|
Advertise with Classic Motorcycling Australia
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
| |
Current Topic Rating:  | Join the Forum to Rate this Topic at: Classic Motorcycling Australia Forums
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
79 Posts |
 Posted - 19 Nov 2002 : 9:24:38 PM
|
I heard that a few carbs were knocked back at Mallala because they were Mikuni.
I had a look in the Classic P3 section of the rule book and ended up all confused. It makes mention of Amals, Delorts and Keihins but not Mikuni? Amal MkI is permitted but I reakon they came out around 66 and MkII's are okay but they didn't come out until the mid 70's. If Mikunis are out how are CR & PK Keihins allowed. Is there an oversight in the rules, or is someone reading the book wrong (maybe me) or there is there a valid reason for it. They are all round slides.
At the same meeting some 7" and 8" brakes were not allowed because they were apparently not old enough. Don't the rules now allow any drum brake within reason up to 8"? The Suzuki 8" 4 leader comes to mind. Though I can't really find anywhere in the book that specifically outlaws 9" brakes except I am consistently told thats the case. Can someone enlighten me.
Al Kidd
|
Al Kidd |
|
|
Allan
Site Moderator
National
599 Posts |
Posted - 19 Nov 2002 : 10:17:05 PM
|
If Iam correct in sth aussie they have a pre 1957 class  (Les Denier Trophy!!) and monoblock carbs are the cut off and brakes are early types too no 4ls types and 8 stud heads for triumph's they (SA) have had this race for many years also see rule 13.6.2 and brakes 13.4.2.3 for normal?? P3 bikes  |
Allan Greening |
 |
|
|
Former Member
deleted
79 Posts |
Posted - 20 Nov 2002 : 9:26:05 PM
|
If the Les Denier Trophy has specific eligibility rules then so be it, that makes for a level playing field, good fun.
I'm under the impression the interpretation on at least carbs & brakes was applied to P3's generally and not to a specific class. So I guess my question remains the same and I don't think the MA rule book adequately addresses it.
Al Kidd |
Al Kidd |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 30 Nov 2002 : 10:05:10 PM
|
| Al send me more details of your request to jdaley@pictureframer.net and I shall forward them on to the Vic. Historic Management Committee for feedback |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 04 Dec 2002 : 3:30:16 PM
|
I have had this response from informned sources about your original questio."In Victoria at least it is accepted that classics can use any brake up to 8" as long as its laced to a legal size spoke wheel. It's also generally accepted that you can use any round slide carb within reason, including Mikuni.
We hope this is a mistaken view of what 'happens' in Victoria because we don't believe the rules aren't adequately dealt with on these components. It comes down to people seeming to want to read into the rules what they like. It's like saying the bible says love everyone but its hard to love somebody with an M16 in their hands pointing at you. Or using an excuse that the speed limit sign said 60 but it didn't say not 80 therefore I can travel at 80.
If we can make one thing clear let it be this... There is no mention of 9" brakes or 8" brakes in the book because it quite clearly states that brakes, both front and rear, are major components and must be manufactured in the period or replicate those manufactured in the period. Look at 13.3.3.4 for a defininition of replica and it says visually indistinguishable from period components.
So if you have brakes manufactured before 31/12/62 you can use them if you want to improve them or copy something to use, then it has to be identical and you would be strongly encouraged to get a ruling from MA before spending a lot of money. We don't believe any body has ever been questioned on a geniune brake, the arguments come when people try to 'interprete' the rules so they have a racing advantage and some riders have been known to have gone to extroindary lenghts to prove they're 'improvements' are legal to no avail.
As for carburettors 13.6.2.1 says it all. Ii is hard to see any grey area in this rule. It is known that some clever lads have said that mikuni's are a period carb...They are 100% correct BUT!!!! only the diameter that was available in the period a 23mm or smaller, not a 32mm.
Historic racing was set up to replicate the period being portrayed and it only becomes an issue when people want to bend the rules so they can win on their bike. The thought that someody would spend $100,000 on a modern version of a Manx to run last is hard to embrace. If they get the bike they get an A grade rider, then they submit that they need bigger brakes because the engine is so good. Then they need stronger forks because the brakes are so much better they bend. Then... and it goes on and on and on.
Lets read the rules on face value, if there is a question ask the authorities not the others pushing their personnal envelope. Let's get all clubs, promoters and yes even riders to make it quite clear that they're not interested in sharing the track with cheats or people wishing to 'bend' rules to win."
|
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
79 Posts |
Posted - 20 Dec 2002 : 12:55:22 PM
|
Dave Morgans reply is informative but also a bit hard to absorb in parts. The comment about Mikuni carbs being max 23 mm and the "clever lads" is uninformed. The first production bike to come to mind was the Japanese 1959 Meguro 500 (A7 copy) which became a Kawasaki. It had a either a 30 or 32 mm Mikuni (I'm not sure). Mikuni also made carbs under licence to Amal. I've got one down here which is a 32 mm that has Mikuni cast into on one side and Amal on the other, and it doesn't look like an Amal. If someone gets called a cheat for using one of these then the person who approved Mk2 Amals (1975) for P3 could also be called a cheat.
The IHMO rules are well worth looking at, particularly if Australia be on an equal footing with the rest of the world. With all of the extra classes that are being howled for heres an international one to think about.
Machine Eligibility Requirements
1. The IHRO caters for thoroughbred Grand Prix racing motorcycles constructed during the period 1945-1972 inclusive, for the specific purpose of participation in competition during that era. There is no limit on the number of cylinders for four stroke machines, but only single cylinder two strokes of European manufacture are permitted. Maximum capacity is 500cc, and wherever possible it is intended to run two classes, for machines up to/over 350cc.
2. Motorcycles must be presented in original, period condition, with no external updating. Period appearance seats, fuel tanks and fairings (if fitted) must be used.
3. No disc brakes are allowed. Drum brakes only may be used.
4. No alloy/magnesium wheels are allowed. Wire wheels only may be used.
5. All machines must have twin shock rear suspension: No monoshocks except Vincent Grey Flash. Suspension units must resemble period components, i.e. no external gas reservoirs etc.
6. All frames and swinging arms must conform exactly to period appearance; no box section swinging arms allowed unless fitted by the manufacturer to that machine in the period.
7. The maximum permitted rim width on either wheel is WM3.
8. No slick tyres, hand cut slicks or modern racing tyres designated by the manufacturer as being exclusively for wet weather use are permitted.
9. Choice of carburettor is free, provided that this is of a period type cylindrical slide model, albeit of a later manufacture. Flat slide instruments are not permitted with the exception of Gardner carburettors. Fuel injection is not permitted except if it can be proved that particular motorcycle ran between 1945-72 with the same type of injection system fitted. A Wal Philips injector is classified under this heading. NB. The maximum size of carburettor fitted to a 500cc machine will be 38 mm/1.5 inches.
10. The type of fuel used must conform to the FIM's current fuel regulations for international road racing.
11. The use of belt primary drives is encouraged.
12. Engines may be modified internally and /or fitted with components of modern manufacture, but all engine castings must be unmodified externally and, if of modern manufacture, exactly resemble the original period castings to a visual inspection.
13. If dry sumped, the machine's original oil tank should be located in the original position in the chassis.
14. The maximum number of valves that may be used by a single cylinder fourstroke engine is 3.
15. All machines must be prepared according to the requirements of the FIM and the organising club. Frequent checks will be made to guard against oil leaks soiling the track for others and anyone whose machine is repeatedly found to leak oil will have their registration removed.
16. All machines must be prepared to a high standard of cosmetic appearance. Untidy machines will not be allowed to start in any event.
17.a. The minimum weight of a 350cc class machine shall be 100kgs.
b. The minimum weight of a 500cc class machine shall be 120kgs. An extra allowance of 5% of this figure (6kgs.) is made for pushrod engined machines in this class.
The weight to be taken in both cases with a 'half-dry' machine i.e. with oil and water but no fuel.
18. No carbon fibre shall be visible in its natural state on any machine. The use of this material is not forbidden on any component normally made from glassfibre, but its appearance must be disguised to look like glassfibre.
|
Al Kidd |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
![]()
3 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2003 : 12:31:28 AM
|
I my self started period 3 classic road racing 12 months ago. I have a Norton Atlas, which had a standard front brake. I felt, as did others, that this brake did not have sufficient stopping power for a 750-road bike and less suitable for racing. After reading the GCR's, and deliberation with other classic racer's I purchased an 8-inch Triumph front brake assembly. Then I modified it to the road-holder front end, while using it all year it passed scruitineering for period 3, until Mallala 29/10/02. Where it and single Modified 34mm Mikuni carb were knocked back.
The relevant GCR's state that
13.3.3.4 "Major components that were manufactured outside a specific period, but which are visu-ally indistinguishable from period components shall be eligible for that period."
13.4.2.3 "Front and rear brakes:”
a) Manufactured in the period; or
b) Which replicate those manufactured in the period."
Prohibited uses
13.5.2.4 Disc brakes
I at the time of fitting this brake considered it to comply as it was
8" diam which was “used in the period”
replicated & modified Twin leading shoe “used in the period”
Not a disc brake.
However, as it seems my perception of “visually indistinguishable from the period”, was misinter-preted. Mainly because many other period 3 bikes have for example: CB Honda 350 twin leaders with a larger scoop fitted and passed at the Australian tiles Mallala Nov 2002. One was even in the same shed as meand raced P# all week end till his motor blew. While I was forced to race period 4). I do not understand how the system works. "They were not replica’s" "no less than mine ”.
I was told at Mallala by eligibility that there is no grey areas in the GCR's, but there always has been and always will be, as some people get treated different to others. “The Log book is a great thing I think”, but wouldn't it be a good Idea to put together a list of known major components; parts, modifications, replica's, that are acceptable or not acceptable for a period? In addition, the MA should have the rules written more decisively in regards to what constitutes a replica, as I do not consider fitting an air scoop a replica.
Any way all I really need to know is do I give up historic racing or do I have to spend over $4000.00 for a professionally replicated front brake that works. As I will not put the Atlas front brake back on for racing as I consider it unsafe to do so.
|
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
![]()
3 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jan 2003 : 9:14:52 PM
|
As to the eligibility of front brakes for period 3.
I contacted Clayton Brown (Historic Road Racing Commission) 7 days prior to the Isle Classic Race 2003. I wanted to submit a replica of an Oldani T/L front brake for my logbook application and was informed that it would not be possible to race at the Isle with out a logbook. He intern rejected the replica and said if I had a STD front brake, fit it if I wanted to race that weekend. I had already paid to go racing, so I fitted the STD S/L front brake and took off the single 34mm Mikuni and fitted the only other carbs I could aquire for the weekend. A pair of dellorto 32 mm. So now the bike was quicker than before and had a front brake with half the stopping power.
Any how I get to the Isle Friday go up to scrutineering and find out that you only needed a receipt for a logbook or if you didn’t have one of them you could pay a$30 fine to race.
As a result brakes were passed even if they were out of period. One was the same as the T/L I was told to remove, if I wanted to race. That bike won a third place and I hit the wall at Southern loop injured my self and wrote off the whole front of my bike about $3200 and that really hurts.
The rules change by the minute depends on who you are. When I rang Phillip Isle to see if I could put in a late entry, they told me a logbook receipt would be enough, so I entered. I had to speak to Clayton Brown M.A. about my logbook and was told that I couldn’t race with out a logbook.
I later spoke to one of the girls at M.A. (Vic) and she said a receipt would do. The GCR’s state that you must have a logbook to race in the year 2003. At the Island Classic they didn’t care either way.
Talk about confused!
All I ask is make one rule for every body and enforce it. But as far as the brake issue is concerned the T/L front/brake I wanted to use is not superior than brakes used in the period. It just makes it safer than the STD S/L, which was developed for a 350cc and was inefficient, but moved its way up to 750 cc bikes were it was totally useless.
There is talk about trying to have the rules changed to be able to use any drum brake up to the maximum brake swept area of the period and if there are ones that a are far superior put them in “not permitted”
If I remember right, the 1996? GCR’s used to state something like this “ any drum brake up to 9 may be fitted”
|
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| Classic Motorcycling Australia Forums |
© 2000 - 2024 |
|
|
|
|
Topic Locked
