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

[mr bucketracer]

My thoughts exactly.

So the way I see it we have the choice between a rule that removes the 24mm carb restriction and another that is almost un-enforcable with out the complete tear down of an engine to inspect.

I can see what I the intent was this is not right

back in the day , first 3 bikes had tops removed after gp , maybe time to bring this back

[Pumba]

back in the day , first 3 bikes had tops removed after gp , maybe time to bring this back

Maybe. Sounds like extra work for the organisers that are already sick of the BS though.

[Sketchy_Racer]

Not that bad...onus of proof is always on the competitor so take your stock derbi barrel along in the spares. Nicasil rather than an iron liner may be a giveaway in some cases...

Nothing to prevent home made stuff either.

Yeah but you see, my "OEM" replacement Cylinder started life as a single port with an Iron bore, and the I added Aux exhaust ports and had the liner removed and Nickasiled, you can tell by my grinding marks that I added.. honest.

What defines "home made" If i grind every surface of a barrel just a little bit is it now homemade as by definition I started with a "block of metal" and ended up with a barrel suitable to go racing, just same if I started with a billet "block of metal" and just removed more of the metal until it was a barrel suitable to go racing.

I am being facetious here, but this just reaffirms my belief that buckets should be going through a rule minimisation, not adding more rules!

My thoughts exactly.

So the way I see it we have the choice between a rule that removes the 24mm carb restriction and another that is almost un-enforcable with out the complete tear down of an engine to inspect.

I can see what I the intent was this is not right

All the rules should go. The only rule in my opinion should be a capacity rule. End of story. No more moaning about "cheater bikes". Either your with in the capacity of your chosen engine configuration or you are not. Simple.

[mr bucketracer]

Maybe. Sounds like extra work for the organisers that are already sick of the BS though.

i agree....but , i wright something out but can't post lol

[Yow Ling]

Don't get me wrong, the S is great loophole , its a gap big enough that a bus can be driven through

Its a silent S , and like family violence its best not talked about in public.

Nobody has dared test it to its limits yet

[TZ350]

Got to love this proposed change



There is no chapter 24 in the MOMS

Its chapter 16 now.

So the way I see it we have the choice between a rule that removes the 24mm carb restriction and another that is almost un-enforcable

There is three choices, (1) the current 16.2 rule, (2) proposed version 1 or (3) proposed version 2.

[husaberg]

Its a silent S , and like family violence its best not talked about in public.

Nobody has dared test it to its limits yet

Oh contraire, likely plenty of people have, with blissful ignorance of the officials.

[TZ350]

The only rule in my opinion should be a capacity rule. End of story. No more moaning about "cheater bikes". Either your with in the capacity of your chosen engine configuration or you are not. Simple.

I like the idea of a set of maximum capacity's, do away with this re bore nonsense.

[Moooools]

Yeah but you see, my "OEM" replacement Cylinder started life as a single port with an Iron bore, and the I added Aux exhaust ports and had the liner removed and Nickasiled, you can tell by my grinding marks that I added.. honest.

What defines "home made" If i grind every surface of a barrel just a little bit is it now homemade as by definition I started with a "block of metal" and ended up with a barrel suitable to go racing, just same if I started with a billet "block of metal" and just removed more of the metal until it was a barrel suitable to go racing.

I had the same thought. It is kind of a 'Ship of Theseus' problem that renders the rule un-enforcable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

[Yow Ling]

So if we take option 1 , then next year argue the meaning of "competition " we should be very close to the ideal rule set

[TALLIS]

Maybe. Sounds like extra work for the organisers that are already sick of the BS though.

What the point of having rules if no one is going to enforce them, I'm swaying towards the "simplest" set of rules to enforce, witch is capacity. There's no arguing if an engine is measured up over, simple. Is that con rod a competition part? Or that set of rings? Or that oil filter? Now that's making it hard.

[TZ350]

.

I like the concept of the F4 F5 bucket rules being three simple sentences and a list of maximum capacity's for various engine types. With no over bore allowance as it will have already been allowed for in the maximum capacity's stipulated.

Chapter 24 – Road Racing – Miniature

24.2 - Engines must be derived from non-competition motorcycles. Motocross, Road Racing, Enduro and Go Kart motor and transmission parts are not permitted except for class eligibility.

There shall be no restriction on the make, type or design of carburettor, ignition, exhaust, piston, cam, valve springs or cooling system except for class eligibility.

All engines must be normally aspirated except F4 4 stroke engines of less than 100cc capacity and F4 2 stroke engines of less than 70cc capacity, which may be turbo or supercharged.

4T - 200cc 2 valve Air cooled Non Competition
4T - 170cc 4 valve Air cooled Non Competition
4T - 160cc 4 valve Water cooled Non Competition
4T - 150cc Competition Engine

2T - 125cc Air Cooled Non Competition
2T - 105cc Water Cooled Non Competition
2T - 85cc Competition Engine

The Bucket rules could be as simple as the above.

[goivy26]

Wow, there are some very heated posts to this thread. Makes me not want to finish my bucket build.

I 1st rode a bucket in 2011, it was a Forza motard 140 it cost me $1500 brand new and I rode it to death, but I sold it because I knew it was upsetting a few racers and I agree that yeh it doesn't fit the rules but the thing was it was cheap and fairly competitive straight off.

I brought an FXR 150 and started building a bucket racer with it , I brought wheels and big piston and looked into cams and carbs when the build bill got over the 2 grand mark and still a long way to go to finish it I sold it for $900 to a bloke in Wellington, I wonder if he ever got it going?

I still wanted to bucket race but like anyone wanted a decent bike but they cost a lot to build if you don't have an engineering shop in the garage or mates etc, and to purchase a awesome bucket if you can find one isn't cheap either!

So jump forward to now and I've been building my NSR / TS 125 which is now close to completion but has cost a fortune, I won't post how much as my wife may see it.

I know that many bucket purists love the existing rules for various reasons but I truely believe that the capacity rules touted by Glenn and Rich would make for such an easy low cost formula that would encourage those people with limited resources, funds or experience into bucket racing and would suggest that it would be imperative to have changes such as this for the growth of the sports future.

I'm not trying to be know it all just an objective view.

[seymour14]

I don't think anyone here is causing a stir at all, some good options are being put up.

There is big merit in making this as simple as possible, capacity being a set upper rule with no worries about how you achieve it.

The real controversy comes in with what is determined a competition part and how to police that. Because I can manufacture any competition part that is asked of me at a price...

Now you need to stop me, because I have been trained by Dr Evil and I will do anything for one million dollars...

[Pumba]

Last chance to make a submission if you haven't already done so!