Era Eligibility

[Rossvickicampbell]

Gents - this may open the proverbial can of worms - but essentially I thought if a piece of equipment was recognised as being period correct (regardless of how readily available that was) then it was OK to be on your machine in that particular class.  If a set of one of Fox factory forx was made for David Bailey in 1983 and they became available on the market now then wouldn't they be OK to go onto my pre 85 Honda CR250?

OK - awaiting replies.

ta guys

Rossco

[LWC82PE]

Fox factory forks were first listed in the 1979 Fox catalogue. I personally would not use them on any 1978 bikes or older.

[Nathan S]

Ifyou're talking about reproduction parts made in 2010, then you may need to prove that they're replicas of parts made for 1984 or earlier. And you may need to prove that they are "exact replicas" (whatever that means).
But if you can do that, then you're home and hosed.

In reality, there's a lot of grey area that can be exploited if you want to - and if you are prepared to live with all of the possible consequences...
We've also got a funny attitude to repro parts - an improved replica is usually tolerated/admired far more than a slightly later part, even though the later part may be an authentic production replica of an earlier works part...

[Rossvickicampbell]

but Nathan - can availability be factored in to eligibility.  If it was available pre (insert era here) and is a genuine period part - not a later repro - should it not be OK?

Rossco

[Nathan S]

Absolutely, 110% A-OK.

(sorry for misunderstanding the first time!)

I should probably mention that for an Evo bike, the poorly defined rule about "Bikes must be OEM" can be interpreted to mean that they've got to be stock. Scrutineers who actually enforce it like that are few and far between though.

[evo550]

If they where built in 1983, of course they are eligible for pre '85.
Could be an interesting evo debate though