Dual Leading front brakes on a Pre82/Evo Legal or not?

[sa63]

Who approved the approved list!!

[Krikey]

so 83 a/c, twinshock drum brake husky is not legal? or could be considered not legal?

EVO yes, pre 82 no coz it's 83

OK pulled directly from pre '82 supp regs for Connondale classic this year. Note Husqvarna's eligibility up to 1984 models in this class....rule 82.1 (C).

Rule – Pre82 Acceptable machines and components: Pre ’82 Class
Pre82.1 Acceptable for the Pre82 class are machines and components built up to and including the 1981 model. The only exception to this
rule is where the model remains unaltered after this date are excluded under rule Pre82.2 or included under rule Pre82.10.
Pre82.2 Machines or components from machines sold with water cooled engines and/or linkage suspension are excluded. Adopting brakes
or wheels from period machines sold as road bikes is not permitted for motocross but is acceptable for dirt track.
Pre82.3 Modifying machines or components to comply will not be allowed. Period after market components, or replicas thereof, available for
complying models is acceptable. Components that have been improved for safety reason may be acceptable. It is acceptable to
build a machine by combining components from complying models.
Pre82.4 Engines, gearboxes and front forks must remain externally unchanged.
Pre82.5 Any carburettor type commercially available prior to 31 Dec 1981 may be used.
Pre82.6 All machines will be fitted with an effective muffler and comply with sound control regulations in GCR 16.12.
Pre82.7 Folding footrests must be fitted.
Pre82.8 Countershaft sprocket covers will be fitted.
Pre82.9 The handlebars must be equipped with a protection pad on the cross bar. Handlebars not fitted with cross bar must be equipped
with a protection pad located in the middle of the handlebars covering the handlebar clamps.
Pre82.10 Acceptable follow on models for the Pre82 class and must also satisfy Pre82.2 and Pre82.3 are:
a) Yamaha DT175
b) Suzuki TS185
c) CR/OR/WR/TE/AE Husqvarna models up to the 1984 model without water cooling.
d) 82 model Yamaha IT 250 and 465
e) 82 model Maico GS 250 and 490 with twin shocks.
Pre 82.11 Acceptable follow on components. Components that bolt straight in, that are not substantially changed. As per the approved list.
a) 82 model Maico 250 and 490 motor.

10(d) is great news for me because until now I thought my 1982 IT250J was not eligible for pre 82 due to the twin leading front brake with the horizontal brake stay.

But I'm now confused because I thought Pre 82 was specifically designed to keep those 43mm TLS front Yamaha front ends out of the old Evo?

[GMC]

While it may seem confusing it all basically boils down to two trains of thought;
‘Traditionalists’ or ‘Nutty Professors’

Traditionalists believe that the ‘twin shock’ class should be about the last of the simple technology era and shouldn’t be advanced with parts that came from later model single shock/water cooled models.
Downside is that some brands don’t have open class models

Nutty Professors believe that they should be able to use any part to build a bike so long as it meets the main criteria of no discs, no linkages and no watercooling.
Downside is that 78 bikes can be fitted with 88 forks etc.

Most are either in one camp or the other, there doesn’t appear to be a lot of fence sitters and it seems very few will switch camps which is why this always ends up an endless debate.

I miss these old rule debates, Not

[HeavenVMX]

10(d) is great news for me because until now I thought my 1982 IT250J was not eligible for pre 82 due to the twin leading front brake with the horizontal brake stay.

But I'm now confused because I thought Pre 82 was specifically designed to keep those 43mm TLS front Yamaha front ends out of the old Evo?

All parts books show IT250J with single leading shoe front brake, IT465J with twin leader both with 45deg tab. They both have the '81 43mm forks without the enlarged axle mount.

IT250K & 490K went to the twin leader 90deg lug brake and later forks on both.

[bigk]

Yeah, IT250J is single shoe brake in std trim so no cigar there Krikey.
K

[HeavenVMX]

While it may seem confusing it all basically boils down to two trains of thought;
‘Traditionalists’ or ‘Nutty Professors’

Traditionalists believe that the ‘twin shock’ class should be about the last of the simple technology era and shouldn’t be advanced with parts that came from later model single shock/water cooled models.
Downside is that some brands don’t have open class models

Nutty Professors believe that they should be able to use any part to build a bike so long as it meets the main criteria of no discs, no linkages and no watercooling.
Downside is that 78 bikes can be fitted with 88 forks etc.

Most are either in one camp or the other, there doesn’t appear to be a lot of fence sitters and it seems very few will switch camps which is why this always ends up an endless debate.

I miss these old rule debates, Not

You are correct on all accounts Geoff.

I personally had two of the Classic Dirt Commissioners (with BigK as witness) confirm that any club has the absolute right to run whatever class they choose, using whatever eligibility interpretation/rules they want. Further they confirmed that the only place the EVO or any classic class eligibility rules for that matter must be ran as per the MOMS is at a National Championship.

Hence the Conondale Classic being a National level event is completely free to include or exclude any class it chooses or have its own class rules the same as some clubs only do up to Pre75 or other include Pre95. All completely legitimate meetings.

[Graham]

While it may seem confusing it all basically boils down to two trains of thought;
‘Traditionalists’ or ‘Nutty Professors’

Traditionalists believe that the ‘twin shock’ class should be about the last of the simple technology era and shouldn’t be advanced with parts that came from later model single shock/water cooled models.
Downside is that some brands don’t have open class models

Nutty Professors believe that they should be able to use any part to build a bike so long as it meets the main criteria of no discs, no linkages and no watercooling.
Downside is that 78 bikes can be fitted with 88 forks etc.

Most are either in one camp or the other, there doesn’t appear to be a lot of fence sitters and it seems very few will switch camps which is why this always ends up an endless debate.

I miss these old rule debates, Not

You are correct on all accounts Geoff.

I personally had two of the Classic Dirt Commissioners (with BigK as witness) confirm that any club has the absolute right to run whatever class they choose, using whatever eligibility interpretation/rules they want. Further they confirmed that the only place the EVO or any classic class eligibility rules for that matter must be ran as per the MOMS is at a National Championship.

Hence the Conondale Classic being a National level event is completely free to include or exclude any class it chooses or have its own class rules the same as some clubs only do up to Pre75 or other include Pre95. All completely legitimate meetings.

So what is the advantage of having 2 clubs in the whole of Australia that refuse to follow the Moms .What are these two clubs trying to prove

[HeavenVMX]

While it may seem confusing it all basically boils down to two trains of thought;
‘Traditionalists’ or ‘Nutty Professors’

Traditionalists believe that the ‘twin shock’ class should be about the last of the simple technology era and shouldn’t be advanced with parts that came from later model single shock/water cooled models.
Downside is that some brands don’t have open class models

Nutty Professors believe that they should be able to use any part to build a bike so long as it meets the main criteria of no discs, no linkages and no watercooling.
Downside is that 78 bikes can be fitted with 88 forks etc.

Most are either in one camp or the other, there doesn’t appear to be a lot of fence sitters and it seems very few will switch camps which is why this always ends up an endless debate.

I miss these old rule debates, Not

You are correct on all accounts Geoff.

I personally had two of the Classic Dirt Commissioners (with BigK as witness) confirm that any club has the absolute right to run whatever class they choose, using whatever eligibility interpretation/rules they want. Further they confirmed that the only place the EVO or any classic class eligibility rules for that matter must be ran as per the MOMS is at a National Championship.

Hence the Conondale Classic being a National level event is completely free to include or exclude any class it chooses or have its own class rules the same as some clubs only do up to Pre75 or other include Pre95. All completely legitimate meetings.

So what is the advantage of having 2 clubs in the whole of Australia that refuse to follow the Moms .What are these two clubs trying to prove

More to the point why are you or any one else concerned. It does not impact you or other clubs. All Pre82 bikes are completely MOMS 'EVO' legal so can easily take part in other events such as the Nationals and from what I have observed the majority of EVO bikes >85% are completely Pre82 legal.

The minority are the few that wish to build bikes using parts from later bikes. They are free to run those bikes in our club but must run in the class of the later components eg a CR250 '80 with a CR480 front end is a Pre85 bike. Don't try and say that is wrong or not right or whatever as it is completely legitimate.

MickD is a member of our club and we are proud to have him. He asked a question as he has been away from competition this year due to family stuff and wants to come back with a trouble free entry to Pre82. NSW is very luck to have two excellent clubs that offer something for everyone. VTR with Vinduros and Heaven VMX for VMX. MickD is a member of both and has forgotten more about Maico bikes than most will ever know.

I am guessing that the 2017 EVO rules in the MOMS are heading towards another major rewrite so lets see where that goes. Everyone talks about the '82/'83 43mm forks and TLS brake that is minor stuff. The major concern for most regarding the current EVO rules is the ability to graft in late model engines and components. An '89 XR600 (with all the bling available for those) engine would make a TT500 engine look pretty slow and heavy for VMX me thinks, A YZ490 engine from '89 is a better base than a YZ465 or heavens forbid the thing in the latest VMX Mag. What about an S2 maico frame with an '84 CR500 Honda or KX500 engine (you can order the frame).

But that is all for the Nationals and clubs that are free to follow that without comment from the two clubs that you and others have often vilified.

My final post on this thread

[Krikey]

10(d) is great news for me because until now I thought my 1982 IT250J was not eligible for pre 82 due to the twin leading front brake with the horizontal brake stay.

But I'm now confused because I thought Pre 82 was specifically designed to keep those 43mm TLS front Yamaha front ends out of the old Evo?

All parts books show IT250J with single leading shoe front brake, IT465J with twin leader both with 45deg tab. They both have the '81 43mm forks without the enlarged axle mount.

IT250K & 490K went to the twin leader 90deg lug brake and later forks on both.

Yeah, IT250J is single shoe brake in std trim so no cigar there Krikey.
K

Thanks guys but permission to say BUGGER!!  The thought the front end wasn't the stock one never occurred to me

[Kenneth S (222)]

The question has been answered, enough has been said. Accusations will not be tolerated on this forum. Topic is locked.