EVOLUTION/OEM - What Is Your Interpretation?

[YSS]

DJ , I dont get offended by your comments. We only produce what people want at the best price possible.
If the rules would dictate OEM replacement parts thats not a problem , we still make them too , if dont have them already.
If the demand is big enough , we make a shock looking 100% original if need to be. But as it stands now , there is no demand for that. After all things should be fun and not politics. Look forward to a great 2008 with lots of racing and fun, thats what its all about . Hope to catch up with you at CD5.
regards Walter

[Lozza]

DJ if the virtues of a Vforce haven't reached the Shakey Isles yet well we are not going to tell you. Just stick to those Boyensen jobbies you'll be fine.

All bike should breeze through scrutineering excepy for Scenario 3 where the owner/rider should be shot at dawn as a deterent for this type of thing ever happening again.

I would argue the OEM is put in there to stop things like lightweight special copy frames and me machining some billet cases, rapid prototyping some barrels etc etc.
However for all those weirdly hung up on 'recreating eras' and such should check out the Manx Norton/AJS 7R copies that race today, they provide a greater spectacle(like lapping the IOM at over 100mph) than an unlimited number of 100% correct period racers.
After all that the rules are pretty clear.

[geraldo]

by MA I assume you mean motorcycling Australia - why on earth do you let them meddle with your sport - VMX should be run by VMX'rs for VMX'rs - keep the suits as far away as possible

as for the rules - the most important rules are

- turn up with an old bike & a good attitude - everything else is incidental
- all bikes to be built in the "spirit of the era" -if everyone did this it would be the only rule you need - it seems to me you Aussies are fixated with rules - I just want to ride my old bike

[DJRacing]

So I take it that as long as noone knows what you have on your bike its ok? Modern high/low speed compression/rebound dampening, v-force reeds, split carb intake, fork emulators or even cartridge? If this is the case why do you have rules?

A reed block is a reed block isnt it? just like a set of shocks are a set of shocks, arent they? 

But hey as Geraldo says 'I just want to ride my old bike' and I dont care if I line up against the newest thing out there or the oldest, I will always have fun doing it.

Good luck with the rules and where can I find a copy of the rules (MA)? can someone please post a link to the rule book?

[Doc]

I really don't care too much for the rules as all my bikes are pieced together with OEM parts built within the correct era anyway. End of problem!  do you really need bling shocks, reed valves, emulators or fatty pipes to be competitive? A properly setup stock bike won't be that much slower than a big dollar high bling machine so simply go with what you have and ride it to the best of your ability..winning rarely enters my mind, staying upright and riding within my ability and remaining within my budget does 

[Hoony]

 http://www.ma.org.au/Content/MA/NewsEvents/2007racingcalendar/FormsRules/Generalcompetitionrules/Manual_of_motorcycl.htm

scroll down till you see this

You can also click here to download the entire 2008 Manual of Motorcycle Sport in one file (Adobe Acrobat [.pdf] file 9.6MB - WARNING- Please be patient - file will take some time to download)


good reading for insomniacs DJ. i agree with you about too manys rules, that's fine for nationals and the trophy hunters out there, but keep the club / state level simple for all to enjoy in uncomplicated format.

if a you need rules to ride old bikes with other old blokes and are concerned that so & so has this part on his bike then go ride modern MX with the catwalk Fashion Racers if you are that serious

[Noel]

http://www.ma.org.au/AM/Template.cfm?Section=General_competition_rules&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentFileID=31251

[firko]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Scenario1: The 1980 CR250 with Fox suspension components is 100% legal as both were available during the 'evo era'. The OEM reference in the rule book refers to 'major components' which if you refer back to the pre 75 rules would mean the frame and engine, wheels and forks. A better,more understandable wording would be "all major components must have been available at the time of manufacture of the engine and/or chassis".

Scenario 2: The XL 350 Honda powered Suzuki RM250T is totally legal. The era of the bike is determined by the latest 'major component', that being the frame which slots it into the Evo class.

Scenario 3: There are at least two ways of looking at scenario 3. There is the rule book legality which from my perspective it's legal, and the moral perspective which to my mind it's illegal. While I have no objection to the modifying of bikes for performance gain, I have a real problem with the use of out of era technology. This is vintage racing folks. Whether you agree with the philosophy or not the class of racing was developed to recreate a particular era in racing history. If the test case 1980 YZ needs to be modified it should be done using the parameters of the technology of the day. V Force reeds, emulators, programable ignitions, and shocks with high and low speed adjustable dampening don't fit into what vintage racing is trying to achieve. If you think that vintage motocross is a hotbed for trying to get 60 hp out of your TM Suzuki or whatever using every modern means you have lost the whole concept of what vintage racing is about. Sure, modify to your hearts content but keep the 'spirit of the era' parameter in place.

Scenario4:The Kawasaki is 100% legal by the rulebook but refer to scenario 3 for my moral perspective.

*Lozza, if you think that todays vintage road racers provide a "greater spectacle" than the "100% correct racers" you either weren't around the classic road race scene during the 1980's golden era or you've conveniently forgotten how many Manx Nortons, G50 Matchys, AJS 7R's and other exotica were racing and are now never seen. Todays vintage racers are indeed faster but it's a sea of cocked up Hondas that were never a part of the scene back in their era, big buck replicas that have little resemblance to the bikes they are supposedly based on internally and in some cases,externally, and speedway Jawa powered Featherbed Nortons that have no historical significance or legality in pre 62 classic racing. Sure they're faster but the racing is piss poor compared to 20 years ago. If you look at how the classic and post classic 250 classes have become a laughable joke because of people taking the technology way past where it was ever meant to go. Now you've got bikes that have no resemblance to anything that raced in the era. I know because I helped build a 1961 Cotton Cobra that was merely a 1982 YZ 250 with Villiers fins and outer cases welded to the yamaha components. It looked like a Villiers from 5 metres away but a close look clearly showed it's Yamaha heritage. The bike was never ever picked up in scrutineering.

If vintage motocross is allowed to continue to continue to allow later mods into the fray it'll before long become the legal rats nest that vintage road racing has become.
 
 
 

[KB171]

Firko i dont spose theres any photos of the cotton/yz  around ? It must have been a good project to have been on.

[Doc]

I agree with Firko..when I first started building my bikes I was a little taken back by how hard the parts were to find..after being involved in VMX discussion groups and meeting many many like minded others over a period of time I now find near any part I wish for is available be it used, NOS or a replica part. (albeit,all at a price) There is no need to for newer tech or newer hi-tech parts to keep these old beasts running as it detracts from the whole concept of being vintage. I loved modified bikes but when you look at some of the current vintage road racing bikes it does nothing for me and it again becomes a situation of who has the most money and the latest technology will usually win..not exactly a level playing field is it! Keep em' stock and ride them hard..look at most of the title winning bikes and you'll see they are not overly exciting to look at but they do the job time and time again. I honestly believe if you throw big $$$ on or at new technology for your vintage  vessels then you have missed the whole concept and more than likely you are trying to compensate for poor initial setup or lack of rider skill. Yes you can throw big dollars at vintage stuff (as we all know) but let's keep it all 100% vintage. 

[BAHNZY]

If we are of the belief (As YSS posted "The rules are made by MA , not us") that a bunch of Management boffins from MA and their local affiliates MA(V), MA(NSW) etc. sit in a room and come up with the new rules then we/us/you are mistaken.
Changes to, and the inclusion of new rules are put forward by MA licence holders via their respective Management Committee's. Yes MA has the final word on them, but they don't initiate them. I think that the reality from MA's point of view is that the least amount of changes would be the best situation as they would take a position of "If it ain't broke, then don’t fix it"

On the scenarios that I outlined;
In relation to using the Pre75 rules & philosophy referencing "major components" this is the case for Pre75, not EVOLUTION. Why, because it does not state that in the section titled EVOLUTION in the GCR's.

Whether a part/component fitted to a bike provides a performance advantage or not (eg: V Force Reeds) the clarification of the rule is simple. The part was not available at the time that the bike was originally manufactured and another competitor is well within their rights (as outlined in the GCR's) to challenge the validity of the bike.

The one point that I thought may have raised some comment is that no age classes will be run.
I find this absolutely ridiculous and it needs to be changed. Maybe not for the National level but certainly for the club/interclub/state level.

As you have probably figured out, the EVOLUTION Rules are minimalist in the extreme, so much so that the interpretation of them is so polarised. So.... If you are unhappy with the GCR's then get a bunch of like minded riders together and write individual letters to your respective Management Committee's (The committee's and the members are in the front of the GCR handbook) and request changes.

If we (the riders) want a set of rules that represent the bikes and classes we ride then we need to fix them. We have 10 months to do so, before the 2009 GCR Manuals published. For 2008 it all wrapped up.
Aside from the EVOLUTION rules, Pre85 rules will be in the 2008 GCR and I am taking a fair guess that as a starting point they will probably be a carbon copy of the EVOLUTION rules.

[firko]

KB..I haven't got any photos of the 'Rotten Cotton' but I'll ask the owner if he has any.

On modifications, you can be extremely creative and still be within the parameters of a given era. I've had some fun locating period aftermarket race parts for all three of my pre 70 class bikes, The Hindall Ducati, Cheney Yamaha 360 and my old Maico. I'm using period Arnaco shocks that will be modified by Walter on the Hindall, stock Konis on the Cheney and the YSS shocks on the Maico are non adjustable. I will admit that I have a fat pipe and PVL ignition on the Maico but all in all I found that you can still go trick without using current technology. I don't understand what's to be proved by using modern components in old bikes? If you need to use out of era components so badly perhaps vintage racing isn't the sport for you. 

[magoo]

Firstly, MA VMX rules are set by vintage riders, either on the State or National boards. If anyone wants a rule re-interpreted they need to put a submission in to their local vintage board.
As for the Evo rules, I can see both sides. My Evo bike I guess is illegal. It has 1983 CR250 forks on it, a 1981 swingarm, 2006 Mikuni carby, 2007 DG pipe, 1989 reeds, 2006 2 pack paint, 19" rear rim, 2007 tyres, Husky shocks. I only did these modifications to make it a better bike to ride and to me it is in the spirit of the era, but as I've discussed with Firko over our monthly beer and bullshit session, where do you set the limits. I agree with him to an extent. I've seen a 1982 CR480 with 2 shocks welded on the back which I certainly don't agree is in the spirit of the era, the problem is that everyone has a different view on what's right and what's wrong so there needs to be a limit as to how far we can go either way. To keep them totally OEM is rediculous, as is open slather.
If you followed the rules to the letter I could run my 1983 forks on a 1987 Husky but not on my Honda because it is off a later model bike. Where does it stop? I don't have an answer, but I certainly have no interest in riding my bike stock because half the fun of being involved in VMX is playing with the bikes

[firko]

But Magoo matey, you don't have to ride it stock to keep it within the spirit of Evo. You ask the question "Where does it stop"? That's a no brainer, you stop where the term "spirit of the era " stops. I'm not involved in the Evo scene but I don't see too many grey areas in the rules as long as you are fair dinkum about it. Why use disc brake model Honda forks when you know they were dodgy. There are plenty of 40-44mm legal forks that you could have used. Same with the swingarm. There are plenty of legal aftermarket alloy swingarms available. I,m not too sure of the rules regarding carbies but if it says round slide only as I suspect it does, why use a new tech carby? The 2007 DG pipe is fine if it's made for a '79 Honda. The paint and tyre comments are silly. Making the bike a better bike to ride is not an excuse to cheat. These are old bikes that are naturally going to be harder to ride. That's one of the things that defines vintage bikes.
If guys like Mike Downey or Elvis can build extremely trick late 70's twin shock Hondas within the rules, anybody can. You don't have to cross over into another era to build a trick bike. As I've argued with you incessantly, grinding off the disc caliper mounts from '83 model forks is not taking the rules seriously. You can modify the bikes to the nth degree and still keep them within the boundaries.

This whole argument shows that the old, drum brake, no linkage, air cooled evo philosophy leaves too much open for cheating by those who choose not to see the spirit of the era . The rules need stronger definition...........Now Bruce, I'm going away until Tuesday. Are we right for a few brews on Wednesday night 02 Jan ?

[magoo]

The reason I run the '83 forks is because they are drum brake forks, which are totally legal in the AHRMA. The disc brake forks you're thinking of are on my Pre '85 bike. I know where you're coming from though.
When Glenn Bell won the last Evo Nationals on a A5 Kawasaki it had a flat slide carby and 43mm forks. I personally don't have a problem with that as the reason he won it is because he is the best rider. You put Maico31 or 090 on a stock bike and me on my modified one, both of them will still kick my arse for one simple reason, they are better riders than me. In any form of motocross, whether modern or vintage, the best rider will almost always win. It's just defining the "Spirit of the Era".