Can't use the forks for a start, you can only use USD forks if they come standard on the bikeOriginally Posted by FROSTY
In the riders seat
Can't use the forks for a start, you can only use USD forks if they come standard on the bike
"If you can make black marks on a straight from the time you turn out of a corner until the braking point of the next turn, then you have enough power."
Hardcore Biker
If you want USD forks put the FZR600 motor in the ZXR400 frame, only way to get the USD's
Growin' up as a kid, always thinkin', you know If I could ever just race motorcycles and make a living that would be the coolest thing know to mankind.
Forum whore
There are certain subtle control points built into the rules such as the ZXR/USD fork rule in pre 89, floaters in Pre 82 etc. These have been placed there to:
1) Stop the effect of every smaller Pre 89 bike being fitted with ZXR400 forks (which patently was never the case at the time), or in pre 82 every bike being fitted with RGB500 discs, which again while available was also, never the case.
2) Cost control. It stops the everyone going out and spending a fortune on parts, of which at the end, if everyone gets them, no one has any advantage except the man selling the parts in bulk and making a killing.
With regards to Kickaha's ongoing complaint about RZ350's being classed as Pre 89. I wrote the rule change and still stand behind the thinking. Yes, I believe an RZ was seen as a prototype in Japan in 82 (though it was about May 83 beforeI saw one of the first RZ250's into the country). However, I have yet to see anything which states when they were actually first produced, but I see that as moot anyway, given the technology that model brought to market and the wide and very negative impact it would have on the current pre 82 junior class.
We see very close similarities to the Z1 and the original RD350 Yamaha which were released in late 1972. Given the great leap forward these models had on their closest competitors and the technology they brought to market, when the rules were written the pre 72 age cut was set to exclude them, plus they were mentioned specifically by model name as not being eligible.
At the same time as we lsted the RZ350 as a pre 89 model, we also for clarity listed bikes like the VF750F, GPz900, RG250/500, RZ500 so there would be no doubt around this for future reference. Given the level and number of complaints, I think 99% of the racing population would agree this was the best course of action for the wider good.
If the "RZ350 rule" was over turned in future years, I would immediately start lobbying to have my TZ750 allowed into pre 72 on the basis of the GL750 road bike seen at the Tokyo and Paris shows in 71/72. This would also open the fllod gates for RD350 and Z1's which would piss off almost all pre 72 riders who would pack up and bugger off for good.
As we have it now, we have good alignment with other countries. In fact Aussie recently moved one of their cut off's to align with us after being different for years and having many more bikes.
Having looked at and ridden or raced Postie bikes in 4 countries now, NZ can lay claim to a set of rules which keep our bikes the most representative of the period.
In the riders seat
Actually I bought that up more to see if I could get a bite than any other reason
The RZ350 was displayed at the Paris motorcycle show in 1982, there was also a link produced at the time this first came up to Yamahas own website stating production on YPVS models had started in 1982, unfortunately the website we had all the info on has since gone
The only technology they had that (possibly) wasn't widely available was the non mechanical powervalve
Lobby all you like a GL750 wasn't a TZ750 although perhaps related but an RZ350 was an RZ350
"If you can make black marks on a straight from the time you turn out of a corner until the braking point of the next turn, then you have enough power."
Kiwibiker
Thanks for this informative post, very constructive and great to see the thinking behind the rules.
If I may ask a question please, Do you think it would be easier to police the manufacturers model year designation rather than the current "manufactured in" rules? Has it been considered, and if so, what was the thinking behind not going with that? The reason I'm asking is I have personally found it a mine field trying to work out what I'm able to use and not use and have wasted money doing so. Some of it my own fault, and some because of what I consider to not be my fault. I've got some parts that have been given the ok, then not ok, then ok again!
gee wizzz
I see the logic behind the rule but then my argument is that its a production part readilly available in 1989,
Different from some unobtanium part fitted to a GP racers machine.
incidently this is for interest sake only not because I'm stuck on an idea.
To see a life newly created.To watch it grow and prosper. Isn't that the greatest gift a human being can be given?
Forum whore
Short answeer is yes, Aussie does that already and I have made recommendations twice to the NZPCRA suggesting that rule be adopted.Thanks for this informative post, very constructive and great to see the thinking behind the rules.
If I may ask a question please, Do you think it would be easier to police the manufacturers model year designation rather than the current "manufactured in" rules? Has it been considered, and if so, what was the thinking behind not going with that? The reason I'm asking is I have personally found it a mine field trying to work out what I'm able to use and not use and have wasted money doing so. Some of it my own fault, and some because of what I consider to not be my fault. I've got some parts that have been given the ok, then not ok, then ok again!
here is the actual wording now in use in Aussie:
16.4.0.5 For the purpose of these rules “Year of manufacture” is defined as the year in
which:
a) For a road based bike the machine or its latest major component was first generally available for sale and delivery to the purchaser,
b) For a race bike the year in which the machine or the latest major component first appeared in open competition.
I would like to see it adopted here also as it does clean it up.
Kick, I knew you were baitingbut a lot of other guys may not have known the background. I dunno, I reckon I know enough to have a shot.... But even if didn't swing it (for my 750)- the same can't be said for Z1's etc.
Forum whore
tiFrosty read my prior post (I guess you may not have seen it) which explains most of this. Essentially trying to be reflective of what happened in the period. Ie how many bikes that were not ZXR400's or a factory WSBK or GP special had USD's, but recognising that those examples mentioned above did and were basically the only bikes that did, so let them run. (if that makes sense!!)
Low personal B.M.E.P.
Some interesting comments coming out here...and the reasons behind some rulings too. I have no argument with the USD forks ruling as although they were supposedly readily available in NZ from Kawasaki pre 89, the fact is there were only a handful of ZXR400's in the country at the time and the price of replacement forks was out of reach of the majority of competitors....
The resoning behind some of the model exclusions is sound but it can still be tidied up. Originally CAMS rules banned all horizontally split case Yamaha 2 strokes from pre 72 as potentially all could be turned into later TZ's. The glaring loophole left now is the R5/DS7 which are legal but can be turned into TR3/TD3 - I know because I did it in period.
The other query I have is the FJ....what threat do they pose ? The frame style was an advance,yes, but Bimota was already marketing it earlier. We've rrecently had an FJ turn up to race here and had to point out the rules to the guy....and couldn't find the slightest reason it shouldn't run.
Forum whore
Grumph
Not aware that Kwaka originally imported the ZXR400 to NZ, I undestood they were all grey imports. Notwithstanding this, our rules do not mention "NZ" in them.
TR3/TD3 replica is not a giant loop hole. Hell Daytona 200 in 72 (March) was won by Don Emde on a TR3. They are a genuine pre 72 bike. When you start converting to TZ with water cooled barrels, that automatically excludes them from pre 72 and the TZ is specifcally noted as excluded to ensure this.
FJ1100. That's nice. Noddy can 1) go back read the rules properly (see below) and 2) ride it pre 89. I can't see how anyone can get that one wrong. If he wants to slip it in as a Bimota in pre 82, he can go buy or rebuild a replica of the specific Bimota in Question, with the rest of the period major components it will require (ie never mind the FJ1100 engine is an 84 model as are the forks, brakes, swingarm etc!!!).
As previously stated elsewhere on these pages, the Rules say "replica",
Replica: an exact copy or model of something as per Oxford's dictionary. They don't say "same technology or style" they mean different things. That will be the key bit that needs to be noted.
FJ1100's are an 84 -> model.
Sometimes it is less about the threat, rather the downstream law of unintended consequences. One of the 13 commandments I pulled together 10-12 years ago as a way of analysing rule changes was to the effect of , will it cause a bike that was never competitive to become overly competitive? Ie let's not try to change history too much.
Ta
There's fuck all point in using USD forks any way. The big gain is cartridges instead of damper rods. Heaps of bikes had them, and there are several tuners in the country here who will upgrade them for fuck all. Upgrading suspension internals is completely legal as per the rules.
As you were.
gee wizzz
Guys just a question for the learned. Just how full are the pre89/pre82 grids right now? How full have they been?
Its just that if they aren't full then why not let people sort of run what they brung?
To see a life newly created.To watch it grow and prosper. Isn't that the greatest gift a human being can be given?
In the riders seat
Why bother having any rules then?
Why should I waste my time building a legal bike which complies with the rules to race against people that don't
"If you can make black marks on a straight from the time you turn out of a corner until the braking point of the next turn, then you have enough power."
Ta
Pretty fuckin full at Vic club meetings. And the streets. And AMCC the times I raced there.
gee wizzz
I can apreciate your point of view with the massive sponsorship deals and prizemoney you SI guys have at stake.
what I'm saying is if theres small grids and you are turning guys away for bikes that sit on the cusp of legality why not make the rules inclusive rather than exclusive.
it looks to be fairly minor and insignificant areas that could be called grey areas rather than plain n simple black and white.
Again not that I'm hooked up on the ZXR forks thing for a moment but just as an example -They were available in a prooduction bike of the era. Its not a production class so therefore the forks should be allowed to be interchangeable.
As drew pointed out the early ZXR 400 forks weren't a lot better than a decently set up set of standard tele's anyway.
To see a life newly created.To watch it grow and prosper. Isn't that the greatest gift a human being can be given?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks