CR 250 GEM REEDS

[jimg1au]

http://forum.ozvmx.com/index.php?topic=37491.0

[211]

GEM reeds have always been and continue to be acceptable pre75.

[KTM47]

GEM reeds have always been and continue to be acceptable pre75.

So what does 13.14.4.4 No reed valves permitted mean?

We all know what 13.14.4.8. Thor and KLP swingarms are not acceptable means

[Gippslander]

Yeah I saw that bit about THOR swingarms, not sure how the system works – one rule for some people another rule for others – perhaps some of us don't have the right friends – last time the National's were run at Broadford this bike went through Scrutineering – no question at all  -- 100% compliant for pre-75





and – I don't know who the Husky owner was, and I'm not saying anything derogatory about him – especially because it was a beautifully prepared bike -- this is just a comment on bloody rules that are not "predictable" because they are not well sorted or well thought out or consistently applied – take your pick

And just noticed it's got a reed valve -- crikey -- no hope of running this bike in the 2016 Nationals 

[LWC82PE]

So what does 13.14.4.4 No reed valves permitted mean?

Its ment to say no Mossbarger reeds. GEM and otther period reed valves DH? are ok

Thor swingarms only came out in 1976, however i am not entirely sure the diamond section ones were available then yet. He was making rectangle box section swingarms very similar to Profabs first. But yeah certainly a no go for pre 75

Those valves on the husky forks are just air valves right? or are they something more special?

[211]

the bike measured in less than 4"of travel; measure was done at scrutineering.
the air caps are just fancy valve caps and 100% Ok
 

[LWC82PE]

the air caps are just fancy valve caps and 100% Ok

Thats what i was thinking. The photo was drawing attention to them so it go me thinking if they were something more.

[Gippslander]

The photo of the front was to show the triples -- not sure about them so I was sort of hopeing someone may comment.

My thoughts are -- if the arm is the same dimensions as the arms available in the day -- and to make that easy say the standard 250 Mag arm then its just "bling" and certainly no suspension improvement (and they are not lighter -- bloody solid they are). Have to fall into the same category as the rear brake lever and the rear backing plate to frame rod -- nice bling

So -- where do we sit? Bog standard bikes OR something we can bling up but only if there is no performance enhancement OR do we get rockin' and have "hot rods" and get what I saw in Europe -- 85 riders 3 deep on the start line.....

[Momus]

So -- where do we sit? Bog standard bikes OR something we can bling up but only if there is no performance enhancement OR do we get rockin' and have "hot rods" and get what I saw in Europe -- 85 riders 3 deep on the start line.....
[/quote]
Euro/evo is the go. We need an expression class for hotrods and hybrids. The revised rules are a good step in this direction.

[211]

211 -- typo? - "9" inches?
Typo - sorry fixed - now says 4"

[KTM47]

GEM reeds have always been and continue to be acceptable pre75.

So what does 13.14.4.4 No reed valves permitted mean?

So is the rule going to be changed to permit GEM reed valves and I believe Yamahas had them too?

[Rossvickicampbell]

KTM - in the "other" thread I posted an MA response - Mossbarger reed valves not allowed - GEM and OEM are OK.

Rossco

[HeavenVMX]

The MA WEB site MOMS download file has been fixed for 13.14.4.4 and possibly others, who knows. It was clearly a typo as, for once and unlike the EVO rule rewrite, the Commission minutes actually clearly showed the discussion and reason for the change.

This naturally begs the question who proof reads the MOMS and is it OK to just change a published rule book without giving it a version number or revision number so that changes can be highlighted/tracked? Apparently not

[KTM47]

If they are permitted the GCRs as available on the MA website need to change.

Anything I post I research and the only mention of reed valves for the Pre75 class is what is in the new version of the MoMS.

As posted elsewhere the rule states:

13.14.4.4. No reed valves permitted.

There is no mention of anything else.  However I do remember seeing it somewhere other than on here.  Maybe in a rule alteration bulletin.

I see it has now been changed. So the forum is good for something.

[Rossvickicampbell]

I received a reply from MA this morning re the pre 75 reed valve issue - pertains to Mossbarger reed valves only being banned

Thanks for your email. Please accept the Commissions apologies for the typo in the 2016 MoMS. A bulletin will be released to advise that it is only Mossbarger (or replica) reed valves that have now been banned from Pre 75 Classic MX & Classic DT.

The new GCR wording will be as follows:

13.14.4.4 No Mossbarger type (or replica type) reed valves permitted.


Very fast reply from MA - thanks

Rossco