What's legal ?

[09.0]

Farrrk,and then you have pre 86.....what the?....even Murray Anderson says it should stop at pre85....there is a huge diference between 85/86 models.....

Yer there is a bigger difference between 85/86 models than 84/85 which is probably why they have pre 86 (which would exclude 86 models?) instead of our pre 85 , sounds good too me

Agreed.
Pre-86 excludes all rear discs, cartridge forks, and Honda's HPP (which was considerably better than the other options).
I don't think any of the 85 models are significantly better than the good 84 models.

There is a huge difference between the 84/85 500's from Honda & Kawasaki, they are all new watercooled bikes that left the other brands behind. The difference is not so big in the smaller bikes though but i think we got it right with pre 85.

it also splits pre85 and pre 90 down the middle.

[motomaniac]

.

Yer there is a bigger difference between 85/86 models than 84/85 which is probably why they have pre 86 (which would exclude 86 models?) instead of our pre 85 , sounds good too me
[/quote]

Agreed.
Pre-86 excludes all rear discs, cartridge forks, and Honda's HPP (which was considerably better than the other options).
I don't think any of the 85 models are significantly better than the good 84 models.
[/quote]There is a huge difference between the 84/85 500's from Honda & Kawasaki, they are all new watercooled bikes that left the other brands behind. The difference is not so big in the smaller bikes though but i think we got it right with pre 85.
[/quote]
85 was the end of the works bike,which is why Honda in 86 had chrome bore ,real powervalves,cartridge forks.The RG was a ground breaking bike and the start of the true turning point in the 80's.Unless you're racing 20 or more min motos Idont think that watercooling is much benefit but a cartridged fork and the power that theHPP valvgave over the ATAC system is significant.

[DJRacing]

Farrrk,and then you have pre 86.....what the?....even Murray Anderson says it should stop at pre85....there is a huge diference between 85/86 models.....

Yer there is a bigger difference between 85/86 models than 84/85 which is probably why they have pre 86 (which would exclude 86 models?) instead of our pre 85 , sounds good too me

Agreed.
Pre-86 excludes all rear discs, cartridge forks, and Honda's HPP (which was considerably better than the other options).
I don't think any of the 85 models are significantly better than the good 84 models.

There is a huge difference between the 84/85 500's from Honda & Kawasaki, they are all new watercooled bikes that left the other brands behind. The difference is not so big in the smaller bikes though but i think we got it right with pre 85.

it also splits pre85 and pre 90 down the middle.

Great points those, I can see now why we should have followed you guys with show casing different eras of motorcross and how it evolved.        

[motomaniac]

Agreed.
Pre-86 excludes all rear discs, cartridge forks, and Honda's HPP (which was considerably better than the other options).
I don't think any of the 85 models are significantly better than the good 84 models.

Yes in NZ we do race Pre86 and it wasnt because we wanted to be "different from every body else" it was because of the 1986 bikes having very significant changes to suspension and motors so it was considered as a good place to start the next era.

Maybe you NZers should consider exporting a little common sense.Just saying

[JohnnyO]

If you've ever ridden an '84 KX & CR500 you'll know what i'm talking about. The '85 bikes were all new(frame, suspension & engines) and much better packages than the 84's.

[motomaniac]

If you've ever ridden an '84 KX & CR500 you'll know what i'm talking about. The '85 bikes were all new(frame, suspension & engines) and much better packages than the 84's.

The 84 500 that Glen Bell raced at the Nats was bought from me.I had Dave Armstrongs ex team Honda RG in 87/88.
The main prob with the 84 wasthe 40mm pistoned minibike shock.  I rode a Mates 85 500 back in the day which I hated . The 86 had much betterforks and shock and power. I also owned every cr250 (upto 89)made except for an M and an RB (which I refused to buy) the stock RG was way better than my fully ProCircuit kitted RF.

[JohnnyO]

If you've ever ridden an '84 KX & CR500 you'll know what i'm talking about. The '85 bikes were all new(frame, suspension & engines) and much better packages than the 84's.

The 84 500 that Glen Bell raced at the Nats was bought from me.I had Dave Armstrongs ex team Honda RG in 87/88.
The main prob with the 84 wasthe 40mm pistoned minibike shock.  I rode a Mates 85 500 back in the day which I hated . The 86 had much betterforks and shock and power. I also owned ever cr250 made except an Mand an RB (whichI refused to buy) the stock RG was way better than my fully ProCircuit kitted RF.

Fair enough.. I didn't think either of the 2 '84 500's was that nice to ride, the '85's felt more refined with better handling and power delivery.

[motomaniac]

If you've ever ridden an '84 KX & CR500 you'll know what i'm talking about. The '85 bikes were all new(frame, suspension & engines) and much better packages than the 84's.

The 84 500 that Glen Bell raced at the Nats was bought from me.I had Dave Armstrongs ex team Honda RG in 87/88.
The main prob with the 84 wasthe 40mm pistoned minibike shock.  I rode a Mates 85 500 back in the day which I hated . The 86 had much betterforks and shock and power. I also owned ever cr250 made except an Mand an RB (whichI refused to buy) the stock RG was way better than my fully ProCircuit kitted RF.

Fair enough.. I didn't think either of the 2 '84 500's was that nice to ride, the '85's felt more refined with better handling and power delivery.

Well I never rode a KX500 until the 88 model.I take your word for it on the KX's andyes the 85 CR was a new bike compared to the 84 but the 250's led the tech in those days and the 86 cr was more high tech than the 85 was compared to the 84 IMO courtesy of the modern vavled cartridge forks and the engine.I realise that theframe was updatd butI actually like the 84 geomnd ergs better.Each to their own I guess but Idont see a problemwith pre 86 at all, an 85 againt 83/83/84 models isfairer than against 86 and on IMO

[JohnnyO]

Well I never rode a KX500 until the 88 model.I take your word for it on the KX's andyes the 85 CR was a new bike compared to the 84 but the 250's led the tech in those days and the 86 cr was more high tech than the 85 was compared to the 84 IMO courtesy of the modern vavled cartridge forks and the engine.I realise that theframe was updatd butI actually like the 84 geomnd ergs better.Each to their own I guess but Idont see a problemwith pre 86 at all, an 85 againt 83/83/84 models isfairer than against 86 and on IMO

I bought/built bikes to suit the rules in place now.. If the rules started as pre 86 then i would've built 85 models instead of 84 models.
6 of one, half dozen of the other.
I built all my bikes over several era's to suit the rules, if the rules were pre 77, pre 80, pre 86 and pre 91 then i would've built 76, 79, 85 and 90 model bikes...
It doesn't matter what the rules are people will always complain, especially the keyboard racers on here. Why can't i ride this, why can't i use that.
Build bikes to suit the rules and GO RIDE. It's not rocket science....

[motomaniac]

Well I never rode a KX500 until the 88 model.I take your word for it on the KX's andyes the 85 CR was a new bike compared to the 84 but the 250's led the tech in those days and the 86 cr was more high tech than the 85 was compared to the 84 IMO courtesy of the modern vavled cartridge forks and the engine.I realise that theframe was updatd butI actually like the 84 geomnd ergs better.Each to their own I guess but Idont see a problemwith pre 86 at all, an 85 againt 83/83/84 models isfairer than against 86 and on IMO

I bought/built bikes to suit the rules in place now.. If the rules started as pre 86 then i would've built 85 models instead of 84 models.
6 of one, half dozen of the other.
I built all my bikes over several era's to suit the rules, if the rules were pre 77, pre 80, pre 86 and pre 91 then i would've built 76, 79, 85 and 90 model bikes...
It doesn't matter what the rules are people will always complain, especially the keyboard racers on here. Why can't i ride this, why can't i use that.
Build bikes to suit the rules and GO RIDE. It's not rocket science....

For sure but I was pointingout that the NZers pre 86 class isnt a bad idea and one can see the sense in having pre 86 .

[JohnnyO]

Well I never rode a KX500 until the 88 model.I take your word for it on the KX's andyes the 85 CR was a new bike compared to the 84 but the 250's led the tech in those days and the 86 cr was more high tech than the 85 was compared to the 84 IMO courtesy of the modern vavled cartridge forks and the engine.I realise that theframe was updatd butI actually like the 84 geomnd ergs better.Each to their own I guess but Idont see a problemwith pre 86 at all, an 85 againt 83/83/84 models isfairer than against 86 and on IMO

I bought/built bikes to suit the rules in place now.. If the rules started as pre 86 then i would've built 85 models instead of 84 models.
6 of one, half dozen of the other.
I built all my bikes over several era's to suit the rules, if the rules were pre 77, pre 80, pre 86 and pre 91 then i would've built 76, 79, 85 and 90 model bikes...
It doesn't matter what the rules are people will always complain, especially the keyboard racers on here. Why can't i ride this, why can't i use that.
Build bikes to suit the rules and GO RIDE. It's not rocket science....

For sure but I was pointingout that the NZers pre 86 class isnt a bad idea and one can see the sense in having pre 86 .

Yeah i guess so..