REVISION OF AUSTRALIAN VMX MACHINE ELIGIBILITY RULE FOR SUSPENSION TRAVEL LIMITS

[Freakshow]

i think it should be a limit not limited to its standard form.

otherwise you only get every one riding the same model, and not the array you currently have.

 As per above why if i owned a T75 M 250 counldnt i run shocks that picked up 7" travel or whatever it is in pre 78,  you cant penilise earlier models or not so advanced models just becuase there are one or two other bikes that might have bigger factory specs closer to the cut period.

 The rule should still be the cut off, as in if it was available in the period you can fit it , its not limited to brand or if it came on that bike.  For example if you found a pre 75 cut off was moved to 5" or what ever to accomamdate the best travel at the time for Ross, then all the twin shcoks should have the same option to go 5" cause im sure you could have built or found shocks that legth in the day.

 That also allows ridders to build mungrels using the best bits ie longer shock from somthing else that has it.  Seems easy to police a "new" limit that brings in the longer travel for all with inthe same period, rather than policing manufacturer and all that specification stuff.  Keep it simple

[All Things 414]

Ok. As above.

[firko]

I must be going into dementia...I can't understand Freakys post either.

[All Things 414]

I think what he's trying to say is:
If your bike in 1976 had 7" of suspension and another brand had a shock (again in '76) that would give you 9" of suspension, then you can use it.
That's how I read it anyhow........

[firko]

oh   I guess I should think about that for a little while. Thank you.

[Freakshow]

yep sorry got a few other screens open. ( and we still dont get spell check in the forum yet ) 

YEs what im saying is jam the " must be as per manufactures spec. "

 YOu just set a lenght for that period and thats it. if you find now you need to move the pre 75 and the pre 78 limits a little higher to say 5" or 10" make it so and then every one can build to that spec and not limit the less lucky models to have to deal with the hand they were dealt, but also allow the "cusp" models the ability to come in and play as they were made too. 

The wording of poll above just sets out to artificially make it a one horse race for the one or tlywo bikes who current sit on the cusp of that period anyway, by disadvantages the earlier model by locking them into there initial specs  sounds stupid to me. its a class killer.

Seams simple to me -  "Keep the field even with a set limit not set the bikes specs to how it left the production line

[090]

I had a 77 Monty that i was riding in pre 78 250. Was i in the wrong class? Why is the Monty excluded again?

You sold a good bike for the wrong reason. As far as I know it's only the length of the suspension that excludes it (as with a lot of Euro bikes of the same year I'm told). Modify the suspension to under the 9" rule and you're on your way.......

Get rid of all the external suspension adjustment froim bikes that would never have had it unless they're a period shock that did (none that I can think of.)

Okay just needed restricters. Just the conversation regarding a Maico was to put restricters in but then when a Monty is mentioned the word excluded is used.
I sold it 'cause it had a woeful front brake, hated the kickstarter and had a gearbox full of neutrals. It was also all new to me (vmx and 'different' bikes).
Good handling though.....

[Rossvickicampbell]

and as per my earlier comment - ie not just pre 78 - what about pre 75?

[oldfart]

9''     7''    4''  that's the way it's been formulated and that's the way it will stay . Sorry Fellas your going no where with this one
                                  
                                  


THE PROBLEM HERE IS THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO RE-INVENT THE WHEEL .   too late it's already been done

[bigk]

That VB 250 was a good fun bike Brad, we never had any issues with false neutrals. The guy I sold it to loves him.
Chers,
K

[LWC82PE]

yes i am happy to allow forks off another make as long as they are from the same period eg 74 Maico forks on a 74 suzuki in pre 75.

[Nathan S]

To exclude so many standard bikes is just dumb - I don't think that anyone really thinks that's the slightest bit reasonable, or good for the sport. Mick's suggested alternative is a great idea, but falls down as Graeme M (and others) have pointed out - I think that a lot of the votes for staying with 9" of travel are more a rejection of the problem with 'standard travel' than any love for 9" of travel.

I think the revised rule should be:
All bikes are limited to 9" of travel front and rear, or the standard travel, whichever is greater.

Its the best of both worlds - the guys with the stock YZ250/400s, Maicos, Montesas, etc etc etc can run, while still keeping the class different (in both suspension performance and appearance) to the Evo bikes.

[bigk]

That one works for me Nathan.
Cheers,
K