1973 shock position

[TM BILL]

I was also of the understanding that period after market swingarms could run as built but had to restrict suspension if necessary.

This is the bit i really cant understand  If the class is pre 75 why should you have to limit 74.5 Maicos or not run readily available in the period aftermarket options without limiters or alteration.

[DR]

  all hypothetical I realize but Firko, getting back to your statement about trick swingarms having to retain the same mount position as the original. Many aftermarket arms were different in this area as well as actual length and appearance but

who's actually measuring or contesting anything

Nit picking shit really but my veiw is the whole deal towards eligability is structured on how much money you have to spend.

e.g racer X can go buy all the trickest stuff, simons forks, ohlins or fox shox, fmf swingarms, radial heads, programmable ignitions, cartridge emulators, PD valves and such in front ends, ceramic bearings and coatings, the list of what you can do if you have serious coin to throw around goes on and on.

What we have in the end is a bike that is a beautiful thing yes, but it is so far removed from the stock model in performance and appearance it isn't funny. Poor old racer joe can't afford anything like that so he modifies his stock bike and stock parts in the vain hope of some improvement but this seemingly isn't allowed

Seems a little hypocritical that Racer X can do as he pleases so long as the parts were or are replica's of parts made in the era. Ol' Joe mxer wanting to to mod his bike at home in the garage with what's available, the same way he did back in the day, is frowned upon.

Not stirring anything here but I see double standards. I'm at the stage now where I build what I like, how I like. 'If' I race at titles (which I highly doubt anymore) I'd ride in whatever class it falls into but for mine, the easiest most simplistic method of eligibility at national or state level is the bike must be as it left the factory excepting consumables such as tyres, lever assy's, bars etc. If there is contentious part this should be raised and attended to 'before' the event not after the fact.

No wide pegs, no aftermarket goodies, no programmable ignitions, no ohlins, none of that 'modern' or bling stuff..it must be as it was originally when it left the factory. We are after all, preserving an era are we not and everyone plays much happier when it's a level field. Just my opinion is all

[firko]

I've read and reread your post Chris but can't for the life of me understand your reasoning. The rich guy who builds his bikes with a well stocked credit card still has to built his bike to conform the the same rules as your hypothetical battler. Sure his bike might be faster, prettier and tricker than our battlers bike with its homebuilt mods but isn't that the way with every facet of our lives?

Poor old racer joe can't afford anything like that so he modifies his stock bike and stock parts in the vain hope of some improvement but this seemingly isn't allowed

What isn't allowed?  Once again, the rich guy and the battler still have to conform to the same rules. If Joe Bloggs can't do a particular thing neither can Richie Rich. To my eyes, the playing field is pretty level. To use the swingarm as an example...Richie Riches mega dollar Thor replica alloy swingarm must have the same suspension mounting points as the stock arm on Joe Bloggs bike. If you think that by fitting an alloy swingarm to Richies bike give him an unfair advantage you've missed the point that in most cases the swingarm makes diddly squat difference to the bike and in some cases it's actually heavier than a stocker (Thor/Maico 490) and is merely a fashion accessory.

No wide pegs, no aftermarket goodies, no programmable ignitions, no ohlins, none of that 'modern' or bling stuff..it must be as it was originally when it left the factory. We are after all, preserving an era are we not and everyone plays much happier when it's a level field. Just my opinion is all.

To a point I agree with you but you know as well as I that having those modern items on a bike rarely detracts from the period looks of the bike. Motocross racers have been modifying, cutting and shutting and fitting aftermarket parts for even longer than I can remember. One of the integral facets of any motorsport is to modify your vehicle to improve its performance and gain some sort of advantage over your rival. Motocross was/is no different. As soon as Dirt Bike magazine showed us how to modify our DT1 frames, nearly everyone was doing it, Poppy alloy Koni bodies were the Ohlins of their day, Preston Petty fenders replaced heavy old steel items, Bassani or Hooker pipes replaced the stock pipes, Inter -Am solid alloy bars went on to replace the chrome steel stockers and so on and so on. The Hot Rod culture in motocross isn't a new thing, we've been doing it since we first through a leg over an old Matchless and found it to be too heavy and cumbersome. That's what prompted the Rickmans to develop the Metisse. Keeping the bikes stock would never work and wouldn't be reflective of how it was anyway.

Fatty pegs are a safety thing that indirectly keeps us on board old bikes for longer due to less injuries. Ever ridden in the wet with pre '75 Maico pegs? If you had you'd be fitting fat pegs pronto. I'm not a big fan of modern shocks like Ohlins, some YSS and even Works Performance appearance but readliy agree that they're 'consumables' and are an easier proposition than continually rebuilding worn out old period items. I personally use period shocks and go through the trouble of rebuilding them (although I have a set of YSS on my B&S TM400)  to satisfy my own ideas but overall modern shocks don't bother me that much. I also don't think that reprogramable ignitions should be allowed but is it as big a scourge as you think? Does having the ability to alter the ignitions curve make any given bike a potential race winner? I doubt it and even if it was, how would you control their use without pulling every ignition cover in scrutineering?

There are aslways going to be Richie Rich v Joe Bloggs situations in our sport, that's what's so great about it. I've seen more low dollar or mid price biikes at the pointy end of the fields than the shiny bikes. Most of the stuff you find offensive is mostly fitted for visual brownie points and rarely have much impact on the bikes ability to win races. Many of the low dollar bikes that you've created are equally as capable of winning as Richie Riches bling mobile. Going back to my opening statement....I genuinely can't see what your problem is.









 

[DR]

Mark, I'll get straight to the point..

Fact -  back in '77/'78 the trick with the RM250's was to move the top shock mount about 1 and a half inches down. I have absolute proof of this modification in the day by leading riders in Australia riding production based bikes so then why is it unacceptable now if the bike still retains the correct wheel travel?

Lots of aftermarket swingarms have different shock positions to the stock items. Is there a list somewhere that says what arms are allowed and what isn't because if one starts measuring correctly you'll find a lot of aftermarket arms could become very contentious

I once asked if I could run the genuine optional RM125/250/370A/B alloy arm and I was criticized as a wanker, wanting my own rules and bending and pushing vmx extremities to the limits yeah right!  This arm however did and does conform 100% to every critera..just seems a little crook to me when infact many other bling arms aren't legal if the shock positioning rule is for some reason enforced

[oldfart]

Seetle down guys, this is not intended to be a shit fight at all.

My point is if it was raced at a national event in Australia would it be Pre 75 or pre 78  because of mods, Why I ask this question you may say     because this mod was done in 1973 and not frowned apon.

Some may say it was not a PRODUCTION bike....yeah I can cop that on me chin, but in my eyes if it was legal then it should be now    so where do you draw a line in the sand.,

Ps,  Yesterday  our home  computor expired and have lost everything ....... lightning strike  cooked our surge board

[firko]

No shitfight here Stuart ...I even included little smiley blokes. Youve been here long enough to be able to descipher polite debate from a bitch fight. Doc made some comments that I thought needed a response. Nothing more, I'm sure Doc agrees.

I'm confidant the bike would be legal as an RH as that's the way they were continually evolving. With photographic evidence that it raced in that form in '73 you'd be right as long as it configured to the 7" and 4" regulations that we race under. A TM however is restricted to the parameters of the production specs.

My laptop got zapped in a storm a couple of years ago...never replaced it....hate the bloody things.

Fact -  back in '77/'78 the trick with the RM250's was to move the top shock mount about 1 and a half inches down. I have absolute proof of this modification in the day by leading riders in Australia riding production based bikes so then why is it unacceptable now if the bike still retains the correct wheel travel?

There are lots of instances where these things occurred. It wasn't just Suzuki. I agree totally but as it is right now our rulebook states in 18.5.0.8.(g)..rear shock absorbers shall be in the original position, using the original mounting points. Now, you make a good point that perhaps the rule should be opened up to allow period suspension mods. If it's something that you feel needs changing, go to your club and go through the correct process to have the rule changed. I think that it'd create more problems than it'd solve, especially for the scrutineer so I doubt it'd get through on that ground alone.

Lots of aftermarket swingarms have different shock positions to the stock items. Is there a list somewhere that says what arms are allowed and what isn't because if one starts measuring correctly you'll find a lot of aftermarket arms could become very contentious 

If what you say is true, those swingarms are ilegal. A list isn't going to totally cover it as there are always things inadvertantly left out. It's up to the owner to prove his swingarm is legal. It's easy, just produce dated magazine articles, ads or brochures backing your claim. If there isn't a historic precedent, it's not legal, full stop.

I once asked if I could run the genuine optional RM125/250/370A/B alloy arm and I was criticized as a wanker, wanting my own rules and bending and pushing vmx extremities to the limits  yeah right!  This arm however did and does conform 100% to every critera..just seems a little crook to me when infact many other bling arms aren't legal if the shock positioning rule is for some reason enforced

I don't recall the situation but if you have documented proof the swingarm is legal, it isbloody legal despite what the cyber experts may tell you. I have no idea myself but if you can back your claim with documentation, it's in. That goes for just about everything. Documentation, documentation and then more documentation. This forum isn't the arbiter of bike legality either. The scrutineer at the meeting in question is the man. I helped and observed Dave at the Conondale Nats and seeing many racers trying to pull swiftys made me a nauseous. The old "my mate told me its OK" or "they used to do it in the old days" dosen't cut it. Unless you can prove it.

Once more with passion.....period documentation is you best friend. 

[Marc.com]

it must be as it was originally when it left the factory. We are after all, preserving an era are we not and everyone plays much happier when it's a level field. Just my opinion is all

With due respect what a load, racing has never been a level playing field and nothing was ever particularly raced as it left the factory, not then and not now. If the part was available before midnight on New Years Eve 1974 then you should be able to run it, whether it changes the shock positions or not.

Preserving an era is very much about preserving the performance parts of that era. Besides most Aussie battlers these days have a couple of million dollars in investment property and can easily pick up a few sets of Simons.

[Lozza]

Once more with passion.....period documentation is you best friend. 

Is there a better case for the introduction of VMX Log Books*?. Would pretty much stop all the anomolies in the rules. The alternative is to draft up even more complex rules that will make post race protests the norm rather than exceptions.

*If your not aware most other motorsport disciplines have a log book(particularly period racing) the issuing of a log book means that you have satisified 'someone' that your modifications(or lack of) are from within the period solely on the evidence you provide.The more modifications the more evidence is needed. Evidence is usualy photos from magazines and articles.Parts books are not regarded as evidence. Log books are usually sold with race bikes/cars.No log book no race.