MNZ rule change proposals

[Kiwi Graham]

http://www.mnz.co.nz/Proposed_Rule_Changes.aspx#road

See......
They are looking at numbers........ ;)

[SWERVE]

Some sense in there........... yay:mellow:

[Mental Trousers]

Rule Number:
All applicable Appendices

Rule to read:
Number digits to be of a BOLD type, and as large as practicable – 140mm MINIMUM height, and must be separate ( i.e. not overlapping )
Legibility of numbers to be decided by Technical Steward – if they are NOT legible from 20mtrs rideby, rider will be directed to re-do the number in a legible, legal form, and will not compete until his numbers comply
Numbers containing more than two digits will NOT be acceptable for Road Race National Championship events. Numbers 1-10 will be reserved for Competitors finishing in that position in that Class in the previous years Championship – these allocations will be made by MNZ’s Office each year

Effective Date:
Immediate

Reason:
Clarification of number policy following numerous examples of riders deliberately flouting regulations


Much better. Just need to enforce it properly now.

Interesting that only 2 digit numbers are allowed for Nationals. Morris and a couple of others are gonna have to change.

The legible from 20m ride by is good but I reckon there should have been a minimum line thickness for clarity.

But still, good job and happy to see some common sense overruling dumb-arse-ary.

[NinjaBoy]

Morris and a couple of others are gonna have to change.



Morris will have to be just "7" instead of "007" :)

[Mental Trousers]

Morris will have to be just "7" instead of "007" :)

... or 80 instead of 808

http://www.mylaps.com/championship/view.jsp?id=14425

[discodan]

Rule to read:
3.7G FRONT FORK : front forks must remain completely stock externally, no modifications to top caps or any external damping bodies. Fork Cartridge tubes and cartridge rods must be OEM, but internal modifications to the cartridges are free. Additional vent holes may be placed in theOEM cartridge tubes. Aftermarket cartridges are prohibited in this class. Alternative springs and guides may be fitted, Oil quantity and weight free.
3.7H REAR SHOCK : Only Stock fitment OEM shock absorbers may be used, but alternative A/M springs may be fitted– shock to remain completely standard externally
( except where alternative springs are used, suitable adaptation collars may be fitted ) but internal mods are free. Reservoir Caps may be modified to make removal of retaining clip easier. Shock shaft may be replaced, providing it is the same diameter and appearance as the OE part

Is it just me or do these super stock rules allow you to chuck as much money as you want into your 'stock looking' suspension? Eg. what is the need to replace the shock shaft except to drive up cost?

[SWERVE]

Im sure Dr Robert will answer your question RE: shock shaft. Dan
Does seem that it is poss to spend just as much on your stock shock as
buying the proper unit!!!!!!!! cant see the point in that myself either.

The only trouble with 2 digit numbers is that some people will not be able to get a 2 digit verion of their 3 digit number as it may already be allocated.
ie we have 330 so it 33 or 30.........guess i will have to contact mnz to see if these are available.

[discodan]

Im sure Dr Robert will answer your question RE: shock shaft. Dan
Does seem that it is poss to spend just as much on your stock shock as
buying the proper unit!!!!!!!! cant see the point in that myself either.

Exactly and at least an after market shock can be sold at the end of the season if need be.

My understanding of suspension internals is limited but I have already had my standard R6 suspension re-valved (as a low cost mod) and it works fine. I thought this would place me on a fairly even ground but maybe I need to throw more money at it now? Wasn't the spirit of the rules supposed to limit spending?

[yungatart]

http://www.mnz.co.nz/Proposed_Rule_Changes.aspx#road

See......
They are looking at numbers........ ;)

I'm a happy flaggie!

[Maido]

Is it just me or do these super stock rules allow you to chuck as much money as you want into your 'stock looking' suspension? Eg. what is the need to replace the shock shaft except to drive up cost?

I would imagine most manufacturers don't actually list a separate part in their parts book for the shaft itself, instead you would have to buy the whole unit if it wears out. (The shaft would be the part to wear the quickest one would assume) An a/m replacement would surely be cheaper?


Further clarifies the suspension requirements of this class, and in doing so sets effective limits to prevent overspending

[Biggles08]

Much better. Just need to enforce it properly now.

Interesting that only 2 digit numbers are allowed for Nationals. Morris and a couple of others are gonna have to change.

The legible from 20m ride by is good but I reckon there should have been a minimum line thickness for clarity.

But still, good job and happy to see some common sense overruling dumb-arse-ary.

Yes the rule needed addressing due to racers being stupid with their numbers but I'm pissed as my numbers have always been easily seen and they are 3 digits....so....it is proven to be possible to have 3 digits easily visable (which is the point after all). They should stick with the point rather than making unnecessary additions. Its another example of typical over reaction from kiwi rule makers...taking a page out of the traffic cop handbook...next we won't be able to speed!?

[Kickaha]

Interesting that only 2 digit numbers are allowed for Nationals. Morris and a couple of others are gonna have to change.

That isn't a really new rule, you only used to be allowed two digits when I started racing and only one person I knew had a three digit number, they'd had to apply for a dispensation to run it as they'd used it for decades

[Biggles08]

That isn't a really new rule, you only used to be allowed two digits when I started racing and only one person I knew had a three digit number, they'd had to apply for a dispensation to run it as they'd used it for decades

So why can you pick a 3 digit number on the MNZ system when you apply for your license? I'm registered with MNZ as running #808 and nobody else can pick that number.

[Kickaha]

So why can you pick a 3 digit number on the MNZ system when you apply for your license? I'm registered with MNZ as running #808 and nobody else can pick that number.

Maybe they changed it at some stage to allow three digit numbers and now they're changing it back as three digit numbers might not fit the specified number board sizes

[gixerracer]

Exactly and at least an after market shock can be sold at the end of the season if need be.

My understanding of suspension internals is limited but I have already had my standard R6 suspension re-valved (as a low cost mod) and it works fine. I thought this would place me on a fairly even ground but maybe I need to throw more money at it now? Wasn't the spirit of the rules supposed to limit spending?

If it works fine then you dont have to spend a cent on it do you:no:

[gixerracer]

That isn't a really new rule, you only used to be allowed two digits when I started racing and only one person I knew had a three digit number, they'd had to apply for a dispensation to run it as they'd used it for decades

The first time I raced on tarmac was at the Golden Handle bars in I think 1993 at Manfeild and my allocated number for that event was bike #256. Then I turned up at a club road race not long after and they said you cant run 3 numbers so I took of the 2 and have been #56 ever since

[scracha]

So why can you pick a 3 digit number on the MNZ system when you apply for your license? I'm registered with MNZ as running #808 and nobody else can pick that number.

Bollocks they can't mate. Obviously depends on "who you know".
I had 71 in F3. They allocated it to someone else.
I had 69 in F2. They allocated that to someone the following year.

They even reallocated the 3 digit number I had. 2 emails sent to MNZ asking why and not even a reply back. Fuckin ridiculous.

[gixerracer]

Bollocks they can't mate. Obviously depends on "who you know".
I had 71 in F3. They allocated it to someone else.
I had 69 in F2. They allocated that to someone the following year.

They even reallocated the 3 digit number I had. 2 emails sent to MNZ asking why and not even a reply back. Fuckin ridiculous.

If someone applies for a number and get it they take it of the list even if someone in 125gp takes say number 12 then I cant get it for 600cc or supers or any other class. Bit stupid really

[Robert Taylor]

If it works fine then you dont have to spend a cent on it do you:no:

If he is happy then thats just fine Craig, but once again he is believing what he is being told, by someone who is well known for spreading BS. I have to wonder aloud how many circuits this R6 that is ''just fine'' has been tested on and at what track temperatures? If its the series R6 that I think it may be the spring rate will be in the order of 11 to 11.5 newtons. Fine if you are over 100kg or for Teretonga where it needs a firmer spring than anywhere else in NZ to hold the bike up during a prolonged time at high speed in the sweeper. But how would his suspension ''tuner'' know exactly what the spring rate is given that he doesnt have a spring rate tester?
Stewart Smart knows all about ( initially ) ''cheap'' jobs that are ''just fine''. He thought that the bike was ''as good as it gets'' at Teretonga until I pointed out to him that the rebound damping was way too slow and was losing him grip. A few simple clicks and he was much happier. A few hundred kilometres up the road in the heat at Ruapuna the same bike was burning up tyres and Stewart was struggling to get below 1.42 lap times. The stock spring that worked ''just fine'' at Teretonga was now no longer suitable for Ruapuna circuit. We changed the spring for him to a much more appropriate and lighter rate with suitable preload and Stewart was able to lap in 1.37s.
Its a very dangerous thing to say its all 'just fine'' when different circuits, varying circuit conditions and above all a shift in temperature can dramatically change how your bike is working.
Racers that have been around for more than 2-3 seasons will know this only too well

[Str8 Jacket]

Bollocks they can't mate. Obviously depends on "who you know".
I had 71 in F3. They allocated it to someone else.
I had 69 in F2. They allocated that to someone the following year.

They even reallocated the 3 digit number I had. 2 emails sent to MNZ asking why and not even a reply back. Fuckin ridiculous.

They probably can't understand what you're saying Steevie!

[Robert Taylor]

Is it just me or do these super stock rules allow you to chuck as much money as you want into your 'stock looking' suspension? Eg. what is the need to replace the shock shaft except to drive up cost?

The CB600RR doesnt have a clevis type mount at the upper frame end of the shock mount, unlike your R6 and GSXR600s. Such mounts are able to be shimmed with suitable washers to raise ride height, something that is a very useful tuning tool in racing. The CBR600RR chassis has a couple of cast in lugs to accept a normal crossbolt so the ride height cannot be easily changed. So if the bike runs a Superstock rules stock shock its instantly disadvantaged, as would any other bike that came along in the future with the same mounting system.
Your mate put in a proposal to allow aftermarket links but frankly that was ridiculous for several reasons;
1) They are quite expensive
2) They are not always calibrated to match the stock shock length
3) Kiwis being kiwis they would be pre-disposed to making their own, that leads to questions whether all home-made links would work properly and if they were made of suitable material. The last thing MNZ wants on its plate are injuries and or fatalities because of a rule that doesnt enforce a minimum standard.
My proposal was to allow the fitment of longer shafts as long as the diameter remained the same. You will have the shock apart anyway to upspec internally and shafts are a cheaper way of effecting a length change without messing up the link ratio curve through its stroke.
Note that there is an aftermarket HRC Showa shock available for the CBR600RR and it like other aftermarket shocks has an end eye length adjuster, thats analogous to fitting a longer shaft.

[Kickaha]

Racers that have been around for more than 2-3 seasons will know this only too well

Except for Craig because he knows fuck all :bleh:

[CHOPPA]

It looks like you have to run lanyards all the time now, bet that rule doesnt get inforced

[Kickaha]

It looks like you have to run lanyards all the time now

Only if you're planning on taking up Sidecars

[Robert Taylor]

Is it just me or do these super stock rules allow you to chuck as much money as you want into your 'stock looking' suspension? Eg. what is the need to replace the shock shaft except to drive up cost?

Again your mate is spreading malicious untruths to the affect ""this will cost more than aftermarket suspension'' TOTAL AND UTTER BOLLOCKS!

Only a week or so back I transparently forwarded Peter Ramage a costing to upspec a year 11 GSXR600 in two different ways, as follows:

1) SUPERSPORT, therefore allowing aftermarket rear shock and cartridges at both ends. All up cost inclusive of fitting and set-up $4498.90 incl gst. Note that this is at dealer cost rather than retail through a dealer. This is largely consigned to the annals of history due to the international marketplace and a lack of ''global pricing'' ( Look at the Adidas debacle, its nothing new )

2) Superstock doing not to a ''just fine'' level but using a top spec piston kit in the shock, flow seperator, replacing the spring ( as it jolly well needs to be on the GSXR600 ) and spare fork spring set for the forks as different circuits require different springs. Note also that we are not the cheapest with labour charge etc but we have a very high level of equipment and experience and refuse to do a cheap job that over the course of a season will prove not to be ''just fine''. $2110 gst incl or $1910 without those spare springs or $1510 with just revalving of the stock piston.

Now according to my maths thats significantly cheaper than aftermarket full suspension replacement.

I heard a figure that Jaden Hassans Superstock 600 cost 7k in suspension ( which it did not ) Now who deliberately spread that malicious lie?

Eventually the two classes within a class may morph back into one class, perhaps with aftermarket suspension being allowable and current Superstock rules for the motors. Personally Id have no problem with that.

But I think that as the Superstock rules were initially drafted they should remain as they are with only fine tuning, exactly what these rule changes are. Id personally like to see aftermarket shocks and fork cartridges being allowed but the reality is the current rules are a neccessary distinction and also a neccessary distinction in cost. Aftermarket suppliers have to sometimes accept such realities, beyond any totally commercial motives.

To not put too fine a point on it the suspension rules have been fine tuned in such a way that it virtually eliminates the possibility of protests, the acrimony and the question, who is going to scutineer this stuff?

[Mental Trousers]

So why can you pick a 3 digit number on the MNZ system when you apply for your license? I'm registered with MNZ as running #808 and nobody else can pick that number.

Not everybody races at Nationals level. Even in little old En Zud it'd be difficult to squeeze all racers between 11 and 99.


Bollocks they can't mate. Obviously depends on "who you know".
I had 71 in F3. They allocated it to someone else.
I had 69 in F2. They allocated that to someone the following year.

They even reallocated the 3 digit number I had. 2 emails sent to MNZ asking why and not even a reply back. Fuckin ridiculous.

It's because you're ugly.

Renew it online and ask for your current number (specify which number!!). Or put a note on the form asking for your current number. Worked for me.

[Robert Taylor]

I would imagine most manufacturers don't actually list a separate part in their parts book for the shaft itself, instead you would have to buy the whole unit if it wears out. (The shaft would be the part to wear the quickest one would assume) An a/m replacement would surely be cheaper?

You can buy 14mm shafts from WP, YSS, Ohlins and Bruin Enginerring in Auckland. They just need machining to suit. Very cost effective, especially from Bruin.

[Biggles08]

Not everybody races at Nationals level. Even in little old En Zud it'd be difficult to squeeze all racers between 11 and 99.


So why is it ok to not be able to see the numbers at club racing (incidentally, where all this fiasco originated from in the first place)...this is going on the logic that you are unable to have 3 digits legible of course...BOLLOCKS!

Its simple MNZ and it should remain so...make numbers able to be seen as the rule intended...don't make shit up just to make shit up! My number is 808 and I want to keep it!

[Mental Trousers]

Dunno where 3 digits being illegible comes from. I can think of 3 bikes off the top of my head that have easy to read 3 digit numbers.

[slowpoke]

Shit, my life must be even more fucked than I thought 'cos changing a few placcy numbers just doesn't rate as a problem on my radar, lol. Maybe tie a ribbon around one of the 'bars if you can't remember which bike is yours? :Pokey:

I intially read the suspension rules and thought "What the fuck?!" but after reading RT's explanation it actually makes sense. You don't have to spend the dosh, it's only an option. And using Robert's costings/services and allowing for buying another used set of tubes shock, you could effectively have 2 sets of suspension (1 x Teretonga and 1 x everything else, lol) ready to go for not much more than the cost of 1 full Ohlins set up. Doesn't seem so bad?

[wharfy]

Dunno where 3 digits being illegible comes from. I can think of 3 bikes off the top of my head that have easy to read 3 digit numbers.

Another reason for me not to do the nationals - my member is to big... oops that should be number :laugh:

[Kiwi Graham]

So who's running #14 on their superbike? Thats my frigin number that is :shifty:

[Shaun]

Yes the rule needed addressing due to racers being stupid with their numbers but I'm pissed as my numbers have always been easily seen and they are 3 digits....so....it is proven to be possible to have 3 digits easily visable (which is the point after all). They should stick with the point rather than making unnecessary additions. Its another example of typical over reaction from kiwi rule makers...taking a page out of the traffic cop handbook...next we won't be able to speed!?



Your bike and Numbers have always been immaculately presented mate! and very easy to read, even for a wanker like me

You are unfortunately caught up in this fiasco due to clubs running race meetings with no PRE INSPECTION of race bikes before going on the track and RIDERS that have created there Number boards and numbers based on Fashion rather than RULES

[Robert Taylor]

Your bike and Numbers have always been immaculately presented mate! and very easy to read, even for a wanker like me

You are unfortunately caught up in this fiasco due to clubs running race meetings with no PRE INSPECTION of race bikes before going on the track and RIDERS that have created there Number boards and numbers based on Fashion rather than RULES

Got to agree with that, why dont we have mandatory pre race technical inspections to verify machine and therefore competitor safety?

[Robert Taylor]

Shit, my life must be even more fucked than I thought 'cos changing a few placcy numbers just doesn't rate as a problem on my radar, lol. Maybe tie a ribbon around one of the 'bars if you can't remember which bike is yours? :Pokey:

I intially read the suspension rules and thought "What the fuck?!" but after reading RT's explanation it actually makes sense. You don't have to spend the dosh, it's only an option. And using Robert's costings/services and allowing for buying another used set of tubes shock, you could effectively have 2 sets of suspension (1 x Teretonga and 1 x everything else, lol) ready to go for not much more than the cost of 1 full Ohlins set up. Doesn't seem so bad?

Thanks Slowpoke! You can only go so far in reducing costs. As for humble springs and the costs of having suitable options for varying circuits and conditions that is one neccessary cost to maximise tyre grip and tyre life.
I dont think a lot of competitors realise how much is STILL done out of sheer goodwill in the NZ road racing scene. If they want a reality check on this they should travel to other first world countries and evidence all of the services the competitors have to pay the going rate for.
''Turn up and ride em'' worked in the 70s but modern machinery is a lot more demanding and fickle of setup, especially when it comes to preserving the tyres and following a strict regime of how you heat cycle those tyres.
If Dan is wary of the costs, even in a cost controlled class then he does have options of going to less costly classes.

[Maido]

Put the 80 inside the yellow and the other 8 outside the yellow.....

[Biggles08]

Put the 80 inside the yellow and the other 8 outside the yellow.....
It will end up being something like that J....and I will put 808 on the side fairings too if it comes to making a point. Stupid that common sense can't seem to prevail however.

[discodan]

Thanks for your input Robert and I’m sure you make some very valid points. However, DON’T try and drag me into your pathetic feud with Kerry as it is none of your business who I associate with.

In reality I am just a racer with a budget trying to get an idea of how much I need to do to my suspension to have a competitive bike. When I saw the word ‘open’ in the rules it doesn’t fill me with confidence that this class is really aimed at keeping costs down – can you blame me?!

As you pointed out so many times, I said that the suspension in my R6 is just fine. This does not make it dangerous and if it needs a spring change at other tracks then so be it but it has been implemented as a low cost solution within the spirit of the rules.

The way I see it is that, if the rules were tighter, then that leaves less room to spend money. OK so the laptimes might suffer but that’s not the point.

[Mental Trousers]

The way I see it is that, if the rules were tighter, then that leaves less room to spend money.

The tighter the rules are the more gets spent on optimizing everything.

Smart tuners get the tolerances as close as possible to the factory specs. It's not unknown for tuners to buy pistons until they have a set that are the lightest factory spec, all have the same tolerances and then they're matched to cylinder liners that have all been through an equally meticulous process. They do all of that because the standard bike off the showroom floor can vary in power output by more than 5%, and being 5% down on power can make the difference between winning and not.

It's the same for the rest of the bike too, including suspension. You can throw a truck load of money at the suspension. The returns diminish while the cost increases, but every single little gain is still a gain. When you go chasing multiple small gains they add up.

[lukemillar]

RIDERS that have created there Number boards and numbers based on Fashion rather than RULES

What rules? Up until these proposed rules, there haven't actually been any regarding number size!

[oyster]

Number sizes
10-2-3 (or relevant Appendix.)
It's all there, always has been

[scracha]

It's because you're ugly.

Renew it online and ask for your current number (specify which number!!). Or put a note on the form asking for your current number. Worked for me.

Exactly what I did and 2 years on the trot they changed my number( Maybe they've got shares in signwriters? Wonder which former Ducati rider who returned to racing I lost number "69" to.

Surely priority for a given number (above 10) should be given to the rider who had it the previous year? Perhaps they give priority to riders who have faster laptimes or more fashionable bikes? But again, as they didn't reply to my emails I can only draw my own conclusions.

[Kickaha]

You are unfortunately caught up in this fiasco due to clubs running race meetings with no PRE INSPECTION of race bikes before going on the track and RIDERS that have created there Number boards and numbers based on Fashion rather than RULES

Pre race inspection (scrutineering) has normally been aimed at safety rather than eligibility



The way I see it is that, if the rules were tighter, then that leaves less room to spend money.

As MT has pointed out it normally makes people spend more

[lukemillar]

Number sizes
10-2-3 (or relevant Appendix.)
It's all there, always has been

That is only regarding number board size. The is no mention as to the size of the numbers, other than they must be "clearly legible", which is somewhat subjective.

[CHOPPA]

Andrew has the number I want

[Robert Taylor]

Thanks for your input Robert and I’m sure you make some very valid points. However, DON’T try and drag me into your pathetic feud with Kerry as it is none of your business who I associate with.

In reality I am just a racer with a budget trying to get an idea of how much I need to do to my suspension to have a competitive bike. When I saw the word ‘open’ in the rules it doesn’t fill me with confidence that this class is really aimed at keeping costs down – can you blame me?!

As you pointed out so many times, I said that the suspension in my R6 is just fine. This does not make it dangerous and if it needs a spring change at other tracks then so be it but it has been implemented as a low cost solution within the spirit of the rules.

The way I see it is that, if the rules were tighter, then that leaves less room to spend money. OK so the laptimes might suffer but that’s not the point.

Of course its no-ones business who's bed you choose to lie upon. But it is everyones business who are interested in the class that there are solid facts, and in this case there are very brazen lies that have been mischievously perpetuated. Exactly why I commented with solid facts.
What really worries me about any people in all walks of life that are full of BS is they are also predisposed to telling lies.
I suggest you re-read the rules and look at the costings I presented. If you find a cheaper price with whomever you associate with then good on you. There is nothing against people spending less, as much as there is nothing against people choosing to spend up to $400 on a shock piston kit to provide a small gain. Within stock shock bodies and shaft diameters there are practical limitations of what you can do anyway. That automatically limits the cost. The same for cartridge bodies and shafts in front forks having to remain essentially stock aside from cartridge tubes allowed to be ''vented''
That is in fact a concession to cost as vented cartridges allow 2 pistons only to be run instead of 4, thereby halving the cost of piston purchase. Note also that not all pistons are suitable for revalving.
Aftermarket top caps are excluded as are aftermarket damping adjusters, because both items are in fact quite expensive.
Extremely tight rules require rigid scrutineering and that is a headache in itself. It also encourages very creative solutions within the rules and that is inevitably more expensive. Ive been around for more than a few laps of the sun and have in past years been involved in karting and seen exactly what goes on within their classes with very tight rules. More than a few championships have been decided in a court of law.
Superstock 600 class is about keeping the costs down, but not to levels that will create unacceptable compromises. You only need to look at Prolite 250's, no spring changes are allowed so very light and heavy competitors are automatically disadvantaged.

[Robert Taylor]

Andrew has the number I want

Thats the spirit Choppa! A man of ambition.

[TonyB]

I have yet to race at the Nats, BUT about 3 seasons ago I got sick of turning up at club meets and being asked to change my number because someone else had it (or visa versa), so I applied for a number with my licence. This was under the old system before it went online, so I sent them three 2 digit options. MNZ assigned me a 3 digit number that bared no relation to the numbers I put forward (well I did pick 1 of the 3)... and now I can't race with it if I turn up at a Nats round? Brilliant!

[gixerracer]

May I suggest to all that are soooooooooooo upset about having a 2 didgit number, if this is of such concern to you I dont think you are mentally ready to do the Nationals:whocares:

[gixerracer]

Andrew has the number I want

Wait your turn

[Kevin G]

I heard a figure that Jaden Hassans Superstock 600 cost 7k in suspension ( which it did not ) Now who deliberately spread that malicious lie?


Actually Greg Hassan stood up at the MNZ conference and told everyone that was the value of the work done on his Sons suspension....

[puddytat]

That is only regarding number board size. The is no mention as to the size of the numbers, other than they must be "clearly legible", which is somewhat subjective.

Dunno what rule book your reading...
"figures must be clearly legible to the following minimum dimensions
Height of figures 160mm
Width of figures 100mm
space between figures 20mm
Width of stroke 30mm

[Robert Taylor]

Actually Greg Hassan stood up at the MNZ conference and told everyone that....

Well ( and I get on well with Greg )he perhaps must have been smoking something halluciogenic that day, Ive got copies of the invoices and its about 25-30 % of such a preposterous figure. Id loved to have charged him 7K but Im not Adidas/ Rebel Sports! Midges was about the same.

Or, it was cost inclusive of other aftermarket parts and bits and bobs, perhaps Greg was quite innocently not specific enough in his description.

But if this is where it may have started then other people with their own agendas have delighted in picking up that ball and kept repeating to anyone who will listen to the effect ''this is more expensive than fitting aftermarket suspension''. Which of course is complete and utter BS.

[Robert Taylor]

Wait your turn

Thats the spirit also!

[steveyb]

Thats the spirit also!

Tell him he's dreaming son!

[Biggles08]

May I suggest to all that are soooooooooooo upset about having a 2 didgit number, if this is of such concern to you I dont think you are mentally ready to do the Nationals:whocares: I'm mentally ready....I'm so mental in fact I'm actually going to do the Nats!

[lukemillar]

Dunno what rule book your reading...
"figures must be clearly legible to the following minimum dimensions
Height of figures 160mm
Width of figures 100mm
space between figures 20mm
Width of stroke 30mm

Really? I can't see that in there!? :confused: Must be going blind....

[Shaun]

Pre race inspection (scrutineering) has normally been aimed at safety rather than eligibility



BOLLOCKS, I have read this statement on here by others also. I have spent years and years invloved in NZ racing in the Nth Island any way. Scruitineering has ALWAYS been about SAFETY first and also to High light to the competitor that Numbers and back grounds are NOT elligable with in the rules , the oint to the scruitineering of the numbers and boards is so the MARSHALLS can see the numbers clearly, to help make the racing safer.

If A Club can run a race metting with NO INSPECTION at all? How the HELL can THEY complain about competitors NOT having MNZ Reccognised numbers?

This whole issue is pathetic, and just another SOFT COCK KIWI created problem, that never really was there in the first place

The NZ PC world lives on

[Robert Taylor]

Pre race inspection (scrutineering) has normally been aimed at safety rather than eligibility



BOLLOCKS, I have read this statement on here by others also. I have spent years and years invloved in NZ racing in the Nth Island any way. Scruitineering has ALWAYS been about SAFETY first and also to High light to the competitor that Numbers and back grounds are NOT elligable with in the rules , the oint to the scruitineering of the numbers and boards is so the MARSHALLS can see the numbers clearly, to help make the racing safer.

If A Club can run a race metting with NO INSPECTION at all? How the HELL can THEY complain about competitors NOT having MNZ Reccognised numbers?

This whole issue is pathetic, and just another SOFT COCK KIWI created problem, that never really was there in the first place

The NZ PC world lives on

Ive got the copyright on BOLLOCKS Shaun. But yes, there absolutely should be scrutineering, for both reasons of safety and eligibility.
( Cynically ) there should also be a spending cap on numbers!

[crazzed]

I hope everyone is using the feedback option on mnz web site to voice there opinion. I have. Look at it also if you already have a two digit number how would you like someone else using it. Mnz will alocate it for a meeting or two. How does this look for sponsers. You may not be allocated the same number each time. Who pays for re sign writing your race number for each race. The same number maybe used for two or three differant riders throughout the nationals Mnz to closed minded only thinking one race at a time. My two cents anyways carry on as you were.

[Shaun]

I hope everyone is using the feedback option on mnz web site to voice there opinion. I have. Look at it also if you already have a two digit number how would you like someone else using it. Mnz will alocate it for a meeting or two. How does this look for sponsers. You may not be allocated the same number each time. Who pays for re sign writing your race number for each race. The same number maybe used for two or three differant riders throughout the nationals Mnz to closed minded only thinking one race at a time. My two cents anyways carry on as you were.



Sorry buddy, but once again the ATTACH on MNZ is NOT fair nor called for. The Numbers rules have been in the rule book for years, ( High lighted by a post from Oyster) it is CLUBS and RIDERS NOT acting to the rule book that causes this problem, then along comes the Internet to make it spread and get worse

[crazzed]

Sorry buddy, but once again the ATTACH on MNZ is NOT fair nor called for. The Numbers rules have been in the rule book for years, ( High lighted by a post from Oyster) it is CLUBS and RIDERS NOT acting to the rule book that causes this problem, then along comes the Internet to make it spread and get worse

MNZ need to man up and get the clubs to enforce rules not change them because they the clubs cant be arsed enforcing them. I have a three digit number that complies and took that number for personal reasons. Its always a minority that fuck it for the majority. As stated ive used the mnz feedback option.

[Tony.OK]

Number sizes
10-2-3 (or relevant Appendix.)
It's all there, always has been
Trouble is its not there anymore

Dunno what rule book your reading...
"figures must be clearly legible to the following minimum dimensions
Height of figures 160mm
Width of figures 100mm
space between figures 20mm
Width of stroke 30mm
Thats from a couple of years ago.

The Numbers rules have been in the rule book for years, ( High lighted by a post from Oyster)
Thats just the problem fella...........its all been altered at some stage and no one is checking.

Just to put this to bed.........................as of today the rules on MNZ website rulebook.


10.2.3 ROAD RACING

Appendix’s A, C, G and I the following rules apply:

Number Boards
Size: Minimum width 285mm, minimum height 235mm, oval or
rectangular in shape.

Placement: Fairing, front of fairing one number board facing forward.
Numbers may also be placed on both sides of the fairing
Rear Tailpiece; minimum of one number on rear seat tailpiece.

All other classes the following apply:
Number Boards
Size: Minimum width 285mm, minimum height 235mm, oval or
rectangular in shape.
Placement: 3 number boards to be affixed or placed upon the motorcycle,
in colours required for the class as follows:
Front: Facing forwards, with not more than 30 degrees forwards from
vertical.
Sides: One either side of the motorcycle in a position clearly visible
when the rider (and passenger for sidecars) is seated in their
usual riding position.

In a place on separate boards, a space of equivalent size and shape can be on
the bodywork or streamlining.

Figures all classes:
Figures must be clearly legible and both numbers and
backgrounds must be in a non-gloss finish
A plain form of figure shall be used.
Colours:
125cc & 150 S/S White background, black figures
Prolite Orange background black figures
Superlite Black background, white figures

600 SuperSport Yellow background, black figures
Superbike White background, black figures
Sidecars – Formula One White background, black figures
Sidecars – Formula Two Yellow background, black figures
Pro Twin Orange background, black figures
600 Superstock Black background yellow figures
1000 Superstock Red background yellow figures

Miniature Road Racing:
Up to 50cc White background, black figures
Open Black background, white figures
Sidecars Black background, white figures

Classic and Post Classic:
Up to 250cc Dark Green background, white
figures
Up to 350cc Blue background, white figures
Up to 500cc Yellow background, black figures
Open Red background, white figures
Only FIM Licence holders will be permitted to use letters.
All other markings or number plates on the motorcycle likely to cause
confusion must be removed or covered over.

And all apendixes A,B,C,F,G & H state the following for number boards......

Number Plate Colours and placement:
Refer to GCR (to be advised)

Maybe people need to throw away old rule books as they are not current anymore. Time to submit ideas re the proposed changes and get all this clarified and sorted?

The entire MNZ rulebook can be found here......http://www.mnz.co.nz/download/2010%20Manual%20of%20Motorcycle%20Sport%20-%20all%20chapters.pdf which is where I have pasted the above from.

[Kickaha]

BOLLOCKS, I have read this statement on here by others also. I have spent years and years involved in NZ racing in the Nth Island any way. Scruitineering has ALWAYS been about SAFETY first and also to High light to the competitor that Numbers and back grounds are NOT eligible with in the rules , the oint to the scruitineering of the numbers and boards is so the MARSHALLS can see the numbers clearly, to help make the racing safer.

Bollocks you grumpy little Ginga tosser, you seem to forget that some of us might have been around race tracks for a few years as well

I have had bikes scrutineered dozen of times not once has any class eligibility items been checked, I have watched scrutineering on dozens of time and not once seen a bike turned down for eligibility despite having illegal numbers, wrong colour number boards, I have also raced in classes against bikes that weren't eligible for the class I was in


If A Club can run a race metting with NO INSPECTION at all? How the HELL can THEY complain about competitors NOT having MNZ Recognized numbers?


Wouldn't matter because even if they did do inspection/scrutineer its about safety not eligibility :whistle:

[Shaun]

Bollocks you grumpy little Ginga tosser, you seem to forget that some of us might have been around race tracks for a few years as well

I have had bikes scrutineered dozen of times not once has any class eligibility items been checked, I have watched scrutineering on dozens of time and not once seen a bike turned down for eligibility despite having illegal numbers, wrong colour number boards, I have also raced in classes against bikes that weren't eligible for the class I was in



Wouldn't matter because even if they did do inspection/scrutineer its about safety not eligibility :whistle:


I Retire again

[Kickaha]

I Retire again

You'll change your mind before you go to bed

[slowpoke]

I don't understand you guys: "racing is too expensive", "make racing cheaper", "I can't afford to race" etc etc.......

.......now MNZ make the cost of numbers 33.3% cheaper (for the lucky 3 digit number racers) and you're still complaining? Sheesh, what does it take to make you people happy?

[crazzed]

I don't understand you guys: "racing is too expensive", "make racing cheaper", "I can't afford to race" etc etc.......

.......now MNZ make the cost of numbers 33.3% cheaper (for the lucky 3 digit number racers) and you're still complaining? Sheesh, what does it take to make you people happy?

Spud you suck :bleh:

[Ivan]

do these rules go for supermoto to? im guessing so as it says all road race classes going to suck for the mx guys who supermoto mitch rowe toby summers etc have there numbers in mx allocated 3 didgits like myne 159 and have to change numbers just to race wanganui and try series

[crazzed]

do these rules go for supermoto to? im guessing so as it says all road race classes going to suck for the mx guys who supermoto mitch rowe toby summers etc have there numbers in mx allocated 3 didgits like myne 159 and have to change numbers just to race wanganui and try series

MNZ need to change it to allow 3 digit numbers if they are to regs.

[MSTRS]

Re scrutineering...
It's been said before, but I'll repeat it.
Many (all?) clubs have taken legal advice around the issue of liability. If a club scrutineers, and passes, a bike which then later suffers a catastrophic failure (of say the headstock) then the club is liable for any costs deriving from that event. Whereas, if the club states that safety/suitability of a bike is down to the rider, then the club has no liability if something does go wrong.

But that's racing, I hear you say. Yes, but OSH etc don't recognise that.
Blame Nanny State for this state of affairs.

[Deano]

But that's racing, I hear you say. Yes, but OSH etc don't recognise that.
Blame Nanny State for this state of affairs.

It is crazy eh - they're (OSH etc) basically saying it's better to be ignorant than possibly miss something.

But if ya don't check, ya miss everything !

[Mental Trousers]

do these rules go for supermoto to? im guessing so as it says all road race classes going to suck for the mx guys who supermoto mitch rowe toby summers etc have there numbers in mx allocated 3 didgits like myne 159 and have to change numbers just to race wanganui and try series

Wanganui and the Tri Series aren't part of the Nationals. At least for the majority of road racing classes they're not. I don't know if it's different for Super Moto.

[Robert Taylor]

Re scrutineering...
It's been said before, but I'll repeat it.
Many (all?) clubs have taken legal advice around the issue of liability. If a club scrutineers, and passes, a bike which then later suffers a catastrophic failure (of say the headstock) then the club is liable for any costs deriving from that event. Whereas, if the club states that safety/suitability of a bike is down to the rider, then the club has no liability if something does go wrong.

But that's racing, I hear you say. Yes, but OSH etc don't recognise that.
Blame Nanny State for this state of affairs.

Arguably the fatality at Hampton Downs wouldnt have occured had the bike been pre-checked by an expert, there were several things wrong with that bike, most notably very bad suspension setup. Ok it was a track day but the same issues apply.

There has got to be a way of circumventing all of this PC nonsense without liability then applying to the body that checks the machines. This is an unsatisfactory situation.

[gixerracer]

Arguably the fatality at Hampton Downs wouldnt have occured had the bike been pre-checked by an expert, there were several things wrong with that bike, most notably very bad suspension setup. Ok it was a track day but the same issues apply.

There has got to be a way of circumventing all of this PC nonsense without liability then applying to the body that checks the machines. This is an unsatisfactory situation.

WTF so you want to be at scruternering? Now and check everybodys suspension man we will need to be there at 5am

[Grumph]

And after you've scrutineered at sparrowfart the wheels get pulled out to change tyres, the weather changes so wheels get pulled again and shock and spring settings get changed....ad nauseum.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - if you're going to scrutineer at all it should be on the dummy grid just before going out.
The yanks did it for years - i have no idea if they still do.
Yes it would be difficult with tyre warmers - but not impossible.

As for checking suspension settings - I don't know a volunteer scrutineer in NZ who would be game to try and tell a rider he/she had it wrong....

[Robert Taylor]

And after you've scrutineered at sparrowfart the wheels get pulled out to change tyres, the weather changes so wheels get pulled again and shock and spring settings get changed....ad nauseum.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - if you're going to scrutineer at all it should be on the dummy grid just before going out.
The yanks did it for years - i have no idea if they still do.
Yes it would be difficult with tyre warmers - but not impossible.

As for checking suspension settings - I don't know a volunteer scrutineer in NZ who would be game to try and tell a rider he/she had it wrong....

Yes its a real can of worms, but the most ''blatant'' really bad and clearly UNSAFE issues could be identified. Thats really my point.

[steveyb]

Scrutineering of machines is a total can of worms. It opens up all sorts of legal and indeed ethical issues around personal and collective responsibility.

My contention is that the legality is very clear. In the entry form for contemporary race meetings there are clauses that state that when you, as a competitor, sign the form that your machine, and gear (at least it should also state gear) are both suitable for purpose, i.e. safe, and meet the regulations for the class of racing into which you are competing.

This introduces the personal responsibility.

If you are with mates or a team, or simply pitted next to a competitor, with a machine or gear that you know or find out is unfit or illegal then it behoves you to point this out to that competitor or the authorities of the meeting in an effort to repair/rectify said machine/gear.

This is the introduction of collective responsibility.

Too often we will say to ourselves or our mates that so and so's bike is not right, but do nothing about it, it's someone elses problem. This needs to change.

Duck shoving this responsibility onto already overworked volunteers who have no business becoming your scapegoats when your machine shits itself after a scrutineer told you it was OK when they are checking a machine with hands and eyes, not spanners and screwdrivers is simply unacceptable.

Sure, we are human and miss things sometimes, but it is your responsibility to ensure you miss as few things as possible, not the organisers. Leave plenty of time to prepare you machine accurately. It is not rocket science. But the collective responsibility includes the organisers too and having such things as random safety checks and gear checks at sign-in and/or on the dummy grid are where they can contribute to the collective (Roberts favourite form of political movement) by informing the individual.

Furthermore, I personally believe that issues such as poorly prepared and ineligible machines come down to education and then to the desire on the part of competitors to do the right thing. Believe it or not, there are plenty of competitors out there who actually do not want to do the right thing.

In other countries riders must pass a series of tests of various kinds before they can race at increasing levels. I don't know if these tests include machine preparation classes/modules but they should as it is just as important as any other component of racing.

I have stated previously, that I believe that road racing in NZ is at a crossroads right now where the introduction of graded and tested racing licences needs to occur.

You can wake up now, I've finished......

[Grumph]

I agree with the collective responsibility thing but getting it to operate is bloody hard.
In the SI I can point to a number of pre 82 bikes (just as an example) which are either blatantly illegal or suffer from the "I'll put the right bits on later" syndrome.
The class is supposed to be self regulating but will anyone actually protest ? Well not so far...and the owners have been spoken to in most cases without result.

Rider intelligence is another thing entirely - some years ago I had a TZ presented for scrut with no discs fitted....he was in the middle of changing tyres on 2 bikes and had run out of time. I gently informed him that,yes, I needed to see that he had discs and they were fitted correctly and in good nick....and if he ever tried that again I'd kick his arse....all he'd needed to do was tell us he needed more time.

[TonyB]

Illegal is not the same as unsafe. Pre82 down here is pretty social from what I've seen. People seem happy to let a guy race with bits that aren't elligable (USD forks/ full floating rotors etc) for a while till they get the money together to sort it out. In the mean time they just get a freindly ribbing.

I have raced against bikes that are unsafe. Nearly always at street races now that I think about it... One bike was spraying such a mist of oil that I took my helmet to show the track marshall- the visor was covered in oil. So were my leathers. I felt like a nark, but he was putting us all at risk. The rider in question claimed to have the problem sorted so he was allowed back out- I never found out if it was fixed because I made bloody sure I was in front from then on. I've also had a bike go down next to me when the brakes had a catastophic failure at the first corner of the first race. It was allowed back out with 1 disc instead of 2, and a repair that everyone who saw it said was dodgy as.

back to numbers. I say again- if 3 digit numbers are illegal then why are MNZ offering them as your only option? When I first applied for MNZ numbers a few years back I gave three 2 digit options. They gave me a 3 digit number. Yes numbers 1 to 10 are reserved for last seasons top 10, but are there really more than 89 other riders in my class looking for an MNZ number? If there are, then maybe they need to start allowing alphanumeric numbers

[MSTRS]

...
back to numbers. I say again- if 3 digit numbers are illegal then why are MNZ offering them as your only option? When I first applied for MNZ numbers a few years back I gave three 2 digit options. They gave me a 3 digit number. Yes numbers 1 to 10 are reserved for last seasons top 10, but are there really more than 89 other riders in my class looking for an MNZ number? If there are, then maybe they need to start allowing alphanumeric numbers

Who knows how the bureaucratic mind works? Despite it trying to do the 'right' thing, it seems fated to never achieving it.
The only thing we can be sure of is it's ears don't work right and it suffers from tunnel vision.

[malcy25]

Furthermore, I personally believe that issues such as poorly prepared and ineligible machines come down to education and then to the desire on the part of competitors to do the right thing. Believe it or not, there are plenty of competitors out there who actually do not want to do the right thing.

One of the most truest things I have seen written Steve, excellent!


In the SI I can point to a number of pre 82 bikes (just as an example) which are either blatantly illegal or suffer from the "I'll put the right bits on later" syndrome.
The class is supposed to be self regulating but will anyone actually protest ? Well not so far...and the owners have been spoken to in most cases without result.



Illegal is not the same as unsafe. Pre82 down here is pretty social from what I've seen. People seem happy to let a guy race with bits that aren't elligable (USD forks/ full floating rotors etc) for a while till they get the money together to sort it out. In the mean time they just get a freindly ribbing.


TonyB and Grumph, this is not directed at you guys, just in general on that attitude:

Sorry, "social" or whatever, it is complete bullshit letting these guys getting away with it - they are showing a complete lack of respect to all the other riders who have made the effort and they know they are taking the piss.

A couple of good old Kiwi attitudes there that probably need to be disabused - "I won't say anything and just hold it all in" and "no one will care, I'll use a bit of #8!"

As hard as it is, I have seen one protest go in and it sorted a lot of people out as they realised that consequences can happen....I'd rather they piss off and take their problem elsewhere, than take the piss out of everyone else who has done it properly. The good thing is that a protester does not have to have their name released I think.

My general view is shit never gets put right while you let people "get away with it" as where is the reason to change? Where in the rule book does it provide them personally an exception?

I bet there are a lot of riders who "seem happy" but deep down they are probably a little pissed off, but don't want to rock the boat. I know, I've been in that camp and have been approached also by riders who have. I got over it in the end and have fronted any number of riders over the years, so they would know full well. I also know of a few riders who have been written to after events and told, don't bring it back until it is sorted.

Maybe rather than spend money on entry fees, they could spent it on the parts they need!!!:laugh:

In terms of the wider topic so we are not off post, there is no rule changes required on this subject, just a few cement pills!!

[Kickaha]

Sorry, "social" or whatever, it is complete bullshit letting these guys getting away with it - they are showing a complete lack of respect to all the other riders who have made the effort and they know they are taking the piss.

When I raced my RD350LC in pre82 you could probably argue that it was illegal as it has the first model RZ350 forks in it

These still looked period, took the original brakes and handled just as poorly as the stock forks

lack of respect and taking the piss? I doubt it as the RZ was built in that time period (Pre82) but the NZPCRA got the rules changed to specifically exclude them when they got the shits with a pre82 RZ350/LC hybrid being built down here

[TonyB]

For the record I dont race in pre82, so I'm only commenting on what I have seen. Nobody down here is spending big dollars on a pre82 bike, and there really does seem to be a willingness to let someone with a bike with non period parts race, just so they get some track time, and also to get the numbers up. There also seems to be an expectation that they will sort it out eventually though.