650 pro twins...

[roogazza]

In fact, I think a return to a bog standard bike (plus allowed suspension mods) will do more for my riding than my souped up SV.

Hit the nail on the head with that one Keystone ! I think so many people could benefit from doing just that ! They get so tied up they miss the basics !!! Gaz.

[slowpoke]

And slowpoke one of the better 600 riders at the moment Kyle Key did alot of his learning on an SV and a Motard bike so how does that fit into your theory?

We'll obviously never know, but how good would he be if he'd spent his SV time on a 600? He might now be racing a Superbike.....

Frosty your long and old go at the horsepower restrictions just isn't possible or realistic in my opinion. If road race stewards aren't even sure of the rules at one circuit (see an earlier thread) how on earth can we expect every circuit and bike club around the country to have equal ability and knowledge to monitor this?

Yup, HP limiting is not a practical solution. Dyno's are notoriously fickle instruments and standardised testing is almost impossible. A cold wet day at Invercargill is going to give completely different results to a dry hot day at altitude at Taupo...not to mention someone has to pay for the dyno and/or dyno time. Even air restrictors aren't the answer as people spend all sorts of money to fatten up the torque curve.

The answer for the Pro Twins/F3 place in NZ racing appears to be the same regardless what the question was in the first place.
Do you see Pro Twins as a class for young up and comers to learn their craft (overtaking and beating other riders on similar spec machinery)? Perhaps for a season between 125GP and 600 SP?
Do you see PT as a cheap and cheerful fairly hassle free national class to retire to or have fun in?
Do you see hordes of similar spec machinery in tightly contested battles being interesting for spectators and riders themselves?

Yes to all the above?

More good points. The conundrum seems to be is the series designed to foster the best racers, the best racing, or the best/most interesting machinery? Equal machinery guarantees close racing, but depending on the machinery involved doesn't guarantee the best tuition for a racer. As an analogy: if you wanted to create high quality racing drivers capable of racing a V8 supercar, you'd ideally having them racing in the V8 Development Series not the Mini Challenge series. The different configuration, lack of power etc doesn't foster the appropriate skills despite the relative cost and closeness of the racing and so it follows for Pro Twins.

One of reasons for keeping F3 going (in tandem with PT) is for the "one off" bike to be built. For the No. 8 wire kiwi ingenuity type to go forth and produce. Mind you lately in F3 there does seem to be a lack of that...
(Where is the, as Gavin HDT boy once suggested to me, R6 sleeved down to 450cc or the Aprilia supermotard motor in a 125 frame etc etc??)

Haha, rather than a sleeved down R6, imagine a de-stroked R6, imagine the revs that puppy could pull...only dogs would be able to hear it!

In F3 we have a class that is currently dominated by SV's (in numbers and top finishing results). It is not the fault of the SV and they shouldn't be punished or blamed for it as some tend to do. Imagine if Suzuki had a 2008 GSXR 400 or Yamaha built an R4! AND Suzuki never built the SV. Then the closest competition from a Vtwin 650 in F3 would be a Honda Bros!!

Keep the debate coming...

Ultimately racing is like life: it's not fair. When you are out in the big wide racing world there are always going to be fast bikes and slow bikes. An R6 has the wood on everything else at the moment, the Fireblade has climbed to the top of the pile again, that's just the way development goes. But the non-R6 or 'blade mounted people don't spit the dummy in the dirt or throw the trike into the bushes, they just get on with it and take extra delight in beating a superior bike. To those in the know performing well on an under-funded or uncompetitive bike is just as impressive as winning on a superior machine. Check out Dom Jones as a case in point.

[Robert Taylor]

I agree 100%. would make for very cheap and close racing :>

but as I have stated I have built one up for $1400 and it should be competitive with the right riding. Im sure Carl Morgon could jump on it and still do similar times to his super fast nationals times. But yes, reducing the number of mods as per your suggestion would make this entry level racing less dire to the wallet in the initial build stage.

Of interest though, Carl Morgon didnt run emulators in the forks and used a gsxr1000 spec WP shock that Ray Clee had kicking around, with old fairings, so his build was budget too, just goes to show what can be done with the SV's with awesome riding!

kyle

Lucky then he didnt fit emulators as he would have been faster.

[Robert Taylor]

Ill throw a curve ball atya--what if the pro twins rules were as I suggested--and a 75hp limit so motors werent getting over stressed
wouldnt that make for CHEAPER racing at the base level?

Thats got merit, the only issue being trackside dyno verification would be required to police effectively.

[Ivan]

The problem I find with this is that if a person with a good engine built with good tolerances and does everything correctly but in the rules can actually gain more horsepower by keeping a bike in good state of tune,

To as say someone who buildsa bike slaps an exhaust on doesnt seal the exhaust properly doesnt do anything to muck around with refuelling issues and just thrashes it his engine could have less power.

I think so long as these rulesstay as they are itl be sweet

[Robert Taylor]

Doesn't matter what shocks an SV has it still won't wear tyres like a superbike.

What shocks did the Harley Sportsters run when the had that series? When Tim Gibbes had the rent a racer series what preparation did Brian Bernard do to prepare/maintain the bikes.

I just put an old carbed SV shock onto my injected SV and becuase its around 5mm longer. The difference to the way the bike steers around corners is so much better. Of course this could have also been achieved by fitting shorter dogbones. Both options almost no cost.

As for wearing out tyres. The slicks I have have done a couple of trackdays (way more use than a clubmeet) and I reacon I'll get at least 2 more.

If everyone in the field spends 2 grand on suspension they might all go a bit faster. If everyone in the field spends nothing maybe a couple of grossly overweight people may be upset but hey they can go on a diet.

A mistake I made with my bike was having too soft suspension. This only became obvious to me after riding two other race prepared SVs.

Jumping off my SV when it had a GSXR frontend to the Standard SV frontend was also interesting. The brakes as you have to squeeze them alot harder and you lose all the delicate feel of the better GSXR brakes.

Reason why a Hyosung would not be a good choice of ProTwin bike IMO is its brakes and theres no fix within the Protwin rules.

What makes ProTwins great is the fact they are different to 600s and 1000s. If you want to jump on a 600 and have a crashing good time go right ahead.

And slowpoke one of the better 600 riders at the moment Kyle Key did alot of his learning on an SV and a Motard bike so how does that fit into your theory?

Like I eluded to in my previous posts we dont need to keep fostering a third world mentality. If we keep thinking like that...well that is exactly like what we will be!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Without even the most basic mods damper rods ( as fitted oem to SV and ER etc ) are in fact potentially dangerous because they afford only very poor pitch control under braking. And an older model SV shock may have worked okay for your own ''unchallenging'' weight. That is your choice, but people who want something better ( within reason ) and are determined to do so should not be penalised or indeed victimised by the kiwi tall poppy syndrome. Thankfully we dont all subscibe to the central government initiated ''dumbing down'' mentality. You personally know how much work we did developing a TTX36 rear spec with Glenn, a lot of hard work, probably more so than the return and ever mindful of the knockers out there who are always present to criticise the success of ones work. At the pointy end of the field we have already found the ''seconds'' improvement to get there and are therfore looking for extra tenths. Inevitably the work and cost goes up paraboloically compared to the return. That is mine and the customers choice. If the rules were further restricted you would still invariably find the same riders at the pointy end, and as I previously said I would personally find the most devious ways of finding advantage because I have the equipment ( and dare I say so ) the tenacity to do so.

Apples for apples the same rider who rides / compares a budget modded bike against a well sorted bike with decent suspenders on it will lap faster and more safely on the latter option.

Heck, shall I fit a set of Ohlins 17,000 gas Superbike forks to an SV and TTX40 rear to really prove the point? Now that would be overkill and arrogant, so again I say the pro-twin suspension rules are largely right.

Frostys and Jills suggestions about restricting what can be done with the motors has got merit. That is where costs can be more sensibly trimmed if need be. If though as I beleive there will be a much larger field of pro twins next season...then people will have mostly embraced the rules.

[Cleve]

Haha, rather than a sleeved down R6, imagine a de-stroked R6, imagine the revs that puppy could pull...only dogs would be able to hear it!

ooops yeah de stroked is what I should have said...?

[Billy]

Cant seem to get into the MNZ website to reread Paul Stewarts original letter RE the introduction of the Pro twins class,But from memory his thinking was to introduce the class this year and then over a period of time(not specified) it would replace F3.As far as a low level feeder class is concerned things got out of hand with the introduction of suspension mods,Power commanders,Full exhaust systems,Full bodykits and so on.As a feeder class it should be,Standard roadbike with replica fibreglass if required,Sticky tyres and a slip on muffler only.Everything else bar fork oil and gearing should have been left standard.I know theres gonna be people out there who disagree citing safety etc.But if everybody is in the same boat then costs are reduced dramatically and its down to the rider to win the races not somebodys cheque book.As far as safety is concerned,A motorcycle is only as dangerous as you make it and it would be a brave person who said nobody ever crashes while using Ohlins/Whitepower/Penske etc.A lot of people I spoke to were keen to enter the Pro twins class until the the final rules were released and they saw how expensive it was gonna be.Sam Love spent in excess of $20,000.00 buiding a bike that could have been built for less than $10,000.00 under the above rules and $10,000.00 buys a shitload of tyres/travel/accomodation etc.I wonder how many would have been on the grid at Ruapuna under the above format.Food for thought

[speedpro]

I wanna race a superbike, but it's too expensive so I want the rules changed to make it cheap enough for me. Only trouble is if they managed to make a set of rules that restricted the cost enough to make it affordable for me it wouldn't be superbike any more. No matter what you do with the rules not everybody is going to be able to afford to go racing and it isn't anybody's job to make affordable for everybody. Some people will never be able to afford a race bike. That's just how it is - life sucks. As for some people spending more than others, good on them for being keen enough and also for having the cash to do it. There will always be sometimes vastly different sums spent even within the same class.

[Billy]

I wanna race a superbike, but it's too expensive so I want the rules changed to make it cheap enough for me. Only trouble is if they managed to make a set of rules that restricted the cost enough to make it affordable for me it wouldn't be superbike any more. No matter what you do with the rules not everybody is going to be able to afford to go racing and it isn't anybody's job to make affordable for everybody. Some people will never be able to afford a race bike. That's just how it is - life sucks. As for some people spending more than others, good on them for being keen enough and also for having the cash to do it. There will always be sometimes vastly different sums spent even within the same class.

A very sensible well thought out point you make and in most respects I agree wholeheartedly with you.However I was alluding to a low cost level entry class with only a few easy to spot modifications with the current 1 pr of tyres per round rule I fail to see how anybody CAN spend more money and stay within the rules.Oh and while we are on the subject,No matter what the pro twins rules are I personally wouldnt be racing one if thats what you were thinking was the reason behind my post

[FROSTY:Me]

The problem I find with this is that if a person with a good engine built with good tolerances and does everything correctly but in the rules can actually gain more horsepower by keeping a bike in good state of tune,

To as say someone who buildsa bike slaps an exhaust on doesnt seal the exhaust properly doesnt do anything to muck around with refuelling issues and just thrashes it his engine could have less power.

I think so long as these rules stay as they are itl be sweet

Thats ALWAYS going to be the case. No matter what the class rules are.
600ss is like that
The point being really that the less modifications that are allowed the less opertunity there is for cheating.

Ive seen what happened to 250 proddy in the end and hate the idea of pro twins goin the same way

That said -going back full circle the other alternative is to make pro twins an open slather class and make F3 400 multis and 500 twins like it used to be.

[FROSTY:Me]

OK ROBERT,Shaun,jd racing,ozzie ----can I ask you a question --not wanting to put you on the spot.
What would be the cost for a SAFE suspension kit for the ER6 and the SV650 --Forget cutting edge here just enough to bring the suspension to a level you concider safe for racing.
--Here's my thought - have a list of CONTROL suspenders available --eg a base level ohlins,a Penske on the rear and um--emulators,springs,oil mods in the front.
The idea being ok no compromise on safety BUT keep the spend within controlled limits

[FROSTY:Me]

I wanna race a superbike, but it's too expensive so I want the rules changed to make it cheap enough for me. Only trouble is if they managed to make a set of rules that restricted the cost enough to make it affordable for me it wouldn't be superbike any more. No matter what you do with the rules not everybody is going to be able to afford to go racing and it isn't anybody's job to make affordable for everybody. Some people will never be able to afford a race bike. That's just how it is - life sucks. As for some people spending more than others, good on them for being keen enough and also for having the cash to do it. There will always be sometimes vastly different sums spent even within the same class.

I think dude you have expressed the nub of the issue
What is the INTENT of PT??
Is it to be1) the entry level class for up and comers from the 150 class to move onto -
OR 2)is the class to replace F3 due to the ageing of the F3 "fleet"?

[Robert Taylor]

OK ROBERT,Shaun,jd racing,ozzie ----can I ask you a question --not wanting to put you on the spot.
What would be the cost for a SAFE suspension kit for the ER6 and the SV650 --Forget cutting edge here just enough to bring the suspension to a level you concider safe for racing.
--Here's my thought - have a list of CONTROL suspenders available --eg a base level ohlins,a Penske on the rear and um--emulators,springs,oil mods in the front.
The idea being ok no compromise on safety BUT keep the spend within controlled limits

Around 2k for front and rear inclusive assuming no dutch auctions. As I have stated before the learning of suspension set up skills is important for when you move on to more elite classes. Btw, WP was another option

[Robert Taylor]

Thats ALWAYS going to be the case. No matter what the class rules are.
600ss is like that
The point being really that the less modifications that are allowed the less opertunity there is for cheating.

Ive seen what happened to 250 proddy in the end and hate the idea of pro twins goin the same way

That said -going back full circle the other alternative is to make pro twins an open slather class and make F3 400 multis and 500 twins like it used to be.

I concur Frosty. Production Superbike had the engine rules ''massaged'' kast year to make it cheaper. The unit time to build a competitive engine has now magnified and the bills are larger. It is importnat that rules are made by people who actually know the technical ins and outs.