Historic road race commission

[Pistonbroke]

Link to the minutes about rule changes etc for next year,everyone should read this stuff

http://www.ma.org.au/fileadmin/user_upl ... y%2010.pdf

[Gosling1]

thanks for the link - some interesting things in there !

* Banning all prize money for Historic events ? Where will that leave the BSFOS ? I think this rule change is really short-sighted and a big mistake. The reasons for banning prize money are dodgy in the extreme....

* Rex Wolfenden continuing to push for the inclusion of methanol in P5 ??? he has been banging the drum about this for a couple of years now....thank christ some wiser heads prevail and have stopped this from happening. If Rex wants to race a methanol-fuelled bike, just get onto a 750/4 ....

* Making carbies a minor component ? The MOMS are pretty clear on this, some certain types of carbs are already included or excluded depending on class..........what *is* interesting though, is that flat-slide carbs are not specifically banned from P5 in the current MOMS. Wonder when or if we will see the first U/L P5 bike fitted with flatties......

* 'Review the Rule Structure'...... apparently it is poorly written and ambiguous.......and open to interpretation !

Of course it is, and the basic problem has always been the unwillingness of the rule-makers to make simple rules that are easily enforceable and simple to understand. The problem with the 'onus of proof being on the competitor' has always been that competitors will always 'interpret' rules in a manner that gives them the best advantage ( or the least disadvantage) - when rules can be interpreted in different ways, this sh1tfight will always occur....

The simple solution is to have rules that are easy to read and watertight. Personally, I think the current MOMS are not that bad really, and just need some tightening up around the edges. The introductory statement within MOMS, at the start of the Historic racing chapter - is a perfect example of something which needs to be tightened up...........

" to ensure the motorcycles are in a condition which is visually compatible with the period of racing being portrayed...."

Put simply - bikes like Rob Phillis' #32 Suzuki - meet this condition easily. Bikes like the Irving Vincent - do not and never have. The above intro statement needs the second bit of bullsh1t that says.." these rules are to be interpreted so as to ensure that motorcycles are presented in the spirit of the period..." to be removed immediately !

I mean, FFS !! The governing body puts in this *interpretation* of their own rules ! And then makes a recommendation that these same rules need to be reviewed.....because they are open to interpretation !!! It's a joke. They invite speculation and confusion with eligibility because of ridiculous additions like that last sentence in the intro to Chapter 16.....

I have always believed that this is the 'Get out of Jail free ' card played by entrants whose bikes do not meet the 'visually compatible' requirement. It simply needs to be removed, and replaced with something simple like this.

"Motorcycles which are presented in a condition that is not visually compatible with the period of racing being portrayed, will not be allowed to enter any Historic events."

It will then be up to those who issue the log books to ensure that only bikes which meet this most basic requirement of Historic racing - ie - bikes which are in every respect visually compatible with the period of racing being portrayed - are actually issued with log books in the first place. Surely it can't be that hard ?

[acotrel]

"Motorcycles which are presented in a condition that is not visually compatible with the period of racing being portrayed, will not be allowed to enter any Historic events."

It will then be up to those who issue the log books to ensure that only bikes which meet this most basic requirement of Historic racing - ie - bikes which are in every respect visually compatible with the period of racing being portrayed - are actually issued with log books in the first place. Surely it can't be that hard ?




All that would be needed then would be a strict control on increases of engine capacity, and we might have some sense in the game?

[john feakes]

WOODNITBELUVVERLY.

WHY IS COMMON SENSE SO RARE?

[Flapper]

The flatslide carby issue was resolved last year...... Suzuki motocross bikes in 1982 ran flatslides, Mikuni TM's to be exact..... so if you want, run them, you grab a get a set of CV's of ebay for next ta nothing, oh! some people don't like CV carbies, so don't do it, anyway they don't meter as well as fuel injection and their to smooth to be anygood on a race bike.

Thing is about historics, inparticular P5 unlimited, so much was being done towards the end of the period experimental wise in both road and endurance racing, you could run most of whats applicable to period 6 that's tarted for next year. Research into the bike I'm building for P5 racing has turnned up some wonderful info as to what was around in 82, but then again MA has banned a couple of RG500's from running that were definatly within the period. So if you turnned up with a GSX 1100 with a mono shock rear, they would have to let you run, even a kawasaki..... or is the visual thing ment to restrict bike "look" to the road going versions?........ Because in that period in Australia it was like it is today, today meaning ASBK etc etc, where every ones broke and racing with the money they got selling the shirt of their backs, and only the wealthy are able to afford good purpose made racebikes ?

Poor old Aussies did what they could with what they had for sure, tweeked up "road bikes", but it certainly is not representitive of the period, and anyway, if you could get hold of one of Hansfords old GP bikes, would you race it anyway, or a 750 factory waterbottle, factory XB.

Run what ya brung, in 2010 nobody should really give a crap about what was legal in 1980, they are now old boys toys and realavant only to us who race them, that being fun and friendship> If Rex wants to build bikes, and build to win, all good, lucky Rex but if anyone thinks that racing Period 5 is about being a winner, they are a looser straight out, they should have tried it 30 years ago, it might have ment something then..... like when they were 18 or 20.

Build good bikes that go hard, race for the bit of track the guy in front of you has, there's not that much more to it. Cheat to make your bike faster? what's the value in that.

My bit on it, ta

[acotrel]

Wal Phillips made a fuel injector for general sale to the public in the fifties. Can I fit a motec engine management system to a manx?

[acotrel]

Build good bikes that go hard, race for the bit of track the guy in front of you has, there's not that much more to it. Cheat to make your bike faster? what's the value in that.


There is such a thing as good competition, and it seems that historic racing is never going to provide that? I believe that 'eligibility' is about ensuring authenticity in our machinery, but there's a balance to be struck between that and whether we allow development of bikes which really should be simply restored. Perhaps we need to make a decision about whether we really race, or preserve old race machinery - which was one of the original aims when historic racing began in 1973? My preference is that we run some events similar to the UK Lansdowne series (the championships), the rest should be relatively uncontrolled!

[Gosling1]

......The flatslide carby issue was resolved last year...... Suzuki motocross bikes in 1982 ran flatslides, Mikuni TM's to be exact..... so if you want, run them, you grab a get a set of CV's of ebay for next ta nothing, oh! some people don't like CV carbies, so don't do it, anyway they don't meter as well as fuel injection and their to smooth to be anygood on a race bike......

Flapper - flat-slides were used on AMA Superbikes well before 1982. I think the first photo I saw of flatties in AMA competition was a set of 41mm Lectrons fitted to a GS1000 back in 1979 ? Would have to go digging through the library to find it though.... In any case, flatties were always a bit of a contentious issue with the old 12/80 cutoff date for P5.....so the change to 12/82 should have fixed this once and for all.

CV carbs are fine for economy and daily commuting - and I have seen a couple of P5 U/L Honda's over the years using CV carbs - but they are not flatties, and as you say, they are sh1thouse for racing compared to smoothbores or even normal slide carbs.

...Wal Phillips made a fuel injector for general sale to the public in the fifties. Can I fit a motec engine management system to a manx?....

Mechanical fuel injection is OK for P4 mate - not sure about P3 though ! - I remember seeing a nice Honda 750/4 back at Oran Park in the early 90's racing with the PCRA - this bike was fitted with mechanical fuel injection.

[acotrel]

Gosling 1, Would you please name the make and model of racing motorcycle which had mechanical fuel injection pre 1972 ?

[acotrel]

I could believe it's OK to run flat slide carbs in P5, as long as they are Lectrons! But to run Mikuni flatties because Lectrons were flatties is absolue BS!

[acotrel]

I believe Tony Henderson had a Lectron on the Matchless in the late 60s? So can we now run flatties on P4 bikes. Sounds good to me!

[Flapper]

Frig me, Al once again your doing the unbelievable by assuming that the flatslide issue is about lectrons, yes that was the deal, you could only run lectrons because they were the onlt flatties around, just like the RGB500 floaters.... ummm the less said the better. But because MA has extended P5 to include 1982 kit, this lets in the Mikuni TM flatslides, it's as simple as that.

[Gosling1]

....Gosling 1, Would you please name the make and model of racing motorcycle which had mechanical fuel injection pre 1972 ?....

no worries mate.

Helmut Fath and Peter Kuhn designed this 4-cylinder 2-valve, DOHC motor back in the early 60's. It used mechanical fuel injection and dual banks of intake venturis. The name of the motorcycle was HEMEYLA, which was an anacronym for the name of the builder, and the town he came from in The Netherlands....Herman Meijer .

HEMEYLA built and raced several types of motorcycles through the 60's and 70's. I don't have any pictures of the racing bike that used the motor pictured here, only small-capacity bikes....




The Munch Mammut of 1971 also used mechanical fuel injection, but I don't think these were raced too often !!!

I recall that the CB750/4 used a basic mechanical fuel-injection system, almost 100% sure it was a Hilborn system, as these were widely available in the US during the 60's and 70's. I guess the PCRA, knowing that mechanical fuel injection systems existed as far back as the mid-50's........in fact, to the very system you mention, being Wal Phillips injector.........had no problems whatsoever in allowing the 750/4 to race. And neither should they.

There should be no considerations given whatsoever, as to wether a *race* bike existed in the period, and raced with the technology available at the time. The only consideration is that the technology was available, so should be permitted in the relevant class.

What really irritates me, is the banning of reed-valves for early 2-strokes !! Reed-valves were first used in 1922 !!! FFS, some people think that if they have not seen something in their own lifetime, then it never existed prior to their date of birth !!! What a crock.

You are splitting hairs with Lectron f/s v Mikuni f/s. At the end of the day - they are carbies with flat slides. That is all that matters.

[acotrel]

In the 1930s, Rudges had 4 valves per cylinder, so that must mean that the manxs in period 3 can be converted? Are the bikes in period 6 going to run full Motec management systems?

[Gosling1]

.....In the 1930s, Rudges had 4 valves per cylinder, so that must mean that the manxs in period 3 can be converted? Are the bikes in period 6 going to run full Motec management systems?......

Unless 4-valve heads are specifically banned from P3 - I can't see why not ? Certain bikes and/or parts have always been subject to banning from certain periods - the RD Yamaha and Z900 Kawasaki being 2 well-known examples from P4. What is 'included' or 'excluded' has always been a sore point with competitors for many years, and it seems that the MOMS relevant paragraphs in the Historic section tend to change fairly regularly - depending on submissions received.

I don't know what the problem with a full Motec management system is in P6 ? The technology was available, hell, the Irving Vincent outfit uses a Motec programmable ignition system and it is ostensibly a P5 outfit !!

[acotrel]

It's supposed to be HISTORIC racing!