Bimota YB8 Postie project sees the light of day

[Drew]

Why do post classic bikes not need to be homologated?

And whoever said that they could run a 1990 Gixxer to get teh 5.5inch rear wheel, you are allowed to put whatever wheels ya want on the bike in the name of safety I think you'll find.

[Kickaha]

. Guess I may need Proof from Kawasaki NZ they were selling H2's in 89

You don't need any proof about anything to do with sales, you only have to prove it was manufactured before the end of December 1989, it doesn't have to have been sold before then

And whoever said that they could run a 1990 Gixxer to get the 5.5inch rear wheel, you are allowed to put whatever wheels ya want on the bike in the name of safety I think you'll find.

Pre89 wheel rules

25.5.2 Wheels
Front wheel shall have a maximum width of 3.5” and minimum diameter of 16”.
Rear wheel shall have a maximum width of 5.5” and minimum diameter of 16”.
Wheels can be cast or spoke type.
Magnesium wheels are permitted. Carbon fibre wheels are banned.

[crazy man]

Yes, that was my take on it too after reading the rules. Guess I may need Proof from Kawasaki NZ they were selling H2's in 89. And yes, for sure bracing the swingarm would be fine as it was a common mod back in the day. To tell the truth, ram airing a H1 raised my eyebrows, but was told it was fine as the president of the nzpcra himself actually did that mod to a 89 h1. So I'm going to build one for the bike. I'm assembling the chassis now and the motor parts I have been collecting from the UK will be here next week

I'd imagine the Bimota should handle quite a bit better than the fzr, I've read good things about that frame. I'd be struggling to get my 750 down to your base weight before you take the lights n that off Was also wondering if it were legal (or even possible) for a ZX10 motor to be shoe horned in

who is the president of the nzpcra? think l have some of his old bike keven g?

[Grumph]

I agree the NZPCRA is not there to enforce the MNZ rules. But if there are questions over a bikes eligiblity the MNZ would ask the NZPCRA to look into it as these bikes are old and sometimes it takes a while to find all the facts, which is also a pain in the butt.
The last thing a club needs while trying to run a race meeting are protests about bikes most people know very little about.
It is easier to get it all cleared before racing.
I have done this myself prior to a race season, so if there was a complaint about my bike I had my own proof and a letter from the NZPCRA.
I have never been protested against and have never laid a protest.
But it does happen from time to time.

Sorry Mr Williams to hijack your thread but I can't let this go unchallenged....I see no provision in the rules for MNZ to ask any club for an opinion on eligibility. Any question would have to arise from a protest for which there are procedures laid down. And as it is stated in the rules frequently - the onus of proof is on the competitor. If a standard protest committee can't reach an agreement and it goes to appeal surely three stewards can sort a matter of proof. I can't see either where a letter from NZPCRA carries any weight as proof of eligibility....
I'd love to hear from Mr Smith where he got the idea from that NZPCRA are so different from any other club in NZ in that they are able to certify a bikes date of manufacture.

[Billy]

To tell the truth, ram airing a H1 raised my eyebrows, but was told it was fine as the president of the nzpcra himself actually did that mod to a 89 h1.

Yes he did,But he didnt own that bike until around 1991,So therefore although the machine was an H1,It was not ram aired until after 1990,Does that still mean its legal???

That was Russell Josiahs racebike from the 89-90 series and in fact is now the Steadman 750 triple

[codgyoleracer]

Yes he did,But he didnt own that bike until around 1991,So therefore although the machine was an H1,It was not ram aired until after 1990,Does that still mean its legal???

I doubt it as none of those parts are considered "a major component", and ram air or scoops for air intake have been around a long time I.E before even YOU were a nipper..... (and that sir is a loooooooong time) :-)

[Billy]

Yes he did,But he didnt own that bike until around 1991,So therefore although the machine was an H1,It was not ram aired until after 1990,Does that still mean its legal???

I doubt it as none of those parts are considered "a major compnent", and ram air or scoops for air intake have been around a long time I.E before even YOU were a nipper..... (and that sir is a loooooooong time) :-)

How would you know what was happening before I was a nipper young fella???

[codgyoleracer]

Sorry Mr Williams to hijack your thread but I can't let this go unchallenged....I see no provision in the rules for MNZ to ask any club for an opinion on eligibility. Any question would have to arise from a protest for which there are procedures laid down. And as it is stated in the rules frequently - the onus of proof is on the competitor. If a standard protest committee can't reach an agreement and it goes to appeal surely three stewards can sort a matter of proof. I can't see either where a letter from NZPCRA carries any weight as proof of eligibility....
I'd love to hear from Mr Smith where he got the idea from that NZPCRA are so different from any other club in NZ in that they are able to certify a bikes date of manufacture.

No worries raising this matter at all, theres far too many "ducks and drakes" about these sort of things aye - and the protest rules applies to all of our various forms of road-race classes. The more information and clarity that we can get out to the general publics/competitors then the less confusion!

The MNZ laid out rules for protest make it very clear how it should all be done (if required). Its a process that provide rights (and penalties) to both parties. + its also a process that i have faith in, as the person protesting needs to have a pretty solid footing to get the process / wheels in motion. (I.E - a page from a google search aint gonna cut it......)

[codgyoleracer]

How would you know what was happening before I was a nipper young fella???

My granddad told me.........

[Billy]

No worries raising this matter at all, theres far too many "ducks and drakes" about these sort of things aye - and the protest rules applies to all of our various forms of road-race classes. The more information and clarity that we can get out to the general publics/competitors then the less confusion!

The MNZ laid out rules for protest make it very clear how it should all be done (if required). Its a process that provide rights (and penalties) to both parties. + its also a process that i have faith in, as the person protesting needs to have a pretty solid footing to get the process / wheels in motion. (I.E - a page from a google search aint gonna cut it......)

Interestingly we had to clarify a ruling for a competitor just last night regarding post classic,It was a similar situation to one I ve been on the otherside of in the past that was at the time handled badly by the NZPCRA.Have no fear that now MNZ are presiding over the rulings for the class,Personalities will not enter into the process as has done in the past.

[Peter Smith]

Sorry Mr Williams to hijack your thread but I can't let this go unchallenged....I see no provision in the rules for MNZ to ask any club for an opinion on eligibility. Any question would have to arise from a protest for which there are procedures laid down. And as it is stated in the rules frequently - the onus of proof is on the competitor. If a standard protest committee can't reach an agreement and it goes to appeal surely three stewards can sort a matter of proof. I can't see either where a letter from NZPCRA carries any weight as proof of eligibility....
I'd love to hear from Mr Smith where he got the idea from that NZPCRA are so different from any other club in NZ in that they are able to certify a bikes date of manufacture.

Sorry Glen, but he requested a reply.
OK. The NZPCRA do not certify bike, I never suggested that.
The idea of contacting them is simply to try and prevent bitch fights at race meetings.
An unbiased letter/ email from the NZPCRA technical comittee can help prevent arguement and protests, thats all.

There have been false documents presented in the past at race meetings to allow bikes to compete in post classics that were clearly outside the rules. But because the rider had false proof and the race club were not experts on 20 year old bikes he was allowed to compete in that class, it took months to get that issue sorted.

I race in this class because it is fun, these guy's are bike enthuiasts like myself and it is nice to turn up at a meeting and have some races, chat to the guy's and go home happy.
As a previous comittee member, it is a pain in the butt spending a race day dealing with complaints and protests, when I need to focus on racing and the officials are trying to run a race meeting.

Contacting the NZPCRA was only a suggestion. My Bad, won't do it again, my applogies for trying to help.

Glen, I look forward to racing against a Bimota.

[Drew]

Pre89 wheel rules

25.5.2 Wheels
Front wheel shall have a maximum width of 3.5” and minimum diameter of 16”.
Rear wheel shall have a maximum width of 5.5” and minimum diameter of 16”.
Wheels can be cast or spoke type.
Magnesium wheels are permitted. Carbon fibre wheels are banned.

Ok then pedant! You can run ALMOST any wheels ya want. Would take a very special individual indeed to go wider than 5.5 inch wide rear wheel, unless they are going drag racing.

[Mental Trousers]

FFS!!!!!

You clowns must be related to Shaun!!!!!


Rule #1: don't delete anything between or including the [ ]
Rule #2: if there's [quote....] make sure there's a matching [/quote] somewhere!!

[codgyoleracer]

Sorry Glen, but he requested a reply.
OK. The NZPCRA do not certify bike, I never suggested that.
The idea of contacting them is simply to try and prevent bitch fights at race meetings.
An unbiased letter/ email from the NZPCRA technical comittee can help prevent arguement and protests, thats all.

There have been false documents presented in the past at race meetings to allow bikes to compete in post classics that were clearly outside the rules. But because the rider had false proof and the race club were not experts on 20 year old bikes he was allowed to compete in that class, it took months to get that issue sorted.

I race in this class because it is fun, these guy's are bike enthuiasts like myself and it is nice to turn up at a meeting and have some races, chat to the guy's and go home happy.
As a previous comittee member, it is a pain in the butt spending a race day dealing with complaints and protests, when I need to focus on racing and the officials are trying to run a race meeting.

Contacting the NZPCRA was only a suggestion. My Bad, won't do it again, my applogies for trying to help.

Glen, I look forward to racing against a Bimota.

No worries Pete, i can see that there is plenty of knowledge to tap into at the NZPCRA - so if its there then yes why not use it - I fully agree.

On another note , I am so far behind in my prep this year due to work that it makes me wonder why i started.......But then again plenty of work means that there is $ in my pocket and the toys in the shed benefit long term!

[Peter Smith]

FFS!!!!!

You Shaun must be related to a clown!!!!!


Rule #1: don't including anything between or the [ ]
Rule #2: if there's [quote....] make sure there's a matching thong [/quote] somewhere!!

Thats a bit harsh on poor old Shaun.