Moms,please explain?

[smed]

 In the evolution section rule # 18.5.6.1  "bikes will be OEM(original equipment manufacture)".WTF is that supposed to mean, My honda must be a honda & not a yamaha ,or no non original parts,that removes three quaters of the field    http://www.motorcyclingvic.com.au/fileadmin/user_upload/state_files/vic/2012_Folders/Event_Admin/2013_MoMS/Chapter_18.pdf

[Simo63]

66 views and no comments yet ... says a lot don't you think

I'm buggered so will have a look tomorrow some time and let you know how I interpret it ... not that my opinion will necessarily be right though 

[Kenneth S (222)]

Is that it? Are there no other guidelines? That does seem a bit unrealistic if you are to read it to the letter. I guess common sense and keeping things within the spirit of the sport will have to come into play. It's obvious there would be more bikes than not that had some or all of the following parts non OEM. Plastics, Seat, Air filter, Throttle grip, Handle Bars, Levers, Spokes, Rims, Shocks, Pistons, Rings...

I guess my simplistic interpretation of the rule and what is realistic is the 'hard' parts of the bike specifically engineered for that model, form axle to axle including the braking assemblies and hubs must be OEM and the 'soft' parts of the bike, the bits that wear out or get broken can obviously be a non OEM replica.

The grey area is the shocks and swing arms, they obviously improve the handling of the bikes but even back in the day, the first thing you did was toss the OEM shocks for a set that worked and if you could afford it put a better swing arm on.

But as Craig says, that's my opinion and it will not necessarily be right though.

[TM BILL]

Its been brought up on here a number of times over the years , its very badly worded but has never been adjusted in the MOMS .
Nathan gave a good definition of how it should be worded a couple of years ago but i cant find it now.

[maico police]

To me it reads that if its a Kawasaki then it probably shouldn't have a twin leading shoe, 43 mm Yamaha front end on it but there's a heck of a lot of people out there that like to interperate that their own way  .

Shocks and wheels and such are seen as a 'disposable' item (they wear out and OEM are no longer available) so you can stick after-market on.

Let's see if this hits 20 pages....

[Montynut]

OEM to a model of the ERA is the common interpretation I believe.

That means you can not use the TLS brake from a 1982 Yamaha because it is not OEM to an EVO bike, you can use a TLS yamaha brake from a 1981 Yamaha 465 because it did originate from an EVO bike.

This is one of the rule that stops the reverse engineering you see in Europe where later monoshock bikes have been modified into a twin shock bike.

Things like rims/handlebars/shocks etc are not covered by this rule as they are considered consumables.

[jimg1au]

you are not able to put any alloy rims on any bike.it all depends on what year it falls in.
for example i was looking at buying a pre65 dot it had new alloy rims and different pipe.they would have needed replacing as not in the era pre65
it had a 400cc stroked enging but looked like the original 250 outside that was ok.
jim

[Ando]

OEM to a model of the ERA is the common interpretation I believe.

That means you can not use the TLS brake from a 1982 Yamaha because it is not OEM to an EVO bike, you can use a TLS yamaha brake from a 1981 Yamaha 465 because it did originate from an EVO bike.

This is one of the rule that stops the reverse engineering you see in Europe where later monoshock bikes have been modified into a twin shock bike.

Things like rims/handlebars/shocks etc are not covered by this rule as they are considered consumables.

Good explanation Monty!

[Montynut]

you are not able to put any alloy rims on any bike.it all depends on what year it falls in.
for example i was looking at buying a pre65 dot it had new alloy rims and different pipe.they would have needed replacing as not in the era pre65
it had a 400cc stroked enging but looked like the original 250 outside that was ok.
jim

You are correct on the rims for Pre65 Jim my response was for the EVO class. I think Pre65 actually has a specific rule on rims?

[Montynut]

you are not able to put any alloy rims on any bike.it all depends on what year it falls in.
for example i was looking at buying a pre65 dot it had new alloy rims and different pipe.they would have needed replacing as not in the era pre65
it had a 400cc stroked enging but looked like the original 250 outside that was ok.
jim

You are correct on the rims for Pre65 Jim my response was for the EVO class. I think Pre65 actually has a specific rule on rims?

Jim reading the MOMS now there is no reference to rims in Pre65 so your rims should have been OK. I am sure there was a rule requiring steel rims in Pre65 and also 'mud catcher' alloys only in Pre70 but that is also gone from what I can see. Am I correct?

[09.0]

you are not able to put any alloy rims on any bike.it all depends on what year it falls in.
for example i was looking at buying a pre65 dot it had new alloy rims and different pipe.they would have needed replacing as not in the era pre65
it had a 400cc stroked enging but looked like the original 250 outside that was ok.
jim

You are correct on the rims for Pre65 Jim my response was for the EVO class. I think Pre65 actually has a specific rule on rims?

Jim reading the MOMS now there is no reference to rims in Pre65 so your rims should have been OK. I am sure there was a rule requiring steel rims in Pre65 and also 'mud catcher' alloys only in Pre70 but that is also gone from what I can see. Am I correct?

Pre 60 is specific with rims. Steel only unless they are mud catchers. I just asked the same question a couple of weeks ago.

[Ted]

To me it reads that if its a Kawasaki then it probably shouldn't have a twin leading shoe, 43 mm Yamaha front end on it but there's a heck of a lot of people out there that like to interperate that their own way  .

Shocks and wheels and such are seen as a 'disposable' item (they wear out and OEM are no longer available) so you can stick after-market on.

Let's see if this hits 20 pages....

If you debate the words " 18.2.1.2.      The onus of proof of eligibility shall rest wholly upon the rider or entrant of the machine. Service and parts manual publication dates are not proof of eligibility "



I interpret this to mean that back in the day if you didn't own a camera to take photos of all your bikes optional parts fitted, a dark room to store these photos for 30 or 40 years, kept every receipt you ever spent on a motorcycle, every magazine you ever bought and had it all co- witnessed and dated by a JP just in case when you turned 50 you came up with an idea " hey, I might find an old bike and go VMX racing " you are pretty well screwed.

More than 20 pages I reckon

[09.0]

As TM Bill said, the 'OEM' in relation to evo is a badly worded rule. 'OEM' should not be used the way it is. As it means genuine parts, it is impossible to keep your race bike fitted with genuine parts. It is referring to (with common sense being used) using parts out of the era as Montynut said. On the internet the rules are all f$%ked up and can be interpreted so many ways, but in real life, thankfully, there is some common sense and bikes (mostly) conform to what is correct for the era.
From what I have seen the most incorrect parts used on an evo bike are 43mm Honda front ends on cr250r's and I'm pretty sure on some four stroke hybrids.

[09.0]

To me it reads that if its a Kawasaki then it probably shouldn't have a twin leading shoe, 43 mm Yamaha front end on it but there's a heck of a lot of people out there that like to interperate that their own way  .

Shocks and wheels and such are seen as a 'disposable' item (they wear out and OEM are no longer available) so you can stick after-market on.

Let's see if this hits 20 pages....

If you debate the words " 18.2.1.2.      The onus of proof of eligibility shall rest wholly upon the rider or entrant of the machine. Service and parts manual publication dates are not proof of eligibility "



I interpret this to mean that back in the day if you didn't own a camera to take photos of all your bikes optional parts fitted, a dark room to store these photos for 30 or 40 years, kept every receipt you ever spent on a motorcycle, every magazine you ever bought and had it all co- witnessed and dated by a JP just in case when you turned 50 you came up with an idea " hey, I might find an old bike and go VMX racing " you are pretty well screwed.

More than 20 pages I reckon

My thoughts are that seeing as vintage mx has been around since 1988, 99.9% of issues have been resolved regarding what was available at the time. I see it more like the new guy on the scene arguing a point that is wrong. You can then refer him to that rule to end the discussion. Come back with the proof.

[maico police]

I do think EVO in Australia as it stands is a lot better than in a lot of the other places.