Reducing motorcycle displacement classes

[sabat]

The "Classic" designation was more brainstorming on my part - maybe a way to reclassify the smaller displacement classes to a year range that is newer than Vintage (56) but not yet modern. Maybe 57-83 or some such, to keep out fuel injection, or aluminum chassis, mono shocks, big fairings, etc. The car classes use the Classic categories.

[bak189]

OK.............OK...........How about a engine measurement to make certain that the "records" set are LEGAL!!!!

PS. Engine displacement classes mean nothing unless engine displacement is checked..(for record runs)
I know that SCTA/BNI and BMST do check for class engine displacement......How about all the others???

[dw230]

 

DW

[sabat]

I agree, I'm talking about SCTA

[generatorshovel]

IMHO, leave the classes alone !
I began in the 175 class, on a 105, bored & stroked to 145, & had no concerns with being outclassed, I had FUN and set records,
We built another engine TO THE RULES, 174 CC, and upped the record, and the fun factor,
Should the rules reflect engine sizes the manufacturers produce ? NO !
If any changes are made, they should separate 2 & four stroke engines, especially in the smaller capacities.
Tiny

[MiltonP]

There has been some great competition in the 250cc classes in ECTA so I would hate to see it go.  400cc is the odd one and I don't remember last time I  tech'd a bike in a 400cc class. That said the KTM single may be a challenger for some of the new 350cc class bikes.  Not sure we need to adjust for the new displacements but am open to discussion.

I am a little tired of the BS on here with every thread mentioning the need for displacement verification for valid records. Must have a lot of cheating attempts out west but I don't believe we have had it with the bikes in the east.  I won't speak for the car guys but I think they would challenge an unusual speed. If we saw an unbelievable record, we would discuss it and maybe challenge it. The only speed I remember questioned in recent years was more likely a fuel in gas class issue but we felt it would fall soon enough and if they could live with cheating...

Maybe we should get wind speed verification for every record on an west > east track. I wasn't thrilled with the records with 15-20 mph tailwinds I witnessed at El Mirage. I think that wind was worth quite a few cc's.  I also didn't feel it was especially safe with the wind quartering but they continued to make record passes.

[sabat]

OK, this conversation is devolving a bit, so in summary, I think I've learned some things about the issue and will now gather some data and think about it a while. thanks folks, Dean

[SaltPeter]

IMHO, leave the classes alone !
I began in the 175 class, on a 105, bored & stroked to 145, & had no concerns with being outclassed, I had FUN and set records,
We built another engine TO THE RULES, 174 CC, and upped the record, and the fun factor,
Should the rules reflect engine sizes the manufacturers produce ? NO !
If any changes are made, they should separate 2 & four stroke engines, especially in the smaller capacities.
Tiny

I agree Tiny .... too many Classes is not a problem ... yes separate Two Stroke/Four Stroke Classes is what is needed ... if any changes are being seriously proposed ...

I do think a "Classic" Engine category is definitely a gap in the SCTA Bike rules for all those Non Pushrod Bikes that Technology has made redundant ... CB750, XS650, RD350, Z1, GS1000, H1, etc ...

Nothing Complicated ... Air Cooled Carb Engines from 1956 -1986 ... every thing else would be the same Prod,Mod, Special Construct etc ...

Pete  

[MiltonP]

We have 2 and 4 stroke class distinction in ECTA.  I have been a beneficiary of the addition of twins classes both in Ohio and Loring but do feel sympathy for the owners of singles and triples that really have no records they can compete for.  That being the case, I would be open to dropping the twins classes versus adding singles and triples due to all the bookkeeping. Alternatively, I could volunteer to do the class designations and record entry work. Maybe the biggest challenge is figuring out what the existing records are with all the sub - classes.

[Jessechop]

We have 2 and 4 stroke class distinction in ECTA.  I have been a beneficiary of the addition of twins classes both in Ohio and Loring but do feel sympathy for the owners of singles and triples that really have no records they can compete for.  That being the case, I would be open to dropping the twins classes versus adding singles and triples due to all the bookkeeping. Alternatively, I could volunteer to do the class designations and record entry work. Maybe the biggest challenge is figuring out what the existing records are with all the sub - classes.

Singles can run in twin class

[MiltonP]

Never had a single come through tech in twin class. Would have see if our rules are an issue, but doubt many would compete well. Same for tripples taking on the fours. Ideally they will stay with the sport trying to up their personal best and eventually want to build a contender on a competitive platform if they want to get a record. If they have been around a bit I would consider giving them a shot at a record on my bike(s) if they can't make that move. I should add that I  built my ducati before there were twin classes in the east.  Until then FIM was the only possibility I was aware of.

[RichFox]

Except for V4 and XF classes, I don't know of any class break for cars based on number of cylinders. This reducing the number of motorcycle classes is beginning to sound like more classes. 

[MiltonP]

My concern is getting enough folks out there to keep the events, and sport, viable. The opportunity to get record is going to be a draw as is having a variety of bikes to see for all to see and hear run. If all we had was displacements to go by there would be no American or European bikes out there except for a few vintage bikes and the BMW 1000rr. The variety is fun for the racers and the spectators.

[SaltPeter]

Except for V4 and XF classes, I don't know of any class break for cars based on number of cylinders. This reducing the number of motorcycle classes is beginning to sound like more classes.  

Rich I understand what you are saying, but I have found comparing Car and Bike Classes is an apples and oranges exercise ...

In SCTA/DLRA Motorcycle Classes you have to use a Motorcycle based Engine ... whereas you can use a Motorcycle Engine in a Car ...

In the MC Displacements Categories you can get the following readily available Mass Production Engines:

250 to 750: 1,2,3,4 Cylinder 4 Stroke and 2 stroke .... above 750: 2,3,4,6 cylinders 4 Stroke .... add to that Liquid and Air Cooled ...

Car Engines are not like that .... Generally the number of Cylinders are usually Displacement related when comparing Mass Production Engines ...

I know there is some cross over in E and F but you basically have 4,6,8 Cylinder that relate to the Displacement Class  ...

So looking at Motorcycle Classes can really only be done from a Motorcycle Rule perspective .....

Pete  

[RichFox]

Yeah, I know that. My point really was that this thread, which started out being about reducing motorcycle classes is becoming about adding tons of new classes for singles and triples. This would not really effect my racing effort other than. I am getting older, and the rule book is getting heavier. I would like it to stay liftable.