Aussie titles. Protest. pre -/78 125's

[motomaniac]

I agree that "he would have won anyway" doesn't cut it.
I got involved in the first thread when the reason was given that the C forks had more travel.
And then kept in when the Maico became part of the discussion,77 Maico's having more travel both ends than RM B or C.
The carry over models is also asking for trouble in my opinion but was explained to me - I dont agree with the 75CR having a barrel that was available in 74.
but if it s then a RM B and C are as close and people down here do think that a C  is a carry over model.
Anyway I was mainly concerned about the bike with the C forks.Spring rates and rubber mounts are in my book not enough especially when so many bikes have PROTAPER BARS etc. Jump 6months out of the ERA and you are disqualified but jump 15 years with bars ,shocks pd valves and its OK.
I see the whole scenario as potentially damaging to the sport and I think thta warrants anyone whos interested in the sport surviving having a say .But if the majority want to forget it and have another beer thats fine too.I like modern MX as well so I can piss off any time I want too.
By the wayOur GCR's for pre 78 say"for this reason ,we do not classify motorcycles strictlyby the year they were produced, but by some similar characteristics that were possessed by the majority of these first- generation long-travel motorcycles,such as suspension travel" B and C model RM are the same frame and suspension travel.
Nice talking to yoy TM

[LWC82PE]

yeah i was gonna mention this earlier as its been mentioned a couple of times. 'hes a good rider, he would win on anything' is not an excuse to have a bike with illegal parts on it.

[AjayVMX]

Update: I thought a bit more about the statement that the B and C having the same suspension travel, as my memory was that they didn't have the same rear suspension.  So I got out my copy of Dirt Bike (June 78) which had the RM125C test in it.

Turns out that the C model had longer eye to eye length shocks (approx 20mm) and a relocated top shock mount to take this into account without unduly raising the seat height.  The longer shocks did give additional rear suspension travel over the B model and the frames are not identical.

Just thought you might like to know. 

And just for the record - I think that the use of blatently modern designs like Pro-taper bars and wide footpegs on Vintage bikes should be eliminated as soon as possible.  For the life of me I can't understand why they are allowed at all.... 

[olddirtbikes]

  Hi,
      TM Bill yes I do own the other bike.
 And Brad the bike has a 'B' frame, motor, front end, tank, seat, wheels & pipe. The rear guard is a 'c' model.'B' rear guards were not in stock when I ordered the plastics. I guess I am saying putting a Roles Royce bonnet emblem on a VW does not make it a Roles Royce.
 Bill did you hear that Kiwi's found two more things they can use sheep for ..............wool and meat. Sorry could not resist a chance to have a go at a Kiwi.
  Hi Ajay, you forgot to mention that 'B' models were available with a alloy swing arm. 
                  regards,
                             Alan

[motomaniac]

Yes AJAY I am reading that same test also.I stand corrected on the extra 10mm of rear travel but that is only 10mm more than a B and still under a stock 77 maico ,and most of all under 9".
I don't think that that is as much difference as the CR125M1 that was mentioned and is specifically in the rule book.The M1 has different cylinder with bridged intake ,longer forks ,diff pipe and bigger carb for eg.
The swingarm on the C is the same dimensions contrary to an earlier post. and it would be easy to put slightly longer shocks on the B anyway.Theres heaps of bikes out there with longer shocks.

Sounds like to me that Kane and Alan have B model bikes anyway, one with C forks and clamp and the other with Cbrake rode(or aftermarket) and C swingarm.
I reckon these guys got it rough.
But what do I know?
Are you doing some TYA stuff or not? The bass on "Love like a man" is just you.

[Freakshow]

I only ever had one question, in any of these threads, who checked the frame numbers and if any one was serious they would have posted  theres up here by now, basically saving 5 pages of reply 's ?? .

[AjayVMX]

 Hi Ajay, you forgot to mention that 'B' models were available with a alloy swing arm. 
                  regards,
                             Alan

Are you saying alloy swingarms were availabe as a stock suzuki part or aftermarket?

Certainly there were aftermarket swingarms available at the time (DG etc...), but I am pretty certain that Suzuki did not offer an alloy swingarm as stock option (why would they?).  If you have proof that they did, please show us.  I'd love to be enlightened.

As far as the "carry over model" discussion goes, the C was seen at the time as a significant improvement over the B.  While it did have many components in common, it did actually have many significant and fundamental mechanical changes, so I don't believe that arguement is valid in this case.  It certainly was not a carry over model in the same sense as a 1975 TM125 was in realtion to a 1974 TM125.

Also, it was the case that while the differences between the B and C had little overall cosmetic effect (as they did also in the change from the A to the B), the tests of the day were in no doubt whatsoever that the C was a far more effective MX bike than the B in terms of on track performance.

All these things ad up to why the C model (or it's parts) aren't OK in pre-78, I guess. 

[chris RA75]

to TM bill
will i still be able to race my 76 RM125A at the VMX Taupo round  with a set of 1977 38mm RA125 forks?? fitted,much like 77 38mm simons.

chris NZ
RMS eng

[chris RA75]

Hi
about the B and C bikes and their swingarms,suzuki did sell in 1977 a optional alloy swingarm for the RM125B,it is listed in the back of a parts book i have.part No is 61100-1871-019 looks like the C swingarm but has the fitting  for the brake arm to bolt too.

chris NX
RMS eng

[motomaniac]

By the wayOur GCR's for pre 78 say"for this reason ,we do not classify motorcycles strictly by the year they were produced, but by some similar characteristics that were possessed by the majority of these first- generation long-travel motorcycles,such as suspension travel"

Yes AJAY a C is better than a B but so is a 75 CR better than a 74.
Are you suggesting that a B model fits the class but a C model is a second generation long travel bike as per the GCR's?
Are you suggesting that a C model because it has floating brake and 10mm more travel be classified in with 12" travel Husqvarna's,Maico's,YZG's and H's.
Pick up almost any 1977 year MXA and you will find alloy swingarms and floating rear brake kits for RMA's and B's.
This is not a personal attack AJAY.

[JohnnyO]

Ajay you could buy an alloy swingarm through Suzuki in '77 as an optional extra, it's listed in the '77 RM125b parts book.
A mate of mine had one on his B in '77, it came painted black and had the bracket for the brake stay welded to the swingarm which is where they differ from a C arm. The C model has a floating brake with the bracket welded to the frame.

[AjayVMX]

Hi
about the B and C bikes and their swingarms,suzuki did sell in 1977 a optional alloy swingarm for the RM125B,it is listed in the back of a parts book i have.part No is 61100-1871-019 looks like the C swingarm but has the fitting  for the brake arm to bolt too.

chris NX
RMS eng

Well there you go!  You DO learn something every day and thanks for the knowledge. 

Motomaniac, I am not registering any of the responses here as personal attacks (other than those which denegrated the protester for doing what he thought was right).  I am merely trying to provide more info about the differences between the RMB and RMC and now, I too have learned something I didn't know, which is cool.

Of course isn't bringing YZG's and H's into the discussion is totally irrelevant as they are 1980 and 1981 models respectively?

And yes, there may also have been full floating brake kits for B models, although I don't specifically remember them in 1977.  Did the two bikes that had full floating rear brakes have full width hubs or half width?  If they had full width, they were C wheels, not modified Bs.  And so it goes...

At the end of the day however, it comes down to whether the RM125C is accepted in the National GCRs as a valid pre-78 class bike or not.  From what happened at Connondale, I gather it is not, despite your references to "your" GCRs.

Maybe you should make the case to the MA commissioners to have it included in pre-78, then it wouldn't be an issue anymore.

[firko]

I reckon we've kicked this subject around way past its use by date. I think the lesson to be learned is that we should make certain our bikes are legal before we enter a particular class at a National title. Nobody likes being protested against or, for that matter, lodging protests so it's up to us to ensure the bike is right for its particular class before entering. If youre not sure, there's a pretty good network of knowledge to help you get it right before you enter right here on this forum.

Despite certain trains of thought that reckon that protesting is a low act, no matter how wrong the protested bike is, the system is in place to keep the 'playing field level' for every racer. What's the point of having classes or even a rulebook if we are allowed to use non compliant parts on our bikes. Imagine what would happen to our sport without those checks and balances.

I'm not Mother Theresa on the subject of ilegal bikes either. I've fudged the rules myself in the past as well as being a Nationals level examiner so I can identify with both sides of the argument.

[motomaniac]

AJAY I know , I was covering my own post as some people have viewed the on going disscussion as personal attacks.

The YZg's etc are relevant as those are the bike that RM125 C 's must compete against if they are not a first generation long travelbike.

There are three bikes , one was definitely a B with different components .Its seems that Kanes bike was also a B if you read his posts. It does have the B front end and rear hub.

Why have you called the GCR's my GCR's? Because I quoted them?

"for this reason ,we do not classify motorcycles strictly by the year they were produced, but by some similar characteristics that were possessed by the majority of these first- generation long-travel motorcycles,such as suspension travel"

[AjayVMX]

Why have you called the GCR's my GCR's? Because I quoted them?

No, because you keep putting the word "our" in your description of the GCRs, which led me to believe that you meant something other than the National GCRs.