Rule re-write.

[bazza]

When you think you have all the bugs ironed out then I suggest you run it by the relevant commissioners to get their take on it before it is submitted to MA

If they are all in agreement with it then it has a good chance of being passed.

Once you get to this stage then we can all copy and paste to submit it to MA

If there are lots of people submitting lots of different versions then it will probably fall in a heap.

Seems like a good idea

[Slakewell]

My only whinge is the 9" Pre 78 rule. I still feel that for pre 78 no limit is the best rule. Less rules mean less BS. When most bikes need to be modified to fit the rules then something is wrong. ( Just because the most chosen bike in the class needs no mods doesn't make it right) Having to back engineer CCM's, VB monty's GP Huskies, AW Maico's and the like is just wrong on so many levels. How many times have I read in this thread about how it was back in the day and how we need to reflect that? You tell me how many people back in 77 shorten there suspension?  I think you find that's a round figure.

[Ted]

And all that will do is start Evo from 1/1/1975

[Slakewell]

And all that will do is start Evo from 1/1/1975

Ted we can never agree on every topic. Keep in mind that their was a good reason that even 77 people didn't modify there bikes to 12" travel. Counter shaft sprocket location. 78/79 saw new crank cases on most bikes so they could increase there travel and keep there chain on.

[Ted]

My only whinge is the 9" Pre 78 rule. I still feel that for pre 78 no limit is the best rule. Less rules mean less BS. When most bikes need to be modified to fit the rules then something is wrong. ( Just because the most chosen bike in the class needs no mods doesn't make it right) Having to back engineer CCM's, VB monty's GP Huskies, AW Maico's and the like is just wrong on so many levels. How many times have I read in this thread about how it was back in the day and how we need to reflect that? You tell me how many people back in 77 shorten there suspension?  I think you find that's a round figure.

I agree that the 9" rule requires several bikes to reduce travel by about 1" but without that rule owners of '75 & '76 models may as well scrape them. I have a VB360 which has had 1.25" taken out of the suspension front and back it is still competative. We are not racing exactly as we did in 1977 we are racing to represent an era. Otherwise why allow modern shocks, modern carbies in Pre65 and the list would go on and on.

As much as it effing well shocks and disturbs me to my last mortal cell I have to agree with Ted on this one. You do not realise how much that pains me to say

Well you really are wiser than first thought

So answer my question from the other day. What is Heavens stance on Evo. Same old same old ( which is great ) or open slather Tanner twin shock rules. I have the lathe running and waiting your response.

BTW I will bring that B pipe up for you at first meeting. Not sure it will get your bike to the finish line but your bike will  look better being pushed back to camp I've also got heaps of spokes if ya want them........free for mates

[DJRacing]

    Evolution class bikes must have been manufactured with Non Linkage suspension and Drum-brakes and Aircooled motors.
All parts from those bikes are permissible as are all after-market parts of this era.
 a) Modifying your bike with other major parts from a newer era is not allowed.

These words mean you can have period correct "works" parts and period correct after-market parts like, water-cooling and all the other hot bling items from that era. It also means that you can't use parts from a Pre85 era bike or newer if it's a major part which are already defined in the rules.
This I believe show cases the era or period of what we call Evo VMX with its long travel suspension and also what hop-up/after-market parts were available at the time.

[Mick D]

    Evolution class bikes must have been manufactured with Non Linkage suspension and Drum-brakes and Aircooled motors.
All parts from those bikes are permissible as are all after-market parts of this era.
 a) Modifying your bike with other major parts from a newer era is not allowed.

These words mean you can have period correct "works" parts and period correct after-market parts like, water-cooling and all the other hot bling items from that era. It also means that you can't use parts from a Pre85 era bike or newer if it's a major part which are already defined in the rules.
This I believe show cases the era or period of what we call Evo VMX with its long travel suspension and also what hop-up/after-market parts were available at the time.

Very nice

[micks]

 very very good that simple but again to be period correct you need a period and then you can have a newer era

[FourstrokeForever]

"A further area that possibly needs consideration is the requirement to have shock mounts in there original position. If a bike meets the suspension requirments does it matter? certainly back in the day people did all sorts of things. Maybe it should apply to Pre75 and earlier only?"

That is exactly what Nathans re-write of the rules is proposed. Yes, suspension travel limits are required otherwise we will end up with all sorts of frankenstien beasts that do not represent any specific era. In most cases, the bike with increased travel will be unrideable anyway. Imagine a 1974 CR250 with 8"s of suspension travel at the back.....YUK.

Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe if enough punters back it then MA will take it seriously.
Then it is up to the commissioners, some of who may not be relevant (classic road race for instance, not too sure on this)

When you think you have all the bugs ironed out then I suggest you run it by the relevant commissioners to get their take on it before it is submitted to MA

If they are all in agreement with it then it has a good chance of being passed.

Once you get to this stage then we can all copy and paste to submit it to MA

If there are lots of people submitting lots of different versions then it will probably fall in a heap.

Exactly right Geoff. The proposed rules need to fit in with what the MAJORITY of riders want as their new bible. I'm sure that Nathan's intent is to give the punters what they deem as the way forward. Sure, there will no doubt be the odd detractor, but that's the way of a democratic society. If the majority agree that the final, and we're not there yet, set of proposed rules are the way of the future, then yes, copy and paste a submission. That can not fail. The strength is in numbers, as it has always been in everything beaurocratic with democracy at it's heart apart from those that CONTROL motorsport in this country. United we stand, divided nothing will be gained. I don't think the classic road race committee should have anything to do with CMX or PCMX or have any right to vote on what the Classic MX committee want to do. And I'm sure they wouldn't want any interference from the Classic MX committee either. They are both entirely different classes of motorcycle sport.

[Rossvickicampbell]

I have previously - and still do - agree with Mr Slakewell on the suspension travel limits - and have to ask why this area gets picked out as being limited to fall into an era when the bike resides.  yes I have a YZB - it is pre 75 but it is bought back to the field because it was ahead of everybody else - why?  It seems to impact more on pre-78 than pre 75 but as mentioned eras are used to sort groups and if a particular bike falls into that category why penalise it.  Surely there is enough knowledge around that we could leave the statement that suspension must not exceed OEM specs or similar or the maximum for a particular bike in an era  Ie pre 75 could be maxed out at whatever the YZB was?? 

I see previously lots of comments about this - particularly with pre 78 yet seems the normal commentators on this are absent currently?

[DJRacing]

very very good that simple but again to be period correct you need a period and then you can have a newer era

Nathan has already put an era in for Evo. 1982
There already is an era or period with those rules because basically there were no more improvements to a bike built with Non Linkage and Drum-brakes and Aircooled motor.

[FourstrokeForever]

I have previously - and still do - agree with Mr Slakewell on the suspension travel limits - and have to ask why this area gets picked out as being limited to fall into an era when the bike resides.  yes I have a YZB - it is pre 75 but it is bought back to the field because it was ahead of everybody else - why?  It seems to impact more on pre-78 than pre 75 but as mentioned eras are used to sort groups and if a particular bike falls into that category why penalise it.  Surely there is enough knowledge around that we could leave the statement that suspension must not exceed OEM specs or similar or the maximum for a particular bike in an era  Ie pre 75 could be maxed out at whatever the YZB was?? 

I see previously lots of comments about this - particularly with pre 78 yet seems the normal commentators on this are absent currently?

I do agree Ross. If a certain model bike had more suspension travel as standard before December 31/1974, then I don't think it should be restricted to suit the 7" and 4" rule. It is actually backward engineering the original bike. Maybe there should be some exceptions to the rule rather than allowing all pre75 machines to have 5" rear suspension travel....

[VMX247]

I would 16.15.7.(ba)  to "operationaly similar and visualy indistinguishable" other than that pretty much complete

Why?

Indistiguishable is clear and defined , 'similar' is open to interpretation. Similar operation means things like I could not convert a powervalve to servo operation from governed off  the crank. here is an example

x2 more

[Lozza]

I have previously - and still do - agree with Mr Slakewell on the suspension travel limits - and have to ask why this area gets picked out as being limited to fall into an era when the bike resides.  yes I have a YZB - it is pre 75 but it is bought back to the field because it was ahead of everybody else - why?  It seems to impact more on pre-78 than pre 75 but as mentioned eras are used to sort groups and if a particular bike falls into that category why penalise it.  Surely there is enough knowledge around that we could leave the statement that suspension must not exceed OEM specs or similar or the maximum for a particular bike in an era  Ie pre 75 could be maxed out at whatever the YZB was?? 

I see previously lots of comments about this - particularly with pre 78 yet seems the normal commentators on this are absent currently?

Suppose it saves grumbles from everyone when you smoke the field at the Nats  Rossco  

[Nathan S]

I have previously - and still do - agree with Mr Slakewell on the suspension travel limits - and have to ask why this area gets picked out as being limited to fall into an era when the bike resides.  yes I have a YZB - it is pre 75 but it is bought back to the field because it was ahead of everybody else - why?  It seems to impact more on pre-78 than pre 75 but as mentioned eras are used to sort groups and if a particular bike falls into that category why penalise it.  Surely there is enough knowledge around that we could leave the statement that suspension must not exceed OEM specs or similar or the maximum for a particular bike in an era  Ie pre 75 could be maxed out at whatever the YZB was?? 

I see previously lots of comments about this - particularly with pre 78 yet seems the normal commentators on this are absent currently?

The idea is that Pre-75 is for bikes with short travel suspension, and the year of manufacture is a secondary concern. It's not about the year 1974, its about the short travel era.

Your bike is an oddity, in that it was one of two/three 'production' bikes with more than 4" of rear travel - in some ways, I'd say that it's proper home is the Pre-78 class, being the "transition era"... The existing rules prohibit you from entering your 1974 model bike in Pre-78, though...
The proposed rules give you the choice of limiting the rear travel and racing with the short travel bikes, or leaving it in original spec and racing Pre-78.