What flatslides are legal for Pre 85?

[Nathan S]

Surely a competitor could lodge a protest over a competitor's machine eligibility at any time during the meeting? Otherwise you could take a legal bike through scrutiny, and then change it...

[KTM47]

In other motor sport genres I've seen deep and difficult eligibility questions easily solved by making the in-question component free.
Often the big argument against a new freedom is the cost burden it may place on the rest of the racing fleet. In the case of a carby freedom for pre '85, as opposed say to legalising sequential change gearboxes in a car racing class that has only allowed for H pattern, the cost is almost negligible; no more than a set of new tyres or a pair of fork valves fitted.

This would have to be a possible result of a well prepared submission to MA. 


PWK flatslides are a current model carby and now with throttle position switch and a 10 watt pressure pump supplied, solenoid controlled, power jet to help the midrange. A pre 85 submission would reasonably rule those out.
[/quote]

You make a good point here and with a good rule change submission it could get up for the 2016 MOMS.

But as the current rules stand

16.15.13.1 Acceptable for the pre 85 class are machines and components built up to and including the 1984 model. The only exception to this rule is where the model remains unaltered after this date.

Note it says machines and components built up to and including the 1984 model

So while the kiehin PJ flat slide may have been available as a spare part it would be for the 1985 model bike, so not legal.

However if kiehin had it available for sale (other than a Honda spare part).  Maybe and that is a big maybe it could be considered legal, but that would be up to MA.

Again this is just my opinion.

Also there is nothing (currently) in the rules that say a lot of things currently used are ok.  Also no where do the rules define major components or consumable items etc

Also you may ask why do I say in my opinion.  Because that is what is it is.  Just my opinion.  The forum is useful to get opinion but very little said here is binding.

[KTM47]

Surely a competitor could lodge a protest over a competitor's machine eligibility at any time during the meeting? Otherwise you could take a legal bike through scrutiny, and then change it...

Yes you make a good point and the context of a protest would be that the bike was changed after eligibility scrutineering.  So you wouldn't just be protesting eligibility you would be protesting that the bike was changed and made in-eligible.

[Nathan S]

The forum is useful to get opinion but very little said here is binding.

Good point: I'd say "nothing said here is binding".
But that doesn't automatically make it incorrect any more than it automatically makes it correct.

[John Orchard]

As far as I am aware, for National titles, bikes are impounded for 30 min after a race to allow for protests.  Maybe for vmx it might just be the first 4 bikes, which makes good sense to me.

[KTM47]

As far as I am aware, for National titles, bikes are impounded for 30 min after a race to allow for protests.  Maybe for vmx it might just be the first 4 bikes, which makes good sense to me.

Yes you are right they are impounded for possible protests.  But in my opinion any protest on eligibility would have to be that the machine has been changed from what passed scrutineering.  Other possible protests could be engine size or fuel etc.  Eligibility Scrutineering is conducted at scrutineering so any protest should be within 30 minutes from the close of scrutineering.

GCR 7.2.1.2.c.ii)

[KTM47]

The forum is useful to get opinion but very little said here is binding.

Good point: I'd say "nothing said here is binding".
But that doesn't automatically make it incorrect any more than it automatically makes it correct.

Yes exactly.  What is said and posted here is just an opinion.

[Momus]

The forum is useful to get opinion but very little said here is binding.

Good point: I'd say "nothing said here is binding".
But that doesn't automatically make it incorrect any more than it automatically makes it correct.

Yes exactly.  What is said and posted here is just an opinion.

Some of the photos and the magazine article excerpts are also part of the weight evidence for the availability of flat slide Keihins prior to 1985, not just opinion.

[Nathan S]

....
 Eligibility Scrutineering is conducted at scrutineering so any protest should be within 30 minutes from the close of scrutineering.

GCR 7.2.1.2.c.ii)

7.2.1.2.c.ii:

7.2.1.2
Any protest must:
a) Be in writing,

b) Be accompanied by the prescribed fee which will be refunded if the protest is upheld, or if not must be remitted to the Relevant Controlling Body,

c) Be made to a Steward of the relevant meeting,

d) Comply with the following time limits:
i) For a protest under sub-Rules a)
and b) of the previous Rule, as
soon as practicable after being
informed of the decision,
ii) For a protest under sub-Rule c) of the previous Rule, no more than 30 minutes after the action or conduct,
iii) For a protest under sub-Rule c) in a Speedway or Supercross meeting, no more than five (5) minutes after the action.

The action or (mis)conduct occurs whenever the ineligible bike is raced. I'd say that you'd have 30 minutes after the end of the last race.

[Nathan S]

Some of the photos and the magazine article excerpts are also part of the weight evidence for the availability of flat slide Keihins prior to 1985, not just opinion.

You don't need to prove that Keihin flat-slides existed as pre-85 parts.

You need to prove that the 1985+ Keihin PJ flatslide existed as a pre-85 part,
OR
You need to prove that the 1985+ Keihin PJ flatslide is an exact replica of one that existed as a pre-85 part.

[KTM47]

The forum is useful to get opinion but very little said here is binding.

Good point: I'd say "nothing said here is binding".
But that doesn't automatically make it incorrect any more than it automatically makes it correct.

Yes exactly.  What is said and posted here is just an opinion.

Some of the photos and the magazine article excerpts are also part of the weight evidence for the availability of flat slide Keihins prior to 1985, not just opinion.

But they mean nothing if they aren't sent to the correct people.  Also I think a photo would need something to prove it is legit.  Documented proof from a company is proper evidence.

[LWC82PE]

For these carbs to be potentionally considerd legal for Pre85 there needs to be evidence that they were available for purchase as an aftermarket accessory sometime in 1984 and not just available as a Honda spare part for a 1985 model bike. Much the same way how you could buy a Mikuni from DG Performance specialites as an aftermarket item and also as a Suzuki spare part from a dealer, although most of the OEM Suzuki Mikunis were different to the universal/aftermarket Mikunis anyway.  So can anyone show evidience that you could buy a keihin  flatslide as an aftermarket accessory carby anytime before the end of 1984???

[KTM47]

For these carbs to be potentionally considerd legal for Pre85 there needs to be evidence that they were available for purchase as an aftermarket accessory sometime in 1984 and not just available as a Honda spare part for a 1985 model bike. Much the same way how you could buy a Mikuni from DG Performance specialites as an aftermarket item and also as a Suzuki spare part from a dealer, although most of the OEM Suzuki Mikunis were different to the universal/aftermarket Mikunis anyway.  So can anyone show evidience that you could buy a keihin  flatslide as an aftermarket accessory carby anytime before the end of 1984???

I agree

[KTM47]

....
 Eligibility Scrutineering is conducted at scrutineering so any protest should be within 30 minutes from the close of scrutineering.

GCR 7.2.1.2.c.ii)

7.2.1.2.c.ii:

7.2.1.2
Any protest must:
a) Be in writing,

b) Be accompanied by the prescribed fee which will be refunded if the protest is upheld, or if not must be remitted to the Relevant Controlling Body,

c) Be made to a Steward of the relevant meeting,

d) Comply with the following time limits:
i) For a protest under sub-Rules a)
and b) of the previous Rule, as
soon as practicable after being
informed of the decision,
ii) For a protest under sub-Rule c) of the previous Rule, no more than 30 minutes after the action or conduct,
iii) For a protest under sub-Rule c) in a Speedway or Supercross meeting, no more than five (5) minutes after the action.

The action or (mis)conduct occurs whenever the ineligible bike is raced. I'd say that you'd have 30 minutes after the end of the last race.

If the bike has passed eligibility scrutineering then it is deemed eligible.  The action is eligibility scrutineering so you have thirty minutes after that action stops to protest.

However you could protest if you think you can prove the machine has been changed. 

A Steward can also not accept a protest if they think there is no grounds to protest on.

I know you like to be right Nathan but I have asked several level four officials on this subject and I am giving my opinion based on that.

Has anyone (besides me) taken the time to ask MA about the keihin flat slides?  Or do we just talk around in circles.

[yamaico]

Surely a competitor could lodge a protest over a competitor's machine eligibility at any time during the meeting? Otherwise you could take a legal bike through scrutiny, and then change it...

I finished 4th in the pre 75 unlimited at the '92 Daigle nats behind a very well known racer on an LTR Maico who removed his rear travel limiters for each heat. I wanted to lodge a protest but was howled down by everyone, as I was just a ring-in dirt tracker and this wanker was a big name. A punch-up nearly ensued in the pits but I was a little outnumbered. The whole deal left me disillusioned for a long time, just because of a lowlife cheat. Just saying....