Rule change submissions close 1 March 2016 - be in to win.

[jasonu]

buckets should go free lance

Which cunt from the MNZ said Buckets is a 'self regulating class'?

If there was someone willing to do the leg work (and that's the hard part), a break away from the MNZ would probably be a good thing. It is not like Buckets doesn't generate plenty of cash...

[mr bucketracer]

Which cunt from the MNZ said Buckets is a 'self regulating class'?

If there was someone willing to do the leg work (and that's the hard part), a break away from the MNZ would probably be a good thing. It is not like Buckets doesn't generate plenty of cash...

or send mnz a bill for getting so meany great riders out there

[jasonu]

Why is there a carb size rule? It's not like carbs are a big ticket item.
Surely making carbs open would very quickly sort out what size carb is best for maximum performance & the playing field would be level again in no time & one less complex & potentially variable rule to police.
Pre '82 senior has open carb size & we each have our own favourite recipie that works best for us.

Not havin a go but have you ever been or are you directly involved with the class?

[mr bucketracer]

Not havin a go but have you ever or are you directly involved with the class?

he raced the fastist bucket sidecar in new zealand

[kel]

Well I want to go after aftermarket cylinders.
All good and well if non OEM parts are the same or equal to the OEM parts but when you can buy an aftermarket cylinder that only shares the stud pattern of the original cylinder then that's just (am I really going to type this ) not in the spirit of bucket racing. Buckets is (in part) about innovative engine building, specifically turning a non competition engine into something worth racing. Whether as simple as my approach of cut, port, epoxy, or GPR's building their own cylinder out of a block of aluminium, we push the boundary's of our non competition motors. This Derbi cup buy off the shelf bolt up performance is not buckets

Let me expand a little on this. While I don't want to reignite the MX85 debate we already have the equivalent in buckets. If I had a Derbi 50 I could buy an aftermarket multi plate complete clutch kit, a close ratio gear set, a multi port race orientated cylinder (label it sport, competition or racing, I don't care as its not from a Motocross, Road Racing, Enduro or Go Kart motor), super fancy cranks, special heads, etc, etc. And guess what they come in 110cc kits!

So what do we think, something along the lines of "aftermarket parts must be the same or equal in construction to OEM parts" Help me out here please

[Grumph]

To still allow innovation I'd word it something along the lines of "commercially available aftermarket replacement parts shall be identical to the OE parts they replace."
Bloody internet purchasing has changed the landscape.

[jasonu]

he raced the fastist bucket sidecar in new zealand

Then I guess I'll shut my mouth for a short time...

[kel]

"commercially available aftermarket replacement parts shall be identical to the OE parts they replace."

I think that would do it

[Bert]

So did I. I reckon that if you look at a class rules whether Buckets or posties or sidecars, everything you need to know about rules specific to that class - including fuel - should be in that chapter.
The idea of the old section 10 technical was that those rules dictated the basics of building a race bike safely. Any variations or additions went in the class chapters.
I find it bloody difficult to find anything now.

100% Agree. At minimum you need to read three different chapters (to obtain little snips of information relevant to your class)...

I really struggle with my juniors, explaining which bits they need to focus on. Ok you could say read everything but: they don't need too.

Keep the General Technical chapter. Class chapters and if they must do a championship chapter.
Table common rules and cut-paste across all the class chapters. Common structure easy to use...

[TZ350]

... in buckets case its trading extra capacity with shit thermal stability against 20% less capacity with no carb restrictions and thermally stable engines

125 air cooled vis 100 water cooled, the 20% difference sort of made it worthwhile persevering with air cooling.

Now that 110 water cooled is possible, a 125 air cooled engine starts to get pointless, even at its max oversize of 130cc the now 15% capacity advantage is not enough to make the extra air cooled engine capacity attractive.

As Husaberg once pointed out, the 125's air cooling with its shit thermal stability was a bigger restriction on power than a 24mm carb.



Speedpros 100 at 30hp with its water cooled head made more power than my 29hp 125 air cooled in a back to back test.

So maybe water cooled 2T's should have the 24mm carb restriction and air cooled 2T's are open.

Just a thought, based on evidence.

To limit the arms race it would be logical to restrict the water cooled 2T's to a 24mm carb equivalent and let the air coolers have any size carb they like because getting rid of 30hp's worth of waste heat is the air cooler's true performance limiting feature.

Not saying I wan't that, just putting it out there.

[TZ350]

And then there is the 20mm carb restriction rule for 100cc 4T's in F5.

It is probably a rule that could be usefully dropped.

In the face of 14+ hp Derbie/Aprilia 50's with their off the shelf cylinders and other hotup bits it makes no sense to limit an old 8hp Honda 100 to a 20mm carb, that you can't easily get anyway.

[jasonu]

125 air cooled vis 100 water cooled, the 20% difference sort of made it worthwhile persevering with air cooling.

Now that 110 water cooled is possible, a 125 air cooled engine starts to get pointless, even at its max oversize of 130cc the now 15% capacity advantage is not enough to make the extra air cooled engine capacity attractive.

As Husaberg once pointed out, the 125's air cooling with its shit thermal stability was a bigger restriction on power than a 24mm carb.



Speedpros 100 at 30hp with its water cooled head made more power than my 29hp 125 air cooled in a back to back test.

So maybe water cooled 2T's should have the 24mm carb restriction and air cooled 2T's are open.

Just a thought, based on evidence.

To limit the arms race it would be logical to restrict the water cooled 2T's to a 24mm carb equivalent and let the air coolers have any size carb they like because getting rid of 30hp's worth of waste heat is the air cooler's true performance limiting feature.

Not saying I wan't that, just putting it out there.

But you keep pointing out that the carb size isn't the 125cc air cooled motors limiting factor so why are you now intent on getting rid of the 24mm restriction and adding that same restriction to 100cc water cooled motors?

[TZ350]

But you keep pointing out that the carb size isn't the 125cc air cooled motors limiting factor so why are you now intent on getting rid of the 24mm restriction and adding that same restriction to 100cc water cooled motors?

Read the bottom line. ""Not saying I wan't that, just putting it out there."" the evidence that is.

[jasonu]

Read the bottom line. ""Not saying I wan't that, just putting it out there."" the evidence that is.

Mate this is Kiwi Biker where you read only part of the post, come to the wrong conclusion then make a fool out of yourself by slagging the OP for something he didn't actually say...

[TZ350]

Sounds fair .....