NZSBK Round 2 - dispute

[Shaun Harris]

Yup, actually Blue Printing a 250 Production engine would be quiet expensive.... For the gain you might as well just learn to ride better.... After all it is supposed to be essentially Run What Ya Brung racing.... Low cost, competitive and most importantly fun.... I love the class because I don't have to have my bike in pieces between every round...

To be fair though, I do know of one of the top car racers buying up the entire stock of engine internals just to build the perfect engine for his class.... Now that wasn't cheap.... He did get to sell all the unwanted bits off to the competition though, so might have made a dollar or two from the exercise.





Sent from my Nokia using Tapa talk.

Blueprinting involves removing metal man, not just choosing all parts the same to weigh the same or as close as possible, it takes 2 to tango

[Mental Trousers]

Blue printing is modifying stock bits (in this case) to optimize things within the given specs with the aim of getting best power - isn't that right??

How can you say an engine is illegally modified if the manufacturer says provided everything is stock parts within these specs it's good?

[Grumph]

go and understand fully what blueprinting means then come back and post away big fulla, as currently you have not even scratched the service of it but love reading your stories anyway

As one who has been blueprinting motors for a very long time, Shaun, I suggest you read the intro to 250 Production in the MNZ rule book - particularly note 2. This is an invitation to blueprinting....You can't blame people for walking in.

If the intent of the rules was to run dead standard, as received bikes, it's a fail.
If the intent was to allow sensible mods which probably extend engine life, it works.

we have both been around long enough to remember certain makes and models which absolutely had to be blueprinted to even last one race meeting.....

What interests me in all this hooha is the suggestion that this bike ran a close ratio box.....Can anyone actually point to a source of supply for one ?

[Shaun Harris]

As one who has been blueprinting motors for a very long time, Shaun, I suggest you read the intro to 250 Production in the MNZ rule book - particularly note 2. This is an invitation to blueprinting....You can't blame people for walking in.

If the intent of the rules was to run dead standard, as received bikes, it's a fail.
If the intent was to allow sensible mods which probably extend engine life, it works.

we have both been around long enough to remember certain makes and models which absolutely had to be blueprinted to even last one race meeting.....

What interests me in all this hooha is the suggestion that this bike ran a close ratio box.....Can anyone actually point to a source of supply for one ?

I take it this is what you mean by an invitation Grumph

"Only OEM engine parts for the homologated model may be fitted - In the
case of overboring, only oversizes listed as genuine options in the
manufacturers partsbook for the homologated model may be used. only
gaskets of the standard thickness may be used


The intent of the rule is very very clear mate, it states at the top of the rules for this and other classes

"If not mentioned it must remain as standard"

I can see how some one could read it to work in there favour, but sorry man, google is my english teacher and know s a lot more than I do about it,

[Kickaha]

it actually means as long as it fits the messurement criteria, and re moving metel to achieve this is ok. WOW good work MNZ reps, just set a presedent for the future in a negative way

Do you have valid proof you can share with everyone that this was done?

If not you should shut the fuck up

[quickbuck]

Blueprinting involves removing metal man, not just choosing all parts the same to weigh the same or as close as possible, it takes 2 to tango

Um, you do remember where I work eh? Yup, fully realise you usually remove metal to Blue Print... Ie make all dimensions Nominal.
The second paragraph was an example of someone building an engine without Blue printing strictly speaking.... As a converse point.





Sent from my Nokia using Tapa talk.

[Shaun Harris]

Um, you do remember where I work eh? Yup, fully realise you usually remove metal to Blue Print... Ie make all dimensions Nominal.
The second paragraph was an example of someone building an engine without Blue printing strictly speaking.... As a converse point.





Sent from my Nokia using Tapa talk.

no actually, some thing else I have forgotten

[Shaun Harris]

Do you have valid proof you can share with everyone that this was done?

If not you should shut the fuck up

Hey, are you the swinger I upset in the toilet block at ch ch a few years back Kickaha

[quickbuck]

no actually, some thing else I have forgotten

Clue: All the pretty coloured words in my signature can be clicked on and the will take you to relevant sites.....



A bit hard if you are on Tapa Talk on your phone to be fair....



Sent from my Nokia using Tapa talk.

[nodrog:Me]

Fucksakes, sombody has hit their head.

[Shaun Harris]

Clue: All the pretty coloured words in my signature can be clicked on and the will take you to relevant sites.....



A bit hard if you are on Tapa Talk on your phone to be fair....



Sent from my Nokia using Tapa talk.

perhaps its just the drugs Im on haha, no idea man

[Billy]

As one who has been blueprinting motors for a very long time, Shaun, I suggest you read the intro to 250 Production in the MNZ rule book - particularly note 2. This is an invitation to blueprinting....You can't blame people for walking in.

If the intent of the rules was to run dead standard, as received bikes, it's a fail.
If the intent was to allow sensible mods which probably extend engine life, it works.

we have both been around long enough to remember certain makes and models which absolutely had to be blueprinted to even last one race meeting.....

What interests me in all this hooha is the suggestion that this bike ran a close ratio box.....Can anyone actually point to a source of supply for one ?

The problem with the statement at the start of your post,Is the competitors don't get the right to interpret the rules,Basically,If your not sure,Ask,Ignorance is no excuse,A few have rung me during my time as commissioner and have gone away with the info they required,Sometimes its what the y wanted to hear,Sometimes,Not so much,


But in the case of the introduction to appendix I,You have to be reasonably stupid to not understand the intent,I meam,If the intent was to allow machining of surfaces,Then there would be an allowance for a different thickness gasket to compensate,Not sure where you heard the rumor of a close ratio gearbox,But thats the rumormill at work.

It appears this is heading to the sports tribunal as there are a number of affected folks lining up to do so,So I won't elaborate too much,But Ive just being going through the file and piccies again with the steward and there are some serious areas of concern,I'll await the report before I make a final decision on my thoughts,Thats assuming anybody bothers to keep me in the loop seeing as I had to hear about the decision release from Australia today,Go figure aye

[FROSTY:Me]

Except it is cheating.

No i think his double entendre is actually correct.
ACCEPT

[FROSTY:Me]

Guys -wouldn't it be a good idea going forwards to take this as a chance to avoid any chance the rules could be miconstrued.
maybee some rephrasing so no way it could be a point of argument in the future

[Mental Trousers]

As one who has been blueprinting motors for a very long time, Shaun, I suggest you read the intro to 250 Production in the MNZ rule book - particularly note 2. This is an invitation to blueprinting....You can't blame people for walking in.

If the intent of the rules was to run dead standard, as received bikes, it's a fail.
If the intent was to allow sensible mods which probably extend engine life, it works.

we have both been around long enough to remember certain makes and models which absolutely had to be blueprinted to even last one race meeting.....

What interests me in all this hooha is the suggestion that this bike ran a close ratio box.....Can anyone actually point to a source of supply for one ?

The problem with the statement at the start of your post,Is the competitors don't get the right to interpret the rules,Basically,If your not sure,Ask,Ignorance is no excuse,A few have rung me during my time as commissioner and have gone away with the info they required,Sometimes its what the y wanted to hear,Sometimes,Not so much,

Unfortunately the rules as they have been written look like they have to be interpreted, ie they're not explicit enough. People not asking is always going to be a problem if they believe they're reading the rules correctly.

However, if they were rewritten to be as clear as possible without any alternative interpretations you then have the problem of enforcement.