Is pre 90 class too close to moderns, too far from vintage?

[mudguard]

Is pre 90 class too close to moderns and too far from vintage at this point in time?
 I ask the question because pre 85 seems to be a fair bit advanced in Suspension, engine and ergonomics, than Evo or earlier classes.
If pre 90 class raced as vmx at the same events / tracks, as say pre 75 class, I would imagine that pre 90 riders would find events boring. These newer classes, pre 90, are so much advanced that they scream for more challenging tracks. How can vmx clubs accommodate the broad difference to suit bike era to tracks? 

[LWC82PE]

Thats one of the reasons for the proposal to have Evo, pre 85 and pre 90 at their own nats and the older classes at their own nats.

[Nathan S]

I think a lot of people throw a lot of red herrings into this discussion. I'll try to be concise...

1. Suspension.
Now that PD valves are cheap and easy to get, the one definite advantage that pre-90s had (cartridge forks) has mostly disappeared. PDV equipped evo bikes will be very nearly as good as the best pre-90 forks. Remember that the early USDs were all pretty shit.
At the rear, modern shocks/internals will bring an Evo bike close to the level of the best pre-90s. The amount of rising rate that's built into a 2010 rear end is only marginally more than an Evo bike with laid-foward shocks - and its tiny. As Tom68 said elsewhere, the bump-stop provides far more progression! The real advantage of pre-85/pre-90 style linkages is weight placement.

2. Brake wise, a pre-90 will have more-or-less the same front brakes as a pre-85 bike. In turn, a clean, properly set-up TLS drum is nearly as good as a pre-90 disc - the disc's real advantages are in the mud and that it requires less maintenance.
Rear discs are the same story - on a properly maintained MX bike, they offer a very marginal improvement in lap times.

3. Engines. Pre-85 is a big leap, compared to Evo - water-cooling, better factory ignitions and exhaust power valves make for a clear technological leap. From Pre-85 to pre-90, the steps are smaller - better power valves, more widespread use of plated cylinders, and the usual incremental changes.
Compared to a modern 2-stroke, the pre-90s are still lacking things like long stroke motors, 3D ignitions, solenoid controlled power jets, and another 20 years of incremental improvements.
It is also worth noting that a lot of new tech has already found its way onto (even) pre-70 bikes - so the stuff like good ignitions and modern pipe designs is irrelevant for the purpose of this discussion - you can assume that ALL serious VMX race bikes have it.

4. Other stuff. What is there?
Ergonomics were incrementally improved, but pre-90s have still got banana seats and low, rear mounted handlebars - they are long way a modern bike! Moderns run very flat seats (with rounded profiles), the bars a long way forward and typically very high. Moderns are also much narrower between the legs (I originally typed "pre-90 bikes are fat between the legs" but I knew that Turtle wouldn't be able to resist...)
Cosmetics. Again, steps foward(?) with fashion, but still a long way from anything like a modern.

Anyone who thinks that a pre-90 is 'just like a modern' hasn't ridden a modern. To seriously state that because a bike has dual discs, water cooling and USD forks that it must perform similarly to a new bike, is like saying that a XF Fairmont is just like a FG XR6... 
By the same token, I'd love to see how much you'd have to pay Jay Marmont to race a 1989 YZ250 for the National MX title, no matter how much you tricked it up. If the 21 year old bike was even vaguely competitive, then I'm sure he and CDR would jump at the opportunity...

Now... the riders. This gets a bit harder to make straight-foward statements about, but I'll try.
a) Everyone loves grass track MX, even young guys on moderns (look at Amcross, the old Thumper Nats, etc). There is absolutely no reason to assume that pre-90 riders will somehow be an exception to this rule.
b) The fast guys are the fast guys, no matter what you put them on. There's talk of pre-90 somehow resulting in an influx of lunatic 18 year old gun riders, but those same guys are either not interested in old bikes, or are already racing in VMX. If it turns out that I'm wrong, and we do get an influx of loonies, then at least they'll be in the pre-90 class where they won't bother the nay-sayers.
c) The guys who are keen on pre-90s because they are the bikes they have a connection with, are all in their late 30s or older. How old were most of the riders back in the early days of VMX (when it was only pre-75)? Did the older blokes stand around bitching about those 38 year old young lunatics then?
d) There was lots of talk about how Evo/pre-80 riders would demand rougher tracks, but it didn't happen. Then there was all of the same talk about pre-85 riders doing the same, but that didn't happen either. The greatest "crime" the Evo+ riders have committed, is being tolerant of newer-style tracks - but modern clubs are building modern tracks for 40 weekends in a year, so there's no way that a few dozen Evo/pre-85 riders' voices would ever change that.

Some people like to talk about pre-90 riders as being somehow wildly different to the existing VMX riders. This is utter nonsense, as the guys who are making the noise about pre-90 are all established VMXers...
Personally, I'm a fat old wobbler with a mortgage, offspring, 9-5 job and all the rest - I don't understand how being allowed to race my pre-90 bike is suddenly going to transform me into a Southern Californian supercross legend?!


There's a ton of reasons why pre-90 deserves its place in the old dirt bike racing scene, but I'm going to concentrate on killing the red herrings for now.

[firko]

Ergonomics were incrementally improved, but pre-90s have still got banana seats and low, rear mounted handlebars - they are long way a modern bike! Moderns run very flat seats (with rounded profiles), the bars a long way forward and typically very high. Moderns are also much narrower between the legs (I originally typed "pre-90 bikes are fat between the legs" but I knew that Turtle wouldn't be able to resist...)
Cosmetics. Again, steps foward(?) with fashion, but still a long way from anything like a modern.

Maybe yeah but to me no. To me Pre 90 bikes have a modern soul and don't fit into my idea of what a vintage racer looks like. They just don't look 'vintage'. It'll take a lot of spin doctoring to convince me and all but the more astute dirt bike fans that the below '89 RM125 isn't a modern bike in overall concept and appearance. To me it doesn't look all that different to the twenty year newer 2008 model below it. The difference between a '75 model and a '55 model is enormous or going the other way, a '75 model and a '95 model is enormous. No matter what spin is put on it the appearance of dirt bikes changed far less than the technology in the 89-09 period. Barring minor plastics variations, I'd argue that the perimeter frame is the only major visual ergo change in that 20 year period.

[worms]

. These newer classes, pre 90, are so much advanced that they scream for more challenging tracks. How can vmx clubs accommodate the broad difference to suit bike era to tracks? 

[/quote]rubbish!!!!,most of the guys with pre 90 have several bikes and i would say less than 5% are new riders to the sport, lots have pre 75 bikes and evo's and pre85's and the pre 90 is just another ride on something they like and have in the shed, the continued arguement regarding pre 90 riders wanting this and that is just plain rubbish and i would say your just pushing your own agenda,

these guys just want another ride on their clubs days and these bikes are a part of their culture, more so than their current rides, big deal!!!

Cheers Trev

[odd1]

A very good case Nathan with the facts and not the bulls;'t

[Shaun G]

Agree Nathan. Once again you've nailed it without the BS.

Sorry Firko but in my eyes those two RM's are a world apart.

Cheers
Shaun

[All Things 414]

My only thought on the subject is it would be ludicrous to ride Pre 90 bikes on anything but a full-on motocross track. I'd hate to hear anyone on a pre 90 bike bitchin' about tracks being ruined by moderns.....

[All Things 414]

Aircooled  bikes       (VMX)      Natural trrain tracks

Why is everybody obsessed with natural terrain tracks? Pre 75 maybe. Not for Evo bikes. They can handle Motocross tracks.

[Nathan S]

Using a pic of an 89 model that's got a circa 2000 graphics kit on it, is a bit misleading.

Here's a stock 89 RM125K:




The new bike's jagged, angular plastics is one immediate and significant point of cosmetic difference.

But yeah, they're still clearly related - in the same way that a TM125 is clearly related to a RM125S is clearly related to a RM125T is clearly related to a RM125D is clearly related to... The evolving appearance of bikes is part of the progression of MX bikes as they're built. Surely that's part of the reason for VMX existing - to celebrate and preserve the obselete and otherwise unwanted old bikes?
Try telling a 20 year old that his new RMZ looks just like an 89 model, and see what sort of response you get.

Are we really so superficial that we can't look beyond appearances?

[firko]

Are we really so superficial that we can't look beyond appearances?

To be fair Nathan, you bought it up. I was just responding to the section of your thesis that I disagreed with. As you all now hopefully know, I have no real problems with the pre 90 concept other than still believing that the sport's not ready for it and runs the strong possibility of shooting itself in the foot by introducing another under subscribed division to add to the other under subscribed divisions.

BUT, how long has it been since the introduction of pre '85? Five years or less? The way that self interest groups rally their cause these days it can't be very long before some young ideas genius comes along with the big "What about Pre '95!! mindblaster and starts bleating about how unfair it is that he can't race his 610 Husky or whatever is stirring his little heart.

I understand quite well that I'm considered an old fart whose mind is stuck in 1975 but I've been around long enough to see that the sport I love isn't performing very well at all and I'm positive that adding new divisions isn't going to fix any problems other than adding fuel to the funeral fire. For any sport to grow, first it must be in good health. Adding new divisions is like nailing new branches on a dying tree and thinking it's going to save the tree when in reality all it's doing is adding to the speed of the trees eventual death.

[TT]

For me personally, I believe that a bike should simply be 30 years old before being considered for any form of 'vintage' or age related racing. That puts us at Pre 80 right now, which I'm fine with.

Or 25 years at least......... 

[Tony Two Times]

Can some of you early-bike-hoarding legends please tell me how I could be riding at all without $3k+ to spend and six months to wait for a rideable bike to come onto the market ? 

Until then pre-90 it is. 

T2X

[POM]

Anybody here who thinks pre 90 is too modern and will water down a temporarily flagging vmx scene is just kidding themselves........pre 90 is definitely coming,as will pre95 and probably pre 2000 etc (perish the thought).....its just a matter of TIMING and how its sensibly introduced..thats all..simple!!......people burying their heads in the sand and refusing to accept pre 90 will do this sport no good....the future of vmx is/will be in the hands of the younger guys who will more than likely want pre 90 .....we should all do ourselves a favour and start thinking for the future........personally I hate em, but there ya go.

[VMX247]

Someone mentioned on the other thread ..all they want to do and what they do is RIDE .........and that is all they do ...
No volunteer/no track prep/no canteen/no officials.
How many are helping do the above jobs to keep the events running. ??

....personally I dislike em, but there ya go.