Evo Revo

[Digga]

Much like the never ending conflict in the middle east (which will probably drag on long after we are all dead & buried), the Evo saga threatens to do the same with no end in sight 

A suggestion:

Evo (Evolution) runs "as is" under current rules/guidleines as per MOM's & MA definition with air cooled, drum brakes, non linkage, no USD forks etc

Revo (Revolution) as above  but you can pick & choose bits from anywhere, create your own Frankfurter thing but again must tick the same 4 key boxes

This should keep both factions happy, run together (scored separately) or run separate, numbers dependant. Have both officially recognized by MA as separate classes & should be easy at srcutineering as long as the Revo's dont try to sneak their way into Evo as entrants 

Of course, an Evo could ride in a Revo event but not the other way around, much like a Pre 78 can ride up into Evo now (I am sure that question would be asked straight away)

This should foster a new and exciting group of innovative & creative genius while at the same time preserving the authenticity of the Evo class as it was intended & existed at the time.

Currently the ID letters used are A, N, H, X, Z, E, Y, W, so the letter R is free for the new Revo class 

Hmmm.......RRRRRRR (by chance) is also the same noise that Pirates make & a good insignia for those who choose to indulge in the new class

[Ted]

Current MA definition is Revo

You would be better off calling it Current MA Evo rules and Pre December 2013 understanding of the Evo rules by the not so vast minority. You will need a very big banner though

[Digga]

Thx Ted, I was just putting another idea out there in case it had merit with the hope that this fracture could be addressed & people can move on with a reasonable outcome to make most people happy.

The politics surrounding this issue is too deep for your average Joe punter like myself, just getting sick & tired of reading about it over & over & over.......again 

[William Doe]

The politics surrounding this issue is too deep for your average Joe punter like myself, just getting sick & tired of reading about it over & over & over.......again 

That's an easy fix , don't read it 

I don't like fairy tales so I don't read the bible 

[bigk]

It's all about bums on seats on start lines. Adjustments which will lead to this are necessary & an improvement.
K

[Digga]

Thx William Doe, TM Bill, Santa or whoever you really are ? ? ?

Yes, perhaps I will take your advice & I wont read it anyomore, good call, easy fix, thx

PS - have you tried the Koran yet, better reading than the bible (apparently) & much more topical nowdays, enjoy 

[Ted]

It's all about bums on seats on start lines. Adjustments which will lead to this are necessary & an improvement.
K

Well you're just about to find out at your Nats aren't you.

[bigk]

Sure will. Everything will be clear as mud.
K

[Tossa]

I just don't get the need for an EVO or REVO.  Back in the day you just raced.  Personal opinion should just be by year pre 78, pre80, pre85 etc, whatever year period they make it, just ride it like you stole it.  We all just ride the bikes we love.  Everything is just too complicated for a sport based on fun and enjoying the era, personal opinion only

[bigk]

The EVO rules are fairly simple & ain't really broke, they just need some common sense tweaking. It's a great, generally well patronized class.
K

[Simo63]

I just don't get the need for an EVO or REVO.  Back in the day you just raced.  Personal opinion should just be by year pre 78, pre80, pre85 etc, whatever year period they make it, just ride it like you stole it.  We all just ride the bikes we love.  Everything is just too complicated for a sport based on fun and enjoying the era, personal opinion only

Tossa you are welcome to your opinion mate.  Like many of us, you are obviously here just to ride the bikes that you relate to and relive some of the fun of your youth.  That is great and something most of us can understand completely.  I suspect many forum goers are keeping out of this discussion because, like you, they are only here to ride their bike and have fun and this topic always brings people down it seems.   

But this sport we enjoy has another completely different and very serious side to it and whilst many may never win an Australian Championship, there are some people that will, or could given the right circumstances, and they work hard at it.  They choose to train, they choose to spend a lot of money on their bikes, they do whatever they can to to help them achieve their goals.  Nothing wrong with that at all.  Good on them I say but we can't ignore that side of the sport when issues like this come up.  Our sport is goverened by Motorcycling Australia and the State Controlling Bodies, you have to be licensed, there are rules and regulations one must abide by.  And when you add in the element of competition, club, state and national championships then it's a serious sport for some.  At that point in time, you need to have very well defined rules.

I believe this topic has caused, and is still causing, a lot of angst due to ambiguity that has really not been resolved correctly for a number of reasons.  At the end of the day none of us wish to see this confusion or rule ambiguity or anything else like it damage our sport any more than it already has

[Tossa]

Point taken Simmo and respected

[Freakshow]

mmmm so my question on all this is simple...... if classic racing is about periods and representing historical racing and equipment as its primary focus,   Then Evo which is now being referred to and structured as a make up of non period specific bikes ( sexmax optional) should it be moved out of classic racing and into modern MX and you can build what you like   ?

Because in reality, it was invented as a catch all for early VMX riders to all ride in, be it prior to pre 85 getting legs and becoming a class, then , surely it was provided as a temporary class only to cover until natural bracket creep was able to move along.   So maybe the question should be is Evo relevant anymore or should it actually be turned on its head and made to be consistent with every other class with a year cut off ? or should it just be killed off all together ?

The question must be if its not a historical depiction of something, then is it 1. Really vintage, 2. relevant or just a fun class ?

[Nathan S]

My 2c worth:

1. Evo as a historically relevant category as has been widely understood until recently is popular and well supported.
2. It has a large number of competitors who have built/bought bikes for the class. These people will be rightly pissed off if their bikes have to race against 84 models.
3. A significant of those competitors also have Pre-85 bikes, so absorbing Evo into Pre-85 will deny them an opportunity to ride at least one of their bikes.
4. I also believe that a most of the existing Evo competitors will be thoroughly pissed off if they have to compete against non-historic Evo bikes.

All of this indicates that we need to maintain a historically representative class for air-cooled, drum braked, non-linkage old bikes.

The "any age bike" version of Evo seems to be very poorly supported by VMX competitors, and clearly does not fit within the definition of "Classic Motocross". It may find support in the wider MX community, but it has no place under the Vintage umbrella.

The ONLY realistic way forward from here is to place an age limit on the Evo class. I would suggest that the existing rules are maintained, with an clause added to mandate that all major components are pre-1986 and carry-overs.
It could be pre-85 or any other year, but pre-86 allows the safety seat DT175s and the very last of the air-cooled, twin shock Husqvarnas (85 XC500?).

[Slakewell]

Would not be more simple to have a rule.
Air cooled drum brakes non linkage. All major components (eg forks brakes etc) Must come from same? 
Is this not more or less what it is now? Been working OK for last 30 years.