NZSBK Round 2 - dispute

[jellywrestler]

It shouldn't be the machinists or engine builders fault. They would have been asked to do it as surely they wouldn't have done extra work for free.

incorrect, I often do a little extra for my customers without charging them, it's building my business and reputation and through that i've a better chance of getting the next job.
KFC don't do a two for one deal because they're feeling generous, it's marketing.

To me there's a set of rules here that are open to interpretation, lock em down, write them betterer.
For example there's a rule stating 'no recording equipment'.
People read it to be 'Oh they're not talking about cameras, they mean all that other data logger shit etc' well do they or don't they want the riders to not run cameras or do they not care, is this an oversight or mean do not run cameras? What's more there has been many vids of 250 production put on the web and has anybody said ANYTHING about it while it was happening either to the competitor or officials, either officially or unofficially???? and that the rule book states 'no recording equipment'

poorly written and open to interpretation.

[Shaun Harris]

It shouldn't be the machinists or engine builders fault. They would have been asked to do it as surely they wouldn't have done extra work for free. If someone gave me a 250 motor and supplied race cams, said to port the head, skim the barrels, and fit a race kit ECU, after I put it together its their problem once its out the door what they do with it. Otherwise every motor in New Zealand would have to be built to stock specs, road bikes included. If a club rider got you to rebuild a motor and supplied race cams should it be the builders fault it was supposedly for a 600 supersport bike but then entered in superstock?

They should be prepared for the back lash though when it is proven the engine builder knew they were building a motor for a class that does not allow machining etc, just as I explained to you on face book days ago when you first said this to me. So what if they are just doing there job, Morals still exist some where in the world I hope

[Shaun Harris]

incorrect, I often do a little extra for my customers without charging them, it's building my business and reputation and through that i've a better chance of getting the next job.
KFC don't do a two for one deal because they're feeling generous, it's marketing.

To me there's a set of rules here that are open to interpretation, lock em down, write them betterer.
For example there's a rule stating 'no recording equipment'.
People read it to be 'Oh they're not talking about cameras, they mean all that other data logger shit etc' well do they or don't they want the riders to not run cameras or do they not care, is this an oversight or mean do not run cameras? What's more there has been many vids of 250 production put on the web and has anybody said ANYTHING about it while it was happening either to the competitor or officials, either officially or unofficially???? and that the rule book states 'no recording equipment'

poorly written and open to interpretation.

Then the rules are proof read and re written by a lawyer or what ever, but as they do not understand our game, the words they choose to use are often still left open to interpretation. The rules need writting by a person who can use a dictionery and knows how to build bikes and motors, so all the grey areas are covered.

[Grumph]

Out of curiosity Greg, where do you stand on "blue printing" of production 250 engines? (If the rules can be read to permit it or not)

If i read it as legal - I'd do it. Besides the obvious potential performance increase, there are other benefits. Some of the engines I've blueprinted have gone on to have long lives on the road after their race careers are finished. Simply correcting factory assembly errors has ensured a longer service life.

Having read Oyster's posts i tend to agree that the problem started as soon as it became a National class with a title available...In my book, any class in the book as bearing a title is fair game for the people wanting to spend cash....So make those classes open.

Back to F1, F2, F3....

I'm not going to bag HPE, I know Gav quite well. Like a lot of engine reconditioner machinists, he will do what the customer wants. If the customer tells what it's going to be used for, fair enough, there may be eyebrows raised....if not, no questions. Just pay the bill please sir, we're a commercial organisation with staff to keep employed.

[Grumph]

Then the rules are proof read and re written by a lawyer or what ever, but as they do not understand our game, the words they choose to use are often still left open to interpretation. The rules need writting by a person who can use a dictionery and knows how to build bikes and motors, so all the grey areas are covered.

That's your most sensible post yet shaun...

[Kiwi Graham:Me]

Then the rules are proof read and re written by a lawyer or what ever, but as they do not understand our game, the words they choose to use are often still left open to interpretation. The rules need writting by a person who can use a dictionery and knows how to build bikes and motors, so all the grey areas are covered.

Thats the nail hit fairly and squarely on the head right there...........

I used to work for a small privateer world endurance team and we had bloody lawyers looking at rule interpretation should there be a need for defence in an effort to maximise our strategy from an engineering perspective.

[oyster]

Then the rules are proof read and re written by a lawyer or what ever, but as they do not understand our game, the words they choose to use are often still left open to interpretation. The rules need writting by a person who can use a dictionery and knows how to build bikes and motors, so all the grey areas are covered.

Right on it Shaun. A good example was the 600 tyre allocation. Until this season the rules clearly stated the allocation was "per round" Now I would have thought "the round" began at sign in. This is when all the process of that championship round begins. Am I right? So the tyres should have been marked as they went out for the first practice. 90% of riders used more than the allocation, as they had extra tyres used in practice/qualifying. I would love to have seen a protest after the races on that matter! How to wipe out 90% of the feild!

[Shaun Harris]

That's your most sensible post yet shaun...

Shit I will have to get up earlier often then. I have asked/offered to do this job many times, but but but but

[Billy]

Right on it Shaun. A good example was the 600 tyre allocation. Until this season the rules clearly stated the allocation was "per round" Now I would have thought "the round" began at sign in. This is when all the process of that championship round begins. Am I right? So the tyres should have been marked as they went out for the first practice. 90% of riders used more than the allocation, as they had extra tyres used in practice/qualifying. I would love to have seen a protest after the races on that matter! How to wipe out 90% of the feild!

The tyre allocation was as you have described for this year and has been enforced in that exact fashion,

Many were not happy about it and claimed it was unsafe practice,In the meantime,Those that actually read the supp regs when they were released,Knew and planned their season to suit,Those that didn't thought the rule would be changed to suit them.

[jellywrestler]

Right on it Shaun. A good example was the 600 tyre allocation. Until this season the rules clearly stated the allocation was "per round" Now I would have thought "the round" began at sign in. This is when all the process of that championship round begins. Am I right? So the tyres should have been marked as they went out for the first practice. 90% of riders used more than the allocation, as they had extra tyres used in practice/qualifying. I would love to have seen a protest after the races on that matter! How to wipe out 90% of the feild!

good point Peter, so how about someone in the know clarifying for me what friday practice is classed as at the nationals. do bikes have to be fully within the rules etc for that day, do riders have the same on track disciplines, ie drop a bike; no returning to pits. pray tell me.

[Billy]

If i read it as legal - I'd do it. Besides the obvious potential performance increase, there are other benefits. Some of the engines I've blueprinted have gone on to have long lives on the road after their race careers are finished. Simply correcting factory assembly errors has ensured a longer service life.

Having read Oyster's posts i tend to agree that the problem started as soon as it became a National class with a title available...In my book, any class in the book as bearing a title is fair game for the people wanting to spend cash....So make those classes open.

Back to F1, F2, F3....

I'm not going to bag HPE, I know Gav quite well. Like a lot of engine reconditioner machinists, he will do what the customer wants. If the customer tells what it's going to be used for, fair enough, there may be eyebrows raised....if not, no questions. Just pay the bill please sir, we're a commercial organisation with staff to keep employed.

Why would you even suggest anybody was bagging HPE,As I understand it they are very good at what they do,Of course he will do what the customer asks,I had a discussion with another supplier of aftermarket parts about this class and he was quite defensive at the beginning,Until I pointed out the same thing to him,Business is business and you just do what your asked to do so you can make a living.


Yip I agree F1/2/3 is definitely alot easier to police

[Billy]

good point Peter, so how about someone in the know clarifying for me what friday practice is classed as at the nationals. do bikes have to be fully within the rules etc for that day, do riders have the same on track disciplines, ie drop a bike; no returning to pits. pray tell me.

ANY event run under an MNZ permit is bound by the rules in the manual as was the case at rounds 1 and 2 of NZSBK2014

[ellipsis]

Then the rules are proof read and re written by a lawyer or what ever, but as they do not understand our game, the words they choose to use are often still left open to interpretation. The rules need writting by a person who can use a dictionery and knows how to build bikes and motors, so all the grey areas are covered.

...anyone who can read and write the good old queens english and new what the rules related to could do it...it is not just the rules pertaining to specs and class rules that are a problem...clubs and officials are left wide open to a few problems, big ones too, with a lot of the wording or lack of...check out the fire extinguisher rules which leave clubs and officials in big time shit if somebody turned their pit into a fireball and somebody died...and as has been mentioned earlier in the thread by someone, the starting, grid procedure...interpretation yet again, due to mis-wording...just because we all should have known the intent of the rule, means jack shit in a court of law, if it reads two ways...

[Billy]

Then the rules are proof read and re written by a lawyer or what ever, but as they do not understand our game, the words they choose to use are often still left open to interpretation. The rules need writting by a person who can use a dictionery and knows how to build bikes and motors, so all the grey areas are covered.

MNZ already has a standing rules committee that is charged with ensuring this happens already,PLUS the board are supposed to proof read them to ratify them before they become active,That system works well doesn't it?

[SS90]

If i read it as legal - I'd do it. Besides the obvious potential performance increase, there are other benefits. Some of the engines I've blueprinted have gone on to have long lives on the road after their race careers are finished. Simply correcting factory assembly errors has ensured a longer service life.

Having read Oyster's posts i tend to agree that the problem started as soon as it became a National class with a title available...In my book, any class in the book as bearing a title is fair game for the people wanting to spend cash....So make those classes open.

Back to F1, F2, F3....

I'm not going to bag HPE, I know Gav quite well. Like a lot of engine reconditioner machinists, he will do what the customer wants. If the customer tells what it's going to be used for, fair enough, there may be eyebrows raised....if not, no questions. Just pay the bill please sir, we're a commercial organisation with staff to keep employed.

Totally, the benifits of blue printing are many, and unfortunately pricey.
Is it likely to make the difference between a race winning bike and an also ran? I would be dubious about that on something like a 250cc twin. But if somehow there was a viability in having engines blue printed, sealed and supplied by a governing body, then that's a sound way to go. Even if it is only aimed at engine longevity.

Under cutting of lower ratio gears is a good example of what manufacturers still don't do from the factory as they should.

We have all seen illegal modifications done to engines in control classeswith no real world gain (moreover actual losses), however, they are illegal and in actual fact, should be excluded... Win lose or also ran.