Nationals split: pre-75 or pre-78?

[JC]

The track arguments are all a bit of smoke and mirrors for the purpose of this discussion, as it will only be an issue IF all of the following occurs all at the same time:
1. The assertions about pre-78 bikes chewing up the track are correct AND
2. The WA Club hosts another National title meeting AND
3. The WA club holds that National title meeting at Narrogin AND
4. Significant numbers of pre-78 bikes turn up.

Is Narrogin WA's only candidate track? Is it really going to be harmed by a couple of dozen pre-78 bikes, on a weekend when many thousands of laps will be completed?

I also feel the need to point out that the vast majority of pre-78 riders (at National level) also ride pre-75 and older, while very few of them ride Evo and newer.
This fact alone tells the story of where the pre-78 bikes belong.

Nathan, I think yr missing the point that WA are not trying to preserve a track (Narrogin), they're trying to preserve the early classes, & not just at club level.

I thoroughly agree with yr last paragraph tho.

In fact, most of the posts in the last 2 pages or so have been sensible & devoid of the earlier angst

[GMC]

It seems that West Oz doesn’t like being told they have to include something they don’t want anymore than East Oz likes being told that they can’t include something they do want.

There should be some flexibility in the system so that promoting clubs have some say in what they want to run. ( I actually don’t understand these supposed new rules as I thought we already had the choice to separate if we wanted)

Forcing WA to run Pre 78 would be a waste of time as they don’t nurture the class over there so there would be hardly any local entries and I’m not sure there would be enough Easterners travel over there to make the class viable.
I’m sure the club promoting Evo etc would welcome the Pre 78 class on the odd occasion.

[211kawasaki]

All
now that the minutes are common knowledge I should make some comment

I dont feel that history should be the sole determination of the future success of the split, part of what we are doing here is to encourage people back to the sport and allow others to ride how better suits them. The 70+ age is a represention of this and the feed back in this area alone will most likely make alterations to the rider entrant numbers. Its thought that it should be a demo class and be non compeditive where every entrant receives the MA medal for competing. I feel you will get some of the old crew back - just for this class alone,

For me its well known I prefer Pre 78 as the split so the classic classes become pre 78 and the Post Classic are Pre 90 etc. (this should confirm that we work on submissions not personal view as the split has been put forward at pre 75). There is room for growth in the pre 90+ classes but no where to go in the future for the pre 78 and older. My point is that this should be considered both a new direction for the pre 90 movement and an effort to get riders to return to the pre 78 classes.

Can I suggest tht everyone has a read of the minutes of the commission to fully understand what is being undertaken here and make sure that if your not happy with any aspect you approach your state HSC and voice your concerns. As I have said many times before the Commission will not make / invent / change anything without solid input for or against from the SCB and their HSC.
Regards
Dave T

[JC]

Gents, it's worthwhile to consider from first principals what cuts up the track

1. Power - it takes power to dig & the bigger the power, the bigger the digger.
The faster riders are on the power more therefore cut up the track more. (this is one of Brads points)
Sidecars have more power than anything
Also the later classes typically have more power than earlier classes.
And arguably, more/better suspension = better traction, therefore more effective diggers
                and  more/better suspension = more on the power.

2. Volume of traffic - more bikes, more races = more diggers. This point is obvious.

3. More tight corners etc - causes braking & acceleration woops. This is Dave#46's point.
The tighter/slower the corner, the more effect for 2 reasons:

a) Front wheel does not usually contribute to cutting up the track since it has no power, but under braking the negative torque applied is effectively power (power is just a mathematical function of torque). The more braking, the more woops.

b) the torque multiplication in the lower gears exiting slow corners effectively means bigger diggers there. This is offset somewhat by slower speeds (see below) but is still a factor.

4. Speed - explained why in point 6) below, but at its extreme a bike doing 2kph won't cut up a track, but one at 100kph will. So again the faster riders will cut the track up more.

But another significant point here is that the whole reason MX went long travel is that any given rough ground can be traversed faster with longer travel.

5. There maybe a 4stroke factor, in that better traction = more efficient digger. But if that traction is due to the frequency of the power impulses, its worth remembering that a 4T spinning at 14000rpm (as the modern ones do) is the same as a 2T at 7000rpm

6. The physics of spring systems. The most fundamental reason why tracks woop-out is that when any force is applied to any spring system the response is multiple oscillations. Its basic physics of mechanical/dynamic sytems. If there were no friction (damping) it would be simple harmonic motion (IIRC) ie perpetual oscillations. If perfect damping were possible there would only be one oscillation, but in practice neither is possible. What happens is numerous oscillations with diminishing amplitude.

The wooping of any track is directly proportional to the amplitute & frequency of those oscillations. The frequency is proportional to speed & the amplitude is proportinal to the stroke of the system & the force applied (which itself is also proportional to speed)


ie on several counts, long travel = more wooping of the track

Personally I still favour pre78 with pre75 for lots of reasons, most of which have been mentioned. I think the pros of that position outweigh its cons. Sadly, tho I think it would contribute to & probably accelerate the diminishing of the earlier classes, on account of it cutting up the track more than the earlier classes & older bodies can reasonably cope with. So I'm also 'sympathetic' towards the split at pre75. 'Spose thats 2 bob each way!

PS This was typed while Dave & GMC were typing their posts above. I'm not contradicting anything they say

[VMX247]

I'm hearing you JC,
In my world add to this Sidecars and modern four wheelers and you have a real conversation piece.
I quiet often hear the words tractor trench's .Fast rider fact 
cheers

[Tossa]

It seems that West Oz doesn’t like being told they have to include something they don’t want anymore than East Oz likes being told that they can’t include something they do want.

There should be some flexibility in the system so that promoting clubs have some say in what they want to run. ( I actually don’t understand these supposed new rules as I thought we already had the choice to separate if we wanted)

Forcing WA to run Pre 78 would be a waste of time as they don’t nurture the class over there so there would be hardly any local entries and I’m not sure there would be enough Easterners travel over there to make the class viable.
I’m sure the club promoting Evo etc would welcome the Pre 78 class on the odd occasion.

I don't quite agree as people seem to have forgotten that though in it's infancy  there is now a pre85MXWA club and this promotes all forms of the sport.  So we are nurturing other than pre75 classes in WA

[firko]

FirKos  Quote: The thing that worries me however is that if the commission is convinced to change their decision, what reaction will come from the west? I sincerely hope it doesn't evolve into yet another lengthy debate.
This could not be further from the truth we are not convinced to change our decision

Shane, the key word in my above paragraph is if. I'm merely indicating that if there is enough convincing argument for a pre '78 split and you do decide to reverse your decision, I'd hate to see the WA lobby enter a counter protest, and then the '78 lobby counter attack again, thereby keeping this going on and on ad infinitum. We have to find a middle ground for the future of our sport.

beleive it our not we take pride in how cmx and cdt are run and feel that this issue could well be the single most important decision in recent VMX history

Knowing all three of you and regarding you all as friends (jeez, two of you are Kevlar good'ol boys and old Rod should be for gods sake ) and I know quite well your dedication and passion for our sport. I have full confidence that the decision you made was indeed one of the hardest you would have had to make as commissioners and also believe that you made the correct decision you could have made considering the proposal evidence you had in front of you. Unfortunately, as I've written numerous times in this thread, the pro '78 lobby got it seriously wrong by arguing their case on this forum instead of presenting their case to the commission. I feel even more guilty as I was in regular contact with Col during the formulation of his proposal. I made the newbie mistake in thinking that you'd be as impressed with Cols submission as I was and that it'd be a shoe in to pass your scrutiny. Not being a member of a club any more didn't help either.

My/our mistake was underestimating the passion the WAVMX have for maintaining pre '75 at all costs. It's something we, on this side of the island let slide when we needed it most, hence the less than spectacular condition pre '75 finds itself in outside of WA today.

In the end, this is all about political spin doctoring and its all about passion for what we think is right but as I've said before, arguing the point on a forum is pointless. I'm passionate that I'm right because nothing has been presented that changes my opinion BUT totally understand why the pre '75 lobby have taken their stance. If I lived in WA and enjoyed the purity of pre 75 only racing, I'de be their bloody spokesman. Unfortunately I live in a world where pre '75 is no longer the centre of the VMX universe and can see that for the classic Nats to succeed into the future, we need to include pre '78 split.

[VMX247]

It seems that West Oz doesn’t like being told they have to include something they don’t want anymore than East Oz likes being told that they can’t include something they do want.

There should be some flexibility in the system so that promoting clubs have some say in what they want to run. ( I actually don’t understand these supposed new rules as I thought we already had the choice to separate if we wanted)

Forcing WA to run Pre 78 would be a waste of time as they don’t nurture the class over there so there would be hardly any local entries and I’m not sure there would be enough Easterners travel over there to make the class viable.
I’m sure the club promoting Evo etc would welcome the Pre 78 class on the odd occasion.

I don't quite agree as people seem to have forgotten that though in it's infancy  there is now a pre85MXWA club and this promotes all forms of the sport.  So we are nurturing other than pre75 classes in WA

Its our future foundation for WA, were just beginning to go through all of what the east coast is and has in the last two years.
Time I think we all get this CMX rules/regulations book right sooner than later 

[211kawasaki]

Wasp
better read the proposals, included are pre 90 and age classes for Evolution. Its already on us.
211

[211kawasaki]

With CD7 only days away and a lot of you all there please make sure if there is anything that you would like to discuss make sure you do. If there are questions that need an answer - I may not have them all but I will attempt to help you understand the situation as I see it.

When its all said and done I along with the other members of the commission will make the final call based on the submissions from the LCBs. Unless you have taken the time to read the MA CMX commission minutes comments off topic are not helpful; for example, make your discussions in the forum specific to the minutes so it all stays on topic; comment for example on the right or wrong of age groups in Evolution - or for that matter why MNSW didnt like us calling it EVO and insisted we change the rules to better reflect Evolution rather than denigrate the class by association with Evil It took 2 days of hard work so take a look.

 

211

[firko]

Just reading Walters reply and reflecting on JCs well considered thesis on track damage, I recall that the WAVMX is concerned about the amount of track damage that pre '78 bikes would do if allowed to run amok on Narrogins hallowed topsoil. Despite those concerns they don't seem to have any worries about sidecars (tractor trench's as Alison so eloquently described them) leaving their customary ruts and whoops.

Am I to believe that sidecars in WA don't dig the trenches they do elsewhere .......Just a thought.

[SAABCOMBI]

I do agree with you Mark, the way l read into this, its double standed for western Australia, In the early days of the 50`s to the 70`s there was a track call Mt shadwell at Mortlake ( Google it).
In 1993  nick Rankin and myself went to the Shire of Mortlake and the owner of that property and asked if we could re-open Mt shadwell to run a vintage meeting and they said yes, to cut a long story short, so we set out with a coupe of fellow colac members and had a working bee on the track, up high on the Mountain you could still see the track after 40 years,  we set out to promote the meeting on AIR, colac herald, warrambool standard, win TV, sponsoreship from Clarke Pies sent out flyers to all the stores all the way to orbost and beyony,on the Saturday of that week end, riders and bikes where rolling in through the grate, by sunday the entry numbers where over 200 and the spectators where 3500 plus, the race program was pre 80, pre78, pre75, pre70, pre65, sidecars, plus age classes. it was amazing to see. if l had photos l would show you all how amazing it was. Every person after that sunday walked away with excitement and enthusiasm. That track was very fast, flowing, off camber, hilly, but the track was still ridible on any machine.
So lets be realistic about all this, and stop the self invested interest and tunnel vision and move on and do it right for own sport.

[Mike]

Just when it looked like peace was made and some agree to disagree statements where made Firko and David#46 have to get the pointy stick out and poke again.  Dave T has explained what you guys need to do so eveything else is BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.

[VMX247]

Just reading Walters reply and reflecting on JCs well considered thesis on track damage, I recall that the WAVMX is concerned about the amount of track damage that pre '78 bikes would do if allowed to run amok on Narrogins hallowed topsoil. Despite those concerns they don't seem to have any worries about sidecars (tractor trench's as Alison so eloquently described them) leaving their customary ruts and whoops.
Am I to believe that sidecars in WA don't dig the trenches they do elsewhere .......Just a thought.

That's why I put the words "MY World" meaning modern solos & sidecars.
Speed(Classic National Speed) makes big ones in the dirt/sand(tractor trench's).I said before,its best left to talk face to face than on a forum as it all gets all double standardize and I don't need to worry about spelling     
cheers

[SAABCOMBI]

The point that l am making, if the tracks are designed right then pre 78 models  won`t do anymore damage to a track that the earlier model bikes. the weekend at mount Shadwell proved that. there was only one problem on the day, there was over 50 pre 80 bikes on the starting line.
Well l was planing on building up my 77 husqvarna 250, so that idea will get the flick.