|
Advertise with us
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
| |
Current Topic Rating:  | Join the Forum to Rate this Topic at: Classic Motorcycling Australia Forums
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
 Posted - 25 Apr 2001 : 08:40:06 AM
|
I note there are no races for 'Forgotten Era' at the Austin 7 Historic Winton, and the machines are not even allowed to run off the back of the grid in Post Classic.
Seems a bit silly to end the Post Classic Class at 1972, perhaps it should encompass Forgotten Era as well (up to 79). However I still think two strokes and four strokes should run separately in the Post Classic grouping. Alternatively there should be a capacity handicap for two strokes.
We still never seem to see Ducati twins or unit Triumphs racing these days. The obvious reason is that running them in Forgotten Era, they have to compete against 350 and 750 Yamahas.
I don't mind running my 850 Norton against Z900 Kawasakis, it already has to compete against a Honda 750 overbored to greater than 1000cc.
When are we going to stop the bull****?
Alfonso
|
|
|
Allan
Site Moderator
National
599 Posts |
Posted - 25 Apr 2001 : 2:59:11 PM
|
Well the question is whether P5 is "classic or not" by MA. I believe that P5 is classic so WHY is their no class for P5 is this because of HMRAV not wanting P5 at this Austin 7 meeting. Cars are being raced up to this time bracket so WHY no P5 bikes as WE are still rated by MA as classic's  |
 |
|
|
Former Member
deleted
![]()
13 Posts |
Posted - 06 May 2001 : 3:39:19 PM
|
acotrel,I note your comments regarding the size of some of the unlimited Classic and Post Classic machines around within our sport at present.
I for one believe that a new rule should be adopted to restrict the Engine capacity to that of the original manufacture specification IE a Norton Atlas/Commando should be a 750cc this practice of going to the largest oversize kit available such as 1000cc plus in the case of a 750cc Honda is wrong and the Historic Commissioners should do some thing about this problem.
|
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 06 May 2001 : 8:57:16 PM
|
I actually raced Allpowers C grade for several years, up to the late seventies. The largest Honda around was 820cc (using 450 honda pistons). How are you going to control the oversize? (The same way Doug Fraser was stopped from using a Jawa four valve head 1976 model, on his Period 3 BSA? It only took about ten years to decide it was not eligible!) Why don't you stop romancing and develop some realistic capacity classes. Rex Wolfenden's Hondas are easily competitive with the 1000cc Harris framed Laverda running in Forgotten Era. I say get rid of period 5 by including it in period 4. Race the four strokes separately to two strokes, in reasonable capacity classes. This business of trying to recreate an era is rubbish, it has only worked to a limited extent with pre 62 machines, and even there the two strokes feature more prominently than they ever did in real life ( I never saw a fast Ossa in the fifties, and that's what regularly wins the championships. Maurey Quincey should be ashamed of his rides on the Walsh Bantam when you see how they go these days, with jap pistons, cranks and gearboxes)
Another point - in the old days we didn't often cheat on capacity, seems to be a bit common these days.
Alfonso |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
![]()
11 Posts |
Posted - 11 May 2001 : 11:02:27 AM
|
The way it is done in the UK classic scene is that two strokes and four strokes have a diffent cut off date. The class I raced in was for up to 1972 four strokes and 1967 two strokes. Also there was a simple rule: no four cylinder bikes! All fours ran in the forgotten era class. The unlimited class was a reasonable mix of Triumph/BSA triples, Norton and Triumph BSA twins and some Dukes,Laverdas and even a few BMWs. I never saw any Kawasaki triples, but I guess they would also be forgotten era. It worked quite well over there, why not here?
|
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 12 May 2001 : 4:13:37 PM
|
Looks like a really good and sensible approach to a long standing problem, that's got the potential to destroy our sport. The question is - how do we get it accepted as common practice?
Alfonso |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
31 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2001 : 5:12:51 PM
|
Hello Everyone. My Name is Zoltan Petri and I am a 34year old member ( and promo officer ) of the Post Classic Racing Association of NSW. I have been invited here to make comments on Period 5 Forgotten Era concepts. Please bear with me as this will be long and ugly. Firstly I'd like to say that I have been involved with PCRA and FE for about 9 years now, since its inception and have seen both the good and bad sided. I do not have a particular axe to grind, except that it is only this year that we are finally achieving eligibility stability in this class. It is in fact this stability which is ever so important if historic bikes of any era are to be accepted by more and more people, allowing for better grids and hopefully more spectators, in turn inviting sponsorship and giving YOU cheaper racing. OK - firstly, please don't call FE as 'classic' - it is an important distingction if you wish to attract new blood and grid bikes. While MA see it as another Post Classic category and may of course be called this, it is better to call it FE as it is a well established class. 2nd- Guys - please don't try to reinvent the wheel. FE P5 is already very well established, in Vic also but more so in NSW. we had our club's round yesterday at Oran Park South circuit and we had almost 38 bikes on the grid from 125s to U/Ls !! MA already has established guidelines (more of this later) and basically involves bikes manufactured before the end of 1980. This in fact is a good year for Make / Model breaks and I would STRONGLY URGE all concerned to Not Try And Change This year to 82 or so. If you do, you will have an endless battle on two hands – one with MA who probably will never recognise ‘your’ class, therefor you will not have state or national titles. The other with entrants, as 1980 model bikes will not want to go up against later model (ie 1985) ones. There is already some interest for a new FE – of bike ranging from 1981 to about 1989?, before blades were made. A large local club ( St George/ Bankstown/ Wiley Park MCC ) ran such a class for a few years with mixed success, called Days Gone By. I believe their error was to raise the cutoff year by one year every year, allowing for bikes to be outdated from year to year, same as the moderns. By staying with the accepted classes you will be able to run comparable state and maybe OZ championships ! Back to FE – The cutoff year of 1980 and current MA regs exclude the following models : Katanas, Suzuki RGB500 MK6s, GPZ900s, RZ Yamahas, RG 250s etc, VF750s, VF1000Rs, GSXRs etc. these are quite different from those models which are allowed, thereby creating a natural buffer. The up to 1980 models commonly used are : HONDAs - H100, CR125, RS125, CB125, XL125, CB500, CBX1000, CB750/900/1100R KAWASAKI – KH100, Z650/900/1000, Z1Rs etc YAMAHA – RX125, DS350, RDLC250/350, TZ250/350, XS1100, XV1000RH, TZ500 GP model, TZ750 OW31, SUZUKIs – RM125, A100, GS1000, GS750, GSX1100, DUCATIs 500/600 Pantahs, 900SS SL500, etc. Also of note have been special bikes such as a Ducati TT600 Factory model, Graeme Crosby’s 1979 Moriwaki / Hatton Z1170 and the Kenny Roberts ridden TZ500 Yamaha GP 4 Cylinder.
ELIGIBILITY is viewed thus by MA and historic eligibility scrutineers – a bike is defined by it’s frame and year of manufacture thereof. Major components ( frame, engine castings incl barrels and head etc, forks, swingarm and brakes ) can be built after 1980 so long as they are identical to an era component. ie this allows a 1982 CB900 frame to be used as it is identical to a 1980 one, but the 1982 antidive 39mm forks are not in as such forks were not used in 1980. OK. Other components are ‘Minor components’ and must remain ‘visually compatible with the era’. You MAY mix eligible components (both major and minor) between eligible makes and models. Ie a GSX1100 engine in a 1980 Harris frame made for a kawasaki motor. Wheel sizes for up to and incl 500s are not smaller than 18inch, whilst U/Ls can use 17inchers up to 4.5 inch width on the rear. Max fork sizes are 41mm dia and must not contain antidives or external damping adjustments unless originally so in 1980 (ie some Marzochis I think).The Historic commisioners are allowing non era 41mm forks ( ie GSXR and FJ1100) so long as they have had the antidive brackets removed and do not have external damping adjustments. This goes against the print, but they have communicated this year that this is acceptable so long as these criteria are met and the fork looks like an era one ( ie off a factory bike even) (copy of this is available from me or the Post Classic Racing Association NSW July Newsletter). This has not been absolutely finalised yet so when building a bike, stick with era forks for now...Discs, Carriers and Calipers must also be era / era replicas. The only floating discs around were the RG500 GP discs as used on Barry Sheenes etc and GSXR ones are apparently not close enough in their carrier patterns. Note – most U/L FE bikes use XS1100 discs redrilled to suit GSXR rims with era type Brembo calipers. A machine must maintain the same number of shocks as used on that model / machine in the era. Ie for me to run my CB900 as a monoshock, I would have to prove that someone modified a CB frame so IN THE ERA ! now remembering that parts may be interchanged, you could put a non era GSXR swingarm on your bike so long as it is an exact replica of a s/arm used on any bike in the era( ie RGB500). ORIGINALITY will go through your mind. No, the bikes are not exactly as they were on the 1980 grids. No, they didn’t have 17 inch rims ( but yes they did have 3 spoke mag rims!) . No, GSXs did not have CB1100R ducktails. DON’T WORRY ABOUT IT ! Australia cannot support enough racing numbers to be purist and elitist about these things. If you want exact originality, you will create purism and we can’t raise enough grid numbers to justify this. I feel this is a very important point. Our aim ( and MA’s too) should be to have more bikes on the grids in a competetive state. Well, on Sunday at Oran Pk, Marcus’ 18 inched TZ750 was right up there with 17 inched GSX1200s. That’s competetive ! RECKLESS - I understand your concerns about non era specs - but I think the ball was lost about 20 years ago when PC was started. let it be - unlimited internal mods are an accepted fact and will remain so. anyway, smaller original capacity vs larger ones does not always make for a lost race. I had my Cb1100 bum kicked by a 750 triumph in NZ at Pukehohe in 96...Changing too far away from the accepted norms NOW would create the sort of instability seen during the 3 last years in FE in NSW where we lost quite a few competitors who built bikes to the accepted norm and then were told that the ball park has been changed......
ACOTREL (Alan ?) - combining P5 FE and P4 PC is a great idea and is something I am trying to encourage in NSW. However, only for club rounds - to put more bikes of similar performance ( which they are) on the grids for both riders' and spectators' pleasure. For NSW/OZ titles, you must and should keep them seperate as they are classed as seperate fields by MA. Still, there is nothing to stop anyone racing both P4 and P5. this is in fact happening here with a number of PC hondas being run in P5FE for fun - this is legal if you change just 1 major component from PC to FE ( ie a fork or caliper or disc - easy to achieve without upsetting the bike and wallet) Normally this is not even required and PC bikes are allowed to run in FE without such mods. I love this as it makes my racing more competetive and gives larger grids. IN CONCLUSION – please consider the above points. Please aim to go with the national classes. There is nothing to stop you running alterations on your club days, but for major titles you need to run as per the GCR rulebook. I am sure you will not regret this. Your hardest task will be eligibility scrutineering. Simple – frame, engine, forks, calipers, discs – must be same as era items. Don't go for function of item, ( ie any 2 spot caliper) but rather ensure that the item in question complies with GCRs and is the same as an era part, even if made after. The rest will follow. For specials, make the owner prove that the frame is as was in 1980. I am looking forward to comments and invite any and all to ask for pics of our racers.Maybe they could be added to your pic library ?
|
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| Classic Motorcycling Australia Forums |
© 2000 - 2024 |
|
|
|
|
Topic Locked
