|
Advertise with Classic Motorcycling Australia
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
| |
Current Topic Rating:  | Join the Forum to Rate this Topic at: Classic Motorcycling Australia Forums
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
 Posted - 28 Oct 2001 : 9:08:04 PM
|
Just saw Ken Watson blow all the T-Rex Hondas to the weeds at Winton on Sunday 29th, using an overbored 750 Laverda. Rex's 1000cc Honda packed it in during the first Post Classic Race on Saturday. But the rest of them (about 10) couldn't get near Ken - includes Tony Cacciotti, and Mick Neason.
Interesting to remember that Jim Eade sponsored Vic Vasella back in the seventies on a 750 SFC, and beat all Steve Chiodos guys who were using Z900 Kawasakis at the time.
History repeats itself, it seems. really good to see a decent bike and rider win without the outrageous overcapacity engine. Incidentally the guy who owns the Ken Wayson Laverda, also owns the old Jim Eade SFC. He hasn't butchered it, but used a standard model as basis for the racer.
Alfonso
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
31 Posts |
Posted - 13 Nov 2001 : 12:02:51 PM
|
Yep, as a P5 rider I'd love to see that bike ran against the P5 fields. It'd open a few eyes.
Also, such a convincing win confirms that we don't need to BAN non book bore machines to get ahead of the OVERBORED JAPS. all those bigbore kits didn't stop the Laverda, did they !? Leave well enough alone, I say again. If people feel uncompetetive on their Brits etc non Japs, then let this be a pointer to them all - Speak to Ken Watson and get him to teach you how to ride your bike to it's potential before wanting to ban modified bikes... |
 |
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 08 Mar 2002 : 2:46:05 PM
|
I think the Chris Cutler/Ken Watson 750 Laverda has the potential to go even faster. I was a bit critical of the exhaust system, and the use of the Krober ignition. In my memory the Laverda was the only really decent bike around in the early seventies. The five bearing crank means you can put really hot cams and high comp in it. You just can't do that with an old triumph or norton, they have to fly apart. Just shows how fast Rex and the others are going, if you have to hot up the laverda to get them.
A standard laverda 750 SFC would make a standard CB750 or Z900 look stupid. An SFC is not much different to a SF1.
Congratulations Chris and Ken, Well done!
Alfonso |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
![]()
11 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2002 : 05:35:26 AM
|
So, one of the few twins that could beat the overbored Hondas will be banned under the new capacity rules! This is exactly the situation that Bill warned MA against. Can someone let me know why we have to run races according to the whim of people who apparently have never raced historic bikes themselves?
|
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2002 : 6:34:03 PM
|
I don't know what you mean by 'banned under the new capacity rules'. Apparently the new rules require the motor capacity to be as supplied by the manufacturer depending on the crankcases used. The Ken Watson/Chris Cutler motor is eight hundred and something capacity, but bringing it back to 750 wouldn't be very difficult. If the Hondas are also brought back to 750, they will be absolutely cacked on by the Laverda, my Norton, and most of the Triumphs and BSA Triples. The Laverdas will win everything when the new rules come in.
The new capacity rules can only make the sport cheaper and more competitve. If we are trying to recreate what happened a few years back, it's a good way to go.
In the old days we didn't 'cheat on capacity' in most cases. Some A graders rode 600cc Manxes, but we don't talk about that. Some heros suck as Blakey and Horsey used nitro and blew motors to the S**thouse as well. Those CB750 Hondas used 450 pistons in the seventies, even then they weren't that fast - gave a capacity of 830cc. It's a bit different these days when we can get CB900 crankshafts and bigger bore kits.
I'm not knocking Rex's bikes, they are a credit to him, and they are good for the sport. I would rather see them dressed up as 'Daytona Hondas' though. The 'situp look' is not good, it is typical of what was run under AMA rules back then. The trouble is the fact that they are so large in capacity, and have so many valves, makes most other bikes uncompetitive.
It is not worth my while building a decent Norton motor for my own bike while they are around. It still wouldn't be competitive even at 920cc, which is the max.
Alan Cotterell |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
63 Posts |
Posted - 04 Apr 2002 : 11:21:14 AM
|
Why wouldnt your Norton be competive at 920cc when you state the Laverda is only 800 and something. The Laverda is not as light as the Norton.
Also I remember Simon Thomas kicking evryones bum at Eastern Creek a couple of years ago on a 750 Norton post classic ...yes even the big bore Hondas
TA |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2002 : 12:27:46 PM
|
Trevor, to get a Norton to 920cc, it means boring to the limit. If you combine this with SSS or whatever cams, you get something which has a lot of reciprocating weight in the engine which is trying to rev. The standard crank is horrible, and obviously doesnt have a centre bearing. What you have is a cast iron flywheel bolted to two half cranks, doing absolutely horrible things when yo spin it up. Bearings and crakcase halfs break under these conditions.
If you use a Nourish crank, or make one yourself of standard stroke, you only half solve the problem.
To get a Norton going you would have to make a short stroke crank, use 78mm bore (Kawasaki?) pistons with the low gudgeon height to get the weight down, make a set of barrels as you can't shorten the standard ones
that much.
For much less cost a Laverda can be modifed to 16 to 1 comp., and fitted with a really good cam. It already has a five speed CR box, so you save $5000 straight away. The Laverda has none of the bottom end problems, you get with the Norton.
Playing with Norton twins is really stupid. I'm still waiting for mine to go bang. I've geared it up really high, and it seems to go even faster. I only rev it to 6,000 rpm. You are right about it being light, but that's the only real advantage. It still needs alloy barrels. I can only afford a four speed box, and I've bought one which has a higher first than a manx. When you get the bike mobile, it's fantastic to ride, but off the line it's hopeless.
You can buy a complete Laverda 750 SF3 road bike for the price of a five speed Norton box.
Alan Cotterell |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
![]()
11 Posts |
Posted - 08 Apr 2002 : 07:16:31 AM
|
Alan,
i think you underestimate the expense of converting bikes back to manufacturers original spec. I must declare an interest. I have a twin which I think will be competitive against most bikes but it is bored out to 998cc. Taking it back to 750 means new barrels and pistons, the present ones cost me 400 pounds sterling! the heads cannot be used with smaller bore as the squish does not match, new heads please. Gas flow the new heads, stainless valves, race springs, machine heads to match piston crowns, oh yes ,the 40mm carbies are too big for a 750, the crank balance is not suitable for the lighter pistons,etc etc. iIf I get change out of five grand I'll be surprised. It's a lot of money just to get a few places up the results sheet. I'd rather take my chances against big bore Hondas thanks.
|
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 09 Apr 2002 : 10:46:08 PM
|
John, I take your point about the expense of converting bikes back to standard capacity. I think we need a Formula 750 class, as well as unlimited. We are simply paying for the sins of the past, with the cost of converting back. If you look at the 49(?) to 1962 class, there were only ever two Norton Atlas's that I saw in melbourne, now they are like backsides, everyone has got them. Do you think all the pre 62 Norton 750's might actually have Commando heads and barrels? They've certainly done something to stop the barrel flanges from breaking off, as they did on the original Atlas 750.
I think it's too late to go backwards.
As I've said before I think we should try to 'broad band' the eligibilty. We could start by extending the pre 62 class up to 1968, and banning two strokes and fours from the class.
I'd be interested to know what your twin is. A good Egli Vincent might make an impression on the Hondas, but I really think a Laverda is the only way to go.
Alan Cotterell |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
![]()
11 Posts |
Posted - 11 Apr 2002 : 05:47:39 AM
|
Alan, Well I really don't pretend to know the way forwards with eligibility, at least not one that would keep every one happy. I do know that until I left the UK a couple of years ago, the rules there were simply no four cylinder bikes.(I believe that has recently changed) People with fours raced in the forgotten era.
I agree that a Lav is a very competitive way to go, but my option was a Bavarian Money Waster. It goes well but I have not raced it against the Hondas (or Lavs) over here yet.
|
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 11 Apr 2002 : 08:46:50 AM
|
I don't know whether you've seen Gyro's BMWs but he has a prewar, a classic and a posty which Johnno (Greg Johnston) rides very effectively. Gyro has backed away from the sport a bit this year, it's cost him too much. He was around at a mate's place the other day with a broken crank, looking to make a new one out of decent material. I reckon it's all too hard. A Lav is a much cheaper way to go in post classic.
If you ride like Johnno (international rider, and A grader for the last thirty years), and you've got heaps of money you might do some good with your BMW. Good Luck
Alan Cotterell |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
2 Posts |
Posted - 13 May 2002 : 03:06:06 AM
|
Ok this is my first post on this board.It is quite different to any I've used before so I may muck it up.I have looked with interest at the debate re Hondas/Laverda etc.You may have noticed a 500 Kawasaki at PI earlier this year in the unlimited PC class.Depending on how you read the rules it was/may have been illegal in the 500 class as it was 521cc or some such.It was there fore entered in the unlimited class to avoid breaking the rules.Steve Dent rode it for me,quite competitively(near 5 secs faster/lap than any 500PC all weekend) getting a 3rd,2nd and 1st in the three races.Despite being undersize and an "unreliable" sort of bike it did quite well I thought, and Steve rode exeptionally.This machine did not cost heaps at all,yet this is the sort of machine which is being eased out of post classic racing due to costs and various rule changes.My bike looks like a bike you would have seen if you were walking about the pits in 1972 and is made in the same fashion,no trick frame/swingarm/brakes etc.BUT it can be competitive.If we went in the 500 race?I spent just over $3000 for the Island Classic this year,not including food/beer etc.This was to prepare my sidecar and solo and transport them to the track,pit shed(oven with no power),new tyres for the solo,three year old on the outfit,many jerries of methanol etc etc.Great value,I am sure at $159/lap of competition.I regret doing this meeting as a result of that.I am an entrant/sponsor and have been for years.I had to argue the toss at the gate to get in as I was not listed in the programme as an entrant.The whole historic racing scene is becoming like this,it seems. For my $3000 I could have bought enough slicks to keep my modern outfit on the track for all the national rounds and all my State rounds this year.At round 1 of our SA modern titles I did more laps of competition in one day than the whole three days at PI including practise.So what does everyone think of that?
Cheers,
Neville Lush
NEVILLE LUSH RACING |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
63 Posts |
Posted - 14 May 2002 : 08:42:56 AM
|
When are you getting Steve to ride that wicked 750 again the one he did a 1.15 at Mallalla ?
As for the island I to chose not to ride as there wernt many races for the for the money you out lay. Plus shed costs etc etc. Seems a bit much when the circut pulls alot of money thru gate money.
I know we have a whinge about not enough post classis & classic meetings however that meeting is too costly considering that the meeting is put on by the circut owners.
TA |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 24 May 2002 : 10:26:49 PM
|
Getting a Kawasaki 500 to go fast is the easy part, the difficult part is shelling out the $6000 for the close box to keep up with a narrow power band. I've got a project I've been working on for a while. It consists of fitting Yamaha 350 barrels to a Kawasaki 500 bottom end. I have got an Egli frame to copy (they were available in 1968).
The question is - why would you bother? You guys will only complain it wasn't about in the early days.
The racing in the late sixties/early seventies (C grade) was dominated by Jap two strokes, they effectively turned the sport into a souless, monotonous procession. I know there were some benefits, but it didn't really make racing much cheaper.
The only decent two strokes were the A7R, A1R,H1R,H2r, TR3,TD3, Tr250, TR500, TR750 - at least they were genuine factory racers. I really think we should try to get away from slightly modified road bikes.
If you want to have fun riding rubbish - go paddock bashing.
The questiion I ask is - how many H2R's are about in classic racing, where are they now?
Alan Cotterell |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| Classic Motorcycling Australia Forums |
© 2000 - 2024 |
|
|
|
|
Topic Locked
