Pre 78 Rule changes

[Slakewell]

For one I have always believed that bikes should not have to be reversed engineered. 
I love those FOX RM's and think should run how they were in 77.
More of the pre 78 bikes don't comply than do.
Some bikes are not cheap and can owe the owner several thousands dollars so to have to change what is stock just so they can race in reality reduces they value.
I strongly believe that in this class much more over 9" really just forks up the corner speed and is no real advantage.
Why make it harder to race than it needs to be.

For example why would I race my Husky again without a rule change? I know for sure that the tape measure will be out. I would really like to import a KTM MC in but now know it does not comply so why would I spend 5k getting one.

All I have said I'm doing is submitting a submission to MA with my views on changes to Pre 78 rules, I can not change the rules only ask that my submission is looked at. Anyone who does not agree with my view can oppose them in writing to MA. 

[09.0]

For one I have always believed that bikes should not have to be reversed engineered. 
I love those FOX RM's and think should run how they were in 77.
More of the pre 78 bikes don't comply than do.
Some bikes are not cheap and can owe the owner several thousands dollars so to have to change what is stock just so they can race in reality reduces they value.
I strongly believe that in this class much more over 9" really just forks up the corner speed and is no real advantage.
Why make it harder to race than it needs to be.

For example why would I race my Husky again without a rule change? I know for sure that the tape measure will be out. I would really like to import a KTM MC in but now know it does not comply so why would I spend 5k getting one.

All I have said I'm doing is submitting a submission to MA with my views on changes to Pre 78 rules, I can not change the rules only ask that my submission is looked at. Anyone who does not agree with my view can oppose them in writing to MA. 

It's when you say the things such as in this post that makes me question your motives is all.
First you say you only got the bike a few weeks ago and that is why it didn't get sorted. Then you say you did but did it wrong. Now you say why bother racing the Husky without a rule change.Why can't you be bothered to just finish the job on the forks and be done with it.
Then to say you won't import a ktm because it won't comply? How can you expect a guy to swallow that?
Regarding Fox RM's, did you not see my rm125B? It has all the trick gear that you can/could buy. Fox shocks and 11'' Simons forks.Looks exactly as it would have back in the day. And its legal.
Part of this whole argument ( talking about quite a few guy's post's here) talks about lower centre of gravity and the effect it has on the bike. The bike's suspension is restricted, not lowered. It's stance is exactly the same as it was before being modified. The point of bottoming out has changed.
I will also say that 'a bike is worth less because of it's suspension being restricted to nine inches' is a crock of shit.
There are only two possibilities why you want to change the rule. Because you strongly believe you shouldn't have to restrict a standard bike to ride in it's correct era or because you just couldn't be bothered to do it. Because it's a disadvantage or they are worth less or it's harder to race etc etc, is all just bull.
With the fact that pre'78 has been running for so long and so many have complied, changing it now seems wrong to me. Again your bike will not look or feel any different and an hour or two in the shed will have it sorted for the rest of it's racing life.

[Nathan S]

....
With the fact that pre'78 has been running for so long and so many have complied, changing it now seems wrong to me.
...

But how many have made changes to their bikes to comply before now?

My bikes have always complied simply because they came factory with less than 9" of travel - but if we're honest, sod-all people have actually modified their bikes back to 9". In fact, before this year's Nats, I'd suggest that the number would be very close to zero...

[motomaniac]

Slakewells first post was about the idea of writing to the MA. Anyway us southeners aint talking about club days, we are talking about our MA affiliated series that use's the MA's rule book.

Ditto in Qld

So why suggest its about clubdays ? Doh!

That's what we call them.. QVMX club days!

Well I dont know what you do in your state I only know that we have (vcm) has a series and that what its called.I dont think that I have ever raced a VMX clubday

[09.0]

....
With the fact that pre'78 has been running for so long and so many have complied, changing it now seems wrong to me.
...

But how many have made changes to their bikes to comply before now?

My bikes have always complied simply because they came factory with less than 9" of travel - but if we're honest, sod-all people have actually modified their bikes back to 9". In fact, before this year's Nats, I'd suggest that the number would be very close to zero...

My two, John Kittle's two, Tatey's , The guy with the yz from Darwin, Dodgey's , Simo did his but didn't end up riding, Mitch Semmen's yz, that's 9 off the top.

[motomaniac]

For those that think our rules suck and the USA does it better, the Historic class(pre '78) rules state suspension travel must be limited to 9" and mentions the '77 Husky, Maico and KTM all must have the std suspension limited to 9" travel!
And also in the UK the class is pre '77 where no 1977 model bikes are allowed, they must race in Twinshock(our Evo)!!
So what's so bad about our pre '78 rules??

the point is pre78 isnt the historic class and the historic class in not the pre 78 class

[motomaniac]

Riding a 77 model in Evo would suck. That's why we only saw one or two early model bikes at fairleigh. The poms got it wrong there. They tend to get things wrong quite a bit. Why the hell would you want to drive on the left side of the road when most drive on the right. Would have made importing cars a hell of a lot easier.... Damn you Poms!

I ride a 77 model in both pre 78 and EVO in VCM and VIPER all the time.I love it.

[JohnnyO]

For those that think our rules suck and the USA does it better, the Historic class(pre '78) rules state suspension travel must be limited to 9" and mentions the '77 Husky, Maico and KTM all must have the std suspension limited to 9" travel!
And also in the UK the class is pre '77 where no 1977 model bikes are allowed, they must race in Twinshock(our Evo)!!
So what's so bad about our pre '78 rules??

the point is pre78 isnt the historic class and the historic class in not the pre 78 class

They are basically the same.. read them.
I mentioned the US and UK classes because a couple of people said other countries did it better.. Total crap!

[motomaniac]

[/quote]We're not in 1977 we're in 2012 and are trying to preserve an era in vintage racing.
Pre '78 means '75,'76 & '77 model bikes and the 9" rule at least gives the '75 & '76 models a chance to be competitive otherwise it'll become the 1977 class...
The full grids at the Nationals tells us something... The pre '78 class is OK!
[/quote]

we're not in 77 we're in 2012 and trying to preserve an era .

thats an oxymoron.

If you dont want to do what was done in 1977 what era are you trying to preserve or create?Not everyone buys a bike because of its suspension travel or goes to a race for the win . They go because they wont to showcase their bike , their loved brand ,model or replica and have a ride . What is the show about if ou have to detune even an of the floor spec bike from the era?
The arguement it will become the 77 class is BS.The competiveness of a bike due to its suspension travel will depend alot on the rider and the nature of the track.The full grids might have something to do with the split and no EVO class - maybe?
In anycase the amount of time and posts spent on these endless pre 78 threads over the last few years seems to me to suggest that all is not OK with alot of people.

[motomaniac]

For those that think our rules suck and the USA does it better, the Historic class(pre '78) rules state suspension travel must be limited to 9" and mentions the '77 Husky, Maico and KTM all must have the std suspension limited to 9" travel!
And also in the UK the class is pre '77 where no 1977 model bikes are allowed, they must race in Twinshock(our Evo)!!
So what's so bad about our pre '78 rules??

the point is pre78 isnt the historic class and the historic class in not the pre 78 class

They are basically the same.. read them.
I mentioned the US and UK classes because a couple of people said other countries did it better.. Total crap!

Is the EVO class the pre 80 class ? no .its regulated by specification and tech, so is the historic class ( its not meant to be pre 78 clss)and all of the AHRMA'S class's

[JohnnyO]

We're not in 1977 we're in 2012 and are trying to preserve an era in vintage racing.
Pre '78 means '75,'76 & '77 model bikes and the 9" rule at least gives the '75 & '76 models a chance to be competitive otherwise it'll become the 1977 class...
The full grids at the Nationals tells us something... The pre '78 class is OK!
[/quote]

we're not in 77 we're in 2012 and trying to preserve an era .

thats an oxymoron.

If you dont want to do what was done in 1977 what era are you trying to preserve or create?Not everyone buys a bike because of its suspension travel or goes to a race for the win . They go because they wont to showcase their bike , their loved brand ,model or replica and have a ride . What is the show about if ou have to detune even an of the floor spec bike from the era?
The arguement it will become the 77 class is BS.The competiveness of a bike due to its suspension travel will depend alot on the rider and the nature of the track.The full grids might have something to do with the split and no EVO class - maybe?
In anycase the amount of time and posts spent on these endless pre 78 threads over the last few years seems to me to suggest that all is not OK with alot of people.


[/quote]Whatever.. if you want the rule changed it aint gunna happen on here. At the end of the day i couldn't give a fork, I build a bike to suit the class and go racing.

[09.0]

Riding a 77 model in Evo would suck. That's why we only saw one or two early model bikes at fairleigh. The poms got it wrong there. They tend to get things wrong quite a bit. Why the hell would you want to drive on the left side of the road when most drive on the right. Would have made importing cars a hell of a lot easier.... Damn you Poms!

I ride a 77 model in both pre 78 and EVO in VCM and VIPER all the time.I love it.

Again you are talking about a club day. You want to call it a fancy name to make out its a big series but it has to be a different form of a club day. I'm talking about a over in England mainly (in that quote you high lighted) with the level of competition over there you wouldn't lob up with a '77 model to race twin shock and they don't. Same as you wouldn't bring one to an evo Nationals here.
The rules have been the same since their inception. Why all of a sudden now are they not good enough? Sure as shit you were around at the beginning of pre78. Why the fork didn't you do it then? I got into vmx in '07. In over 5 years its been good enough, the yanks deal with it. If it's such an injustice, why now? Because one guy got pinged and so he is going to turn it on it's head to suit himself.If he didn't get pinged and old mate got his second place, I bet there would not be this latest drama on here.
Everybody gets the bit where a bike that comes out standard and it should run. I also understand the reason behind limiting them to bring the class closer to try and put a more level playing field for the class, just as they did for pre 75. You carry on as if you have to bastardise your bike to run it when its a simple mod for the front and as part of the restoration process of the bike, shocks that are in line with the rules are purchased and job is done. Alternatively a small spacer gets put under the bump stop.
You also have so much to add to these types of threads yet I have never seen you at any major event that I have attended, especially a national event, even when it's in your back yard.
While I'm here as a side note, you recently brought up my Maico as not complying, insinuating I was a cheat. Well as you would know I won the class and my bike was WELL under spec. Seeing as I really took offence to your accusation which was very unfounded, here is a nice big f uck you as well.

[worms]

Brad, your a great custodian of the english language.

they just dont get the fact, that the rules are keeping these bikes in the pre78 class and not pushing them into Evo. and being able to race pre78 bikes in EVO, so what? good riders can ride well on any bike, but its not about how good a rider you are, it's about showcasing era's off motocross and having Rules reflecting that. and it's not that hard to comply.

bloody Victorians, they allways do it better ??

worms

[JohnnyO]

For those that think our rules suck and the USA does it better, the Historic class(pre '78) rules state suspension travel must be limited to 9" and mentions the '77 Husky, Maico and KTM all must have the std suspension limited to 9" travel!
And also in the UK the class is pre '77 where no 1977 model bikes are allowed, they must race in Twinshock(our Evo)!!
So what's so bad about our pre '78 rules??

the point is pre78 isnt the historic class and the historic class in not the pre 78 class

They are basically the same.. read them.
I mentioned the US and UK classes because a couple of people said other countries did it better.. Total crap!

Is the EVO class the pre 80 class ? no .its regulated by specification and tech, so is the historic class ( its not meant to be pre 78 clss)and all of the AHRMA'S class's

Feel free to tell us the difference between the pre 78 class and the Historic class, especially seeing the Historic class says machines up to and including the 1977 model year..
They allow the '78 Harley and KX250 to race.. big deal

[Nathan S]

Changing the rules to make standard bikes legal, is hardly going to "turn it on its head".

We've accepted that the difference in travel makes sod-all difference to the bikes' speed, and may even be detrimental.
What's the argument against allowing standard bikes to compete, again? That we're afraid of change?