Burt Munro's Records

[Marcroux]

  Once again I asked a question about something I read about in a book. I have no interest in any record in the streamliner class at this time. If I was to build one it would be in the 250cc class or smaller. ( note to NSU fans I am not building a streamliner so there is no need to write messages telling me not to build one) I do not now nor have I ever own the following Norton 850, Moto Guzzi 850, Suzuki 850, Honda 810 or Ducati 860. I do not care that there was once a 883 class, that it was removed from the record book and do not surport bring it back. My question to you guys are there any records in the A or APS bike class that you think should not be broken?

Marc     

[JackD]

A-class with it's few restrictions should be the fastest sit on class but it has not been developed to near the potential it offers.
Modified bikes have been generally faster because there is a lack of effort to build a single purpose LSR racer.
 Modified is not meant to be nor ever has been another street bike class but the rules seem to be evolving that way with a false sense of tradition that never existed.
Politics being what they are, "false" seems to be the prime objective and motivated by personnel interests.

[kspz3]

Here is my question regarding Bart's s-1000 record - Russel Wright (another kiwi) in 1956 along with Bobby Burns (accompanied by Burt as pit crew and his first vist to Bonneville) ran 196 MPH in a streamlined, 1000cc Vincent Black Lightening running fuel. How is it that Bart's later pass was defined as a record....... I have always been curious about this  - Wright to my knowledge holds the last outright speed record (july 2nd 1955 - 185.15 - Tram Road NZ) set on a production based bike (Frame and Motor with a streamlined shell - similar build to Burt Monroe Special) and the last outright record set on asphalt - all since have been at Bonneville. they went to Bonneville in 56 in an effort to be the first motorcycle to exceed 200 - of course they were beat to the goal by the NSU team and next the Texas Cigar/Devil's Arrow - Triumph. Bobby Burns of course set the side car record that year but the history books seem to have forgotten Russel's pass.

[Marcroux]

 For change I can answer your question. It very simple the FIM would not accept the records on the grounds that the timekeepers and the clocks on the site had not been sanctioned by them. Both Burns and Wright went fast enough to set records but no bike organization clocked them. In the Fifties there was no FIM member club in the USA. Bill France started one in the Sixties so he could run the US Grand Prix at Daytona. The AFM then became a member after that. The AMA became the FIM affilate in 1970 or 71. Since also the AMA did not clocked them, no record by them would be in the AMA record book.

 Jack,
 I agree with you that a true class A bike should go faster that a class M bike but racers have to build them. Maybe with the rule that you can only race a bike in one class or the other will help the situation. Also if they quit changing the rules every year maybe I will be able to figure something out.

 Marc 

[JackD]

In the first 15 years after SCTA picked up the responsibility for the bike program there were actually very few rule changes. The interested bikers seemed satisfied with the simplicity and the ability to be heard at was  to become a traditional gathering out of hours and a no cost to them or the association. When that changed, it was the beginning of the end.
The first couple of years saw the Street Bike Production rules actually tighten up as was their wishes and not much else changed.
I suggested the language be added to the Streamliner rules that required full rider protection and thus isolate them from the illegal partial streamlined bikes.
That did not result in a large influx of new liners but protected them from sub par performances by sit on bikes.
A true Class A bike like a liner is a single purpose vehicle that is not suited to much of anything else.
Rule changes to benefit a very few and without the prior knowledge of the participants is the ruin of the sport , particularly in this day of instant communications.
Most of the items have been listed here.
I feel pretty strongly about it as you can tell and I am not shy.
Jack

[aswracing]

I feel pretty strongly about it, too.

Pissed me off to no end to log on one day and discover that my newly built "M" motor, on which I had spent thousands of dollars, had been rendered illegal. Before I even got to race it!

There was no notice given, no opportunity to comment, no warning whatsoever. It came out of the blue.

I had built that motor on aftermarket cases because I kept breaking the factory cases.

The bike it sits in will never be a good "A" bike. I'll go out and run it in A, and set a soft record, but I've already started accumulating parts to build a new "M" legal motor. I have an idea of how to make the cases live, we'll see if it works. But until that rule change, aftermarket cases were the proven way to build a solid "M" motor that wouldn't crack the cases.

Sure wish someone would've told me that rule change was coming a few months before it hit. Would've saved me a lot of money.

The impact on the record book is not to be taken lightly, either. Lots and lots of those "M" records were set on aftermarket cases.

Sorry to react like this, but this is still a hot button issue with me. How in the hell can a sanctioning body operate that way? Just willy-nilly make rule changes that cost the racers thousands of dollars, with no advance warning or opportunity for input? There is something really, really wrong with that organization.

[narider]

I agree, and as I don't even have any dogs in that fight I won't speak on what I think about unwarranted(or at least publicly unjustified) rule changes.
But as far as running oem cases... can you melt down and cast the cases you like out of a couple existing sets? Not saying it's that easy or even sure it's feasible, and certainly not real cost effective... but it would give you the option to make them exactly like aftermarket cases yet still technically be using oem cases to fit in the modified class rule. Maybe someone like Dan in PA or S&S would be willing to use stock case material and help out?
Just a thought,
Todd

[JackD]

Using the original material in an improved casting is the same trick and lie they are wanting to force on you.
Why go to all the trouble of actually doing it when nobody is going to notice the difference?
If their is no difference and also it is contrary to many of the other records that still stand, it is the same sick joke they are trying to play on you.
I know you are not serious but seriously they have to be stopped or it is going to spell the end of the program.
It could be that is the intention but they choose to lay the blame on you.
Not until it gets more public exposure will it get the attention it deserves and if these things are not hammered home, well I guess they deserve that.
E-mail is a strong tool and documented copies should get the widest distribution you can gather.

SIGNED
Jack

[dwarner]

How would one know that the recast cases were of OEM material?

DW

[narider]

How would one know that the recast cases were of OEM material?
DW

Of course there should be documentation, from affidavit, photography, video, sworn statements, blah blah blah.... up to before and after case sampling of material makeup and stamped by that manufacturer if needs be.

Documentation is not the part that's tough.

The problem doesn't sound to be on who or how the burden of proof comes to be, but more so on the integrity and judgement of those requiring and inspecting that proof.
Todd

[JackD]

JUST  WONDERING
I can prove that thousands of S+S cases are used in Street Legal Production now and they have also been used from the beginning in many HD based M-class bikes with records that still stand.
In addition there are clearly push rod style bikes with records that were not moved to push rod class when that was devised and the record remains in gas and fuel.
The push rod rules disolved to the point the Vincent is not legal !
Does that sound right ? Maybe it sHould be the SOME PUSH ROD CLASS ?
With a car, as soon as you leave Production you can put in a Dart replica SBC in a Pinto with the blessing of SCTA, but a bike can't do any of that.
 Why is that ?
Are the car rules that dumb or is it something else ?

[MattS]

In addition there are clearly push rod style bikes with records that were not moved to push rod class when that was devised and the record remains in gas and fuel.
The push rod rules disolved to the point the Vincent is not legal !

If I have a vintage (push-rod) bike, can I run it in the push-rod class? Can I run it in the regular (M or A) class? I know it won't be competetive in A or M  but it might be in push-rod. The push-rod rules only state the style of motor, not the age.


Matt

[PorkPie]

After Wilhelm Herz in 1956, Allen was faster with the Texas Cigar, but he set no FIM record, due to this that he was not interest to pay the FIM - the FIM was there and could do it.
There was no problem to get the FIM at the salt in the 50's.
Also, if Wilhelm Herz had not crashed the Baumm IV with the big engine, due to crosswind, the Delphin record wouldn't stay for long - the Baumm was good for 235+ mph.

[JackD]

"Seeing is believing."
A lot of riders don't believe the effect from a cross wind because they can't see it because they don't know where to look.

[PorkPie]

"Seeing is believing."
A lot of riders don't believe the effect from a cross wind because they can't see it because they don't know where to look.

Yup, and the Baumm was much more cross wind sensitive than the today two wheel streamliner.