A class issues

[stay`tee]

times have changed,, go to any dragstrip these days and you would be hard pressed to find a homebuilt laydown jigger anywhere, thay are all souped up modified sportsbikes running times only dreamed off back in the day, ,,,
 

[sabat]

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.

Here's one way to simplify class distinctions.

1. Altered bikes have no limitations other than safety. This includes whatever chassis desired, OEM or custom.
2. Modified bikes must have OEM frame, restrcited wheelbase, seating position, etc etc, the current standard.
3. No class that is designed to be faster (i.e., Altered) is "protected" from competition from a more restricted class.


In this way, design restrictions are truly unlimited - if a builder believes that the OEM chassis is sufficient - but wants to make other changes that are not allowed in Modified, they are not forced to recreate the wheel.

By allowing more restricted classes to compete with less restricted classes, we create motivation for bike builders to take full advantage of the flexibility of the rules. An unrestricted class should not be a safe haven from competition. Thus a Production bike could compete with Modifed or Altered, Modified could compete with Altered.

Dean

[BHR301]

to sabat...

Dean...Thank you, that is the most "common sense" idea I've seen yet.

Bill

[Koncretekid]

Here's one way to simplify class distinctions.

1. Altered bikes have no limitations other than safety. This includes whatever chassis desired, OEM or custom.
2. Modified bikes must have OEM frame, restrcited wheelbase, seating position, etc etc, the current standard.
3. No class that is designed to be faster (i.e., Altered) is "protected" from competition from a more restricted class.


In this way, design restrictions are truly unlimited - if a builder believes that the OEM chassis is sufficient - but wants to make other changes that are not allowed in Modified, they are not forced to recreate the wheel.

By allowing more restricted classes to compete with less restricted classes, we create motivation for bike builders to take full advantage of the flexibility of the rules. An unrestricted class should not be a safe haven from competition. Thus a Production bike could compete with Modifed or Altered, Modified could compete with Altered.

Dean

I would agree with you on this one.  Actually, that is almost exactly what the rule book says:
 "Special construction class is unlimited in design, with the following exceptions:
1.) The seat area (farthest to rear) shall not be above and/or
behind a line drawn vertically upwards through the rear
axel.
2.) It must be rear wheel drive only.."

  They wouldn't even have to change the rules; just follow the ones they have.  Somehow, I don't think that's what we'll get.  We don't really know who's in the driver's seat at BUBs.

As an alternative, more definitive rules could be added. Adding a few statements about what is required, such as assigning percentages for each change from stock and then requiring that "A" class bikes must be at least 50% modified or whatever they would like to see.  Maybe 25% for an altered steering angle, and 25% for a wheelbase change over 10%, and 10% for other minor changes such as a 1 gallon fuel tank or altered seating position or rigid rear suspension or foot peg within 6" of the real axle.  Just throwing out some ideas here.
Tom

[BHR301]

Koncretekid...I don't feel we need more rules, we just need a little "common sense" in way the ones we have are applied!

The only problem in what I just said is there in very little common sense in the world today so why should I expect to find any in motorsports??

Bill

[bak189]

"Who is in the drivers seat at BUB?" I posted that in previous postings ....add Rex...............The people most concerned and effected should contact "them" direct.....................Simple..........................................................

(that what I have done in the past regarding sidecar rule problems)

[nrhs sales]

I am really glad to see that we have a very thoughtful discussion going on without any hateful arguing or name calling. Nice to see for a change on the internet!!! Just proves LSR racers are the greatest folks in the world!!

[joea]

Bak...folks making decisions wanted this aired out some "here"...to have the discourse from lsr folks to facilitate the decision making process...

[donpearsall]

Well - as long as the rules for the "A" Class are going to be revisited, why not get rid of the ridiculous rules that restrict rear streamlining i.e. "A minimum of 180 degrees shall be showing, with no blockage by streamlining..." Isn't the point to design a fast bike? This absurd rule makes it difficult to design and create a streamlined fairing. Why?
SCTA has seen the light, why not AMA? Dump those rules.

Don

[JimL]

This is part of something I have previously written about.  I think the lessons my party learned, this year, are worth sharing.  This has been eye opening to me, as we ran both APS and MPS bikes with identical engines, built by me on the same day.  These are bikes number 1581/1580 and 797 in this Speedweek 2013 results.  Hope you enjoy....It begins telling about my big, orange APS bike:

"This year I ran the bike in APS-PF-650 class, with my return run at 163.8 mph.  Following that run, we removed all streamlining, put my son on the bike with no jetting or gearing changes, which resulted in 135 mph.  Regearing for better point in the power band made no noticeable difference.

From this experience, we understand how effective the long bike, long tail streamlining seems to be.

Now, the rest of the story.  Over the last two years I also built an MPS-PF-650 bike for my friend, Dan Wagner.  This engine/drivetrain is identical to my A bike, but the bike only uses a Charlie Toy fairing on a stock CBR600f3 chassis with 1.75" swing arm stretch.  The seat/tank/tail are stock CBR600f3.  http://www.landracing.com/forum/index.php/topic,10559.0.html

This bike ran only 136 mph, partially due to Dans physical size, but mostly due to short length and no rear streamlining.

The real potential for speed difference, between A bikes and M bikes, is length (which allows a lower,longer riding position) and full APS streamlining.  How the frame is made is not necessarily a factor, considering the compact size of many modern frames."

I just LOVE these APS bikes; they are too much fun!  Thanks for letting me join your conversation.

Regards, JimL

[wobblywalrus]

Maybe some "UPS' classes for unlimited partial streamliners.  They could allow bike with production or special frames and skirts on the tail, like DLRA, SCTA, FIM, and Run-watcha-brung.  The ol' walrus might come back to the AMA for that.

[joea]

Wobbly an unlimited type class as u describe has been discussed / considered abit for a few years

[maj]

If the classing and application of them stays similar to SCTA there is a better chance of more time and effort going into a bike than if the classing were to be so different that it could only run at the one AMA meet a year

Jim, i think good bodywork with a standard type tail is worth 20-30 mph over a naked bike when your in the 200mph range and a good tail design that much again

New bodywork commercially available and seen on the Hunter/Sills BMW and a Guthrie 1000 should help bump some of the APS records in the SCTA but less so in the AMA if it has to be cut too much to comply even FIM with its 135 deg view of the rear tire is only a small cut in comparison
 

[joea]

I had typed up a hope for more parity between the organizations...but deleted it...

I think it is a positive to have more parity..

There is so much innovation that can be fostered in altered that goes beyond modified allowances...

I hate seeing rules making , follow the path of our societies whining about this and that unfair to the point that someone starts specing what a racer should do, to separate them from others who worked hard under existing rules for decades and went faster...

More rake and long arms isnt necessarily a feature of best practices...

Its the whole system...altered class allows for alot more of the system to be custom...

Its worked well in scta, and other sanctioning bodies following close to that model...until someone felt it wasnt fair that their custom veh couldnt compete

If a production veh , with a few mods can enter altered and go faster than you in same class...they shouldnt be the ones the rules made to exclude...there is something fundamentally flawed with that logic...

Kinda like alot of the way society moving , "its not fair he is doing better than me"...

[nrhs sales]

If a production veh , with a few mods can enter altered and go faster than you in same class...they shouldnt be the ones the rules made to exclude...there is something fundamentally flawed with that logic...

Kinda like alot of the way society moving , "its not fair he is doing better than me"...

It's like you are reading my mind Joe!!!