Author Topic: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...  (Read 11729 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

  • Guest
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #30 on: July 19, 2004, 07:04:00 PM »
Here's a thought... there is nothing "wrong" with the way the classes are now, Altered, production, Modified... the only thing that needs to be cleaned up and defined are the rules governing them, the intent behind them, and how they are enforced at tech and registration on the Salt.
 
 Make those all 3 of those items PUBLIC and offer them up for a little bit of open discussion, and it will be fine.

  • Guest
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #31 on: July 19, 2004, 07:11:00 PM »
as to finding open records and going 60mph to get in the record books... whats wrong with that? I do it all the time.  :D  'Cept now we are doing over 80mph with the same bike and hunting for 90+.
 
 remember all records were once open ones, and there is nothing wrong with finding one that someone hasnt bothered to set yet and doing it.
 
 Are there ANY small cc pushrod sidecar records? Nope, mainly because I havent had time to build the derned sidecar.  :D

Offline Glen

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7024
  • SCTA/BNI timer 1983 to 2004, Retired,. Crew on Tur
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #32 on: July 19, 2004, 07:59:00 PM »
Dave
 There are over 1800 MC classas available we don't really need more.
Glen
Crew on Turbinator II

South West, Utah

Offline Dakin Engineering

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 412
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #33 on: July 20, 2004, 07:59:00 PM »
BTW, I emailed Wink and his response was the handlebars and the seat height must be above a line drawn thru the top of the rims for Modified class.
Turbo Sportsters since '97

  • Guest
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #34 on: July 21, 2004, 01:36:00 AM »
yes, but the seat height and handle bars below the top of the rims isnt REQUIRED for Altered. Thats the point of discussion... Can/Should one be allowed to run an otherwise legal for Modified class bike in Altered and give up the advantage that a custom chasis provides...
 
 kinda like running a bike with a slightly larger than legal for Open class "headlight" in MPS. It aint legal for Open class, but there is nothing in the MPS class rules that say you HAVE to have a full fairing... a cafe racing fairing will do, or even a large "headlight". If you run against someone with a full fairing and streamlined this and taped-up that.. and still beat 'em... good on ya.

BiggerDanno

  • Guest
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #35 on: July 29, 2004, 02:15:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by AlanGalbraith#4747:
  Here's a thought... there is nothing "wrong" with the way the classes are now, Altered, production, Modified... the only thing that needs to be cleaned up and defined are the rules governing them, the intent behind them, and how they are enforced at tech and registration on the Salt.
 
 Make those all 3 of those items PUBLIC and offer them up for a little bit of open discussion, and it will be fine.
DIng, ding, we have a winner!!!
 My original question was posed as the rulebook becomes a bit unclear. I see by the responses that I am not the only one confused...
 Then there are those that used this to start a whole 'nuther discussion...

Offline firemanjim

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 399
Re: Differnece in Altered Partial Streamline and...
« Reply #36 on: August 01, 2004, 03:22:00 AM »
Danno,I agree,the rulebook is as clear as mud.Just try and figure out what size motor is allowed in a particular CC class---
Bonneville 2001,2002,2003,2004,and NO stinking 2005,DLRA 2006, next?
Well,sure can't complain about 2008--6 records over 200 and 5 hats from Bonneville,Bubs, and El Mirage for the team!