New 600 rules...

[Triple R]

Hi, I see somepeople have seen the potential rule changes for the 600's, with regards to Privateers.

As someone else pointed out, this is just a proposal, so nothing is in concrete yet.

I have not gone through what everyone has written about the proposed rules for the Privateers yet. But there will be a few changes to them.

Mainly to make it alot easier to check riders bikes and also to take in to consideration, the bikes out there with riders who would already come under the Privateer class rules. And these bikes were bought with the full race suspension already.

A rule I put forward also for the 600's, is the number of tyres. There will only be allowed 2 fronts and 2 rear tyres, for both qualifiying and the 2 races. These tyres will have to be presented, to be marked before the qualifying. And have to be on the bike from then on.
This is exactly how it is done with the Aussie 600's and I fell can work here too. Which should help bring the cost done a touch.

In Superbikes, it looks as though race cams will be dropped. This has been looked at to help reduce the intial cost of building new race bikes for SBK. Also it looks as though this will also include current model bikes, like the current 2008 Honda, 2007-8 Yamaha and also the K7/8 Suzuki.

Also, my Naked Production Class (just for Nationals) is also going to be put forward for consideration.
From what I saw here, pretty well eveyone thought it a good idea. As long as it was not going to suck riders out of the 600's or SBK.
I hope it doesn't.
What I want to see with this class, is maybe some of us old timers would then come back for some fun in a National Class, which is fun and also to bring other people who don't currently race, especially in 600's and SBK, and have them come and race in a National Class.

Hope this is along the lines of what most people would like to see.

Cheers,
Red.

[Maido]

Hi red,

The privateer class seems like a great idea, however the only problem I can see with it is that potentially the privateers (which will be slower riders in theory, no disrespect intended), will be on slower bikes. This could create a safety issue when the fast riders come to lap. However I suppose there are two alternatives, firstly qualfying with a cut off and secondly the blue flag could be implemented? what are your thoughs on this aspect?

Jeremy Holmes

[Triple R]

Hi Jeremy.

Yeap, James said to me the same thing, with the possible difference in speed.

Basically, there would still be the time cut off, like there is now.........or is meant to be. In other words, riders would need to qualify within 105% of the #1 qualifier.

The people who don't make the cut off, would then drop down to race in Clubmans.
That is why I would like to see the Clubmans Class at all National Rounds. Giving people the oppotunity to race at the same event as the top riders on the same bikes, even if they are not quick enough to be in their respected classes.

Also, I have been trying for AGES to get the blue flag used properly and at all races. If the car guys can do it, why can't we......!!!!!!!!!

[cowpoos]

I wouldn't mind seeing all porting and polishing dropped 'if cams' are...and limit machining to balancing at the most...for engine reliablity in superbikes.

[CHOPPA]

If i have to remove the cams from my new bike i wont be racing the nats. Id save the money and do a few oz rounds

[flame]

Best of luck with the Naked Proddy class Red. I think its an awesome idea. Might even have to think about parking an S4R the garage :yes::msn-wink:

[Triple R]

Porting and polishing is already been stopped. Only removing material straight down from the valve seat (without touching the valve guide) is allowed. Or something along those lines.

The removeal of cams...........this was a hard one to do Paul said.
He has been getting pressure from people to reduce the costs to building the bikes. With them thinking this is the answer to get people back on the grids.

But, I don't believe that this is the case, and, the real reason we are where we are, is the very big lack of presentation, by the paid side of MNZ, in getting our sport out into the public domain.
Promoting our sport within the right areas, and getting companies outside of the box, into, supporting our championships.

Dumbing down the rules for Superbikes, is not going to increase the number of riders on the grids, or get riders closer to Andrew or Robbies bikes. And, with too much dumbing down of the rules, there will be a real chance of losing manufacturer support for the Championship.

Having a championship, which is well televised, so that riders can then use this to put together proper sponsorship proposals, because of the TV, to then attract the potential sponsors.

Now, this would not happen over night, and it would take a lot of hard work to achieve.
But, we have all seen what Paul Stewart and his helpers (all did a great job) have done for the series, with regards to getting TV etc. And these guys were not even paid for their work.
So how much better could someone do, or should do, who is paid to do all this........

Maybe we do need something like Shaun H has mentioned a few years ago, and I have also.............. A paid promoter. On a retainer, set a strict set of requirements (guide lines) that are set up by the riders, team owners and manufacturers, to make the Nationals work.
And, if the Promoter made money out of running the National; as long as all the guide lines and requirments were meet, then good on them for making money.

Well........that is what I think anyway.......!!!

[codgyoleracer]

QUOTE "Triple R
A paid promoter. On a retainer, set a strict set of requirements (guide lines) that are set up by the riders, team owners and manufacturers, to make the Nationals work.
And, if the Promoter made money out of running the National; as long as all the guide lines and requirments were meet, then good on them for making money"


This may well be worth consideration & may well take the sport in a direction that ultimatly is more commercialy viable than it is currently.
The current funding expectations placed on the various motorcycle distributers is unfair, but whilst this input is really appreciated - it can also ultimatly be to some degree unhealthy due to conflict of interest issues.
The risk (to the competior) with with using a promotor is simply the potential cost of entry. Entry costs can be driven by a promotors infrastructure costs, increased facilty costs (track hire) etc and increased liabilty issues that they may percieve that they require personal & business insurance coverage for & of course a requirement to make a healthy profit.
Of course MNZ could theoretically "sell the rights" to a series promotor and has the ability to cap the entry fees as part of these rights.

Another Interesting observation is - I wonder what a promotor would make of the huge public perception difference between a street race meetings and a track based one - then the potential returns from a street series appears to be far greater & like it or not - the crowd love em, tv loves em and many riders (like em, sorta :-) (+ of course councils actually throw money into the pot to make em happen...........)
A national series thats a mixture street meeting & track based ? - far fetched ?, very much so - however potential for profits for all and massive sport exposure definately.
This is pie in the sky stuff - sorry , but just an observation. If you wish to comment on the safety of a street based national series then start your own thread please :-).

Cool thread & well worth discussing in the open, not sure who gets to read it in any offical capicty though !
Cheers
Glen Williams

[t3mp0r4ry nzr]

G.W, I think your on the money. If we need to race on the streets to get the punters in, we need to do it.

[Shaun]

Maybe we do need something like Shaun H has mentioned a few years ago, and I have also.............. A paid promoter. On a retainer, set a strict set of requirements (guide lines) that are set up by the riders, team owners and manufacturers, to make the Nationals work.
And, if the Promoter made money out of running the National; as long as all the guide lines and requirments were meet, then good on them for making money.

Well........that is what I think anyway.......!!!



Cheers Red- I do still believe we need this person working for us PAID for by us, so we can grow with the importers etc and work together towards re building the future

[Shaun]

If i have to remove the cams from my new bike i wont be racing the nats. Id save the money and do a few oz rounds


bye bye then

[brads]

If i have to remove the cams from my new bike i wont be racing the nats.

Why would you do that mate?

[Shaun P]

If i have to remove the cams from my new bike i wont be racing the nats. Id save the money and do a few oz rounds


Why would you do that mate?

Cause it wouldnt run without them :lol:

[Shaun P]

I was quite surprised when I saw that allowing standard suspension was being considered in the Supersport class. Apart from getting the predictable responses from some partys I think there will be alot of support for this from riders.

There are a few questions like how can we be sure people aren't modifying shocks. And the revalving issue put forward. One idea thatI think would work would be to let guys get their standard shocks set up (springs and valving) before the first round and at the first round have the shocks or mounting bolt marked/sealed with (for example) a microdot identification expoxy.
This way guys could have their bike set up pretty well by an expert but would then not be able to make any major changes apart from clicker and preload adjustments.

The other issue you have mentioned is tyres. An ideal would be for a manufacturer to get behind this or MNZ to negotiate a deal to supply all the racers with the same control tyres. The supplier would know pretty well how many tyres they need to stock and all the riders should be able to get a good price this way. People with backing might not like this.

One more issue is how many people will still be running for the premier 600 title? If it reduces the contenters to a few factory riders things would not be good.

Lastly is the issue of the speed differential between the top guys and the slower privateers class riders. This is an issue already but would become more of an issue if fields increased. The blue flag is good but sometimes the timing can just be unfortunate for a lapped rider. eg the Smith Sheriffs backmarker incident an couple of seasons ago.
Not sure what the answer is here but it can ruin a top guys chances at the championship. One DNF with so few races can be a killer.

I'm well aware that there people that hate the idea of "dumbing down" the class. I see it more as taking some of the technical and financial aspects out (which many very good riders get handicapped by) and putting more focus on the riders riding ability rather than how many people around him setting up the bike and then taking some credit for how well the bike and rider performed.

Great to have you on here Mr Fenton. Knowing your opinions and vision for the sport is a great benefit to everyone involved.




Hey Sloan are you running a 600 as well? I know where your at as far as the Superbikes go but thought you would be going for the overall honors anyway.



I think you keep missing the point that motorcycle racing is a winning combination of machine/supension/tyre setup-skill and rider skill.

[Tony.OK]

Cheers Red- I do still believe we need this person working for us PAID for by us, so we can grow with the importers etc and work together towards re building the future
Don't we pay a licence fee for that already? The money certainly isn't going to our road race comissioner or team, oh hang on, MNZ are looking at upgrading their offices and carpark according to the CEO's newsletters, that'll make a huge difference to our sport:whistle:

bye bye then

Thats just harsh:Playnice:
Would've thought someone with Sloans abilities should be encouraged.................

[Robert Taylor]

I was quite surprised when I saw that allowing standard suspension was being considered in the Supersport class. Apart from getting the predictable responses from some partys I think there will be alot of support for this from riders.

There are a few questions like how can we be sure people aren't modifying shocks. And the revalving issue put forward. One idea thatI think would work would be to let guys get their standard shocks set up (springs and valving) before the first round and at the first round have the shocks or mounting bolt marked/sealed with (for example) a microdot identification expoxy.
This way guys could have their bike set up pretty well by an expert but would then not be able to make any major changes apart from clicker and preload adjustments.

The other issue you have mentioned is tyres. An ideal would be for a manufacturer to get behind this or MNZ to negotiate a deal to supply all the racers with the same control tyres. The supplier would know pretty well how many tyres they need to stock and all the riders should be able to get a good price this way. People with backing might not like this.

One more issue is how many people will still be running for the premier 600 title? If it reduces the contenters to a few factory riders things would not be good.

Lastly is the issue of the speed differential between the top guys and the slower privateers class riders. This is an issue already but would become more of an issue if fields increased. The blue flag is good but sometimes the timing can just be unfortunate for a lapped rider. eg the Smith Sheriffs backmarker incident an couple of seasons ago.
Not sure what the answer is here but it can ruin a top guys chances at the championship. One DNF with so few races can be a killer.

I'm well aware that there people that hate the idea of "dumbing down" the class. I see it more as taking some of the technical and financial aspects out (which many very good riders get handicapped by) and putting more focus on the riders riding ability rather than how many people around him setting up the bike and then taking some credit for how well the bike and rider performed.

Great to have you on here Mr Fenton. Knowing your opinions and vision for the sport is a great benefit to everyone involved.




Hey Sloan are you running a 600 as well? I know where your at as far as the Superbikes go but thought you would be going for the overall honors anyway.

So how well is a shock that is valved to ride the bumps at Pukekohe going to perform at tire shredding Teretonga? Dont say you can just adjust to compensate with the clickers because the response range is not the magic cure all that many mistakenly think it is. This ruling proposal confirms beyond all doubt how little those that draft ( or rather request ) such proposals actually know and will only draw support from the least experienced or those that havent had the benefit of same. This has the CEOs smell all over it.
Your continuing tone of condescension does you no credit, little wonder you have been taken to task by several.

[Maido]

Most motorcycle governing bodies around the world have come to realise that "stock" suspenders are not up to the specification required to compete, sure they are superior to "old" suspension systems but they aren't up to it. Perhaps for the average joe they are functional but if you are in the top 15% of riders then stock doesn't cut it and can be down right dangerous.
Our major road racing cousins (who we should align with, might I add) Australia, Japan and America (couldn't find BSB), have realised this and all allow (at the very least) valving and springs to be open (providing externaly they look the same). Also, policing who is running stock shim stacks would be the worst job in the world!
Sure us Kiwi's are renouned for taking a different approach, but in this case I believe alignment is the sensible approach as we know their series are consistant and well attended.

This reminds me, Red, what are your thoughts on aligning rule books with Aus, and trying to get Australasian regs in place. This would make trying to race over the ditch for both parties much easier. Especially for someone like yourself with Robbie?

[Maido]

Well looking at the CEO's credentials and the years of sucessful roadracing he has done I would think he has alot more experience than most including yourself about the riders perspective on this.

So how well is a shock that is valved to ride the bumps at Pukekohe going to perform at tire shredding Teretonga? I will have to ask one of the riders who didn't get their shock revalved between these two tracks. Do you know anyone who didn't?

This is an arguement I want no part it, but I have raced on a stock shock at Teretonga (my home circuit), to put it simply my tire was shagged within about 10 laps.
I think we are also getting off topic again, this is just a continuation from another thread. Maybe someone could add something new?

[Robert Taylor]

Well looking at the CEO's credentials and the years of sucessful roadracing he has done I would think he has alot more experience than most including yourself about the riders perspective on this.

So how well is a shock that is valved to ride the bumps at Pukekohe going to perform at tire shredding Teretonga? I will have to ask one of the riders who didn't get their shock revalved between these two tracks. Do you know anyone who didn't?

I seriously beg to differ, over many many years I have worked with many riders at the top level and have also worked with the said CEO in a simpler time when less was understood about suspension. With all respect to the said person he clearly understands a lot less about suspension and tyre interaction than the top riders I have been working with. The sad thing is I think there is almost a refusal to understand.

[Triple R]

Hi GSVR,

Seriously, the 2 tracks are so different, that yes, you do need to have different settings if you want your tyres to last.

The only way to not shred the tyre at Teretonga, with a Pukekohe setting, is to ride slower. The G forces created on the suspension (and tyres) at Turn 1 Teretonga are well different than any turn at Pukie.

There is no way Robbie could run the times we did with the exact same setting at all the tracks. It would become dangerous if he tried, especially with blistering tyres etc.

Hope this helps answer your question.
Cheers mate.
Red.

[Triple R]

Hi Maido,

To be honest, I would love us to have a closer tie in with Aussie and their rules.
I kknow for a fact that I could get quite a few Aussie riders over to race here, if they were able to bring there bikes, minus the data logging possibly.
And, I know I could get something set up to take bikes etc over there too.

Cheers,
Red.

[CHOPPA]

bye bye then

Nice way to get rid of 50% of the privateers, maybe you should be our promoter...?


Why would you do that mate?

What Shaun P says...


Cause it wouldnt run without them :lol:

[Shaun P]

Most motorcycle governing bodies around the world have come to realise that "stock" suspenders are not up to the specification required to compete, sure they are superior to "old" suspension systems but they aren't up to it. Perhaps for the average joe they are functional but if you are in the top 15% of riders then stock doesn't cut it and can be down right dangerous.
Our major road racing cousins (who we should align with, might I add) Australia, Japan and America (couldn't find BSB), have realised this and all allow (at the very least) valving and springs to be open (providing externaly they look the same). Also, policing who is running stock shim stacks would be the worst job in the world!
Sure us Kiwi's are renouned for taking a different approach, but in this case I believe alignment is the sensible approach as we know their series are consistant and well attended.

This reminds me, Red, what are your thoughts on aligning rule books with Aus, and trying to get Australasian regs in place. This would make trying to race over the ditch for both parties much easier. Especially for someone like yourself with Robbie?

You really think thats an option with aus superbike having full data logging and free ecu's with traction control now??

[Robert Taylor]

Once again like you so often do you ignore a question and only answer what suits you.



Did everyone racing this year have to revalve their shocks between teretonga and puke?

Thanks for you input Maido but did you do any tests or try other compounds, pressures, springing etc to try and get the standard shock to work?

More to the point, how many times have you attended and raced at Teretonga????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????

Also take it from me, Maido knows his stuff re set up and is a highly skilled qualified motorcycle engineer. You may not know him given the relative anonymity of forums but its effectively ludicrous you asking him such questions.

[Robert Taylor]

Nice way to get rid of 50% of the privateers, maybe you should be our promoter...?



What Shaun P says...

Sloan, I really think Shaun said that in jest, nothing more.

[Robert Taylor]

More to the point, how many times have you attended and raced at Teretonga????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????

Also take it from me, Maido knows his stuff re set up and is a highly skilled qualified motorcycle engineer. You may not know him given the relative anonymity of forums but its effectively ludicrous you asking him such questions.

And oh, he also had the motivation to attend a recent suspension set up school with one of the worlds top suspension engineers.
When you talk, its best to use the correct orifice to do so.

[CHOPPA]

Factory riders - Standard bikes....

Privateers - No restrictions....

:lol::2thumbsup:woohoo:

[Shaun P]

Once again like you so often do you ignore a question and only answer what suits you.



Did everyone racing this year have to revalve their shocks between teretonga and puke?

Thanks for you input Maido but did you do any tests or try other compounds, pressures, springing etc to try and get the standard shock to work?

Try going back to school you might learn something there :bash: haha

[Maarty]

You really think thats an option with aus superbike having full data logging and free ecu's with traction control now??
It seems that there is huge misconception about data logging and the cost of it. There are some really effective systems on the market for a few haundred dollars right up to the 2D and Motec systems, even on supersport machines, whats the problem? it the big scheme of thing they are only a useful tool as against a "rich boys toy", I am sure that if Robert was allowed to use data logging on Sams or Jays or Nicks bikes then the information would flow on and eventually benefit everyone with better tyre wear and longevity. Surely this would also help the cost format and just as crucially, the safety aspect!
On our 125 we run full data logging, GPS, RPM, Detination, Wheel cadence, TPS, G-Force( acceleration and braking) lean angle and even lap timing.
As far as traction control goes, turn it off!
No one is forced to use data logging if it were available but why punish those who want to! it is really just a case of green-eyed-monstor syndrome? Maybe!

Red, all your ideas have merit and I applaude you for presenting them, the aussie full idea is a very sound one and has beendebated for many years, perhaps it is time to take another look at it. I magine how good the spectical would be if we had another 4 Robbies or Garaths here! Have a few in the 600's as well, wonderful. Now that would get the punters watching the TV wouldn't it! while we are at it, get a few of the 125 boys again!

[Shaun P]

It seems that there is huge misconception about data logging and the cost of it. There are some really effective systems on the market for a few haundred dollars right up to the 2D and Motec systems, even on supersport machines, whats the problem? it the big scheme of thing they are only a useful tool as against a "rich boys toy", I am sure that if Robert was allowed to use data logging on Sams or Jays or Nicks bikes then the information would flow on and eventually benefit everyone with better tyre wear and longevity. Surely this would also help the cost format and just as crucially, the safety aspect!
On our 125 we run full data logging, GPS, RPM, Detination, Wheel cadence, TPS, G-Force( acceleration and braking) lean angle and even lap timing.
As far as traction control goes, turn it off!
No one is forced to use data logging if it were available but why punish those who want to! it is really just a case of green-eyed-monstor syndrome? Maybe!

Red, all your ideas have merit and I applaude you for presenting them, the aussie full idea is a very sound one and has beendebated for many years, perhaps it is time to take another look at it. I magine how good the spectical would be if we had another 4 Robbies or Garaths here! Have a few in the 600's as well, wonderful. Now that would get the punters watching the TV wouldn't it! while we are at it, get a few of the 125 boys again!

Even so whats the season cost difference/advantage in a large amount of testing with traction control on motec type ecus on different tracks vs non traction control/ limited testing etc
I would personally like to see lots of technology but it comes down to cost which most seem to be stuggling with at the moment especially with the pacific peso.

Yep more promotion and trans-tasman riders(both ways) is the way to go

[Shaun P]

Probably because im from NZ and know alot of people on here, genius :Pokey:

[Maarty]

Even so whats the season cost difference/advantage in a large amount of testing with traction control on motec type ecus on different tracks vs non traction control/ limited testing etc
I would personally like to see lots of technology but it comes down to cost which most seem to be stuggling with at the moment especially with the pacific peso.

Yep more promotion and trans-tasman riders(both ways) is the way to go

What i was getting at is, if Robert was able to use some form of data logging then I am sure the benefit would filter down to ALL and that would be a saving for everyone Re; tyre wear etc, I am not asying it will save bulk but any saving is a good one. It may take a season to filter down but so what!

More promotion is great but who pays for it? Red put his hand in his own pocket for the JBM and he deserves the kudoe there, are we all prepared to do the same thing? I doubt it! Most are moaning about entry fees now! In reality they are very low, back in 1991 I paid 300 pounds to enter a club event in the UK and I had to qualify ofr a start!

I don't mind the fees rising as long as I can see that it will be used appropiately for my chosen sport and not spirited away on junkets ar frivilous parking spots!

[cowpoos]

Ha ha and whats your reason for hanging out in an NZ forum. Thinking of emigrating? Do you like sheep?

Maybe because he is a well know racer...known by alot of people on here and in racing circles.

[Pussy]

As is well known, Robert is a gun with suspension, the trade off is he is hopeless with 'puters!
Here is an interesting submission from RT

ATTN: MNZ ROAD RACE COMMITTEE



3-4a: Privateers Cup Rear Suspension Unit. The following is the only change allowed: Rear Spring

I would like to make comments re the above proposed ruling for 600cc road race
privateer class. I am neither a member of MNZ or any affiliated club. However the
Company I co own with Shayne King (an MNZ member) is the biggest supplier of
whole suspension units and upgrade components to the road racing and motocross
fraternities in New Zealand. Our investment is substantial, not only for reasons of
commerce but also a substantial investment in knowledge and experience. Much of
the knowledge we have passed on for the good of the sport.

As will be well known I am at odds with a number of your CEO’s views and actions
and I would hope that this submission is dealt with in due consideration of the
material presented and free of emotion. I recall a letter the CEO penned for BRM
magazine in which he stated that he had tested a number of the late model 600’s on
Pukekohe track. He thought they worked well with no suspension or tyre issues and
that comments that disagreed with his (ie mine) were “BS”. With all respect to the
CEO, Pukekohe is very much anachronistic to every other track in N.Z. (requiring a
softer overall set up) and his pace is very much off that of our current racers. So he
was hardly reporting from a basis of challenging the limits of the machines he rode
and couldn’t exactly comment on the stability of their performance on our disparity of
circuits that throw up different challenges. ( Teretonga being an extreme example
regards rapid tyre degradation ) To that end I’d pay much more credence to the views
of our top and more experienced (and current) road racers.
ITS ALSO TOTALLY RELEVANT TO POINT OUT THAT MODERN DAY
PRODUCTION MACHINERY IS MUCH MORE SENSITIVE TO SETUP
THAN IN YEARS PAST AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF LESS THAN
PERFECT SETUP ARE MUCH MORE NEGATIVE.
AND ………. IF STOCK SUSPENSION IS THAT GOOD WHY DOES NO
ONE RUN IT IN WORLD SUPER SPORT 600/WORLD SUPER STOCK?

But, it is fair to say that I have no issue with the basic intent of the rules and if it
attracts more competitors then all good! But I do take (technical) issue with only a
spring change being allowable to the stock shock. To that end I make the following
points;

1. SPRING RATES ARE ABOUT POSITION, DAMPING IS ABOUT CONTROLLING RATE OF CHANGE OF POSITION. Sure enough spring rates need changing for varying rider weights, height and skill but this does absolutely nothing about controlling one of the biggest single issues in road racing:- Rear end acceleration squat/chassis pitch control and resultant understeer off corners. This is simply because stock sports bike shock absorbers are internally calibrated for road use, and because of that a decent level of comfort is a pre-requisite. Get them on a race track and you’ll find the rear end squats excessively off especially the tightest low gear corners, somewhat prevalent on our NZ tracks. That manifests itself as understeer and also overstresses the rear tyre too quickly as the rear shock is getting too readily into the rising rate part of the link curve. We see this issue very often just with ordinary every day track day riders and many of the riders come to us requesting a fix after finding out that external adjusters will not do so. As I have been at pains to point out many times external adjusters are not a magic fix all, many people still do not comprehend that fact. They only operate in a small/narrow range.

The simplistic but incorrect approach is to fit a firmer spring to try and control this squat. But then the spring is often too firm to ride the bumps on the track! Or to put it another way; the rider weight will suggest that a certain spring rate is correct to achieve the correct correlation of rider sag and static sag. SO WHAT THE RULING IS IN EFFECT SAYING IS IF YOU ARE HAVING A SQUAT ISSUE OVERSPRING IT! FRANKLY THAT IS A 1970’S SOLUTION WHICH DOESN’T CUT THE MUSTARD NEARLY 40 YEARS ON.

2. As an example a 75kg rider will likely not need to respring his late model GSXR600 or R6 (or in fact any of the current 600’s) because the standard spring satisfies the sag ratio’s but the bike squats too much exiting turns and burns up the rear tyre too quickly. This is a commonly reported problem!
Those who don’t fully understand suspension will say in response “just turn in the clickers” but it is a common misconception that external damping adjusters are a magic fix all and manufacturers publicity machines/magazine testers are guilty of perpetuating that myth.
Closing in the clickers does very little to alter the opening pressure of the shim stacks, because they predominantly only regulate bypass bleed!!! A LOW SHIM STACK OPENING PRESSURE IS THE EXACT REASON ROAD BIKE CALIBRATED SUSPENSION HAS POOR SQUAT CONTROL WHEN USED IN ANGER DURING A TRACK DAY OR DURING A ROAD RACE. Moreover, if you close in the clickers to near or full closed the shock loses its pressure balance and cavitates internally. This is an issue that shock manufacturers such as Showa, Kayaba, WP and Ohlins are abundantly aware of and why all of those companies have race specific settings and train people worldwide to install and optimize such settings.


3. Even high quality aftermarket shocks such as the brand we sell (Ohlins) come
out of the box set up for the road and will squat excessively when used in a road bike with no internal recalibration. Before they are raced we spring and valve them according to rider weight and height statistics, speed, tyre type and brand, power output etc.
OEM ROAD BIKE SHOCKS HAVE LOW SPEED COMPRESSION CONTROL THAT IS WEAK AND POINT OF FACT VERY DECENT IMPROVEMENT CAN BE YEILDED AT LITTLE COST.

4. So back to our 75kg rider example. Instead of a replacement spring at nigh on $300.00 for almost exactly the same cost there are very well proven techniques for revalving the shock piston. Ironically those techniques we have learnt working with the Ohlins product and their large databank of setting information and knowledge. Given the choice between doing the job incorrectly (by overspringing) or doing it correctly (by revalving) I know what I’d choose. I also know what would achieve the best result. THAT ALSO REFLECTS RATHER IMPORTANTLY IN EXTENDING TYRE LIFE.

A heavyweight rider who wants to be competitive will logically require a very substantial increase in spring rates at both ends to achieve correct sag ratio’s. But there is now so much spring force that the stock rebound valving is too weak to control re-extension of that spring! Its hardly a level playing field if it is not permissible to revalve that shock. (and dare I say, forks).

[Pussy]

1. Unlike the situation and technology (or lack if it) that prevailed in the 70’s/early 80’s most shocks were sealed for life and non rebuildable. Chassis were relatively flimsy, tyres narrower with much lower grip levels and engines significantly less powerful. Less challenging times and arguably the bikes were more forgiving . But the whole point is the technology of the current bikes has change significantly and 1970’s solutions are now no longer a cure.. Here now in the 21st century sportbike shocks are now serviceable and a whole worldwide industry supports that fact.

2. SO HOW WOULD YOU POLICE IT?
Occassionally a shock will leak so it will need to be pulled apart to fit a new bushing and seal kit. To do so invariably requires grinding/machining/de-peening of the base locking nut to withdraw the seal head to service.
Also, such shocks are bladder type to separate the nitrogen gas from the oil. Such rubber membranes leach nitrogen into the oil, much as a car tyre leaks its air pressure back into the atmosphere, and this happens far more quickly than is commonly realized, given that charge pressure is 10-12 bar. Because of this aeration of oil problem these shocks need servicing frequently to maintain peak performance, much more so than a shock employing a piston seperation system. (and more precise tolerancing and higher spec material choices).

3. No suspension specification cards exist as such for OEM sport bike shocks. They are built as a component by an outside vendor (e.g predominately Showa, Soqi and Kayaba) and supplied to the bike manufacturer. It is not a habit of such vendors to supply their internal valving specs and I suspect that is because there may be a mixture of technical sensitivity and product liability laws in certain countries. Valving specs have in fact never been available from the manufacturers. So the only realistic option would be to strip a brand new suspension unit from every make/model of bike homologated for the series and record the internal settings, piston dimensions, bypass orifice sizes, etc. A labourous task and who’s going to pay for that to be done?
NEEDLESS TO SAY A SIMILAR SITUATION WOULD HAVE TO PREVAIL WITH FRONT FORKS.

It therefore makes a whole load of sense to ALLOW REVALVING OF THE STANDARD OEM SHOCK ABSORBERS. (AND FRONT FORKS FOR EXACTLY THE SAME REASONS) That would totally negate the need of constant technical inspections and the constant inevitability of protests, such as seen in many controlled classes. Not a pretty sight at the best of times as it brings out the worst in people. (just evidence Formula 3 this past year) I can think of at least two internal shock mods that would be highly effective and virtually undetectable except by a very skilled and experienced suspension engineer and access to a suspension dyno. It should also be considered to allow fitting of aftermarket piston kits (e.g Race Tech or from any other manufacturer that sells pistons in the appropriate sizings). There is a huge database of set up info with such kits that anyone can access and that levels the playing field somewhat.

Unless you ban suspension engineers from the class, I don’t see how you can police such a proposed ruling. Even “sealing “ of shocks is less than fool proof, as has been proven in auto racing over and over again. The only other alternative is to transport a portable single phase shock (and fork) dyno to every single meeting, that’s a $30,000 investment plus the need (and cost) of a skilled and knowledgeable operator. That is a step that has had to be taken in the Toyota Racing series.

I respectfully ask that MNZ give full consideration to all that I have said above. I’ve spent 25 years in the suspension industry and right at the sharp end including under contract directly to Ohlins for WSBK testing. Suspension, chassis and tyre interaction is EVERYTHING in 600 and 1000cc class racing and all competitors and technicians at the sharp end acknowledge that. I would also reasonably hope that of all the submissions you receive you give more weight to those from people that have relevant experience (and I mean up to date experience) in such racing classes.

I an available for further comment at anytime.



Yours faithfully






Robert Taylor

[Maido]

Data logging isn't that far out of reach to the average joe. I have a basic 2D logger system that I use to initially setup the fueling on my bike before nationals. It reads throttle position, RPM, front wheel speed, Lambda etc. When you work this out in comparison with a day or 2 on the dyno, and the fact that it is interchangable between bikes it is actually a very good price.


Thanks for you input Maido but did you do any tests or try other compounds, pressures, springing etc to try and get the standard shock to work?
I have tried various solutions, believe me! Having a home track as abrasive as Teretonga can be hell! I have raced 400 - 250GP - 600's - 1000's there. As you go up in the HP the more you NEED tyre/suspension that is compliant. I am being completely honest when I say that regardless of springs, tyre pressures and compounds you need other changes. Granted all of these other things are equally important, but unless you have control inside the shock you will honestly just chase your tail!
I take it (just a guess) you attend mainly track days with a bit of racing? I do some coaching for the local club's as well as quite a bit for HRC, usually doing all of the South Island Tracks (I helped at the HRC day in Taupo a year or so back). Now from personal experience, I can tell you factually that even the road riders experience completely different results in their tyres from Ruapuna to Levels to Teratire. The tracks offer very different forces which cannot be completely controlled by springs. Hopefully this shed a bit of light on the situation.
No disrespect, and I don't know how fast you ride, but as I haven't met you at a national meeting I will assume that you aren't at a Nationals pace, which is fine. Until you have actually ridden at the speed that makes a shock really start to matter (around Puke I would say you would need to be doing at least a 1.02 on a 600) then you can't really explain it to someone who hasn't why it is so important.
This isn't a personal attack so don't take it the wrong way please, i am trying to get my point across

[Robert Taylor]

Ha ha and whats your reason for hanging out in an NZ forum. Thinking of emigrating? Do you like sheep?

Even if he was an Ocker hes got something thats worth saying. Shaun, look forward to you racing back here sometime soon.

[Robert Taylor]

What i was getting at is, if Robert was able to use some form of data logging then I am sure the benefit would filter down to ALL and that would be a saving for everyone Re; tyre wear etc, I am not asying it will save bulk but any saving is a good one. It may take a season to filter down but so what!

More promotion is great but who pays for it? Red put his hand in his own pocket for the JBM and he deserves the kudoe there, are we all prepared to do the same thing? I doubt it! Most are moaning about entry fees now! In reality they are very low, back in 1991 I paid 300 pounds to enter a club event in the UK and I had to qualify ofr a start!

I don't mind the fees rising as long as I can see that it will be used appropiately for my chosen sport and not spirited away on junkets ar frivilous parking spots!

Check out Shauns thread that proposes having a full time promoter ( which would be a good thing ) and raising MNZ levies to pay for it. Largely the silence is deafening.

[Maarty]

Check out Shauns thread that proposes having a full time promoter ( which would be a good thing ) and raising MNZ levies to pay for it. Largely the silence is deafening.

As you know, I aim to give my sponsors value for money and try and present my team in a professional manner, thats why I can see the benefit of Shauns letter and ideas. It can only be a good thing for all concerned, me ,you, the riders and the sponsors. It is a pity that so many are short sighted when it comes to promotion! I know that quite a large portion of my yearly budget goes on promotional things.

[cowpoos]

As is well known, Robert is a gun with suspension, the trade off is he is hopeless with 'puters!
Here is an interesting submission from RT

ATTN: MNZ ROAD RACE COMMITTEE

Etc etc etc etc etc etc etc






1. Unlike the situation and technology (or lack if it) that prevailed in the 70’s/early 80’s most shocks were sealed for life
Yours faithfully

Etc etc etc etc etc






Robert Taylor


I'm not sure why you stopped short of suggesting leaving current suspension rules for 600's in place for a privateers cup... as anything less...will infact slow the privateers down...and make them dangerous to faster riders....hell...it will probally make it harder for them to make qualifying cut of times, if ran in the same class as 600SS

Well argued Robert

[Shaun P]

Heres my submission to MNZ for the superstock 600's

Hi, as has been widely discussed valving changes should be allowed to a superstock 600 class for race bike setup for obvious reasons. No need to re-invent the wheel just copy Aus superstock 600.

Note rule 15.8.0.7

n) Front and rear suspension springs
and internal components, but external appearance must remain unchanged.

Regards Shaun Pattenden

http://www.ma.org.au/AM/Template.cfm?Section=General_competition_rules&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentFileID=43411




15.8 SUPERSTOCK 600



15.8.0.1 Subject to the required and permitted

alterations set out below, Superstock 600

machines must:



a) Be fitted with ADR compliance

plates for the particular machine,

b) Be eligible for registration in all

States and Territories in which they

compete,

c) Be of a make and model lawfully

sold in Australia,

d) Be as constructed by the

manufacturer,

e) For 2 cylinder engines, have an engine

capacity of no more than 750cc,

f) For 3 cylinder engines, have an engine

capacity of no more than 675cc,

g) For 4 cylinder engines, have an engine

capacity of no more than 600cc,

h) At least 20 production machines of

that make and model must have

been imported into Australia by

the manufacturer or the Australian

distributor representing the

manufacturer.



15.8.0.2 Tyres must be homologated by MA and

must:



a) Be commercially available in

Australia,

b) Be manufactured for road use in all

weather conditions,

c) Be not less than the machine

manufacturer’s recommended

speed and load rating,

d) Be worn no more than to the

minimum tread depth indicators,

e) Not be manufactured for only

competition use,

f) Not have an augmented or modifi ed

tread pattern,

g) Comply with the service description

(load and speed rating) as

permanently moulded on the OEM

tyre side wall,

h) Comply with the relevant requirements

of the nominated standard. e.g.

ETRTO, JATMA & TRA.



15.8.0.3 When, a race or practice has been

declared ‘wet’, the use of a special

tyre commonly known as a wet tyre is

allowed. Homologation of wet tyres is

not required.



15.8.0.4 To be permitted to compete, a machine,

without rider, empty of fuel, but with all

other fl uids at optimum levels, must

weigh no less than:



a) 162kg for 4 cylinder,

b) 162kg for 3 cylinder,

c) 170kg for 2 cylinder.



15.8.0.5 A 1% tolerance at post race control will

be allowed.



15.8.0.6 The following must be removed:



a) Head lamp,

b) Tail lamp,

c) Reflectors,

d) Horn,

e) Traffi c indicators,

f) Mirrors,

g) Centre and side stands.

h) Registration plate / bracket and label

holder.



15.8.0.7 The following may be replaced or

modifi ed:



a) Fairing,

b) Screen,

c) Rear body work,

d) Seat,

e) Mudguards,

f) Tank covers, and

g) Frame side covers,

but replacements must be the same in

shape and appearance as the original.

h) Mounting bracket for fairing, screen

and instruments, but replacements

must be mounted in the original

position on the frame,

i) Passenger footrests,

j) Spark plug type, leads and cap,

k) External gearing and chain, but not

chain pitch,

l) Brake pads, linings and brake hoses,

m) The muffl er and tail connector pipe

at the bolt-on or slip-on fl ange joints

only, the original header pipes

must remain as supplied by the

manufacturer,

n) Front and rear suspension springs

and internal components, but

external appearance must remain

unchanged.

o) Handlebars, but replacements must

be mounted in the original position

on the fork assembly and have

the same profi le and shape as the

original assembly,

p) Footrests and foot controls, but the

replacements must be mounted at

the original mounting points, and

q) Air fi lter element,

r) Engine and gearbox breather tubes

and the radiator bottle overfl ow

must exhaust into the airbox to the

rear of the intakes. The lower airbox

breather tubes must be blocked.



15.8.0.8 The following may be added:



a) Steering damper,

b) Ride height adjuster, providing there

is no modifi cation or alteration to

frame or rear suspension unit.

[Robert Taylor]

I'm not sure why you stopped short of suggesting leaving current suspension rules for 600's in place for a privateers cup... as anything less...will infact slow the privateers down...and make them dangerous to faster riders....hell...it will probally make it harder for them to make qualifying cut of times, if ran in the same class as 600SS

Well argued Robert

I agree with you but if I argued that I would be accused by the pygmies that both constantly whinge on this site and inhabit MNZ of having an agenda.

But as youve come to mention it these are the advantages that I can rattle off the top of my head of having quality aftermarket suspension, in random order;

1) Gas piston separation system in a precision honed bore. Prevents constant and rapid areation of the oil through a porous rubber membrane ( bladder ) so the shock doesnt turn into a ''milkshake'', deteriorating its damping response.

2) As knocking out of shock units at the lowest possible price is not number 1 on the agenda there is rather more attention paid to; a) close, precision tolerancing and b) higher quality material choices and closely matched coefficients of heat expansion between key working components to minimise / eliminate fade.

3) Top shaft bushings in many oem shocks run dry, in high quality units such as Penske, WP and Ohlins the bush runs wet, less wear, less friction

4) WP and Ohlins frequently employ internal top out springs in the sportbike and race shocks. There is a choice of these in length but also rate to match the rate of the main spring. The effect is to counterbalance the main spring force at the top reaches of stroke. This allows more agressive main spring preload settings ( where required ) and precludes relatively uncontrolled ''topping out'' There are very plausible benefits in braking performance ( you can go in later under brakes ) Edge grip, pitch control and off corner traction.

5) Companies such as WP, Penske and Ohlins often provide setting banks of alternative internal valving specs for different race tracks and scenarios. It is expected that their relevant distributors in each country will provide high level technical support. ITS NO DIFFERENT IN MX, we have different settings for sand and hardpack surfaces. We won the 3 major junior MX titles at Taupo on the weekend using a mixture of Ohlins, Pro Circuit and Race Tech suspension. Perhaps the CEO wants to ban aftermarket suspension in that sporting code as well? He delighted in telling me that a European rider went very well with stock suspension at the last International there, he forgot that the same rider crashed heavily and didnt come back.

6) Spring options are much more readily available than with oem shocks. Heck we very often exchange them at no charge.

7) Main piston rings are of an expanding type to compensate for main body tube heat expansion, this precludes fade. One of the big issues with oem, especially if you ( often ) have to instal aggressive settings

8) Oil selection in such shocks is usually very ''top shelf'' assisting stability of performance and ultimate service life.

[Robert Taylor]

Part 2...

9) Modular construction means that you can usually purchase every individual piece. Try that with a Japanese shock.

10) Convenient quick and easy length adjusters for rapid geometry changes. Very seldom seen on sportbike shocks.

11) Great residual value. Purchase of such shocks is not ''once only dead money'' They are highly sought after second hand and are often transportable from model to model with update changes. Many distributors will trade used for new.

12) In the advanced designs that come from companies such as WP, Penske and Ohlins there are benefits to be realised inride height control, mechanical grip, compliance, tyre life and stability of performance.

13) Better response range from external adjusters, especially in designs that dont rely totally on shaft displacement to create damping.

14) Much easier to recalibrate for trackday / road race use

15) Twin tube recirculating designs have perfect pressure balance. That means the gas pressure can be significantly lowered, that in turn sizably reduces main shaft seal to main shaft friction. The shock is more responsive.

16) Compared especially to short squat single tube shocks there is a huge percentage increase in fluid and nitrogen gas capacity. That significantly aids stability of performance.

17) Such shocks are designed to be quickly and readily serviced, where oem ones really are not.

And doubtless etc etc....

[Robert Taylor]

Maybe because he is a well know racer...known by alot of people on here and in racing circles.

Poos, he is also from Earth, not from Melmak.

[Shaun]

Nice way to get rid of 50% of the privateers, maybe you should be our promoter...?



What Shaun P says...


The idea RE the cams is to keep the cost down for the PRIVATEERS mate

So build a new bike LESS the 2K+ Required for cams

So how is that hard on the "TRUE" privateers mate?

[CHOPPA]

The idea RE the cams is to keep the cost down for the PRIVATEERS mate

So build a new bike LESS the 2K+ Required for cams

So how is that hard on the "TRUE" privateers mate?

The post states that even bikes that already have cams in the NZSBK class that have had megabucks spent on them to make them run with those cams have to change back to standard cams. This makes it much more expensive when a privateer has shelled out for a competitive bike that already has them.

Fair enough for privateer class but for NZSBK class they should leave bikes that have already been built alone and just have 09 bikes restricted and 08 bikes that are still current in 09

[CHOPPA]

BTW everyone! It seems everyone complains about our MNZ ceo and MNZ in general for not replying to emails etc.

I have written 2 emails to MNZ in the past 6 months, 1 to the Road Race Commissioner (no response) and the latest one i directed straight to the CEO. I had an indepth response back the very next morning! Much appreciated :)

[Rcktfsh]

The post states that even bikes that already have cams in the NZSBK class that have had megabucks spent on them to make them run with those cams have to change back to standard cams. This makes it much more expensive when a privateer has shelled out for a competitive bike that already has them.

Fair enough for privateer class but for NZSBK class they should leave bikes that have already been built alone and just have 09 bikes restricted and 08 bikes that are still current in 09

If this was the case why would anyone build new 09 bikes, if anything it would result in further stagnation of the class.

[CHOPPA]

If this was the case why would anyone build new 09 bikes, if anything it would result in further stagnation of the class.

Because the 09 bikes should be better with an extra 2 years of development up there sleeve.... Its not like everyone is gonna run there 07 bikes for the next decade just cause your aloud cams

[Robert Taylor]

BTW everyone! It seems everyone complains about our MNZ ceo and MNZ in general for not replying to emails etc.

I have written 2 emails to MNZ in the past 6 months, 1 to the Road Race Commissioner (no response) and the latest one i directed straight to the CEO. I had an indepth response back the very next morning! Much appreciated :)

Chop, youre of course very much entitled to draw your own conclusions. In defence of Paul Stewart he was putting in over 1000 hours per annum UNPAID on top of a fulltime very demanding day job. And taking a LOT of heat. It may have been missed, who knows, but you couldnt hope to meet a nicer guy who played everything straight.

[CHOPPA]

Chop, youre of course very much entitled to draw your own conclusions. In defence of Paul Stewart he was putting in over 1000 hours per annum UNPAID on top of a fulltime very demanding day job. And taking a LOT of heat. It may have been missed, who knows, but you couldnt hope to meet a nicer guy who played everything straight.

Oh for sure, didnt really mean to bag PS, just more showing a bit of appreciation for PP to taking the time to reply and knowing that my emails dont just go straight to the junk mail! :sunny:

[The Chow]

Chop, youre of course very much entitled to draw your own conclusions. In defence of Paul Stewart he was putting in over 1000 hours per annum UNPAID on top of a fulltime very demanding day job. And taking a LOT of heat. It may have been missed, who knows, but you couldnt hope to meet a nicer guy who played everything straight.

Spot on Robert

A full time paid employee like the CEO should answer straight away , As I have said before have had dealings with all parties i know who i would trust completely. Also as I have said previously the series was a team effort and Paul Stewart would have the backing of everyone of those people.

Remember it takes people to run the series and meetings for riders , so the riders can race.

Interestingly I was listerning to to the NZ Rugby guys today and they have very similar issues to motorcycling , no crowds , hard to get money and so on on.So if someone has a majic bullet to fix the motorcycle series , my suggestion is tell the Rugby union as they need help to and they pay more.:rockon:

[k14]

Interestingly I was listerning to to the NZ Rugby guys today and they have very similar issues to motorcycling , no crowds , hard to get money and so on on.So if someone has a majic bullet to fix the motorcycle series , my suggestion is tell the Rugby union as they need help to and they pay more.:rockon:
Well that could quite be the answer there. With the advent of the internet and all the tv coverage we get now days, people are happier to sit on their bums at home and watch it on tv than go to the trouble of having to go down to the track/stadium and watch it live. Don't know how you get around that??

[slowpoke]

The post states that even bikes that already have cams in the NZSBK class that have had megabucks spent on them to make them run with those cams have to change back to standard cams. This makes it much more expensive when a privateer has shelled out for a competitive bike that already has them.

Fair enough for privateer class but for NZSBK class they should leave bikes that have already been built alone and just have 09 bikes restricted and 08 bikes that are still current in 09

Cams are only part of the problem Choppa, the whole damn cylinder head is gonna have to be replaced to remove the offending machined orifices and Yoshi valves etc. Do the later model gixxers still have the adjustable swing arm pivot and steering head inserts fitted by RCM like the earlier ones? Then there's that luvverly carbon Yoshi tri-oval that's gotta go in the bin.......

I'm in the same boat mate, prolly worse. I only bought my bike after corresponding with Paul Stewart who (promptly) assurred me that earlier bikes ('07 and backwards) could remain as is (old modified rules), thereby competing on a reasonably equal footing with more advanced less modified new bikes. He was well aware of the need to keep older bikes eligible thereby maintaining grid sizes but it looks like others have perverted his original intent. Thinking long term I bought the highest spec' bike I could afford (still a bargain, much less than the cost of a new road thou'), aiming to learn as I went and contemplating Nat's events down the track. As it stands I've learnt a bit alright, but Nats events are now well and truly off the event horizon and my bike has been instantly devalued.

I don't have a problem with changing the rules, but to make a change of this magnitude, with no transitional period or equivalency allowance for not quite up to the minute bikes is extremely short sighted.

Haha, it's gonna funny as fuck when the hottest bikes you see are all in Clubman's.....

[CHOPPA]

Cams are only part of the problem Choppa, the whole damn cylinder head is gonna have to be replaced to remove the offending machined orifices and Yoshi valves etc. Do the later model gixxers still have the adjustable swing arm pivot and steering head inserts fitted by RCM like the earlier ones? Then there's that luvverly carbon Yoshi tri-oval that's gotta go in the bin.......

I'm in the same boat mate, prolly worse. I only bought my bike after corresponding with Paul Stewart who (promptly) assurred me that earlier bikes ('07 and backwards) could remain as is (old modified rules), thereby competing on a reasonably equal footing with more advanced less modified new bikes. He was well aware of the need to keep older bikes eligible thereby maintaining grid sizes but it looks like others have perverted his original intent. Thinking long term I bought the highest spec' bike I could afford (still a bargain, much less than the cost of a new road thou'), aiming to learn as I went and contemplating Nat's events down the track. As it stands I've learnt a bit alright, but Nats events are now well and truly off the event horizon and my bike has been instantly devalued.

I don't have a problem with changing the rules, but to make a change of this magnitude, with no transitional period or equivalency allowance for not quite up to the minute bikes is extremely short sighted.

Haha, it's gonna funny as fuck when the hottest bikes you see are all in Clubman's.....

Yeah im surprised that your the only one that sees my point! I emailed MNZ and there gonna take our points into consideration....

[Shaun P]

There is a way more simple solution and thats to make an open class with no restrictions on engine work, tyres or cc's so that highly modded 600's and 1000's + can compete, thats a format the have gone back to in formula-xtreme in oz. Bring your desmodici if ya want, but be prepared to be beaten by a 600 if ya not on your game!!

[White trash]

Cams are only part of the problem Choppa, the whole damn cylinder head is gonna have to be replaced to remove the offending machined orifices and Yoshi valves etc. Do the later model gixxers still have the adjustable swing arm pivot and steering head inserts fitted by RCM like the earlier ones? Then there's that luvverly carbon Yoshi tri-oval that's gotta go in the bin.......

I'm in the same boat mate, prolly worse. I only bought my bike after corresponding with Paul Stewart who (promptly) assurred me that earlier bikes ('07 and backwards) could remain as is (old modified rules), thereby competing on a reasonably equal footing with more advanced less modified new bikes. He was well aware of the need to keep older bikes eligible thereby maintaining grid sizes but it looks like others have perverted his original intent. Thinking long term I bought the highest spec' bike I could afford (still a bargain, much less than the cost of a new road thou'), aiming to learn as I went and contemplating Nat's events down the track. As it stands I've learnt a bit alright, but Nats events are now well and truly off the event horizon and my bike has been instantly devalued.

I don't have a problem with changing the rules, but to make a change of this magnitude, with no transitional period or equivalency allowance for not quite up to the minute bikes is extremely short sighted.

Haha, it's gonna funny as fuck when the hottest bikes you see are all in Clubman's.....
This is only going to be a problem for you IF you choose to ride in the Nationals anyway mate.

All of the clubs (to my knowledge) follow Formula 1 format for their respective championships and not Production Superbike rules anyway. Same goes for Street meetings.

You're sound as a pound my friend.

[slowpoke]

This is only going to be a problem for you IF you choose to ride in the Nationals anyway mate.

All of the clubs (to my knowledge) follow Formula 1 format for their respective championships and not Production Superbike rules anyway. Same goes for Street meetings.

You're sound as a pound my friend.

Yup, it just shits me that were I to give my missus a bit too much lip and suffer a serious head injury, then miraculously emerge from the ensuing coma with Mair-type racing skills that I would have the option of being able to enter the Nat's, but that's not gonna be the case.

So where would I find a copy of the F1 reg's? I couldn't see anything on the VMCC or MNZ websites.

Well, I've just got a good price for a kidney, so I'm off to shop at www.SBKsurplus.com to pick up the 16.5" rims, Ten Kate engine, WSBK front end, carbon self supporting monococque etc. I might be 10sec off the pace on the track but I'm gonna look fuggin' fast in the pits.....

[White trash]

Ummmmm, you not seen a Mair race mate? We're the ones constantly waking up in hospital wards mate, your wife wont have to lift a finger.

[GSVR]

So where would I find a copy of the F1 reg's? I couldn't see anything on the VMCC or MNZ websites.


I used to ask the same question until a realized the answer.

The F1 regs are so simple you don't need to write them down. All you need to do is attend a few meetings where they apply these rules and observe.Note theres very little bitching about bike legality at Vic meetings and when someone does its sorted out by senior people pretty dam smartly.

To many technicalities and rules stiffle any sport except for the elitist ones.
ie. Americas Cup which team NZ isn't going to compete in I hear.

[CHOPPA]

Just had confirmation that cams must be standard or put back to standard for for the nats.

I dont even have the original cams for my bike, i was 1 of 2 privateers that done the whole series last year now there goal is to make it cheaper?

I purchased a bike that was able to run at the front for a good price so it was affordable now ive gotta spend lots of cash buying oem cams and gettin it re tuned what a lot of cock!!

Anyone want to buy a fast GSXR?

[boomer]

waaaah......

Anyone want to buy a fast GSXR?

Is it any good for the street? Does it Wheelie?

[CHOPPA]

Is it any good for the street? Does it Wheelie?

To much for you sorry mate

[boomer]

To much for you sorry mate


i got money mate.. i sold my ass last night ! Maybe you should try it.. then you'll be able to afford to race again :p


ps.. it cant be worth that much now anyways.. the bike's redundant :cry:

[CHOPPA]

i got money mate.. i sold my ass last night ! Maybe you should try it.. then you'll be able to afford to race again :p


ps.. it cant be worth that much now anyways.. the bike's redundant :cry:

Too much power mate :bleh:

[boomer]

Too much power mate :bleh:

oh shit .. really!!!??? They have a 'C' Button don't they?

[Tony.OK]

Just had confirmation that cams must be standard or put back to standard for for the nats.

I dont even have the original cams for my bike, i was 1 of 2 privateers that done the whole series last year now there goal is to make it cheaper?

I purchased a bike that was able to run at the front for a good price so it was affordable now ive gotta spend lots of cash buying oem cams and gettin it re tuned what a lot of cock!!

Anyone want to buy a fast GSXR?

Is that for this years upcoming Nats or next years Chop?

I was under the impression those new SBK rules were for the 2010/11 Nats. You'd need a new head then if its been ported, thats not allowed either.:mad:

Hey congrats on the new family member too mate:2thumbsup

[Two Smoker]

Is it any good for the street? Does it Wheelie?


Yes it does... and know you cant... hehehe

[Two Smoker]

I just want to say thaks red for putting in your thoughts. Much appreciated.

I think that the 2 fronts, 2 rears is a very good rule.

I still see that the main problem is TV coverage, and a lack of sponsorship endorsement at the event level. Even the Mini Cooper challenge is televised! Maybe MNZ should be working on the hunt for a large corporate sponser. I like Shauns idea too, this means there is a give take relationship and increases the likelihood of a major sponsor.

Cheers,

Chris Sucich

[Shaun]

i got money mate.. i sold my ass last night ! Maybe you should try it.. then you'll be able to afford to race again :p


ps.. it cant be worth that much now anyways.. the bike's redundant :cry:




Selling your ARSE to a wax Candle is NOT a real sale mate

[speights_bud]

Hi red,

The privateer class seems like a great idea, however the only problem I can see with it is that potentially the privateers (which will be slower riders in theory, no disrespect intended), will be on slower bikes. This could create a safety issue when the fast riders come to lap. However I suppose there are two alternatives, firstly qualfying with a cut off and secondly the blue flag could be implemented? what are your thoughs on this aspect?

Jeremy Holmes

I find it interesting that they can however run a streetstock class mixed with clubmans bikes, and 125's with motards as we have seen in the last 12 months or so....

[Maido]

To be fair, clubmans riders aren't exactly on the "edge"(no disrespect intended) , they have a little more leway through the corners. I myself have never been a fan of mixed racing, mainly speed diferential. Also, clubmans aren't a national class, just at the meeting, there is no championship up for grabs.

[codgyoleracer]

To be fair, clubmans riders aren't exactly on the "edge"(no disrespect intended) , they have a little more leway through the corners. I myself have never been a fan of mixed racing, mainly speed diferential. Also, clubmans aren't a national class, just at the meeting, there is no championship up for grabs.

No doubt there will be some speed differential between some privateer spec machines & ss, & no doubt some privateer machines will be quicker than some ss machines. Essentially the difference will not be huge - so i dont think the argument that its "unsafe due to the speed differential" is justified.
As far as the corner speeds go - then the percentile thing applies i suppose (dependant on field sizes) :-)
Glen