and not interested in stripping the bike at scrutineering at all. I think I'll just forget it.
Front With bike suspended, remove top caps and measure difference between fully extended and fully compressed.
It's not complicated.
If in doubt about your machine check it before you leave home so you can enjoy your racing with peace of mind.
L
-
4 The definitive measurement system as given by both the CMX Commission Chairman and the Chief Eligibility Scrutineer for this event is:-
Rear--Remove both shocks,with rear wheel suspended.
Remove spring from one shock and re-install.
Measure vertically the difference at the axle between fully extended and fully compressed with the rider's full weight (incl normal compression of the bump stop)
Good Answer Col, pity you didn't arrive earlier we could have saved 10 pages of discussion. Now back to the Simons, I get the impression as long as they are reduced to 9" of travel then the 0.1 of a milimeter above 38 is not going to be an issue.
-
TMBILLY - now might be a good time for a break, ;) hop into the he shed and pack up my 2 valve for posting, it will be great therapy :D
-
TMBILLY - now might be a good time for a break, ;) hop into the he shed and pack up my 2 valve for posting, it will be great therapy :D
Sorry freaky the charity jobs are 2nd tier ATM ;) all i wanted was a simple answer witch Col has provided :)
In life im am more than happy to play by the rules ;D but i expect those who make, and those who enforce the rules to have their ducks in order ;)
-
He cant pack up your 2 valver yet Freaky, when I'm over for the Johnny Old with Brad in a few weeks, the 3 of us are gonna flog it around the Taupo MX track and see how it goes. ;D
-
to Simo63 hope this helps:-
2 You can PM David on this forum
3 Ordinary licence holders like you and I (having common sence or not) can initiate change. After all that's how Pre78 came about in the first place.The suspension rule (good or bad) has been there since inception of the class.A bit late to be huffing and puffing about the rule three months out from an event.
4 It is unlikely you"ll be called on to prove eligibility unless there's a protest (which is also unlikely).In spite of all the froth and bubble on this forum, in recent times those protested have generally been trying it on.Sometimes a protest can clear the air.For example Tony Cavelles 250 Pre65 BSA was legitimately protested in Tas. re engine capacity.It was torn down and found to be kosher.A lot of Noise went on about people who protest, but in fact it cleared the air, stopped all back of the pits mumbling and showed how good dad Bert's bike prep was and how good a rider Tony was.
It would be a shame if you let this prevent you participating, but only you will lose by it.Pehaps you could help us out as a flaggy if you don't ride.
-
For my all carrying on ::) i hope nobody gives the nats a miss for any reason. This new breed of nats promises to provide some great competition and a track that will really suit the older bikes :)
While my frustration has been vented in this thread that was in no way a dig at what promises to be the best nats yet. Hopefully common sense will prevail as the people behind this event are good people and enthusiast like us this side of the track.
As far as the pre 78 rules go, it as has been pointed out if we feel strongly enough then its up to us to canvass people and try to get things changed through the appropriate channels.
I stand by my opinions i have voiced, but Superseniors intervention has made me think about the bigger picture . Supersenior (Col ) put a lot of time effort and thought into making these new nats a reality and has shown that the little people can effect change if they are prepared to put in the time :)
See you at the Nats
Bill
-
So can I use Simons on my Pre 78? :-X
-
So can I use Simons on my Pre 78? :-X
Patience, an answer can't be too far away.
-
Good Question. :o :o :o :)
-
to Simo63 hope this helps:-
2 You can PM David on this forum
3 Ordinary licence holders like you and I (having common sence or not) can initiate change. After all that's how Pre78 came about in the first place.The suspension rule (good or bad) has been there since inception of the class.A bit late to be huffing and puffing about the rule three months out from an event.
4 It is unlikely you"ll be called on to prove eligibility unless there's a protest (which is also unlikely).In spite of all the froth and bubble on this forum, in recent times those protested have generally been trying it on.Sometimes a protest can clear the air.For example Tony Cavelles 250 Pre65 BSA was legitimately protested in Tas. re engine capacity.It was torn down and found to be kosher.A lot of Noise went on about people who protest, but in fact it cleared the air, stopped all back of the pits mumbling and showed how good dad Bert's bike prep was and how good a rider Tony was.
It would be a shame if you let this prevent you participating, but only you will lose by it.Pehaps you could help us out as a flaggy if you don't ride.
Thanks for your advice super senior 50. I'm not sure what difference it will make but I will PM "Dave" tonight if I get the chance (still at my 2nd job and just taking a break so might not get the chance). Is his ID just Dave or is it DaveTanner or something else?
To be honest with a full time day job plus owning and operating 2 Franchised Pizza outlets 7 days a week (plus family with 3 kids etc) I don't have time to get involved in politics or clubs or much at all. In fact I'm lucky to find time to go for a ride (still miffed that I am going to miss QVMX sign on this weekend #$@^) so whilst I agree in principle with what you are saying re making changes, I'm neither inclined nor able to spend the time doing that. However happy to support in any way that I can but it is easier for me to just change the bike. I've already detailed in a previous post how I was more shocked that the bike I purchased specifically for pre 78 wasn't stricly legal in pre 78 ... and I acknowledged that was due to my ignorance and lack of research (Who would of thought you had to research to see if a pre 78 model bike actually complied with pre 78 class rules .. like I said before, the irony is just a bit much for me at times) but I'm glad that I found out now and not at scrutineering in a few months time.
Having said that though, I musn't be alone with my concerns as I've had a couple of requests from people I don't know (not hard I don't know many in this scene) looking for Brent's tips on lowering a YZ250D to make it class legal. So I guess I'm not alone with my ignorance or concerns. Of course if I wanted to try and cheat I wouldn't give a toss but I don't so that is why, only a few months out from the event .. one which I only found out about 2 weeks ago because I'm not enough into the scene and too busy, I'm "huffing and puffing" about my not class legal suspension .. although I didn't think I was actually huffing and puffing but I accept that from some perspectives it might appear that way. Sorry for that.
So at the end of the day I'll either reduce the suspension travel to 9 inches or just not enter. I certainly won't show up with an illegal bike and run the risk despite the fact that I agree with you that I won't be protested. I doubt I would be protested either but it's more the getting through scrutineering that concerns me particularly after 69ers comments.
Anyway enough from me on this, I've got pizzas to make so back to the original question .. what was that again? Oh yeah something about Gene Simmons??
-
211 kawasaki is who you are looking for simmo
-
what col said is correct its not an issue unless
you get protested
you dont get elegibility scrutineered at scrutineering just full safety compliance
so if you have a standard bike which has 1 inch more travel
i wouldnt loose any sleep over it ;D
-
lets see if we can make this meaningfull thread go 20 pages ;D1 page of useful information which i like and the rest just plain shite :o :D this is why i stopped going to local bike club meetings and stopped paying membership fees
-
lets see if we can make this meaningfull thread go 20 pages ;D1 page of useful information which i like and the rest just plain shite :o :D this is why i stopped going to local bike club meetings and stopped paying membership fees
because of the crap that goes on on this forum? Or because of people scruintinising your bike. Sounds like a story to me.
-
Hi Simo, look forward to meeting you. We must move in the same circles. This comment applies to a lot of posts on this forum.I fully understand the time constraints for busy people, but to write a submission to your club re a rule change would take a lot less time than has been spent on this topic on this forum.
We hope to see your entry shortly.
-
HB - I have been checked for eligibility at scrutineering?
Maybe it was just me ;D
-
to Simo63 hope this helps:-
2 You can PM David on this forum
3 Ordinary licence holders like you and I (having common sence or not) can initiate change. After all that's how Pre78 came about in the first place.The suspension rule (good or bad) has been there since inception of the class.A bit late to be huffing and puffing about the rule three months out from an event.
4 It is unlikely you"ll be called on to prove eligibility unless there's a protest (which is also unlikely).In spite of all the froth and bubble on this forum, in recent times those protested have generally been trying it on.Sometimes a protest can clear the air.For example Tony Cavelles 250 Pre65 BSA was legitimately protested in Tas. re engine capacity.It was torn down and found to be kosher.A lot of Noise went on about people who protest, but in fact it cleared the air, stopped all back of the pits mumbling and showed how good dad Bert's bike prep was and how good a rider Tony was.
It would be a shame if you let this prevent you participating, but only you will lose by it.Pehaps you could help us out as a flaggy if you don't ride.
Thanks for your advice super senior 50. I'm not sure what difference it will make but I will PM "Dave" tonight if I get the chance (still at my 2nd job and just taking a break so might not get the chance). Is his ID just Dave or is it DaveTanner or something else?
To be honest with a full time day job plus owning and operating 2 Franchised Pizza outlets 7 days a week (plus family with 3 kids etc) I don't have time to get involved in politics or clubs or much at all. In fact I'm lucky to find time to go for a ride (still miffed that I am going to miss QVMX sign on this weekend #$@^) so whilst I agree in principle with what you are saying re making changes, I'm neither inclined nor able to spend the time doing that. However happy to support in any way that I can but it is easier for me to just change the bike. I've already detailed in a previous post how I was more shocked that the bike I purchased specifically for pre 78 wasn't stricly legal in pre 78 ... and I acknowledged that was due to my ignorance and lack of research (Who would of thought you had to research to see if a pre 78 model bike actually complied with pre 78 class rules .. like I said before, the irony is just a bit much for me at times) but I'm glad that I found out now and not at scrutineering in a few months time.
Having said that though, I musn't be alone with my concerns as I've had a couple of requests from people I don't know (not hard I don't know many in this scene) looking for Brent's tips on lowering a YZ250D to make it class legal. So I guess I'm not alone with my ignorance or concerns. Of course if I wanted to try and cheat I wouldn't give a toss but I don't so that is why, only a few months out from the event .. one which I only found out about 2 weeks ago because I'm not enough into the scene and too busy, I'm "huffing and puffing" about my not class legal suspension .. although I didn't think I was actually huffing and puffing but I accept that from some perspectives it might appear that way. Sorry for that.
So at the end of the day I'll either reduce the suspension travel to 9 inches or just not enter. I certainly won't show up with an illegal bike and run the risk despite the fact that I agree with you that I won't be protested. I doubt I would be protested either but it's more the getting through scrutineering that concerns me particularly after 69ers comments.
Anyway enough from me on this, I've got pizzas to make so back to the original question .. what was that again? Oh yeah something about Gene Simmons??
that starts a whole new subject favourite pizza's mine from the 70's was the pizza hut in mayfield peperoni on thin base with a sub on the side and a beer , now it is a pepperoni with anchovies and black olives and a little bit of chilli from dominoes at port macquarie , back in the 70's i had a durodenal ulcer now my gut is fine 'work that out' more spicy food now than then go figure ??? man i miss those pizza huts it was a great night out
-
Ladies
Can I end this crap with a few short words
1/ Simmons Forks - I personally dont think so but Im happy to be wrong as I know its on the cusp of 77/78. I would need to see 1977 material in support of them to be sure and IM not going to look for it.
2/ Pre 78 is the only strict "era" class in VMX. It seeks to recreate a period in the sport of dramatic change and the bikes are really between the pre 75 stuff and later LTR - they sit in their patch on their own. The history of how it came to the rule book is that the Whitsunday dirt riders put it up and the states supported it. The rules were coppied in the early pre 2012 GCRs from the AHRMA almost word for word. Pre 78 works, the rules are simple and have been unchanged since day 1. For the guys who want 10" of travel I say bad luck, there are guys in the class with 6.5 (me included) if you want to ride the class look at the rules and make your bike fit.
3/ for me personally there are no excuses for not being involved; In your club where ever you are there will be 3-5 guys doing all the work and this applies to the nationals this year that Col and I and a bunch of BMCC guys are running, and just about every other aspect of our sport is no different. If the guys who winge on this forum spent a tenth of their time doing something more positive for the sport it would be a better thing. We are ALL busy! Start a productive thread, think about being constructive for the sport - this shit just turns people off this forum and the sport.
4/ get the rule book out, turn to section 18 and look for the class your wanting to compete in; its all there and really basic!
Dave Tanner
-
well said dave
-
Dave, I thought about sending you a PM but thought better of it as I have already determined that I will either lower my suspension or not ride however now you have posted here I fell obliged to respond. I agree with some and disagree with some of what you have said however instead of continuing my responses to this thread and wasting not only my time but everyone elses, I will spend what little spare time I have modifying my bike's suspension so I can satisfy the requirements of the class. In other words, no more from me.
As an aside, I've never had a rule book for any class of racing I have done over the years. Maybe that makes me different/weird/stupid or just plain ignorant but I've never sought to understand the complete technical aspects of the sport, preferring just to ride and have fun. I wonder if there are others out there like me?
Anyway I guess it's a sad sign of the times we live in that today I will look to obtain my very first set. Not even sure where to look but I guess google is a good start.
-
You can download the MoMS here: http://www.ma.org.au/index.php?id=142 (http://www.ma.org.au/index.php?id=142)
-
As an aside, I've never had a rule book for any class of racing I have done over the years. Maybe that makes me different/weird/stupid or just plain ignorant but I've never sought to understand the complete technical aspects of the sport, preferring just to ride and have fun. I wonder if there are others out there like me?
Anyway I guess it's a sad sign of the times we live in that today I will look to obtain my very first set. Not even sure where to look but I guess google is a good start.
You get a current rule book everytime you renew your MA licence.
-
You can download the MoMS here: http://www.ma.org.au/index.php?id=142 (http://www.ma.org.au/index.php?id=142)
Thanks mboddy, will download a set and start reading
You get a current rule book everytime you renew your MA licence.
Thanks JohhnyO but because I only get to ride one or two events per year (as I've said previously in this thread I'm just too busy unfortunately) I just purchase a day license.
-
because I only get to ride one or two events per year (as I've said previously in this thread I'm just too busy unfortunately) I just purchase a day license.
I hope you realise you can't just rock up on the day and buy a day licence.
This is a National Championship race and as such it is run as an open event.
The one day licence for this event if you go that way has to be organised something like a month in advance, it can't be done on the day like a club day.
-
Good advice
-
because I only get to ride one or two events per year (as I've said previously in this thread I'm just too busy unfortunately) I just purchase a day license.
I hope you realise you can't just rock up on the day and buy a day licence.
This is a National Championship race and as such it is run as an open event.
The one day licence for this event if you go that way has to be organised something like a month in advance, it can't be done on the day like a club day.
Yes Geoff I did realise that but (sincerely) thank you for that advice I got the same message when I joined the BMCC a few weeks back and at the riders briefing there was a discussion on this event .. which is exactly when I found out about this event .. sorry I'm just not up to speed with what's going on and, obviously, what bikes comply and what don't. So I'm glad it was mentioned on that day otherwise I would not have known until you mentioned it.
Just like I'm glad I read this thread otherwise I would have been completely ignorant of the issue of 9/9 altogether.
So yes I planned to send my entry away early with my license application ... provided of course I can get that weekend off.
EDIT: 18 pages now ;D
-
Hmmmmmm? I was Happy 15 pages ago, Thanks Dave ;D ;D ;D. So has anyone got mag adverts or brouchers to prove thay were available in 77. Thanks Birko.
-
Hmmmmmm? I was Happy 15 pages ago, Thanks Dave ;D ;D ;D. So has anyone got mag adverts or brouchers to prove thay were available in 77. Thanks Birko.
I think that I have got a '76 or '77 edition of Motocross Action magazine somewhere, with an article titled "Get ten from an RM". It shows Jody Weisel standing on a milk crate to get onto an RM fitted with Simons forks and Fox airshocks. I will go and have a look for it. I assume this could be used for proof of availability pre '78.
-
Thanks for that,all you got to do is ask. Love the Forum. ;D ;D ;D
-
I found the magazine, but it is not exactly how I remembered it . The forks in the article are standard RM forks fitted with Al Baker aftermarket damper rods. There are smaller pics in the 11/77 magazine with Pat Richter on an FMF Suzuki fitted with Simons forks, but it is probably not the best evidence to use for proof of availability. Someone else out there should have something better.
-
Hmmmmmm? I was Happy 15 pages ago, Thanks Dave ;D ;D ;D. So has anyone got mag adverts or brouchers to prove thay were available in 77. Thanks Birko.
I think that I have got a '76 or '77 edition of Motocross Action magazine somewhere, with an article titled "Get ten from an RM". It shows Jody Weisel standing on a milk crate to get onto an RM fitted with Simons forks and Fox airshocks. I will go and have a look for it. I assume this could be used for proof of availability pre '78.
I've got all the Motocross Action mags from the 70's.. Yes Simons forks were available and used in 1977
-
I found the magazine, but it is not exactly how I remembered it . The forks in the article are standard RM forks fitted with Al Baker aftermarket damper rods. There are smaller pics in the 11/77 magazine with Pat Richter on an FMF Suzuki fitted with Simons forks, but it is probably not the best evidence to use for proof of availability. Someone else out there should have something better.
I quoted Motocross Action June 77 on page 4 of this topic.
-
Thanks MM, June 77, I`ll track down a Copy.
-
He cant pack up your 2 valver yet Freaky, when I'm over for the Johnny Old with Brad in a few weeks, the 3 of us are gonna flog it around the Taupo MX track and see how it goes. ;D
Make sure you bring somethign back with you then, i have some bikes leaving Qld soon, so any parts you can drag home the merrier. cant fit a Motor on ya lap can you....