Author Topic: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...  (Read 11692 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline hawkwind

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 415
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #15 on: July 14, 2004, 04:55:00 AM »
Jon we use the same rules as SCTA but a year behind( and you think you have to wait a while for your new rules )   looking at your 2003 rules  for "partial streamlining " as in what streamlining is allowed for partial streamlined  these are the same for both modified  (MPS) and special construction ( APS) yes there are many differences between modified and special construction  but unless I am reading /interpreting differently  than you,   streamlining  for special construction refers you back to modified , I thought Danno was asking was there a difference in what streamlining is allowed  for each class of bike  have the rules changed for 2004???
 Gary
slower than most

  • Guest
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #16 on: July 14, 2004, 10:09:00 AM »
I'll post the exact rules out of this years book... but you DONT to have the seat lower than the tire, a small gas tank, or the pegs farther to qualify for Altered this year in the SCTA, you just need a londer wheelbase....

Offline Stan Back

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5879
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #17 on: July 14, 2004, 01:24:00 PM »
A grizzled old salt veteran once told me that maybe the car classes would be better off if we all ran on a record logged to our vehicle number.  Then we wouldn't have to fret about streamlining, hood length, parachute pack configuration, etc.  If you ran vehicle #1010, for instance, once you exceeded your best speed you had a new record (for vehicle #1010).  No more quibling, no more protests.  I thought this was just a joke.  But with over 1500 motorcycle classes and only about 100 bikes at Speed Week, this is something you guys might want to consider in the future.
Past (Only) Member of the San Berdoo Roadsters -- "California's Most-Exclusive Roadster Club" -- 19 Years of Bonneville and/or El Mirage Street Roadster Records

Offline Pat Kinne / Salt201

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #18 on: July 14, 2004, 07:35:00 PM »
I am a car guy and I don't want to step on any toes here but Stan does have a point - whats up with the million classes - how fine can you split a hair??

Offline yamagamma

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 48
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #19 on: July 15, 2004, 10:45:00 AM »
With the current rules anyone can run a modified bike in Altered by either, changing the gas tank size, or moving the pegs, orlowering the seat, or extending the wheelbase.
 
 With the onset of several bikes knocking on the 250mph door, maybe it is time for a re-think on the Altered class rules that really define the class for purpose built land speed bikes. Imagine - full dustbin fairings - allowed! Streamlined tail sections that extend beyond the rear wheel allowed!  This would open up the class to some really creative technology and even greater speeds from sit-on bikes. 300mph maybe???
Never underestimate an old guy on a Yamaha!

Offline hawkwind

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 415
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #20 on: July 16, 2004, 01:53:00 AM »
yamagamma  possibly by 2006 this will be reality  in the DLRA ( dry lake racers Australia ) provided concensus can be reached regarding  safety issues real and percived , it is extreamly exciting ,and opens up 300+ mph for "sit on type bikes " my plans are now waiting to become reality
 Hawkwind
slower than most

Offline Larry Forstall

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 294
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #21 on: July 16, 2004, 05:45:00 AM »
Here we go again. At Speed Week it was said that the Modified bikes would be kept out of the Altered classes by the rear frame rail lower than the tire rule. The 2004 rule book clearly states that any of the WB, footpeg location, gas tank size rules will put you in the Altered class. Imagine the poor racer who shows up without a 68" WB. expecting to run Altered, he can't. It would be so simple just to say that an Altered bike must have a custom frame and no other restrictions (except streamlining) and a Modified bike has to have a factory frame. Yes, I have a bias, but I still think it is the best, simplest solution.

Offline yamagamma

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 48
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #22 on: July 16, 2004, 11:35:00 AM »
Larry I think maybe the wording is wrong in 7.F.13. It states... ANY of the following will advance a modified production bike into Class A.(tank size,footpegs,wb, seat)
 If it said ALL of the following are required to advance.... then there would be a lot more difference between the two classes.
Never underestimate an old guy on a Yamaha!

racin jason

  • Guest
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #23 on: July 16, 2004, 02:08:00 PM »
as a record holder in both a class and m classes i have no problem with people going from m to a frame classes  with small changes. the car guys do it (the racedeck street roadster ran three classes in 2003 and set 3 records) what the  bike board must look at as the car board has done is that is there a PERFORMANCE advantage if you were to take a  m class frame and run it in a class. the answer is no. its a dissadvantage to run a production based frame against a purpose built landspeed racing bike. which brings us back to a point that the 200mph club has brought up with the minimums to gain acceptance to the club. setting records should represent a superior performance for that class. so if a purpose built super aerodynamic , long, low, raked and massaged bike cant go faster than a stock framed production bike with a few mods how valid is the record. i say bring on the m framed bikes and lets see who's the fastest!

landracing

  • Guest
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #24 on: July 16, 2004, 08:36:00 PM »
AAA a message from Mr Guthrie who is famous for class jumping, the master at it...  :)   :)   :)   :)
 Love ya scott.
 
 The biggest problem I see that a A class big should be the dream deamon from hell that is going to go super fast, as Jason says faster then the Production or Modified bikes, However the gas tank rule sucks. A purposed built bike to go super fast may not be a turbo, but rather a nitro burning bike, and on the long course going the full 7 miles, im sure that 1.3 gallon tank could empty pretty fast. I dont really know. But an A frame and built bike you should be allowed for more modifictions to go fast, not lower the seat below the tire. There is really a large lack of innovation for that class, what if I dont want my foot pegs back at the rear tire, or want a 1.3 gallon tank, maybe I need more fuel then that (like nitro or more fuel needed for nitrous bike). Hmmm something to think about.
 
 Just seems more limits put on a purpose built class.
 
 And really what was so wrong as before? People got to run in several classes, thus being more money for the organization for more class changes. I think what it really did was the people who could do it before, have rather a secure record because now it is harder to get into that class from a production or modified frame.
 
 I say lets rid some of the 1500 bike classes and incorporate less classes for next year. Could prove to make a better meet racing each other.
 
 One example was Joe Amo and Jason McVicar going after the 1000 MPS-F record. Starting in 1998 the record I beleive was 186 mph. Joe bumped it a little (191 or 193) then McVicar bumped it to (196 or 198), then Amo bumped it to 201, Mcvicar bumped it 206, then Amo bumped it to 221 mph in 2001. Its just not all about getting the name in the book.
 
 That was fun watching and being part of it all, parking lot rebuilds, stuck to the radio for the times, the sharing of smirks, the hand shakes, the "what the fu**'s", the wrench throwing etc etc.  That is true in a Bonneville memory. Competitivness. Not searching the rule book for where there is no record and going 60 mph in one of the open 1500 classes.
 
 Jonathan

landracing

  • Guest
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #25 on: July 17, 2004, 05:16:00 AM »
How do you come up with this stuff, Scott?
 
 Do you actually have a day job?
 
 Makes me laugh though.
 
 Actually Scott, here is a different view, combine altered and modified and take the higher of the speeds?
 
 El Mirage does not run a modified class, and most rules stem from El Mirage running then Bonneville runnings.  Seems that there isnt much advantage to running a altered bike since there are more restrictions on that class to be in it. More of an advantage thru Gas or Fuel or Blown and Unblown so keep those as they are. That would get rid of 133 spaces in current rule book that would rid of 4 pages. But we arent really talking about pages in the rule book, we are talkig about reducing the number of classes. Or we take hte modified frame and combine it with altered, same difference. That would or possibly affect 15 of your records in the altered class. How many of those records were set with a purpose built bike in the altered classes? 6 of those records have a faster speed in the modified class versus the altered class. You were given chance by jumping classes from a modified bike to altered. Im not picking on you Scott Im just showing a point. Altered should have faster speeds then modified, should be a purpose built bike etc etc.  So basically what it amounts to, releive the delimma of classes and combine the two?
 
 Just funny now they make a deal of it, instead of 10-15 years ago when it was happening?
 
 They say most rules wont change for an unfair advantage like the "36 rule, for the people who raced before you.
 
  :)   :)
 
 Jon

Offline JackD

  • NOBODY'S FOOL
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4684
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #26 on: July 17, 2004, 06:31:00 AM »
Individual record performance importance is divided by the number of classes and cheap shots are extra.
 It could be the FIM/FIA is correct and the US has created a non racing monster with a class for everybody that comes along forever with the entry fee.
"I would rather lose going fast enough to win than win going slow enough to lose."
"That horrible smell is dirty feet being held to the fire"

landracing

  • Guest
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #27 on: July 17, 2004, 08:10:00 PM »
"Once a bike is "entered" at Bonneville, the bike stays in that same class FOREVER! One meet; ten years, whatever!"
 
 
 Ok by me, in not interested in mutiple records, im interested in going fast and enjoying the surroundings of going to Speedweek.
 
 But politics would come in and ruin that, imagine how much money would be lost from class moving at todays meets. Even now with the Altered rule I venture to say it will affect the pocketbook of the scta.
 
 Jonathan

Dave H.

  • Guest
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #28 on: July 18, 2004, 01:19:00 AM »
Hi all,
 
 Hey, I'm all for MORE classes! How about two-stroke
 AND four-stroke records in the same class? Just some
 more fuel (or pre-mix) for the fire! Hee hee!  ;)
 
 Keep up the discussion, very informative and
 entertaining. Hope to meet you guys on the salt
 this year.
 
 Dave

Offline JackD

  • NOBODY'S FOOL
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4684
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #29 on: July 18, 2004, 11:40:00 AM »
Anybody can try to pull a chain, but to push one "FOREVER" is an art.
 No one has "CLASS JUMPED" more than Scott at the club races except perhaps Me.
"I would rather lose going fast enough to win than win going slow enough to lose."
"That horrible smell is dirty feet being held to the fire"