I have listened. A new class, some diff solutions?

[scracha]

...

So your point is that we keep racing 20 year old bikes and just hope more of them magically start turning up on the grid? At least propose some way of getting the newer and cheaper bikes out there racing before you bag all my suggestions. At least if we try a rolling 10 year old class or a Pre 2000 class or "steel framed" class or "non fuel injected class" or whatever and it doesn't work we can work on it and modify the rules from there. At the moment, there's loads of cheap 5 to 20 year old potential race bikes that are sat rotting and if including them gets more folks out racing then I'm all for it.

[neil_cb125t]

Primo Stevey- totally!!

So your point is that we keep racing 20 year old bikes and just hope more of them magically start turning up on the grid? At least propose some way of getting the newer and cheaper bikes out there racing before you bag all my suggestions. At least if we try a rolling 10 year old class or a Pre 2000 class or "steel framed" class or "non fuel injected class" or whatever and it doesn't work we can work on it and modify the rules from there. At the moment, there's loads of cheap 5 to 20 year old potential race bikes that are sat rotting and if including them gets more folks out racing then I'm all for it.

[Benk]

Ten bucks says you get a red (grey actually LOL) rep from (P) for this one.

Shit man, I hope so, I need to BE as much of a badass as I feel (on KB at least)

[Benk]

if including them gets more folks out racing then I'm all for it.

Will it? Id love to hear from some people who want to be racing, have a 5-20 year old bike in the garage, and arent racing because theres no class for them.

From what ive seen, those that want to race, race. Those that want to wait around, and moan about everything, race to post on KB.

[scracha]

Will it? Id love to hear from some people who want to be racing, have a 5-20 year old bike in the garage, and arent racing because theres no class for them.

From what ive seen, those that want to race, race. Those that want to wait around, and moan about everything, race to post on KB.

Posting a poll. My gut feeling is that since the majority of bikes that are ridden on the road are between 5 and 20 then if there was a class for them, there'd be a hell of a lot more folk racing.

[Benk]

Posting a poll. My gut feeling is that since the majority of bikes that are ridden on the road are between 5 and 20 then if there was a class for them, there'd be a hell of a lot more folk racing.

Sweet, demand first, supply second

[Deano]

Check out the times on mylaps for the winter series F1 races.

I've heard there is a 2 second diffeence between a cold winter track and the summer Nats conditions.

F3 needs a complete revamp anyway...a class based around bored out and outdated Japanese 400cc license restrictions and the "SV650 cup" is too stupid for words. .

Revamp F3 all you like but leave pro twins as a separate class within the F3 'race'. The SV class is getting busier and makes for close racing, and less prone to burgling by cheque book racers.

[Deano]

Posting a poll. My gut feeling is that since the majority of bikes that are ridden on the road are between 5 and 20 then if there was a class for them, there'd be a hell of a lot more folk racing.

You think ?

If someone is serious about racing, surely they will sell the 'incompatible bike' and buy one to fit into a class that suits their requirements/budget/capabilities.

At the moment, there's loads of cheap 5 to 20 year old potential race bikes that are sat rotting and if including them gets more folks out racing then I'm all for it.

And guess what....Clubmans is the perfect place to start. Do people expect to win a championship in their first year ? It's about learning the craft initially isn't it ?

[Str8 Jacket]

Revamp F3 all you like but leave pro twins as a separate class within the F3 'race'. The SV class is getting busier and makes for close racing, and less prone to burgling by cheque book racers.

I agree with Deano! I am definately interested in racing Pro Twins in the next 2 years and i'll bet you the grids will start to grow over the next few years. I reckon its an obvious step up from Street Stock for me.

As for Clubmans, why not leave it alone?! I know that if I can afford a pro twin bike next year and I am still riding/racing like I am now then I will definately start out as a clubmans rider for my first year. Its nice to know that clubmans is there, should I need it!!

[mossy1200]

So your point is that we keep racing 20 year old bikes and just hope more of them magically start turning up on the grid? At least propose some way of getting the newer and cheaper bikes out there racing before you bag all my suggestions. At least if we try a rolling 10 year old class or a Pre 2000 class or "steel framed" class or "non fuel injected class" or whatever and it doesn't work we can work on it and modify the rules from there. At the moment, there's loads of cheap 5 to 20 year old potential race bikes that are sat rotting and if including them gets more folks out racing then I'm all for it.

I turned up last year and Martin Peck this year.Its growing.
I think clubmans should develop clubmans(a)new generation bikes and clubmans(b)10year and older on a revolving timeline and give them championship points again.This will be the class that semi retired bikes slightly out of date can compete.It serves as entry level and spot for the 2nd and 3rd generation bikes plus fresh road conversions etc.
Post classic is still about a generation period race and the 89 cutoff stops fuel injection and modern lighter design causing huge differences in performance.

[malcy25]

So your point is that we keep racing 20 year old bikes and just hope more of them magically start turning up on the grid? At least propose some way of getting the newer and cheaper bikes out there racing before you bag all my suggestions.

I am saying don't screw up the existing successful classes. If that if you look closely pre 72, pre 82, pre 89, Classics, etc. The all have a very defined rule strategy, which means that bikes DON"T get kicked out the back door and they are protected from the later model bikes by establishing fixed age grouping, so the bikes don't once again become obsolete, worthless and discarded. I know it's anti consumerism, but it does work. Is especially pertinent given the number of people who are moaning about teh cost of racing!

Things to think about with age related tech rules (ie for old bike racing):
1) Age related technical rules are a very different world from say f3, protwins, prod superbike etc. As one person who has dealt in the arena for 20-30 years said to me, you need to look 2-3 years ahead and try and understand the impact it will have on the class.
2) Most of the age based racing is related to the preservation of the bikes. Thus, the cut off's are structured around technical periods of change.
3) The rules are to ensure a high degree on authenticity of the machinery. Adding a rolling age date cut off just means that in 3 years you just end up having some modified specials of limited value made up of a collection of disparate parts with no intrinsic value or spectator interest. Thus a big version of bucket racing.

Changing cut off's of existing classes is the wrong "lever" to pull to get a result. An ill informed, knee jerk 'solution" like this usually results in a screw up of a carefully created balance and very unintended consequences. First, use the 4 W's. Why, What, Where, When, How. (okay the last one is H and is the 5th of 4!) is stopping these mythical riders and bikes from entering. Then we can have a fact based discussion about what a real solution could be.

Most of the Postie classes have stemmed from proving the need exists - In recent memory, pre 82 and pre 89 classes are proof of this process. Get the bikes out and build a class from it. The challenge to you is get those guys on their bikes in at least clubmans to prove that a another "grouping is possible". However, this must not be at the expense of a good existing class.

Especially now that rules are formalised and in the MNZ rule book which should go some way to removing some burgler bikes.

Oh,and if you read back, I did make a suggestion on what I think should be done regarding not so old bikes and clubmans. Mossy has the same view just above this post.

[scracha]

es.
Oh,and if you read back, I did make a suggestion on what I think should be done regarding not so old bikes and clubmans. Mossy has the same view just above this post.

Mossey's suggestion ain't bad as a starter. F3 aside (cos it's fucked in it's present for IMHO...and I'm not talking about Pro-twins), I've never mentioned changing the current post classic classes or rules so I dunno where everyone has got that into their head.

I'm just pointing out that times move on and we should be looking towards a new 'post classic' cut-off date...a new class. Pre 95 or pre 2000 or summit along these lines. I'd love to see fireblades and ZX7R's and CBR600F3's and suchlike out racing competitively again. You hear some peeps getting misty eyed and going 'these were the bikes I grew up with'. Well...these were the bikes I grew up with.

Adding a rolling age date cut off just means that in 3 years you just end up having some modified specials of limited value made up of a collection of disparate parts with no intrinsic value or spectator interest. Thus a big version of bucket racing.

A big version of bucket racing sounds awesome to me

[Deano]

The Answer is to add this idea to another class – at rnd 2 there was a total of 32 entries in PC 82 onwards incl JNR and SNR, so additional bikes can be added. If the grid fills up then you have to make the 115% or you’ll get bumped to you guessed it ......Clubmans.

I don't see what would be achieved by having an extra 3 bikes on the PC grid.

Why not just put them in Clubmans to start with, as it is now, albeit with A and B being age related, as Mossy has said.

[mossy1200]

I don't see what would be achieved by having an extra 3 bikes on the PC grid.

Why not just put them in Clubmans to start with, as it is now, albeit with A and B being age related, as Mossy has said.

Its like i said in the other thread.
If you knock the tail off post classic with newer entries you will push them into clubmans.
Then it wont be long before post classic becomes clubmans and clubmans becomes postclassic.The oldest smallest bikes will become clubmans racers.
Not only will they be left out of posties they will line up with weekend warriors on new bikes.(No offence intended to clubmans guys but some of your bikes are f1 f2 standard equipment and your lap times would put you in the sharp end of these fields).

[scracha]

Its like i said in the other thread.
If you knock the tail off post classic with newer entries you will push them into clubmans.
Then it wont be long before post classic becomes clubmans and clubmans becomes postclassic.The oldest smallest bikes will become clubmans racers.
Not only will they be left out of posties they will line up with weekend warriors on new bikes.

My point was that if there were enough entries you'd have them as a different class. Maybe pre 95 and pre 2000. A bit like how we currently have pre 82 and pre 89.

If a class consistantly as more than 35 entries then perhaps it should be split? Especially when we have classes where only a handful of bikes circulate.

Shouldn't we be encouraging more riders out on the racetrack?