What flatslides are legal for Pre 85?

[smed]

Bob Hannah used a rear disc on his RC250 in 1983, they must be okay to use in pre 85 also then

http://moto.mpora.com/instagram/photos/777134986629929135_231371717

[Nathan S]

Bob Hannah used a rear disc on his RC250 in 1983, they must be okay to use in pre 85 also then

http://moto.mpora.com/instagram/photos/777134986629929135_231371717

If you had the works bits, or exact replicas then yes, it would be legal to run a rear disc in Pre-85.

[Nathan S]

Seriously......this is where punters get put off of racing at the "Nats". Who cares what Carby you run on your bike? Unless you have somehow managed to make a fuel injected 1984 CR500, is ANY
flatslide carby going to make that much of a difference to a round slide?
We all seem to forget that the least functional part of any motorcycle is the person controlling (or attempting to) the bike.

If we're not worried about bikes being historically valid, then what's the point of VMX?

[Nathan S]

The relevant rule mentions components available in 1984.

There is no requirement for specific part numbered model identification

By the look of the carbies in the various photos they are die cast production parts, unlike  the big black round slide mixers fitted on earlier HRC motocrossers.


GCR 16.15.13.1.  Acceptable for Pre 85 class are machines and COMPONENTS built up to and including the 1984 model.

This is it. It's not about names or numbers, it's about the parts.

Is an RX-8 motor the same as an RX-4 motor? They're both called "13B"... If the racing class specifies "Pre-1985", then how do you justify allowing a Renesis into that class?

It's the same as you're trying to do here.

PJs are pooh.

[mboddy]

If you had the works bits, or exact replicas then yes, it would be legal to run a rear disc in Pre-85.

Unless the rules said that it was not legal to run a rear disk in Pre-85.
For example, when MA changed the rules for pre-78 to ban flat slides even though the Lectron had been available for years.

[FireKwaka]

It would be poor sportsmanship for you to protest John, especially if PJ's are poo.  Here I was thinking John was doing good for the sport! I do see the point that they may not be legal, still pretty f#*ked anyway.

[John Orchard]

It would be poor sportsmanship for you to protest John, especially if PJ's are poo.  Here I was thinking John was doing good for the sport! I do see the point that they may not be legal, still pretty f#*ked anyway.

Well it is a title on the line, and if I go to the trouble to make the stock carb work, or I can ride fast enough with the stock round slide (that is even more poo), well too bad 'that's racing'.

It's just like the crap happening in Evo at the moment, I want to run my '84 43mm forks (which are poo) but can't .... we all live & die by the rules  :-)

[Nathan S]

If we're not worried about bikes being historically valid, then what's the point of VMX?

[FourstrokeForever]

If we're not worried about bikes being historically valid, then what's the point of VMX?

No body is trying to reinvent the wheel Nathan. I just don't see all the fuss about what carburetor is on an '84 CR. The Lectron flatslide was available way before 1985. And also of note is the fact that the early to mid 80's was the period when the factories were at the peak of war with the works bikes. Is it not plausible that the tradition continues today?
I didn't think I'd ever read from John O that he would protest against another machine over a simple component like a carby. Flatslides were available in 1984 and to me, that is the end of the debate, regardless of what brand the carby is.
Why is that I can go and buy a BRAND NEW flatslide Mikuni or Lectron today and fit it to my CR250RE but I cant use a PJ or PWK simply because of it's name and date of introduction to machines available to the public?
Protest all you want John. I think you will be wasting your money and the officials time.

[Ted]

Because its date of introduction does not comply to the Era's completion date.

Pretty simple stuff really

[shelpi]

what about suspension? as long as its got the correst axle travel and mounting, look at the shocks we are useing, way better than the works gear back in the day

[Nathan S]

Shocks on twin shock bikes were always a consumable, and the rules were specifically written to accommodate this while keeping the travel restricted (in the relevant classes).

Those rules probably never really considered the possibility of the sorts of shocks that are easily available now, but - unlike the carby regs - they specifically allowed newer parts to be fitted.

[FourstrokeForever]

Because its date of introduction does not comply to the Era's completion date.

Pretty simple stuff really

Explain how it is simple stuff Ted..... Us mere mortals seem to have a hard time keeping up with you super humans that seem to able to dictate what is right and what is wrong with the typing of a few, non descriptive words.

Nathan, what the hell has shocks got to do with this current discussion? Seems when ever you are stuck for an argument you change tact. Get into sailing buddy. They forever have to go port and starboard.

Get back to the facts.....Flatslide Mikuni's, Lectrons, and Keihins were all available before 30.12.1985. IF you had the coin to do so, anybody could walk into a dealership and buy their choice of carby to "update" from public specification to what the factory guys are (were) using.

[FourstrokeForever]

I've said it before and I will use the opportunity to say it again. Not 1 individual protested against Bells bike in '09 with USD forks, flatslide carby, Ohlins rear shock and oversized front wave disc rotor......

[Ted]

TBM, Pre 85 finishes at the end of 84, not the 30/12/1985. I guess that's why it's called PRE ( precedes) 85

Nathan, you are right again. Looks like the Sexmax could be the only truly eligible bike in VMX