OzVMX Forum
Clubroom => General Discussion => Topic started by: Iain Cameron on October 01, 2012, 07:12:09 pm
-
Ok I know the 1975 MX250/400 Yamaha is not legal for pre 75 . but the frame ,wheels ,forks and s/arm are YZb so are they a carry over item if the rear is limited to 4" ?
If it is a carry over If I happen to have a SC 500 motor that will fit in can I race it ? this should stir up some ideas . Iain
-
I reckon yes, but you'd want to be prepared to weather the poop-storm that it will create.
-
Also I would like to fit MX360 five speed gears . :o
-
As long as you don't start winning!
-
Are you sure the YZ-B and MX-B frames are the same Iain? I thought that he engine cradle is a different shape to accept the newer engine on the MX. The engine mounts are different at least. I see what you're dreaming up but I doubt it'd be legal mate. As Nathan said, there'd be a shitstorm of opposition to it. Close enough isn't good enough either....the '75 Maico frame is the exact same geometry as the '74 and is pretty much identicall except for the steering head bracing and they aren't allowed in pre '75. I think the MZ-B frame would be knocked back for the same reasons the '75 Maico frame is.
-
Mark I think the engine mounts are the only difference . This bike is for club level only , and the only other riders Ive passed at the Nat's have either broken down or fallen off . ;D
-
I think the MX shock is a bit longer also - meaning slight differences in frame there possibly?
-
You're right Firko, the YZB has a lot smaller bottom end than the MXB so the frames are probably different. Lot of work to have it knocked back at scrutineering.
-
This could turn into 20 pages easily.
For club racing it comes down to who you beat and who protests, for major or National meetings I could see problems.
Whether it's club or national racing it's still pushing the idea and spirit of pre 75.
There seem to be few who want to push a bike down a class
The YZ360B is listed in MOMS as a pre 75 bike but not the YZ250B. Page 167, 18.5.4.9 Acceptable follow on models for pre 75.
Did the YZ360B get mistakenly put into pre 75 instead of pre 78?
MY OPINION is that this is that an oversight as as YZB's are a 75 model. Same with an MXB. I suppose you could push the point and use a YZ360B frame, as it is specifically mentioned as pre 75 legal, and build your bike from there.
I can't see any problem with MX360 gears or the SC500 motor.
-
Surely if you took a YZ-B or MX-B frame and modified it with an MX-A engine cradle, it would look just like a stock MX-B frame. ;)
The shocks are slightly different between the 75 and 76 model monoshocks, mostly relating to total length. I am unaware of any/the differences between the 74 and 75 model shocks?
PS: Hi Brad. :)
-
Why not build it as a pre78 weapon?....my YZB is getting that treatment at the moment....instead of having 500cc's trying to kill you at every twist of the throtle, give it a bit more suspension and enjoy the ride.
-
Brett, YZB is classified as a 74 model.....they where all built in Feb 74 and likewise the A models where built in Feb73....Elsinores came out in 73.....MXB's came out as designated 75 models...YZB was a very close copy of the bike which won the world championship in 73 (250cc), Maico bought out there 74 1/2 model to combat it.... the race was on....im sure now someone will shoot me down.
-
Guys Im not a good rider my normal finishing place is last , Im only thinking about this hot rod as I have all the bits sitting in the spare parts pile . I allready own a Yz 400c and 400d for pre 78 in pre 75 Ive got Mx360 and Sc500 so this would be a fun bike Hence the Legality question . Iain
-
Both the YZ250B and YZ360B are designated '74 models and were available mid '74, that's why they are pre '75 bikes.
-
Guys Im not a good rider my normal finishing place is last , Im only thinking about this hot rod as I have all the bits sitting in the spare parts pile . I allready own a Yz 400c and 400d for pre 78 in pre 75 Ive got Mx360 and Sc500 so this would be a fun bike Hence the Legality question . Iain
Go for it! As long as you are prepared to be disqualified from last place who givesashit?
-
There is already one built in WA in that configuration and raced. Never seen it at a nats but I hear it runs successfully at state titles in Wa
-
not quite Freaky. There are a couple in WA basically SC500 motor in a YZB frame - completely legal. And no state titles in WA either - no points racing. I have riden one of the bikes and seriously it is a gem. All the advantages of the B handling and with the engine mods on the 500 motor pulls like a tractor forever - god it went! Well in a straight line with me anyway ;D
-
Why not run last place in pre 78 and stick to the rules instead of running last place in pre 75 and breaking them? Why not try Crockets idea and see how good a bike you can make it (for pre 78)?
Cut-off dates are a mind set. I think you can do well on anything if you take the time to set it up properly.
-
Why not run last place in pre 78 and stick to the rules instead of running last place in pre 75 and breaking them? Why not try Crockets idea and see how good a bike you can make it (for pre 78)?
Cut-off dates are a mind set. I think you can do well on anything if you take the time to set it up properly.
Thread killer ! Now what are the boys going to hypothesize about ?
-
Thread killer ! Now what are the boys going to hypothesize about ?
I dunno. Filling your shocks with lard? Why can't I run my 1989 KX 500 in with EVO 80's? Converting your RM 465 to points ignition......? ???
* WATER. Cheap, economical and you can get a whole two litres in your gearbox.
-
Why not run last place in pre 78 and stick to the rules instead of running last place in pre 75 and breaking them? Why not try Crockets idea and see how good a bike you can make it (for pre 78)?
There it is!
-
at some point we are going to wind up having to get our bikes certified because so many want to test the rules for what-ever reason, wake up to yourselves before you turn a great sport into a over-regulated bitch fest. I think we should ban all Y generation riders, they dont know what the word NO means.
-
not quite Freaky. There are a couple in WA basically SC500 motor in a YZB frame - completely legal. And no state titles in WA either - no points racing. I have riden one of the bikes and seriously it is a gem. All the advantages of the B handling and with the engine mods on the 500 motor pulls like a tractor forever - god it went! Well in a straight line with me anyway ;D
funny i thought thats what we were talking about ???
-
funny i thought thats what we were talking about
Iain wants to do the engine swap to an MX-B frame for pre 75, not a YZ-B. That's what the threads about.
-
and we dont run state titles in WA Freaky.
-
I'd be very surprised if Iain is GenY! :)
-
I'd be very surprised if Iain is GenY! :)
;D classic Nathan ;D
Correct me if I'm wrong, it's been awhile since I've read your inch thick rule book but aren't the rules for pre78 era dated, that only bikes and parts from '75 through to '77 allowed to race in pre78? Modified pre75 bikes aren't eligible, or am I wrong?
18.5.5.1 Acceptable for the pre 78 classes are machines and components that are limited to the 1975, 1976, 1977 models alone. The only exception to this rule is where the model remains unaltered after this date.
Wouldn't this first rule of pre78 make a SC500 motor illegal for pre78? And the bike in question (MX-B 500) would in fact have to run in your Evo class ??? ;D
-
Guys Im not a good rider my normal finishing place is last , Im only thinking about this hot rod as I have all the bits sitting in the spare parts pile . I allready own a Yz 400c and 400d for pre 78 in pre 75 Ive got Mx360 and Sc500 so this would be a fun bike Hence the Legality question . Iain
Iain in my opinion I wouldn't have a problem racing against you in pre75 on a slightly modified 37yr old frame and I like your idea of marring a 500 with a MX-B frame. If you're got the parts and the inclination to do the job then I would rather see another bike out on the battle field than a bunch of parts waisting away sitting in a shed because of a modification to the front engine mount that renders the bike illegal in pre75 and also pre78 and now becomes an out of era looking bike in the Evo class.
I say build your bike and go racing (as you say friendly club meetings) and if people protest over a 37 yr old frame that has been altered to be made even older then just park the bike up (at least you have another rideable machine) and take it to the next classic dirt where it will be a true vintage bike of the true progression of motocross of that time. Where in that era all modifications and different ideas were looked upon as exciting, innovative and inspirational.
No rules needed here, just good ideas and motivation to try something different...... The progress of Motocross.
-
DJ you dont need to ask whats legal (you know your legal fish sizes)
Hope your well and alls good in wakavegas(with no H)
-
DJ you dont need to ask whats legal (you know your legal fish sizes)
Hope your well and alls good in wakavegas(with no H)
Wakavegas does have a H though Bazza, I got one in the garage ;D alls good here mate and looking forward to Fakatane this weekend...... Go the YZ360B
(Sorry for the sideways slide of the thread, back to normal bitching please ;D )
-
Thanks for the comments guys, GenY thank you but Im 52 and after a massive heart attack and a quad bypass I don't think you will see me doing GenY tricks on a bike . ( three laps and Im ready for a little lie down ) As for breaking the rules or the spirt of the rules Ive competed in three Nats 03,08 and 11, every bike was standard except Dt1's but the mods were all ok by the rule book . This thread was only to ask what others thought of the idea not an outright challenge to the gents at the front of the field .
Iain ;D
-
Geezus....the fishermans back.....hows it going DJ?.....how come your not up in Whangarei?....those arse cheeks of yours will be sqeezed tight on the big 360B.....are you gonna kick the black poms arse?....do you think he'll bring the Beeza or is he gonna turn up in one of his new cardigans and do a photo shoot? ;D.....I bet your only going to Whakatane so you can slip a bit of fishing in.....good luck on the weekend and look after my 360!!!! ;D
-
I agree with DJ's comments 100%.
If you've got the bits needed and the motivation then go for it, disregard those who criticise just for the sake of it.
-
I'll just be happy to be back on a bike again Joan and I know I won't be kicking Bill ass because I haven't ridden four a couple of years now and I need him on my side to kickstart the 360. My ankle won't stand up to the first compression stroke and since its a 2 smoker there's twice as many as those 4 bangers ;D
I wish I was going fishing as well as motocrossing this weekend because on Monday I start my next job in the worse place to be in, in New Zealand and I have to live there for 12 weeks >:(
I agree with DJ's comments 100%.
If you've got the bits needed and the motivation then go for it, disregard those who criticise just for the sake of it.
Iain, at the end of the day what ever the rules may state they don't say you can't make the bike so with that get building and enjoy it because you'll be a winner in the "pre76" class and I think that that era is one of the coolest of all VMX. Good Luck DJ
-
I agree with DJ's comments 100%.
If you've got the bits needed and the motivation then go for it, disregard those who criticise just for the sake of it.
it's not for the sake of it, it's for the big picture that is era racing and preserving the bikes, certainly from my perspective.
Okay so go ahead and use a 75 frame in pre 75. No big deal.
Okay what about 75 tm250? Move the shocks back and it will clearly fit in looks wise to the pre 75 era as well as not out class others in the class.
What about. 75 Maico then? Same same.
75 Cz? Closer again.
76 cr250? Move the shocks back and pre75 here we come.
My 75 rh is basically a 74 with forward mounted shocks. Surely if I retro fit it to 74 specs I can run it pre75?
Let one slip through then there is a base for the next rule stretch. It's not about being a rule nazi.
As far as the pre78 only thing dj, I think common sense would prevail and there would be no issue if the bike was run in pre 78.
-
Totally agree with you Brad but I'm not trying to change the rules or even go against them. What I said is that I wouldn't protest a bike like that and also I would be happy to race against a bike like that in pre75 since the engine is legal for pre75 and the frame geometry is the same as a pre75 legal bike apart from a miner engine mounting adjustment. Common sense surely would say the bike looks to belong in pre75?? So why would there be an issue with the bike running in pre75. Because the rules say so! But now you tell me that the bike shouldn't have an issue racing in pre78 because common sense would prevail and say that's where the bike belongs but the rules state that it is out of era with a pre75 motor and therefore is illegal to race in pre78.
Now I'm happy to live by the rules but what rules are we talking about now, is it MA or is it common sense or DJ's or 090's rules?? By your reckoning that bike can't break the pre75 rules (by the way of an engine mount change) but can break the rules of pre78 by racing with an out of era motor. I ask you, where is the common sense in that??
As Worms has said, but I will state it in the complete opposite to what he means...... Wake up to yourselves before you turn a great sport into an over regulated bitch feast !!!!
As I have said many a time, I can live with any rules, common sense or not, but I struggle went some rules have to be obey religiously but the next rule can be used with common sense??? Who picks the rules we can use with common sense??
-
Chopping bikes to fit back a class also destroys the integrety of the bike. I thought our sport was meant to be about preserving old bikes?
-
by building what ever bike you want from what ever parts will create the bitch fest and turn the sport into an over-regulated joke, the sport will gradually loose its integrety. keep the bikes original and it cuts out the whole wank-fest thats creeping into the sport. maybe there should be class's for the best non-conforming bike and the best blinged bike, best bitsa for all those who cant . yo bro!
cool runnings Worms
DJ, under the current rules a pre 60 can race in pre90, no questions asked by MA, pre means excatly that, its up to the rider where he enters his bike and then up to a race sec to determine, but once again this applies to title meets, not your every day meet.
-
Totally agree with you Brad but I'm not trying to change the rules or even go against them. What I said is that I wouldn't protest a bike like that and also I would be happy to race against a bike like that in pre75 since the engine is legal for pre75 and the frame geometry is the same as a pre75 legal bike apart from a miner engine mounting adjustment. Common sense surely would say the bike looks to belong in pre75?? So why would there be an issue with the bike running in pre75. Because the rules say so! But now you tell me that the bike shouldn't have an issue racing in pre78 because common sense would prevail and say that's where the bike belongs but the rules state that it is out of era with a pre75 motor and therefore is illegal to race in pre78.
Now I'm happy to live by the rules but what rules are we talking about now, is it MA or is it common sense or DJ's or 090's rules?? By your reckoning that bike can't break the pre75 rules (by the way of an engine mount change) but can break the rules of pre78 by racing with an out of era motor. I ask you, where is the common sense in that??
As Worms has said, but I will state it in the complete opposite to what he means...... Wake up to yourselves before you turn a great sport into an over regulated bitch feast !!!!
As I have said many a time, I can live with any rules, common sense or not, but I struggle went some rules have to be obey religiously but the next rule can be used with common sense??? Who picks the rules we can use with common sense??
Well at the end of the day my thoughts are to accommodate this chaps bike. As far as I'm concerned its a pre 78 bike. Rules are always going to be flawed but with the right attitude ( read not wanting to bend the rules) you can happily abide by them with common sense and honesty.
There is a general rule that the bike is what the youngest part of the bike is. In this case it's a 75 model.
Where you are saying it has a 74 motor therefore it can't run in a class designated as for 75,76 and 77 models. If you want to run that train of thought, the bike should not be built as it does not belong in either class by your theory. You are just saying that you wouldn't protest it if it ran in pre 75 with you. If I changed my shock mounts on my rh to make it look like a 74, you wouldn't protest me either. Doesn't make it right.
If this bike was built it would be a 75 model as the youngest part is 75.
So another bike on the park, no noses out of joint re 'cheating' so to speak. So the only guys with their nose out of joint are the ones that say there was no bike ever made and its bastardising the bike so to speak.
Oh and kiora buuuddy!
-
Chopping bikes and building " Specials " is what DT ( Short Circuit ) was built on in the early days, which is probably why I personally don't see a problem with it, to each his own I say.
Iain may be wishing he'd never mentioned it.
-
I'll just be happy to be back on a bike again Joan and I know I won't be kicking Bill ass because I haven't ridden four a couple of years now and I need him on my side to kickstart the 360. My ankle won't stand up to the first compression stroke and since its a 2 smoker there's twice as many as those 4 bangers ;D
Hey DJ,
Get a compression release for the 360 and live happily ever after...
Good to have you back. ;D
VMX42
-
He has Jeffery....its called a "Biil Doe" release.....only problem is it also comes with a built in flaw..... ;D
-
Good post Walter. :)
I always get yelled at when I talk about the rules, but I've seen this many times before in car racing/rallying - the best example is Improved Production. Twenty years ago, they were called "Road Registered". Fifteen years ago, it was a low budget class for the amateur racer/builder, but nowdays more than have the field has pneumatic on-board jacks and $15k gearboxes... The category has minimal resemblance to its original aims. While it is currently well supported, there's no longer a class that meets the original demand. Same goes for the old road racing Buckets, AFAIK.
It's a type of "bracket creep" - people finding the limits of the rules and pushing them over a period of time and ultimately shifting the practical and accepted limits of the category.
So no matter how much we might like the existing rules, and no matter how well they've served us in the past, they MUST be regularly updated to stop bracket creep (assuming we don't like the direction they're creeping in).
The common VMX attitude of "just build your bike to the spirit of the rules" slows down the bracket creep, but will never stop it.
This is why I'm forever harping on about getting the rules right - it's not that the current rules were failures from the start (quite the opposite, actually), it's because even the best-written set of rules will have loopholes of ambiguities that will be exposed over time.
-
I agree with DJ's comments 100%.
If you've got the bits needed and the motivation then go for it, disregard those who criticise just for the sake of it.
it's not for the sake of it, it's for the big picture that is era racing and preserving the bikes, certainly from my perspective.
Okay so go ahead and use a 75 frame in pre 75. No big deal.
Okay what about 75 tm250? Move the shocks back and it will clearly fit in looks wise to the pre 75 era as well as not out class others in the class.
What about. 75 Maico then? Same same.
75 Cz? Closer again.
76 cr250? Move the shocks back and pre75 here we come.
My 75 rh is basically a 74 with forward mounted shocks. Surely if I retro fit it to 74 specs I can run it pre75?
Let one slip through then there is a base for the next rule stretch. It's not about being a rule nazi.
As far as the pre78 only thing dj, I think common sense would prevail and there would be no issue if the bike was run in pre 78.
I totally agree with your sentiment, but...
If a 75 model bike is modified to 1974 specs, then it IS a 1974 model according to the rules.
I mean, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, etc...
We tie ourselves in knots over the rules because we talk too much about the process, and not enough about the end result.
How can a 2012-built replica frame be OK, but a slightly modified 1975 frame not be? We need to step back and look at what is being presented, and then ask "Does this bike have an advantage over the 1974 model bikes?" and "Does it fit the era/could it have been built in the era?"
When the answer is No to both questions, then the bike should be allowed with no grizzling and not even a sideways glance.
I don't want to go down the path of Dutch-style "twin-shock" bikes, because it's a travesty to butcher old bikes to suit a historic racing category. However, while we have a class structure that makes certain bikes uncompetitive in their proper class (eg: virtually every 1975 model in pre-78), it is inevitable that people will look at whether their bike can meet the earlier era rules.
-
A good example of 'bracket creep' is the twinshock class in the UK. They started off with a class the same as our Evo but now it's common for many bikes to have later pre 85 era air cooled engines, modern '99 RM Suzuki conventional forks, pre '85 twin leading drum brakes and wheels, '84 model single shock bikes modified to have 2 shocks bolted on the rear etc. Hardly any of the field are production bikes that were raced back in the day.
Not saying it's going to happen here but just an example of what happens when people start pushing the boundaries of the rules..
-
Dutch twin shock is in with your theory then Nathan. Can't have it both ways which is my point. No means no. Anything else is Dutch twin shock.
-
Dutch twin shock is in with your theory then Nathan
Not really, Brad.
The Dutch bikes fail the "Could it have been built back in the day?" test - You couldn't build a CR480RZ in 1979/80, for example.
If Evo was an era (rather than a technological cut-off) then they would also fail the "Do they have an advantage over the 19xx model bikes?" test.
NB: I'm not suggesting those questions become the rules, just that the rules should reflect that intent.
Can't have it both ways which is my point.
Absolutely. We specifically want there to be a clear and fair cut off. The question is how to achieve that.
To tweak Iain's hypothetical example, you could build a MX250/360/500B in 1974, out of MX/SC-A and YZ-B parts. If anyone was prepared to butcher two vintage bikes, they could do it (and for less money than a complete YZ-B, so it's not an entirely stupid idea). It would be 100% legal for pre-75, despite the obvious Dutchness of it all.
OR, you could end up with a damn-near identical result by just using a stock MX-B chassis with the shock travel limited, and not butcher any bike. Yet this would be illegal?!
Neither option is perfect, neither is complete nonsense - the challenge is to work through the contradictions...
-
Nathan....you couldn't have built a MX250/400B in 1974...because the 400 didn't exist....until 1975...remember model/year is the specific..not the date manufactured
-
Ah, yeah - I started off talking about the 250 specifically, then changed it to include the 400 (to make it closer to Iain's original post), but forgot about the 360 to 400... :-[
Earlier post edited to make it right...
-
All makes sence to me.....
-
Neither option is perfect, neither is complete nonsense - the challenge is to work through the contradictions...
why? The rules are clear enough as they are. The same old same old trying to bend the rules to fit my bike into a class.
Your own argument fell into a heap as you couldn't have done it back on the day. Iain's bike if it were ridden in pre 75 would open flood gates to others with 75 models retro fitting their bikes to 'comply'. Not to mention taking bikes away from pre 78. Again if he said I'm old slow and want to ride this bike in pre 78 then he would have gotten the thumbs up. I'd like Iain to say why he doesn't want to run it in pre 78.
-
Your own argument fell into a heap as you couldn't have done it back on the day.
Only because I originally, mistakenly included the 400. If we were talking about a 250, 360 or 500 then my point stands perfectly.
Iain's bike if it were ridden in pre 75 would open flood gates to others with 75 models retro fitting their bikes to 'comply'.
Who's to say that there aren't already plenty of neatly converted 1975 models running in pre-75? ;)
More importantly, what makes a bike a particular model? It's the total sum of the important parts, not any one or two particular part(s) - in the cases we're talking about, a bike that is converted back is a bike that is legal.
Not to mention taking bikes away from pre 78.
How often do you see 1975 models in pre-78? In all of the club meets I've been to, and the few Nationals, I can recall seeing only a tiny number of 1975 models competing in pre-78 - a 75 CZ125 (once), my YZ125C (occasionaly), Graeme's RM-M (semi-regularly) and a couple of MX-Bs (semi-regularly). I'm sure there's more, but even so, it's a bloody short list...
I love the pre-78 class, but because it is a transition era, the difference in performance (most 1975 models to most 1977 models) is big.
I'd like Iain to say why he doesn't want to run it in pre 78.
I don't dare pretend to speak for Iain, but I can think of a few reasons why:
It will be far less competitive in pre-78;
It arguably it at home in pre-75;
The rules imply that it is not legal for pre-78 (due to the pre-75 motor);
He already has a "proper" pre-78 bike.
You've drawn your line in the sand, as is entirely your right. But until you can resolve the conflicts, then these sort of questions will continue to come up and continue to irritate you.
Let's say I had a V75, and neatly converted it back to VR250* specs (or TM250 or...).
For all intents and purposes, the bike is a 1974 model, and is 100% legal for pre-75, right?
If you agree, then explain how Iain's proposed by is not legal...
If you disagree, then explain how it could be illegal while the newly built frames are legal? Not to mention the impossibility of enforcing it...
*Bigk sold such a bike a couple of years back. Plus the work Montynut did in converting his LTR-modified VR250 back to pre-75 specs shows that it is entirely possible.
-
if you take a 1975 model bike and convert it to a 74 model, it's still made in 1975, youve just butchered a bike for your own gains or losses. just ride the thing in pre78. And at your age Ian, you should know better ;D
-
slightly off topic - Nathan why cannot a pre75 motor run in pre 78?
-
Let's say I had a V75, and neatly converted it back to VR250* specs (or TM250 or...).
For all intents and purposes, the bike is a 1974 model, and is 100% legal for pre-75, right?
If you agree, then explain how Iain's proposed by is not legal...
If you disagree, then explain how it could be illegal while the newly built frames are legal? Not to mention the impossibility of enforcing it...
*Bigk sold such a bike a couple of years back. Plus the work Montynut did in converting his LTR-modified VR250 back to pre-75 specs shows that it is entirely possible.
Geeze Nathan don't bring me into this all I did was return a Pre75 frame to it's original state. By the way there are many differences between a VR250 frame and a V75 frame which I would think would render the V75 frame outside the rules although the engines are the same.
-
By the way there are many differences between a VR250 frame and a V75 frame which I would think would render the V75 frame outside the rules although the engines are identical but exhaust is not
I was told once that if I moved the shock mounts on my V75 back I'd have no trouble getting it into Pre 75. I couldn't bring myself to do it and I'm glad I didn't. It would have been butchery of a beautiful little bike.
(http://i1232.photobucket.com/albums/ff366/Avonkitty/DSCN0846.jpg)
-
I would believe that you could run a V75 or even VA model in Pre75 with the rear sub frame modified at most Club events. The differences in the rear sub frame would rule it not eligible for Pre75 if properly examined.
-
slightly off topic - Nathan why cannot a pre75 motor run in pre 78?
Ross...In my opinion a pre 75 engine can most definitely be used in pre '78 if, for whatever reason, the rest of the bike doesn't qualify for pre 75. For instance, if I fitted AW forks and longer, laid down shocks to my '74 Maico it'd automatically go into the pre '78 class. Ditto Iain's hypothetical '74 SC500 because it's been fitted with a '75 MX250-B frame. I don't know what all of the kerfuffle is about, it's all pretty simple if you sit down and think about it for a minute or two ::).
-
Bracket Creep.....
So, if an MX400B frame is made legal in Pre-75 as long as it has an MX360 or SC500 motor, does that mean I could put the same motor in my IT400C (76 model), or YZ400C (76 model), restrict the suspension slightly, and run it in Pre 75?
Apart from one extra mounting point for the muffler, and one digit in the frame numbers, the YZ400C and IT400C frames are identical to the MX400B... (MXB: 510-0*****, YZC: 510-1*****, ITC: 510-2*****)
Bracket Creep...
-
slightly off topic - Nathan why cannot a pre75 motor run in pre 78?
Ross...In my opinion a pre 75 engine can most definitely be used in pre '78 if, for whatever reason, the rest of the bike doesn't qualify for pre 75. For instance, if I fitted AW forks and longer, laid down shocks to my '74 Maico it'd automatically go into the pre '78 class. Ditto Iain's hypothetical '74 SC500 because it's been fitted with a '75 MX250-B frame. I don't know what all of the kerfuffle is about, it's all pretty simple if you sit down and think about it for a minute or two ::).
18.5.5.1 Acceptable for the pre 78 classes are machines and components that are limited to the 1975, 1976, 1977 models alone. The only exception to this rule is where the model remains unaltered after this date.
That is what is quoted for pre78 rule number 1 for the year 2012
Take it as you want to read it, but it certainly doesn't include any parts from pre75??
-
That is what is quoted for pre78 rule number 1 for the year 2012
Take it as you want to read it, but it certainly doesn't include any parts from pre75??
So, where do my hypothetical bikes go? For all intended purposes they're more pre '78 eligible than for pre '75. If I was the head scrutineer and presented with these bikes or anything like them I'd have no hesitation but to put them into pre '78. Let's face it, they're not going to out perform a legitimate '77 model are they?
-
That is what is quoted for pre78 rule number 1 for the year 2012
Take it as you want to read it, but it certainly doesn't include any parts from pre75??
So, where do my hypothetical bikes go? For all intended purposes they're more pre '78 eligible than for pre '75. If I was the head scrutineer and presented with these bikes or anything like them I'd have no hesitation but to put them into pre '78. Let's face it, they're not going to out perform a legitimate '77 model are they?
I have to agree with you Firko, but its not me who wrote the rules. Now as head scrutineer you say that you would allow this hypothetical bike race in pre78 but in actual fact the rules state that pre78 is only for 1975, 76 and '77 bike models and their parts. So this hypothetical bike now has to race in the Evo class.
Lets take a hypothetical sale of a frame that I sell to you. I say it is a YZ360B frame but the serial number is unreadable but in fact the frame is a MX-B with a MX-A cradle welded in. Now I may not have known that this was the case but in all practical purposes the frame looked and measured identical to my YZ360B so that's why I sell it to you. With your love of Yamaha hybrid bikes and having a SC500 motor spare you decide to combine to two together (and why wouldn't you, it would be a very cool bike) with all other parts being from the pre75 era. I ask you now, as it stands now and to your knowledge (or lack of information about the frame) would this hypothetical bike be legal for pre75?
-
So in 1977 there was no one still pedalling around on a 74 model?
-
Chopping bikes to fit back a class also destroys the integrety of the bike. I thought our sport was meant to be about preserving old bikes?
Our sport is all for preserving old bikes, but what happens when we have an abundance of spare parts doing nothing but collecting dust in boxes on shelves, under benches and never seeing the chequered flag again. Here is a guy willing to go outside the norm and put them together to create another bike to see the light of day.
So in 1977 there was no one still pedalling around on a 74 model?
If you are talking about the rules of MA classic MX pre78, then no, 74 models do not exist. ;D
Don't shoot the messenger ;D
-
Lets take a hypothetical sale of a frame that I sell to you. I say it is a YZ360B frame but the serial number is unreadable but in fact the frame is a MX-B with a MX-A cradle welded in. Now I may not have known that this was the case but in all practical purposes the frame looked and measured identical to my YZ360B so that's why I sell it to you. With your love of Yamaha hybrid bikes and having a SC500 motor spare you decide to combine to two together (and why wouldn't you, it would be a very cool bike) with all other parts being from the pre75 era. I ask you now, as it stand now and to you knowledge (or lack of information about the frame) would this hypothetical bike be legal for pre75?
Using your word that the frame is from a YZ-B I'd have to say yes, but before I stuck the OK sticker, I'd be giving this bike a good old once over because I'd read on the OZVMX forum that the MX-B and YZ-B frames were very similar and that some people had decided to deliberately deceive by disguising the latter frame to look like the former. At the slightest hint that the owner had deliberately set out to deceive by disguising the frame, I'd be forced to send him home without any opportunity to race the bike. Cheating is an offence not taken lightly by this scrutineer. ;)
Now.....methinks you blokes are looking too closely at the what if's rather than building to the rules as they stand. I build extremely trick bikes that verge on the inner edge of the rules but they're %100 legal* because I respect the reasons we have a rulebook in the first place. Rather than building bikes that test the rulebook, why not just build the bike within the available rule constraints. If you look at our rulebook laterally you can build extremely trick bikes without having to verge over to the outer side of the legality edge.
*With the exception of the hubs on my pre 70 Maico which is being addressed.
-
How many pre 70 bikes are using the correct full width hubs ? I continue to use the shitty old big width girls on my yams but i notice others are using the pre 75 conical hubs..........
So are people drawing the same arguement as the frame and motor now, by letting the other bits slide into........... and im sure its happening on other makes too. this verge can/is fluid in the real world until someone says no.....
-
Lets take a hypothetical sale of a frame that I sell to you. I say it is a YZ360B frame but the serial number is unreadable but in fact the frame is a MX-B with a MX-A cradle welded in. Now I may not have known that this was the case but in all practical purposes the frame looked and measured identical to my YZ360B so that's why I sell it to you. With your love of Yamaha hybrid bikes and having a SC500 motor spare you decide to combine to two together (and why wouldn't you, it would be a very cool bike) with all other parts being from the pre75 era. I ask you now, as it stands now and to your knowledge (or lack of information about the frame) would this hypothetical bike be legal for pre75?
haha - I think Firko would have his suspicions the moment he discovered that his prized NOS YZ360B airbox and sidecovers didn't fit... (different mounting points between the YZ360B and MX400B frames)..
Not to mention the non-YZ360B coil and CDI box locations... ::)
I think you may end up getting a late night visit from some of Firko's "associates"... ;D
-
I have to agree with you Firko, but its not me who wrote the rules.
Waiting for the chorus girls tostar up with their old pre78 hit "she's so fine" ::)
-
slightly off topic - Nathan why cannot a pre75 motor run in pre 78?
Ross...In my opinion a pre 75 engine can most definitely be used in pre '78 if, for whatever reason, the rest of the bike doesn't qualify for pre 75. For instance, if I fitted AW forks and longer, laid down shocks to my '74 Maico it'd automatically go into the pre '78 class. Ditto Iain's hypothetical '74 SC500 because it's been fitted with a '75 MX250-B frame. I don't know what all of the kerfuffle is about, it's all pretty simple if you sit down and think about it for a minute or two ::).
18.5.5.1 Acceptable for the pre 78 classes are machines and components that are limited to the 1975, 1976, 1977 models alone. The only exception to this rule is where the model remains unaltered after this date.
That is what is quoted for pre78 rule number 1 for the year 2012
Take it as you want to read it, but it certainly doesn't include any parts from pre75??
You are easy going when it comes to the rules yet you are like a dog with a bone with this one rule. The hypothetical bike cannot run pre 75 according to the rules. Again to let him run said combination it should go in pre 78. If you want to follow the rules to the enth degree then it doesn't fit pre 78 either. So as the rules stand its an Evo bike. Or let it run pre78 and not one person would care.
-
Build a bike to suit the rules. Don't try and change ,stretch the rules to suit your own agenda.
-
I think you may end up getting a late night visit from some of Firko's "associates"... ;D
;D :o that's ok, a couple of slaps and then we would be talking bikes and drinking margaritas ;D
Lets take a hypothetical sale of a frame that I sell to you. I say it is a YZ360B frame but the serial number is unreadable but in fact the frame is a MX-B with a MX-A cradle welded in. Now I may not have known that this was the case but in all practical purposes the frame looked and measured identical to my YZ360B so that's why I sell it to you. With your love of Yamaha hybrid bikes and having a SC500 motor spare you decide to combine to two together (and why wouldn't you, it would be a very cool bike) with all other parts being from the pre75 era. I ask you now, as it stand now and to you knowledge (or lack of information about the frame) would this hypothetical bike be legal for pre75?
Using your word that the frame is from a YZ-B I'd have to say yes, but before I stuck the OK sticker, I'd be giving this bike a good old once over because I'd read on the OZVMX forum that the MX-B and YZ-B frames were very similar and that some people had decided to deliberately deceive by disguising the latter frame to look like the former. At the slightest hint that the owner had deliberately set out to deceive by disguising the frame, I'd be forced to send him home without any opportunity to race the bike. Cheating is an offence not taken lightly by this scrutineer. ;)
Now.....methinks you blokes are looking too closely at the what if's rather than building to the rules as they stand. I build extremely trick bikes that verge on the inner edge of the rules but they're %100 legal* because I respect the reasons we have a rulebook in the first place. Rather than building bikes that test the rulebook, why not just build the bike within the available rule constraints. If you look at our rulebook laterally you can build extremely trick bikes without having to verge over to the outer side of the legality edge.
*With the exception of the hubs on my pre 70 Maico which is being addressed.
I think at times we all push the boundaries Firko and cheating is not taken lightly by myself either. As you know I made a bike that was my impression of the Yamaha OW11 (1973) It had mostly 1975/76 parts but the tank was 74 which is a non-performance part. The frame had been modified, as to had the suspension (made to be less than a 1975 model). This made the bike the worse bike in its class but that didn't stop me from butchering a few parts I had to make something that I could still race. That bike complied with all the rules of pre78 and that's where it raced so you won't have any argument from me about cheating.
I think Iain should make this hypothetical bike and he should still turn up to race it at local low key fun meetings in the pre75 class but maybe he should ask his follow races on the line if they are happy with that since they are the ones he is riding against. As he has already said that he doesn't want to race it at national level because he already has fully compliant bikes for both pre75 and pre78.
Which is the worse of many evils? A one year to newer frame that's been altered back a year to become a replica frame or a bike that the only thing that complies to the rules is the frame and the rest is illegal or totally legal but utterly out classed and looking completely different to its competitors and racing in Evo?
Brad, that's a bit rich since I could say the same for you ;) and it was me who said that it is an Evo bike at the start although if it raced against me in pre75 or pre78 I wouldnt care one way or the other but as eras go it is not an Evo bike but that's where your rules put it not me! Oh and don't forget I did say I wasnt here to try to change the rules but the question was asked if he built the bike would it be legal. You don't want it in pre75 because it isn't legal but you are fine with it in pre78 but those rules state that it isn't legal there either. I know you and I will probably never see eye to eye on this one but please read my last part of the above paragraph (many evils) and sometimes it's not always black and white as I can definitely see your case in point that it is a perfectly fine bike (not legal though) for pre78.
-
Ok gents I also have a E model dt trail bike less motor mmm no rule book . play bike for trail riding thats the go . I only floated the idea to see where such a hybid would fit (no where if one goes by the rules except evo ) there again CD10 is not far away .
-
Using your word that the frame is from a YZ-B I'd have to say yes, but before I stuck the OK sticker, I'd be giving this bike a good old once over because I'd read on the OZVMX forum that the MX-B and YZ-B frames were very similar and that some people had decided to deliberately deceive by disguising the latter frame to look like the former. At the slightest hint that the owner had deliberately set out to deceive by disguising the frame, I'd be forced to send him home without any opportunity to race the bike. Cheating is an offence not taken lightly by this scrutineer. ;)
For as long as I live, I don't think I'll ever comprehend the logic that says a replica part made from 2012 metal is fine, but a replica made from 1975 steel is a stinking cheat.
-
Firko/DJR - so if I remove the suspension limiter in my YZ360B I can't ride it? Just a question - like seeing SOME of the common sense that comes out of these threads. Or does it mean I can ride pre 78?
:D
-
Firko/DJR - so if I remove the suspension limiter in my YZ360B I can't ride it? Just a question - like seeing SOME of the common sense that comes out of these threads. Or does it mean I can ride pre 78?
Rossco, I reckon you can ride it in pre 78 but apparently* the rulebook says you can't.
* Because I'm not licenced any more I don't get my yearly yearbook allocation so I rely on my old 2009 version. If pre '75 bikes aren't allowed in pre '78 if they don't qualify for pre '75 for whatever reason, I reckon the rulemakers have got it wrong. Every bike should have a place to go and Evo isn't the place for a 1974 motorcycle. That place should be the next class up the food chain...pre '78.
-
. Brad, that's a bit rich since I could say the same for you and it was me who said that it is an Evo bike
You could seeing I would let the bike slide if it was in pre 78 being a rule nazi and all ;D But I think that is the lesser of two evils as it is clearly a 75 model bike in my eyes. Re Evo I was merely agreeing with you by the rule book.
The real issue is not just a 75 framed bike. It is the big picture of ( to steal Johns words) bracket creeping and Dutch twin shock syndrome.
-
Firko/DJR - so if I remove the suspension limiter in my YZ360B I can't ride it? Just a question - like seeing SOME of the common sense that comes out of these threads. Or does it mean I can ride pre 78?
Rossco, I reckon you can ride it in pre 78 but apparently* the rulebook says you can't.
* Because I'm not licenced any more I don't get my yearly yearbook allocation so I rely on my old 2009 version. If pre '75 bikes aren't allowed in pre '78 if they don't qualify for pre '75 for whatever reason, I reckon the rulemakers have got it wrong. Every bike should have a place to go and Evo isn't the place for a 1974 motorcycle. That place should be the next class up the food chain...pre '78.
I have a current licence but for some reason I only have 2011 version which says - built upto and including 75/76/77model year ??
-
Firko/DJR - so if I remove the suspension limiter in my YZ360B I can't ride it? Just a question - like seeing SOME of the common sense that comes out of these threads. Or does it mean I can ride pre 78?
:D
Firko/DJR - so if I remove the suspension limiter in my YZ360B I can't ride it? Just a question - like seeing SOME of the common sense that comes out of these threads. Or does it mean I can ride pre 78?
Rossco, I reckon you can ride it ip pre 78 but apparently* the rulebook says you can't.
* Because I'm not licenced any more I don't get my yearly yearbook allocation so I
Rossco I think that's a great question since the YZB is regarded as a "follow on" model (follow on from what I'm not sure ;D ) but as I read it if you didn't have the limiter in your rear shock you wouldn't be allowed to race it in pre75
18.5.4.2 Front wheel travel will not exceed 178mm (7 inches) rear wheel travel will be limited to 102mm (4 inches) measured at the axle. Rear shock absorbers will be in the original position using the original mounting points.
18.5.4.9 Acceptable follow on models pre 75
a) honda CR125M1, xL250K1,
xL350K1, MT250 and MT125,
b) Yamaha YZ360B, DT250B,
c) Suzuki TS400 (all).
Make of that what you will but I would assume that you could ride pre78 if you didn't have a limiter in your shock because the bike has a dispensation allowing it to race in pre75 if the shock is limited so therefore if you had a second rear shock with a limiter in it does that mean you have one bike for two classes with the simple change of a shock?
The rule book
http://www.ma.org.au/index.php?id=142
-
Ok gents I also have a E model dt trail bike less motor mmm no rule book . play bike for trail riding thats the go . I only floated the idea to see where such a hybid would fit (no where if one goes by the rules except evo ) there again CD10 is not far away .
Now look here Iain, your getting a bit pushy I think with this one because we haven't finished arguing about you first question ;D ;D ;D
-
From page 167 of the 2012 book:
18.5.5 Acceptable Machines and Components - Pre 78.
18.5.5.1 Acceptable for the pre 78 class are machines and components that are limited to the 1975, 1976, 1977 models alone. The only exception to this rule is where the model remains unaltered after this date.
-
So in 1977 there was no one still pedalling around on a 74 model?
we're talking mx'ers here, they were lined up 5 deep at the dealership to get the latest cutting edge model when it came out. Every outdated bike was pushed into the shed where it remained until we came along to resurrect them. This explains why every old bike that gets dragged back into the daylight looks like it's only done one season of racing ;D
-
. Brad, that's a bit rich since I could say the same for you and it was me who said that it is an Evo bike
You could seeing I would let the bike slide if it was in pre 78 being a rule nazi and all ;D But I think that is the lesser of two evils as it is clearly a 75 model bike in my eyes. Re Evo I was merely agreeing with you by the rule book.
The real issue is not just a 75 framed bike. It is the big picture of ( to steal Johns words) bracket creeping and Dutch twin shock syndrome.
I think we would all let it slide Brad (I wish Iain had a YZB frame to go with his idea) and bracket creeping may happen (I hope not) but it is the way of the world but the "Dutch twin shock syndrome" I don't believe will happen here in the Southern Hemisphere apart from the odd special twinshocker getting a newer (read bigger CC) model engine. I only know of one here and that's along way from being complete.
Rossco, I reckon you can ride it in pre 78 but apparently* the rulebook says you can't.
* Because I'm not licenced any more I don't get my yearly yearbook allocation so I rely on my old 2009 version. If pre '75 bikes aren't allowed in pre '78 if they don't qualify for pre '75 for whatever reason, I reckon the rulemakers have got it wrong. Every bike should have a place to go and Evo isn't the place for a 1974 motorcycle. That place should be the next class up the food chain...pre '78.
Completely agree Firko.
-
Is that all settled now boyos?......I'm now moving over to the 'Which Bike Should we Hoard for Amageddon' thread for some light relief.
-
Farrrk, if it stops all this BS, I have a YZ250B frame I may part with......geezus.....what a load of horse manure....DJ, you shouldnt be stirring the pot with the mess the NZ VMX scene your coming back to after 3 or 4 years fishing (I hope you put back all those undersize fish!!)....your pre 75 (sorry "Classic" ) class allows 75/76 models to race in it (and your mate who was the main sponsor of your Kiwi VMX series to run I think a 77 Maico AW400 against your legit pre 75 bikes and no one would say anything so he keep doing it year after year ???).....and you wonder why that class has almost disapeared....your pre78 class morfhs into your evo/twinshock and then you have pre 86.....what the?....even Murray Anderson says it should stop at pre85....there is a huge diference between 85/86 models....even TMBill agrees we have it pretty much sorted and you guys should get into line and follow the leader. We have a great scene over here which you have attended on occasion and it pretty much runs with alot of commonsence on the day...sure some peoples noses get put out of joint but we have a structured rule book that is pretty close to the mark and getting closer every year (and quite easy to read to see the do's and the dont's). Your lucky TMBill has eloped with the Italian Princess for the week but I'm sure he'll set you straight when he returns. ;D Now go and make Karen a nice cocoa....and make sure my 360B is covered up. ;)
-
Mocking a serious topic like Beyond Blue is disgracefull but I'm not surprised.
Let's just hope the black dog doesn't bite you.
-
I'm sure Vwalter will remove it Slides...as he always does.....it is very insulting.
-
You keep digging your hole Wally, your ignorance never ceases to amaze me.
-
Look I took your advice and read the story about the girl that took her life because her forkseals where leaking . That is sad . Very sad .
Not funny
-
Farrrk, if it stops all this BS, I have a YZ250B frame I may part with......geezus.....what a load of horse manure....DJ, you shouldnt be stirring the pot with the mess the NZ VMX scene your coming back to after 3 or 4 years fishing (I hope you put back all those undersize fish!!)....your pre 75 (sorry "Classic" ) class allows 75/76 models to race in it (and your mate who was the main sponsor of your Kiwi VMX series to run I think a 77 Maico AW400 against your legit pre 75 bikes and no one would say anything so he keep doing it year after year ???)
The bike you're talking about there is a 74.5 GP440 not his AW400, had a ride on both bikes a couple of weeks ago & the AW would actually be a handicap. Now that I've ridden the GP I can see some of the reason he's so quick, that bike is very well set up
I agree that NZ pre75 actually isn't, as you say there are a few slightly later bikes in there, 1 Falta framed CZ250 but I can't say which others aren't pre75 without getting a headache.
The open title was won by a bike running piggyback ohlins a couple of years ago & the bighorn runs a modern pipe just like the americans do but I can't see anything happening about things like that as that would just be removing numbers from the grid
-
I think Davey is referring to the fact that the 74.5 runs very long suspension and actually looks like one of their pre 78 models as do a few of the classic bikes running in the class. it would not fit the description for their rules, however they are our rules not theirs and you will always run a race bike to the edge of the rules if you are a racer, if you are a collector / race then you bike will be era specific and correct.
I have raced both sides of the Tasman , from a purest racing point of view ( sheep stations and all that) OZ have it right, firm rules, big tracks ,massive organization , licensing etc .
For relaxed racing and run what ya brung then the Kiwi scene is very good. Most of the classes sort themselves out and I dont think the OZ approach would necessarily work here most of our riders a way too laid back to get into the crap it can throw up .
-
Gee Tony, I dont think that Maico would even fit our pre78 rules....have a good look at it mate....front and back and dont just stick up for him cause hes your mate....if you guys had some sort of organised system thats fair, you might find the numbers increasing.....its not that hard.
-
. Approach would necessarily work here most of our riders a way too laid back to get into the crap it can throw up .
95% happens here in cyber space....
-
Bloody hell Joan your medication sure is working well ;)
Mate if we tried to import the Aussie rule book into NZ, the sport would die.
Far too much politics and bullshit involved, which is not the NZ VMX formula.
If it aint broke, don't fix it,end of story.
;D
-
Bloody hell Joan your medication sure is working well ;)
Mate if we tried to import the Aussie rule book in NZ, the sport would die.Far too much politics and bullshit involved, which is not the NZ VMX formula.
If it aint broke, don't fix it,end of story.
;D
It aint broke here either, I don't see or hear any of this crap at race meetings. It's the keyboard experts on here with nothing better to do.
If Iain really wanted to know if it was legal or not he should ask an MA classic scrutineer or official, no one in this discussion has the authority to say yay or nay. This could go 20 pages and you still won't have an answer.
-
Bloody hell Joan your medication sure is working well ;)
Mate if we tried to import the Aussie rule book in NZ, the sport would die.Far too much politics and bullshit involved, which is not the NZ VMX formula.
If it aint broke, don't fix it,end of story.
;D
It aint broke here either, I don't see or hear any of this crap at race meetings. It's the keyboard experts on here with nothing better to do.
If Iain really wanted to know if it was legal or not he should ask an MA classic scrutineer or official, no one in this discussion has the authority to say yay or nay. This could go 20 pages and you still won't have an answer.
AMEN John.
-
Why not run last place in pre 78 and stick to the rules instead of running last place in pre 75 and breaking them? Why not try Crockets idea and see how good a bike you can make it (for pre 78)?
Cut-off dates are a mind set. I think you can do well on anything if you take the time to set it up properly.
Thread killer ! Now what are the boys going to hypothesize about ?
Shit ,howwrong can you be?
-
Mate if we tried to import the Aussie rule book in NZ, the sport would die.Far too much politics and bullshit involved, which is not the NZ VMX formula
If you judged the Aussie VMX rule problems from what you read on this forum you'd be forgiven for thinking that it's a giant shitfight, with punters lined up with their $60 protest fee in hand at every race meeting. The real story is very different. 99% of vintage racers happily build their bikes to the rulebook and go about their enjoyment of our sport with nary a hint of drama. In the real world away from the computer, protests and rulebook fudgeing are actually few and far between.
Having only ever been to one NZ VMX meeting I'm not really an expert on how the set up is but from my observations and from conversations with my many Kiwi mates, I reckon the 'rules' may be a bit on the loose side. The South Island runs a totally different set of rules to the North Island which is a bit confusing in itself. There are good reasons the rest of the VMX world went with the pre 65/pre 75/pre 85/Evo splits but for some reason best known to them the Kiwis opted for different cutoff/eligibility criteria. The meeting I went to in Timaru was a loose mix of four stroke/British class, short travel and long travel classes (I'm sure it was more defining than that but to us outsiders that's how it looked). There were more than enough bikes there to split them in a pre '65/ pre 75/pre 85 manner but they did it their way. Maybe the Kiwis want to keep it loose and free and if that's the case, good on 'em but I reckon if they want the sport to grow on both islands it'd be more advantageous in the long run to adopt cutoffs and eligibility criteria that ties in with what Australia, USA, UK and Europe largely follow..........just my 2 bobs worth ;) )
-
Mate if we tried to import the Aussie rule book in NZ, the sport would die.Far too much politics and bullshit involved, which is not the NZ VMX formula
The real story is very different. 99% of vintage racers happily build their bikes to the rulebook and go about their enjoyment of our sport with nary a hint of drama. [/i]
So what is the answer to the original question? What class ,if not the pre 75, is the forum members bike thats he's contemplating building eligable for?
-
The day before today,One day, making tracks
In the prairie of Prax,
Came a North-Going Zax
And a South-Going Zax.
And it happened that both of them came to a place
Where they bumped. There they stood.
Foot to foot. Face to face.
“Look here, now!” the North-Going Zax said, “I say!
You are blocking my path. You are right in my way.
I’m a North-Going Zax and I always go north.
Get out of my way, now, and let me go forth!”
“Who’s in whose way?” snapped the South-Going Zax.
“I always go south, making south-going tracks.
So you’re in MY way! And I ask you to move
And let me go south in my south-going groove.”
Then the North-Going Zax puffed his chest up with pride.
“I never,” he said, “take a step to one side.
And I’ll prove to you that I won’t change my ways
If I have to keep standing here fifty-nine days!”
“And I’ll prove to YOU,” yelled the South-Going Zax,
“That I can stand here in the prairie of Prax
For fifty-nine years! For I live by a rule
That I learned as a boy back in South-Going School.
Never budge! That’s my rule. Never budge in the least!
Not an inch to the west! Not an inch to the east!
I’ll stay here, not budging! I can and I will
If it makes you and me and the whole world stand still!”
Well…
Of course the world didn’t stand still. The world grew.
In a couple of years, the new highway came through
And they built it right over those two stubborn Zax
And left them there, standing un-budged in their tracks.
-
Deep....and funny ;D
So what is the answer to the original question?
Nice try, but I'm not going there. ::)
-
. Approach would necessarily work here most of our riders a way too laid back to get into the crap it can throw up .
95% happens here in cyber space....
and where does the other 5% happen ?
-
Well…
Of course the world didn’t stand still. The world grew.
In a couple of years, the new highway came through
And they built it right over those two stubborn Zax
And left them there, standing un-budged in their tracks.
Haha pretty funny but the Zacs on this forum who want to create something in their own garage just go back and do it anyway. Anyone seen Doc around lately?
-
......................Anyone seen Doc around lately?
No not for awhile, i miss his project builds and the pics of his restos.
that bloke can turn shit into strawberry jam.
-
......................Anyone seen Doc around lately?
No not for awhile, i miss his project builds and the pics of his restos.
that bloke can turn shit into strawberry jam.
He's on Facebook every other day...
-
yup..still lurking motomaniac. I prefer to sit on the sidelines and watch the legality debates these days as they really don't affect me.
and thanks Hoony ;)..Bi-Lo strawberry jam maybe not (http://www2.woolworthsonline.com.au/Content/ProductImages/big/033565.jpg)
-
Nicely done, buts it's IXL Jam for me Mate :D
-
Like my bikes, I like things home made...... Nana made Lemon/Orange marmalade from the monthly local church fete! Her lemon butter is pretty damn good too!
Hows things going these days Doc?
-
Farrrk, if it stops all this BS, I have a YZ250B frame I may part with......geezus.....what a load of horse manure....DJ, you shouldnt be stirring the pot with the mess the NZ VMX scene your coming back to after 3 or 4 years fishing (I hope you put back all those undersize fish!!)....your pre 75 (sorry "Classic" ) class allows 75/76 models to race in it and you wonder why that class has almost disapeared....your pre78 class morfhs into your evo/twinshock and then you have pre 86.....what the?....even Murray Anderson says it should stop at pre85....there is a huge diference between 85/86 models....even TMBill agrees we have it pretty much sorted and you guys should get into line and follow the leader. We have a great scene over here which you have attended on occasion and it pretty much runs with alot of commonsence on the day...sure some peoples noses get put out of joint but we have a structured rule book that is pretty close to the mark and getting closer every year (and quite easy to read to see the do's and the dont's).
John this is not my "load of horse manure". A question was asked and all I did was answer it with the best of my knowledge and understanding after reading your rule book. Which as you say is a stuctured and quite easy to read to see the do's and don't. Don't be having a go at me when it is what it is. I didnt write your rules, I just read them and copied them here.
You seem to be on the defensive for what reason Im unsure but this is an open forum for discussing all things VMX and in this thread it was about a bike that was questionable for pre75.
As for what we do here in NZ wouldnt it be best you start a new thread on the wrongs of VMX in New Zealand?
I will debate it with you in there at length if you so wish. ;)
-
Firko talking of lemon kurd how did edna like hers from classic dirt trip
-
yup..still lurking motomaniac. I prefer to sit on the sidelines and watch the legality debates these days as they really don't affect me.
and thanks Hoony ;)..Bi-Lo strawberry jam maybe not (http://www2.woolworthsonline.com.au/Content/ProductImages/big/033565.jpg)
Nice Doc ,I did check your FB page outta curiousity.Alls good except I'm a bit above the Woolies variety stuff thesedays. ::)
-
Farrrk,and then you have pre 86.....what the?....even Murray Anderson says it should stop at pre85....there is a huge diference between 85/86 models.....
Yer there is a bigger difference between 85/86 models than 84/85 which is probably why they have pre 86 (which would exclude 86 models?) instead of our pre 85 , sounds good too me :P
-
Firko talking of lemon kurd how did edna like hers from classic dirt trip
All gone Mikey....whoofed down every morning for brekkie until it was gone! Ditto the Tomato/Passionfruit jam!
-
Danger Will Robinson! Thread hi-jack in progress.
Firko, status quo here. Nothin' a year in the tropics wouldn't fix ;)
-
"that bloke can turn shit into strawberry jam."
Remind me not to drop into see Doc around arvo tea time
-
Firko, status quo here. Nothin' a year in the tropics wouldn't fix
I'm hearing you matey.......a couple of weeks months on a tropical beach with a few good books and a decent rum supply is just what I need to get over a pretty ordinary year.
-
Farrrk,and then you have pre 86.....what the?....even Murray Anderson says it should stop at pre85....there is a huge diference between 85/86 models.....
Yer there is a bigger difference between 85/86 models than 84/85 which is probably why they have pre 86 (which would exclude 86 models?) instead of our pre 85 , sounds good too me :P
Agreed.
Pre-86 excludes all rear discs, cartridge forks, and Honda's HPP (which was considerably better than the other options).
I don't think any of the 85 models are significantly better than the good 84 models.
-
Stuff the beach ....might get sand in the Rum! ;)
-
Farrrk,and then you have pre 86.....what the?....even Murray Anderson says it should stop at pre85....there is a huge diference between 85/86 models.....
Yer there is a bigger difference between 85/86 models than 84/85 which is probably why they have pre 86 (which would exclude 86 models?) instead of our pre 85 , sounds good too me :P
Agreed.
Pre-86 excludes all rear discs, cartridge forks, and Honda's HPP (which was considerably better than the other options).
I don't think any of the 85 models are significantly better than the good 84 models.
Yes in NZ we do race Pre86 and it wasnt because we wanted to be "different from every body else" it was because of the 1986 bikes having very significant changes to suspension and motors so it was considered as a good place to start the next era.
-
Iain hurry up and build the bike the last race for the year is in about 2 weeks. No one cares to much here in tas any way theres dt400 in pre75 a yz125 g in pre 80 no one cares to much and our classes are pre 75, pre 80, pre86, pre90 thers no pre78 to race in or evo cheers george
-
Farrrk,and then you have pre 86.....what the?....even Murray Anderson says it should stop at pre85....there is a huge diference between 85/86 models.....
Yer there is a bigger difference between 85/86 models than 84/85 which is probably why they have pre 86 (which would exclude 86 models?) instead of our pre 85 , sounds good too me :P
Agreed.
Pre-86 excludes all rear discs, cartridge forks, and Honda's HPP (which was considerably better than the other options).
I don't think any of the 85 models are significantly better than the good 84 models.
There is a huge difference between the 84/85 500's from Honda & Kawasaki, they are all new watercooled bikes that left the other brands behind. The difference is not so big in the smaller bikes though but i think we got it right with pre 85.
-
Farrrk,and then you have pre 86.....what the?....even Murray Anderson says it should stop at pre85....there is a huge diference between 85/86 models.....
Yer there is a bigger difference between 85/86 models than 84/85 which is probably why they have pre 86 (which would exclude 86 models?) instead of our pre 85 , sounds good too me :P
Agreed.
Pre-86 excludes all rear discs, cartridge forks, and Honda's HPP (which was considerably better than the other options).
I don't think any of the 85 models are significantly better than the good 84 models.
There is a huge difference between the 84/85 500's from Honda & Kawasaki, they are all new watercooled bikes that left the other brands behind. The difference is not so big in the smaller bikes though but i think we got it right with pre 85.
it also splits pre85 and pre 90 down the middle.
-
.
Yer there is a bigger difference between 85/86 models than 84/85 which is probably why they have pre 86 (which would exclude 86 models?) instead of our pre 85 , sounds good too me :P
[/quote]
Agreed.
Pre-86 excludes all rear discs, cartridge forks, and Honda's HPP (which was considerably better than the other options).
I don't think any of the 85 models are significantly better than the good 84 models.
[/quote]There is a huge difference between the 84/85 500's from Honda & Kawasaki, they are all new watercooled bikes that left the other brands behind. The difference is not so big in the smaller bikes though but i think we got it right with pre 85.
[/quote]
85 was the end of the works bike,which is why Honda in 86 had chrome bore ,real powervalves,cartridge forks.The RG was a ground breaking bike and the start of the true turning point in the 80's.Unless you're racing 20 or more min motos Idont think that watercooling is much benefit but a cartridged fork and the power that theHPP valvgave over the ATAC system is significant.
-
Farrrk,and then you have pre 86.....what the?....even Murray Anderson says it should stop at pre85....there is a huge diference between 85/86 models.....
Yer there is a bigger difference between 85/86 models than 84/85 which is probably why they have pre 86 (which would exclude 86 models?) instead of our pre 85 , sounds good too me :P
Agreed.
Pre-86 excludes all rear discs, cartridge forks, and Honda's HPP (which was considerably better than the other options).
I don't think any of the 85 models are significantly better than the good 84 models.
There is a huge difference between the 84/85 500's from Honda & Kawasaki, they are all new watercooled bikes that left the other brands behind. The difference is not so big in the smaller bikes though but i think we got it right with pre 85.
it also splits pre85 and pre 90 down the middle.
Great points those, I can see now why we should have followed you guys with show casing different eras of motorcross and how it evolved. ;) ;D ;D :-*
-
Agreed.
Pre-86 excludes all rear discs, cartridge forks, and Honda's HPP (which was considerably better than the other options).
I don't think any of the 85 models are significantly better than the good 84 models.
Yes in NZ we do race Pre86 and it wasnt because we wanted to be "different from every body else" it was because of the 1986 bikes having very significant changes to suspension and motors so it was considered as a good place to start the next era.
Maybe you NZers should consider exporting a little common sense.Just saying ::)
-
If you've ever ridden an '84 KX & CR500 you'll know what i'm talking about. The '85 bikes were all new(frame, suspension & engines) and much better packages than the 84's.
-
If you've ever ridden an '84 KX & CR500 you'll know what i'm talking about. The '85 bikes were all new(frame, suspension & engines) and much better packages than the 84's.
The 84 500 that Glen Bell raced at the Nats was bought from me.I had Dave Armstrongs ex team Honda RG in 87/88.
The main prob with the 84 wasthe 40mm pistoned minibike shock. I rode a Mates 85 500 back in the day which I hated . The 86 had much betterforks and shock and power. I also owned every cr250 (upto 89)made except for an M and an RB (which I refused to buy) the stock RG was way better than my fully ProCircuit kitted RF.
-
If you've ever ridden an '84 KX & CR500 you'll know what i'm talking about. The '85 bikes were all new(frame, suspension & engines) and much better packages than the 84's.
The 84 500 that Glen Bell raced at the Nats was bought from me.I had Dave Armstrongs ex team Honda RG in 87/88.
The main prob with the 84 wasthe 40mm pistoned minibike shock. I rode a Mates 85 500 back in the day which I hated . The 86 had much betterforks and shock and power. I also owned ever cr250 made except an Mand an RB (whichI refused to buy) the stock RG was way better than my fully ProCircuit kitted RF.
Fair enough.. I didn't think either of the 2 '84 500's was that nice to ride, the '85's felt more refined with better handling and power delivery.
-
If you've ever ridden an '84 KX & CR500 you'll know what i'm talking about. The '85 bikes were all new(frame, suspension & engines) and much better packages than the 84's.
The 84 500 that Glen Bell raced at the Nats was bought from me.I had Dave Armstrongs ex team Honda RG in 87/88.
The main prob with the 84 wasthe 40mm pistoned minibike shock. I rode a Mates 85 500 back in the day which I hated . The 86 had much betterforks and shock and power. I also owned ever cr250 made except an Mand an RB (whichI refused to buy) the stock RG was way better than my fully ProCircuit kitted RF.
Fair enough.. I didn't think either of the 2 '84 500's was that nice to ride, the '85's felt more refined with better handling and power delivery.
Well I never rode a KX500 until the 88 model.I take your word for it on the KX's andyes the 85 CR was a new bike compared to the 84 but the 250's led the tech in those days and the 86 cr was more high tech than the 85 was compared to the 84 IMO courtesy of the modern vavled cartridge forks and the engine.I realise that theframe was updatd butI actually like the 84 geomnd ergs better.Each to their own I guess but Idont see a problemwith pre 86 at all, an 85 againt 83/83/84 models isfairer than against 86 and on IMO
-
Well I never rode a KX500 until the 88 model.I take your word for it on the KX's andyes the 85 CR was a new bike compared to the 84 but the 250's led the tech in those days and the 86 cr was more high tech than the 85 was compared to the 84 IMO courtesy of the modern vavled cartridge forks and the engine.I realise that theframe was updatd butI actually like the 84 geomnd ergs better.Each to their own I guess but Idont see a problemwith pre 86 at all, an 85 againt 83/83/84 models isfairer than against 86 and on IMO
I bought/built bikes to suit the rules in place now.. If the rules started as pre 86 then i would've built 85 models instead of 84 models.
6 of one, half dozen of the other.
I built all my bikes over several era's to suit the rules, if the rules were pre 77, pre 80, pre 86 and pre 91 then i would've built 76, 79, 85 and 90 model bikes...
It doesn't matter what the rules are people will always complain, especially the keyboard racers on here. Why can't i ride this, why can't i use that.
Build bikes to suit the rules and GO RIDE. It's not rocket science....
-
Well I never rode a KX500 until the 88 model.I take your word for it on the KX's andyes the 85 CR was a new bike compared to the 84 but the 250's led the tech in those days and the 86 cr was more high tech than the 85 was compared to the 84 IMO courtesy of the modern vavled cartridge forks and the engine.I realise that theframe was updatd butI actually like the 84 geomnd ergs better.Each to their own I guess but Idont see a problemwith pre 86 at all, an 85 againt 83/83/84 models isfairer than against 86 and on IMO
I bought/built bikes to suit the rules in place now.. If the rules started as pre 86 then i would've built 85 models instead of 84 models.
6 of one, half dozen of the other.
I built all my bikes over several era's to suit the rules, if the rules were pre 77, pre 80, pre 86 and pre 91 then i would've built 76, 79, 85 and 90 model bikes...
It doesn't matter what the rules are people will always complain, especially the keyboard racers on here. Why can't i ride this, why can't i use that.
Build bikes to suit the rules and GO RIDE. It's not rocket science....
For sure but I was pointingout that the NZers pre 86 class isnt a bad idea and one can see the sense in having pre 86 .
-
Well I never rode a KX500 until the 88 model.I take your word for it on the KX's andyes the 85 CR was a new bike compared to the 84 but the 250's led the tech in those days and the 86 cr was more high tech than the 85 was compared to the 84 IMO courtesy of the modern vavled cartridge forks and the engine.I realise that theframe was updatd butI actually like the 84 geomnd ergs better.Each to their own I guess but Idont see a problemwith pre 86 at all, an 85 againt 83/83/84 models isfairer than against 86 and on IMO
I bought/built bikes to suit the rules in place now.. If the rules started as pre 86 then i would've built 85 models instead of 84 models.
6 of one, half dozen of the other.
I built all my bikes over several era's to suit the rules, if the rules were pre 77, pre 80, pre 86 and pre 91 then i would've built 76, 79, 85 and 90 model bikes...
It doesn't matter what the rules are people will always complain, especially the keyboard racers on here. Why can't i ride this, why can't i use that.
Build bikes to suit the rules and GO RIDE. It's not rocket science....
For sure but I was pointingout that the NZers pre 86 class isnt a bad idea and one can see the sense in having pre 86 .
Yeah i guess so..