The pre-78 solo protest.

[Tossa]

You've got it right Graeme.  Slow down fella's and have a think about it.

[090]

You guys either dont read the thread properly or dont understand the rules as they stand or both. Two bikes were 125 C models with B tanks on them. Thats a no brainer. The other one has a complete front end off a 78 model bike (C again). We all know that handlebars,shocks within spec's, rims, pipes for example are all okay to be 2009 models.
Same as a cr125 '75 model IS A FOLLOW ON as per the rules. This is exactly what is needed to shake up all the bikes that dont comply. Time to get them right.
Also as said by Nathan in the beginning, that the time that you protest a bike is at the end of the third race when the bikes are impounded. That is why it was done then.

(I think some facts should be established before this goes too far

Exactly! Most of the opinions are from people that weren't even at the event.

[motomaniac]

oh yes, wave rotors, modern tapered bars, modern shocks........ its really a can of worms waiting to be opened but i really dont know where things can go from here? perhaps there is room to have some changes made to the rules? or things left as they are now and we will always have questions, quiries, issues etc on whats legal and whats not. Im not that fussed as i know whats legal and of the correct period.

Agreed, Im not fussed either as my bikes are simple no carry on models .
The pre 78 class is the first that I would look at "no more than 9" of travel regards less" that means Huskies,Monties, YZ's Maicos ,Bultacos all have to be  modified form stock to be legal.HUH?

[Nathan S]

Yes okay I all for keeping it correct but then Belly's wave disc and protaper bars are blatantly out and Im not sure about Nathans examples .YZ125 forks are different internally, cylinders are ported different.75 CR125 cylinders aren't the same exactly as the 74 GP kits that were offered.
I think we are splitting hairs here .I would prefer not to have a carry over model rule just to keep it simple.
I wasn't at the event but it seemed strange to me that someone could pic a 78 model fork.A 78 model Maico fork for eg wouldnt be so easily noticed but they have 20mm more travel than 77 models .What do you do?

The thing to remember is that a lot of stuff can be modified legally - if the later part is the same as the legally modified earlier part, then its OK (like the 75 CR barrel).

Alternatively, the porting in a '78 YZ125 barrel is impossible to replicate in a '77 one, so there's no way the later barrel will be acceptable (plus they're visibly different from the outside, but even if you ignore that, the porting is enough).

Fork internals are an interesting one. The simple version is that 'everyone' accepts that internals are free provided they have the correct travel, are of the correct diameter and look correct (including details). If nothing else, it would be impossible to enforce a rule that demanded original internals - imagine trying to prove that someone had 1978 damper rods in their 1977 forks. Apart from the huge hassle of pulling forks apart every event, it would be impossible to prove exactly what every different model's internals actually looked like.

[Nathan S]

Hey Brad , Did you have restrictors in your aw?
Dont think so??
I checked
Get off your high horse

Maico stu

I have NFI whether Brad had limited his travel - same goes for the other bikes motomaniac mentioned.
But if it was a problem for anyone, then they would have been 100% within their rights to protest and (if the bikes had more than 9" of travel) they would have won and Brad (or whoever) would have had to suck it up.

Technically its the same, but morally I think there's a significant difference between changing a bike to improve it (while also making it illegal), and using the stock bits that fall otside of the rules.

[Graeme M]

An interesting thread and I think Nathan has done an admirable job in summing it all up. I must admit I don't follow some of the arguments. It would seem pretty simple to me.

1. It's a National event, run according to the MoMS. It is probable that the MoMS is not as detailed as it could be.
2. We ALL know what it means however.
3. We are ALL free to ride bikes that are not 100% legal, and we ALL know that if that's so, someone else can protest.
4. There is every likelihood that people will 'cheat', knowingly or otherwise.
5. The responsibility rests with the rider to ensure compliance.

The issue is whether or not a protest itself is within the 'spirit' of the event, and sadly there are no rules for that. This can give rise to situations such as those described as happening at earlier Nats (eg the Vern Grayson debacle).

Personally IF a bike is a 78 model masquerading as a 77, it's a no-brainer. IF it's more murky such as the suggestion that fork extender caps were fitted, then personally I couldn't care less and wouldn't protest. BUT, anyone who does is entirely within their rights. Of course I can imagine being a bit cheesed off if I were the one being protested against.

Mind you, I don't know the details of it all not having been there, and it's obvious some emotions are running high. So I think the thread is a good discussion about the issue, but let's just avoid TOO much individual criticism and questioning of motives. Keep it to the actual issue of elgibility etc.  Ta.

[Sun Prarie Jimmy]

Hey Brad , Did you have restrictors in your aw?

If it's such a bother to you Stu, why didn't you protest Brad?
Restrictors or not, Brad still would have won the class.

[firko]

You watch now, every slightly ilegal bike will be outed in the name of revenge. Get a grip Stu, Jimmy and others.

[paul]

THE RULES ARE FOR EVERY ONE AND PEOPLE IN GLASS HOUSE.S SHOULD NOT CAST THE FIRST STONE

[All Things 414]

I think the whole meeting's results should be null and ran again this Sunday at Barrabool....
(You'll have to fight out the Pre 75 stuff the following week at Shepparton)

[paul]

I THINK AFTER READING THESE THREADS THAT THERE WERE PROBABLY BIKES WITH ISSUES AND THAT IN THE SPIRIT OFF RACEING  THEY WERE OVER LOOKED BUT UNTILL SOME ACTUALLY DID PROTEST ON A COUPLE OFF BIKES/ NOW   SHITE HAS HIT THE FAN SO TO SPEAK

[mx250]

Will someone please establish the facts.

If the facts are as Nathan so precisely described than the Offenders haven't a leg to stand on and I applaud the Protester, if he advanced his cause or if he did it as a Matter of Principle.

And I applaud the Officials.

If the facts are otherwise I suggest the Offenders appeal using the MA rules.

If the MA appeals are exhausted and they want to turn the incident into a debate about the rules will they please establish the facts here with photos and other such clear, concise, reliable  evidence.

If the Offenders want to moan, groan and generally whinge 'that I've raced like this for the last five years' or 'what about Bloggies' Yondasaki's suspension' then please go elsewhere and chill out, read up on the meaning of amateur, sport, sportsmanship, and a few others. Failing that seek psychological help.

[dave]

A very interesting posting! It's great to see some passion in the sport and healthy debate on the topic of eligibility and sorting out rules. Prior to forums these kinds of discussions went on behind closed doors and rumours grew dangerously and many careers and friendships have been wrecked due to it. As an ex-spanner turner for winning Castrol 6 Hour / Bathurst production (ha,ha,ha) teams in the mid 80's I have seen my fair share of tweaks & mods etc that people seemed to need to have that psychological edge. In the end if you get caught take it on the chin

It's not cheating unless you get caught

by famous Australian Road Racing Champion & World 500GP bike technician! If the mods are minor and slip through it's already been proven last weekend and several 100 times in all motor sports that cheating doesn't always help the winner just good riding / driving.

[Sun Prarie Jimmy]

While all of these RM125 protests were going on there was another more interesting protest going on in pre 65. It was more interesting because of the characters involved, Peter and Brook Lawson, eligibility scrutineer David Tanner and Firko. The protest was dismissed for lack of solid evidence but Dave is taking it to the next level. What's the background Dave or Firko?

[mx250]

While all of these RM125 protests were going on there was another more interesting protest going on in pre 65. It was more interesting because of the characters involved, Peter and Brook Lawson, eligibility scrutineer David Tanner and Firko. The protest was dismissed for lack of solid evidence but Dave is taking it to the next level. What's the background Dave or Firko?

(Nothing quite like a little 'red herring' thread hijack to muddy the waters and stir the emotions .)