A class issues

[stay`tee]

yes Don, you and i and most folks on here know that,, i presented the official with oem (page in laptop from Official Kawasaki Service Manual) showing wheelbase,, i asked for a second openion, only to have the second official confirm what the first said,, at that point, given the hell-a-baloo that was going on, i thought roll with the punches and get outta here, obversley the officials had been given a directive, and there interputation was what thay were stiching with,,
will i be bringing my bike half way around the world to run at BUB again,, you betcha, seeya in 2015,,,

[BHR301]

One thought comes to mind with these made on the spot rules...SHOW IT TO ME IN PRINT!
If they can't, won't or don't want to...what the hell is a rule book for?

Bill

[wobblywalrus]

This is one argument where all three or four sides have valid points.

[bak189]

I would like to note that everybody on this Landracing.com keeps saying that Drew, Curtis, AMA Ken do a great job and to a certain degree I agree, doing Tech is a thankless job ......But if I understand this whole process is that BUB (Denis) and Drew, Curtis, AMA Ken (with the help of some other like myself on sidecars) write and edit the AMA Landspeed rules.........I don't believe the AMA "home-office" has any input or interest in Landspeed racing rules.........................I may well be wrong, if so Drew, Curtis and AMA Ken can post here and prove me wrong.......If I am right then the above named people are the ones to contact to correct a problem..............................................

[nrhs sales]

it would be really nice if we could hear from the powers that be. I do know that at least one of them is following this thread for sure. Evenn if it is just to say they have read this and understand some of the concerns, etc..

[bak189]

Regarding my last post.......I do have some knowledge as to the inner workings of the AMA having worked as a AMA official back in the 1970's on their road race program with the late great Bill Boyce (a outstanding person with great racing event knowledge, one of the best the AMA ever had).....I know there have been many changes made in all these past years but I think I am right in regard to AMA LSR rule making..........................................

[631]

Bak, you are correct on the development of the rules reference the AMA.  Most of our MC rules have come through the SCTA historical development format; they have the operating history to build upon.  My belief (and I could be wrong) is that 2 wheeled classification developed from the car rules model: production vehicle, a little modified, more modified, a whole lot more modified and we're building from scratch. The motorcycle iteration has been primarily frame based to place bikes into an appropriate modification category. The advent of modern  frames, modifications required to control prodigious power outputs and aerodynamics has clouded the traditional rule structure and contributed to the issues we are discussing.  My opinion is that we ALL are transitory stewards of our sport and as such should take the rules seriously and classification changes should be well researched and thought out- which unfortunately takes time. There is a working group that is addressing the A / M issue; one- define the problem and two- create a solution.  Constructive discussion is of course welcome and a couple of us do monitor this thread and take  well thought out postings seriously.  Please PM me on this subject if you desire a less public format.  We do understand the need to get any changes / information out early so we can plan for the 2014 season which will be sunny days and hard salt.
thank you
Rex

[Dean Los Angeles]

I agree that it's crappy to discover a bike that was legal last year isn't this year.

I don't agree that a modified frame ever belongs in altered. You can have a frame that is not legal for either.

For those of you complaining that they should follow the printed rules, the rules are so full of holes that interpretation is necessary everywhere. Can you run oxygen to go faster? No, even though i it's not disallowed by the rule book.

Dean, why can't you run a modified frame in altered? Because you can't.

What really bothers me about this argument is the almost complete lack of innovation by the people running this class.

If it remotely looks like a motorcycle, then you don't understand aerodynamics. Why are the modified records faster?

[sabat]

Bak, you are correct on the development of the rules reference the AMA.  Most of our MC rules have come through the SCTA historical development format; they have the operating history to build upon.  My belief (and I could be wrong) is that 2 wheeled classification developed from the car rules model: production vehicle, a little modified, more modified, a whole lot more modified and we're building from scratch. The motorcycle iteration has been primarily frame based to place bikes into an appropriate modification category. The advent of modern  frames, modifications required to control prodigious power outputs and aerodynamics has clouded the traditional rule structure and contributed to the issues we are discussing.  My opinion is that we ALL are transitory stewards of our sport and as such should take the rules seriously and classification changes should be well researched and thought out- which unfortunately takes time. There is a working group that is addressing the A / M issue; one- define the problem and two- create a solution.  Constructive discussion is of course welcome and a couple of us do monitor this thread and take  well thought out postings seriously.  Please PM me on this subject if you desire a less public format.  We do understand the need to get any changes / information out early so we can plan for the 2014 season which will be sunny days and hard salt.
thank you
Rex

Thanks for the insight Rex, good luck with the process. -Dean

[sabat]

Dean, why can't you run a modified frame in altered? Because you can't.

Wow, I hadn't thought about it that way, this is really helpful.

[Old Scrambler]

Its a great discussion............

So if the rules committee will NOT allow a highly modified frame to run in A......which one of you is going to take the records away from Tom Mellor?

And if you think that's not a problem.........before the 10% wheelbase rule was put in, I believe Tom ran the same chassis in the M-class.

My own 250cc M-PG record was set in 2011 with a total wheelbase about 2-inches beyond the current allowance. I saw the rule change and spent a LOT of $$$ and shortened my swingarm to comply. I used the often published 1+-inch longer wheelbase for Triumph T20s built at the factory with the heavier-duty front forks and larger diameter wheels. Triumph published the wheelbase at 49-inches for standard models and added a footnote at the bottom of the page that reads "other models may vary". I brought evidence of the wheelbase sizes and a copy of the Triumph manual printed from a computer screen. The techs would only accept the 49-inches....................so we agreed to have the techs measure and place a mark on the swingarm with the warning that if I ran at record speed, the center of the axle had better not be beyond the mark. We ran in MPS-PG and set a new record after we hunted down a half-link to get the chain to fit the 3/8-inch adjustment window.   

I have a hard time understanding the 10% rule and would not begin to argue with the techs........they did not right the rule.  A factory production bike has an adjuster at the rear that allows the wheelbase to be change. The typical new bike has the axle slightly behind the most forward position. Is this where the factory gets the measurement?  If I measure my completely stock T20 at the rear-most setting of the axle, I get a rounded 51-inches. Does it not follow that if the modified wheelbase is measured at the rear-most axle position, that the comparisons should be made on the SAME basis?   

[Old Scrambler]

I offer the following as a solution to the 10% rule....................Identify the longest factory-production wheelbase for the class and allow all competitors no more than a set measurement of allowed modification for the M-class.

I also believe the following would solve the M vs. A dispute for frame type:  If the seating position is lower than the top of the rear rim, the bike is only permitted to run in the A class for all sit-on motorcycles. An exception would have to be made should a production bike be introduced that sits lower than the rear rim.  With that as the basic rule...........build away. Completely stock cradle with a lowered seat and extended wheelbase to an entirely 'purpose-built' frame.

BTW...........who came up with the idea that a frame from a modern bike is allowed to be married to an older motor and compete in the M-class as long as its all the same brand?  To me, that says A all over it.

[maj]

Rex thanks for the information, 

[joea]

Dean LA...why have modified frames been allowed to be altered and run
in altered A class for over 50 yrs...?....because they could and it was LEGAL...

'my frame is built by hand by me...that's special construction...yeah that's the way it
should be"...well did ya do that to go faster than the modified records or did ya
do that so ya didn't have to run against modified records....?....im assuming folks
do that so as to take advantage of more liberal rules and go faster than those
using altered prod frames....BUT that simply has not panned out to be the case...99% of the time...

the fastest sit on bikes in the world are altered prod. frames....the idea that they should not have a class
to run in is simply asinine.....

having 50 yrs or so of a precedent, ruled on differently at the event...is  unconscionable....

[hawkwind]

There seems to be a problem with definitions ......at what point does a production frame become a modified frame? ..then a modified frame an altered frame ? ( and what is the distinction between modified and altered )  I was always of the understanding that  "A" was for "special construction " again what does special construction mean? made from scratch ( my understanding) or an altered / modified production frame?

I do have 2 dogs in this fight ( if ever I decide to play in your playground)

My first dog is a modified / altered  production frame ...a raked 10* busa with a very modified  stock sub frame and a one off swing arm ...because the wheel base is greater than modified rules allow it is forced into 'A'  where as far as i'm concerned its a modified frame and should be in the modified class

Dog # 2 is what I would call a special construction .....a one off hand built frame .....contrary to what some think this bike makes use of every thing possible ( that I can think of)  to achieve the best outcome for a naked bike i.e.. the smallest frontal area  etc.. will this make it any faster than a modified bike ? there is a lot more to a bike than a frame.

IMHO the rules for modified need to be opened right up ....allow any modifications to a production frame ....so long as the bike has a production frame or part thereof its a modified class bike .......this will stop special construction becoming a dumping ground for what are essentially modified bikes.