Wanted: Pics of Jeff Smiths 1964 BSA

[huskibul]

   Nice  bike firko ! like the old school low styling      pretty sure b40 head intakes are on the left  and b44 square heads right ? and as JC said earlier those competition c15/b40 frames come in 63' and were on the early round barrel b44's

[firko]

They are both B44 frames Firko.... The things they can get away with in pommy land! I also think the first bike has a victor GP or round barrel B44 head going by the left side entry of the carby.

have oil in frame
Yeah now I look a bit harder I can see they haven't got the C15/B40 style frame but while I'm not so sure of the silver bike, I'm fairly confident that the orange bike doesn't have oil in frame, going by the stock oil tank on the rhs. There was a time where the Brit pre 65 and pre 68 rules were something to follow for purity but these days some weird stuff gets through, especially in the BSA single area. I was reading in Classic Dirt Bike of a 580cc B44 which I guess is legal, even here as long as it's all internal. I suppose it's to counteract the 750 kitted Triumph and BSA twins. Still, these are still nice looking little 350 Beezas. That's the look I hope for with my TriBSA. I've got three of those tanks now, two alloy and one fibreglass.

[g465b]

hope this helps,safe and merry chrissy to all vmxers     g.[/URL][/URL[URL=http://s1284.photobucket.com/user/gbankier/media/f2e27a26-2d69-4103-9751-54e52e35950d_zps69b5e28b.jpg.html]][/img]

[firko]

According to the article they used the stock cases for the first nine rounds of the 64 season until they went over to sand cast cases for the final four rounds. The photo of the sand cast engine clearly shows a points cover so from my perspective, that settles the case, the points cases clearly existed in 1964. The only fly in the ointment being whether the sand cast works cases constitute production proof. I'm just playing good cop/bad cop here, throwing an opposition perspective into the ring. I personally think this is proof enough.   

Grant your vast library has once again helped answer a hotly debated legal question. Thanks mate and a Merry Christmas to you too.

[huskibul]

  Thats the article -cheers grant!  as Ted suggested earlier "theres nothing in the MOM's about works parts ! BUT the MAIN arguement is whether the bike in the first 9 rounds was sidepoint ,were Jeff clearly states they were production cases -Hence wanting pics of the bike in those rounds , if it is sidepoint there is no arguement ! surely theres pics out there

[FourstrokeForever]

Interesting to find out the 420cc B40 was mounted in the GP OIF in 1964. That could open up a whole new can of worms should someone want to argue the point.....

[albrid-3]

I think all round barrel BSA engine should be pre65, as they where in the beginning, it needs to be revised. and b50 should be allowed to run in pre 70

[firko]

So where do you fit the b44 square barrel then Dave

[TM BILL]

DISCLAIMER I AM NOT SUGGESTING THAT RULES BE CHANGED OR THAT THE CURRENT RULES DONT WORK

But is there somthing in what Dave says  Obviously with a year cut off for classes its not possible to change to much in the way of elidgibility . If the older classes were remaned eras with a broader scope for models would that encourage more people to bring out their older bikes .

In the early days of VMX 25 yrs ago in Australia ? the current classes ( pre 70 , pre 65 and pre 60 ) were probably well subscribed and the classes made perfect sense following development across that era . Blokes who raced those bikes in the 60s probably came back out for a ride and the class structure suited perfectly .

25 yrs on with few exceptions i dont imagine many of those blokes are still racing .

From a spectator point of view i dont imagine the average spectator would care less if 67,68 model bikes were racing in pre 65 or 71,72 B50s were racing in pre 70 , they would rather see fuller grids and closer racing .

Maybe in time a loosening of the rules and moving to a circa system rather than a fixed year cut off could be a progresive move 

To play Devils advocate if someone suggested doing the same to my eras (pre 75 and pre 78 ) i would object ( however that could change in another 10 yrs )

[mike1948]

Referring to the publication " Classic British Scramblers ", an Osprey publication, it refers to the following re BSA 420 -
" UNTIL MID 1964 , the ignition systems contact-breaker assembly remained housed within a car type distributor, rather than as points on the side."
I have a copy of " Out Front - British Motocross Champions 1960-1974 ", which has a couple of photos of JS's 420, unfortunately of a clean 420 on the drive side, and a very muddy ignition side, can't see what it has!
Mike

[albrid-3]

I personally feel that the cut off dates are all wrong, it should have been thought out much better than they where.
pre 73, pre 68, pre 62.

[firko]

This could easily turn into a can of worms . There was a time when I shouted the "B44 for pre 65" mantra from the rooftops but today I'm not so sure. The November 1966 release date really sticks in my mind to the point that I now think the bike races where it belongs, in pre 70. Dave also calls for the B50 to be allowed for pre 70. That idea has some merit  and has been raised in the past but the 1971 release date and  it sharing the class with the less developed square barrel B44 causes a problem in my mind.

I think the BSA spread should be......B40 (ALL)in Pre 65....B44 Oval and Square barrel in pre 70... and the B50 remain in pre 75. I understand that BSAs technological advances were a couple of years behind everyone else's which is why we have a bike that for all intended purposes should be a pre 65 (B44) and a pre 70 (B50) but by the tragedy of their birthday they miss out. If we start fudging cut off dates we open up a hornets nest. Which brings me to Dave's other point that the cut off dates should be 73, 68 and '72. While I think the current cut offs historically fit into the technological advancements pretty well, Dave got me to thinking that perhaps "the pre 65" class might be a better if changed to pre 68. The pre 68 class was run as an experiment a few years ago with mixed reaction. I personally liked it as did many others but it did cause some dissent and in the end the experiment was canned. Ironically the winning bike for the three years (I think) at National level was the B44. I also wonder why you picked 1973 as a cutoff Dave? The Poms went with pre '74, I'd presume to avoid the Maico CCM, KTM, Montesa 5"+ rear travel situation but what would you do with those 1973 and '74 model bikes that have 7" and 4" travel Dave? They'd be totally uncompetitive in pre 78 so in my eyes 1973 creates more problems than it solves. I can see the Pre 62 was picked to replace pre 60 because it historically excludes aftermarket framed bikes but to bundle all of the Metisse/Cheney etc bikes in together creates a big technology gap. For instance you'd have a B44 BSA competing against a Rickman Weslake 490 and Cheney's early 60's products were vastly different to his 1967 models. Once again, I understand your reasoning but think it creates more problems than it solves. 

[albrid-3]

73, 74 75 models would become pre 76.

[firko]

Here's a shot of 'Black Bess' from Frank Mellings classic book 'The Big Leap". Even though the caption says 1965, one would have to assume that the bike existed in 1964. I'll search a bit more over the holidays and see what else I can dig up.

                                                                                   

73, 74 75 models would become pre 76.

So....We've also now got a new pre 76 class? What's the reasoning behind these cut offs Dave? A 1973 7"& 4" travel bike would now be up against an 8" front and 7" rear travel '75 model. You're making this up as you go aren't you Dave . Let's just stick with what we've got. It's worked for thirty years all over the world.

[albrid-3]

Just a thought, getting back to the real topic, B40 should be pre 65, all this changed to suit Vern Graceson  and his cheney/ triumph I do recall.  I don`t want to open up a can worms, but pre 65
would be a lot stronger fields if the b40 and b44 round barrels where aload back in.