Bike eligiblity, arguments and perspective

[GMC]

Please excuse me for pushing my own agenda, but it seems a lot of the good posts on here lately come from guys named Geoff 

[Davey Crocket]

Who?

[Rossvickicampbell]

slow day Geoff - grasping at straws???

he he!

[bigk]

Yes we need rules, but the current rules are flawed with regard to getting more people involved. Some common sense should prevail, but there is a total lack of common sense world wide let alone in VMX racing. The following is just one example: I would love to race a national meeting in pre '78 but bugger me dead if I'm reducing the suspension on my dead stock 1977 Husky CR390 (as it was produced) to meet the current rules, when the guy on the RM370 next to me can have a set of brand new, built yesterday Ohlins shocks with 40 clicks of rebound & compression adjustment. Yes I know I can have them too but I don't want them, I just want to ride my stock standard 1977 model motorcycle. Doesn't seem right IMO.
K

[JohnnyO]

Yes we need rules, but the current rules are flawed with regard to getting more people involved. Some common sense should prevail, but there is a total lack of common sense world wide let alone in VMX racing. The following is just one example: I would love to race a national meeting in pre '78 but bugger me dead if I'm reducing the suspension on my dead stock 1977 Husky CR390 (as it was produced) to meet the current rules, when the guy on the RM370 next to me can have a set of brand new, built yesterday Ohlins shocks with 40 clicks of rebound & compression adjustment. Yes I know I can have them too but I don't want them, I just want to ride my stock standard 1977 model motorcycle. Doesn't seem right IMO.
K

Not a big deal to me bigk, ive got a RM370 that I fitted a fox fork kit to improve it and bring it up to 9" travel, now I've got a 77 390 Husky that I have to pull the forks apart and fit travel limiters... Six of one, half dozen of the other.
If you want to race pre 78, and I do, it's not such a big ask when building a bike compared to all the other work required.

[albrid-3]

BigK, I agree with you, if the Husky meets the cut off within the rules and it was manufactured  to the correct original specification then it should not be changed.

[bigk]

It's not a big deal in the real world John but it's the principle. As the current rules stand I can modify some (or all) brand bikes with all sorts of modern, performance enhancing equipment but can't race a standard model of other makes. In pre '78 racing you should be able to race a bike in the configuration it was produced & raced in 1977. If said bike had a real or perceived "advantage" in 1977, it should be the same today. Whoever thought up the rules must have had a Honda or Suzuki back then as most of the other '77 bikes exceed the suspension rules. It's just dumb in my mind, and I'm certainly not saying my mind is infallible.
K

[Ted]

Whoever thought up the rules must have had a Honda or Suzuki back then as most of the other '77 bikes exceed the suspension rules.
K
[/quote]

That's what I'm thinking

[JohnnyO]

I know it's the principal Michael but since I came into vintage racing over 20years ago there has been a rule in place stating pre 75 bikes must have no more than 4" rear wheel travel so people with 74 Maicos, Huskys and YZB Yamahas have had to modify their rear ends and shorten the travel to comply so it's nothing new...

[JohnnyO]

BigK, I agree with you, if the Husky meets the cut off within the rules and it was manufactured  to the correct original specification then it should not be changed.

So what about the 74 Maico, Husky and YZB Yamaha that have to have the rear suspension modified to comply in pre 75, do you want to change those rules too??

[Tim754]

Pre75's allowed to have 7 inches travel up front unreal! My pre75 gets by with 3.75 front travel and 2.5 rear, and its engine alone weights more than most complete 125s ..... Then again I got legal electric start and a disk brake 

Just avoiding making any personal thoughts or comments on the eternal " Bike eligibility " sagas.

 PS There's four "i"s in eligibility                                    inane, intractable, imperfect, idiocy 

[oldfart]

I  have a tendency to agree with Big K  statement  on this one, as the bike was ahead of their  game compared to others.
Sadly  the rules are rules and if you want to play in the sand pit with other's you have to abide by them.
 

[Slakewell]

It sucks to re under engineer a bike
I have a 77 GP husky that I have reduced it's travel so I can race the Nats the only reason my KTM complies is it's based of an enduro model and does not have the 10.5 MC travel.
Fewer bikes comply than dont in regards to Pre 78 suspension limits. The irony is pre 78 should have no suspension limits as all bikes were on the very limits in regards to frame design in 77 and adding any more suspension travel just f*cked up the handling and slowed them down. Im very happy to line up with a 12inch RM 370 any time. 

[albrid-3]

BigK, I agree with you, if the Husky meets the cut off within the rules and it was manufactured  to the correct original specification then it should not be changed.

So what about the 74 Maico, Husky and YZB Yamaha that have to have the rear suspension modified to comply in pre 75, do you want to change those rules too??

Maico and YZb, they where manufactured with the year of 1974, they should be aloud to be ridden without change. The yz 250, 360 B where on sale here in Australia at easter time 1974.

[Rossvickicampbell]

so - as has been said earlier I think - the circle goes around.  We have had this debate any number of times on this forum - all have an opinion and voice that opinion but nobody does anything about getting together to make a change. 

I have a YZB and don't like limiting the travel - however the current rules state I must so since I can't change ther rules I abide by the rules.

I understand what you are saying guys but the continual, repetitive nature of complaints on here is going to do nothing than make it clear who sits in what camp!

Is anybody on here cluey enough to put together a propsoal for changing the suspension limits (for a start) which people like myself can support and we can actually do something rather than talk?