I think we're now well on the way to sorting the MoMs wording and interpretation out. From what I can see there are some classes that need little or no modifications to their wording or rules. One problem that is appearing more and more however is the use of trick 'billet' or custom made aftermarket parts manufactured in the USA and elsewhere. Many people seem to think that if a part is allowed in AHRMA competition it must automatically be allowed here. At the risk of repeating my point, alloy billet triple clamps might well be legal for pre 75 in AHRMA competition but they are not legal under our MoMs. This is also seen in the number of KLR or Thor style swingarms appearing on Australian pre 75 bikes, their riders assuming them to be legal when in fact they aren't according to the MoMs definition of 'Major Component' and period integrity.
*Pre 75 has traditionally been the sports most popular class and needs nothing other than some minor wording changes and parts eligibility criteria detail added (eligible aftermarket 'Major Components' (aftermarket frames, swingarms and triple clamps, see Reply #93 ).
*Pre 78 seems to be the class most in need of a definition tune up. The rules for the class were originally 'borrowed' almost to the word from the AHRMA rule book and it's since shown that they hold some inherent flaws . The biggest problem seems to be in suspension limits, many racers believing that the current 9" limit is inadequate. I believe that the suspension limit needs to be adjusted to that of the longest OEM travel bike in the class, whether that be 10", 11" or whatever. It's easier to put an inch of travel into a bike than to de-engineer it to a lower limit (9"). Another situation that seems to be worth investigating is to remove the "standard suspension mounting points" stipulation. Once again, harking to my earlier post, there wasn't another era except maybe for pre 65 where bikes were modified more for increased performance. The suspension revolution was in full swing in the '75-'78, with all sorts of frame and swingarm mods being commonplace. A lot of guys were still racing their '74 (and earlier) bikes with upgraded suspension mods, I myself had a Montesa 360 with Maico style rear suspension and Marzocchi forks.
I'd suggest removing any reference to suspension mounting points from the pre '78 regs.
Evolution. DJ's on the money with his ideas (Reply #82 ). The beauty of Evo is in its simplicity and lack of overbearing eligibility rules, it's the poster child for the KISS principle. For that reason lets not over complicate it with too many words. Here's my version....
*Evolution class machines must be air cooled, have drum brakes and non linkaged suspension.
*All major components must have been derived from an air cooled, drum braked and non linkaged motorcycle.
*Parts from any bike that is water cooled, disc braked or featuring linkaged suspension are not allowed.
* There are no suspension travel limits in Evolution.
Another challenge is to create a fair eligibility list for pre '60 and pre '65. These classes are undergoing a small but inspiring resurgence in interest and I feel that to make the classes as accessible as possible we need to broaden their eligibility criteria. I make reference to the BSA B40 distributor/points models grey area for pre 65 and acceptance of modern Indian manufactured Royal Enfields as a cheap and readily available machine for both pre '60 and/or pre 65 as examples of some points that need to be addressed. There needs to be a serious discussion and research into allowing as many machines into both classes without infecting the historic integrity of the class(es).
A similar research undertaking is needed to compile a list of eligible flow on models for all classes with the exception of Evo. There are already some listed flow ons for pre 70 and pre 75 but I feel that there are more machines that could be allowed for those classes and that a similar list be created for pre '78, pre 85 and pre 90. I propose that volunteer committees of knowledgeable people should be formed to consider flow on alternatives for all eras. There are some very knowledgeable and passionate people (many of them frequenting this forum) interested in the various divisions that I feel could really make a contribution.
