| Author |
 Topic  |
|
| |
Current Topic Rating:  | Join the Forum to Rate this Topic at: Classic Motorcycling Australia Forums
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
![]()
18 Posts |
 Posted - 12 Sep 2001 : 5:46:18 PM
|
I've just received the minutes of the Victorian Historic Management Committee in which they have asked for ideas on the introduction of a clubmans class. I think this is a great idea and a topic that should generate some discussion on this forum for feedback to the committee. It's an ideal way to encourage more people into the sport who don't want to spend a bomb but want to be racing against similarly specified machinery.
In Queensland we have been talking about clubmans categories for 500 classics as well as 750 post-classics (maybe 350 classics as well?). This is still being discussed, but current thinking is to keep it as was defined in the era - all road based, all one make (i.e. no specials) and allow internal modifications. I think we should allow methanol or the bikes would be completely outclassed when run in open races. Initially we'd propose to simply run the clubmans class within the normal set of open races, but if it takes off we could run separate events.
So what do you think? Would clubmans be viable? It would be great if we could do something along similar lines around Australia rather than all doing our own thing. What I like about the class is that we'd be doing something that was actually done in the era for the same reason - to encourage another level of competition.
Looking forward to some discussion.
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 13 Sep 2001 : 10:18:10 AM
|
Sounds like a good idea. I think the class should extend to include machines up to 1980. I think 350cc two strokes should be included in the 750 four stroke class. Japanese 750's from these early eras must be amongst the cheapest bikes available, but they can really give a good account of themselves.
Perhaps the class should only cater for capacities I mentioned? |
 |
|
|
Former Member
deleted
![]()
13 Posts |
Posted - 13 Sep 2001 : 2:47:39 PM
|
quote:
I've just received the minutes of the Victorian Historic Management Committee in which they have asked for ideas on the introduction of a clubmans class. I think this is a great idea and a topic that should generate some discussion on this forum for feedback to the committee. It's an ideal way to encourage more people into the sport who don't want to spend a bomb but want to be racing against similarly specified machinery.
In Queensland we have been talking about clubmans categories for 500 classics as well as 750 post-classics (maybe 350 classics as well?). This is still being discussed, but current thinking is to keep it as was defined in the era - all road based, all one make (i.e. no specials) and allow internal modifications. I think we should allow methanol or the bikes would be completely outclassed when run in open races. Initially we'd propose to simply run the clubmans class within the normal set of open races, but if it takes off we could run separate events.
So what do you think? Would clubmans be viable? It would be great if we could do something along similar lines around Australia rather than all doing our own thing. What I like about the class is that we'd be doing something that was actually done in the era for the same reason - to encourage another level of competition.
Looking forward to some discussion.
|
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
![]()
13 Posts |
Posted - 13 Sep 2001 : 3:17:45 PM
|
Bill,
I for one would support a Clubmans class in the Classic Period 3 class of historic racing.
In fact I posted just such a comment on the 6 April 2001.
I would hope our M A Commissioners might take up the idea on our behalf, but I for one will be seeking the support of the MAQ Historic Sub-Committee and would hope that the Victorian Historic Management Committee does the same in an effort to have our state delagates raise the matter at M A level on our behalf.
At Bathurst right up till 1965 events were run for GP Machines (overhead cam) and for Clubman Riders on street production machine.
Two classes in the one event, with the same awards for all.
Racing is about running against similarly specified machinery.
I for one would think that the 350 classic class should be included and the Unlimited Class, otherwise we will start to see a rash of 560cc GP based machines in the unlimited classic class. |
|
|
|
Allan
Site Moderator
National
599 Posts |
Posted - 14 Sep 2001 : 2:37:19 PM
|
| Reckless i dont understsnd what you mean when you say 560GP machines? to me we would see all the classic of the time, Goldstar bsa, thruxtan-viper-venom velo's triumph T120, t100 and the matchless/ajs 600/050 csr? twins even the norton twins 500/600 "BUT" please why not limit it to Petrol(100 octane) who cares if the others are a bit in front?? this if worked correctly could be just the thing to improve true CLASSIC RACING in aussie. yes we at You must be logged in to see this link. would support such a class and donate a trophy for a few rounds(3) best of luck |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
![]()
13 Posts |
Posted - 14 Sep 2001 : 5:42:23 PM
|
Allen,
What I mean by 560cc GP Machines is that before long we will have the some of the current modern GP Rcing Machines who can lap 5/6 seconds per lap faster then the original classic production based street machines being raced in the senior classic events.
Before long they will simple enter these machines as 526cc in the unlimited classic events and before long they will be dominating this class as well as the senior events.
As to what fuels should be used, I am in favour of the current rules, those who wish to use 100 grade should be able to do so, just as I would want to keep on using Alcohol, its cheap, easy to tune on, and was the preferred fuel used in the period.
Reckless.
|
|
|
|
steve
Level 2 Member
Queensland
86 Posts |
Posted - 22 Nov 2001 : 10:16:07 PM
|
Hi Historic Racers
Bill & Ron I have just a small problem with introducing another Class "If it takes off" Wouldn't that add extra racers per allready full events meetings??
In Qld people still object to Period 5 going as far as not attending Aussi Titles because "Period 5" they don't class as a "Historic Bikes"!!The Classic classes not getting the same amount of racers as previous. As of late when P5 attend the Aussi Titles All Classes are on a level playing field or Classes getting the same amount of racers, less rides for the Classic fellows as before the Period 5s. Here in Qld we don't have a Club that supports or promote period 5 we are flat out getting equal race time as the Classic riders/racers in Period 4!! ask any Post Classic Racer in Qld who get more racers per meeting.Period 4 does not get a fare go here in Qld, no period 5 because the Classic riders don't deem them as a Historic motorcycle. & now Bill & Ron want to bring in another "PERIOD 3 Clubman Class" may-be with in the allready Period Classes but when again maybe Period 4 & 5 also.
Steve
|
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 23 Nov 2001 : 09:17:42 AM
|
It always seems silly to me that we run P4 and P5 separately. In Vic. there are a few TZ's in P5 which seem to give some people worries. Most P5 bikes are actually slower than P4 machines. Rex's P4 Hondas don't seem to be much different to the Laverda triple which runs in P5. If we run P4 together with P5, would't that give better fields and allow more events (such as the Clubmans Class) to be run?
The main problem as I see it, is that we need a 750 class in P3, P4, P5, and limitation of two strokes to half capacity in every class.
It was interesting to see the 350 race at the recent championships at Winton, where several eras ran together. It was difficult to understand who won each class, but the racing was spectacular. And that is what I think it is all about - providing value for the spectators, and good racing for the riders.
Regards,
Whatever we do, I think it's a matter of getting a promoter to run it. Don't worry about MA championship rules, let's try a new formula. We might actually improve the sport.
Alan Cotterell |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
![]()
18 Posts |
Posted - 27 Nov 2001 : 2:44:33 PM
|
Hi Steve
I agree we have to be careful not to water down the existing classes, but what we also need to do is encourage new competitors. The easiest thing in the world for us to do would be to include period 5 to boost numbers and hence, the viability of our meetings. However, as evidenced from what I've heard about the Australian Titles at Winton, all this does is reduce the number of rides, or length of races for everyone.
The issue that is driving the clubmans class is keeping the existing sport in good order. Under the current formula there is no incentive for people without a huge bank book to get into our sport. It doesn't matter how hard you compete, a road-based machine will never be competitive with a purpose-built racer, particularly in period 3. The clubmans class is what was actually done in the era to overcome this problem and it worked well.
If we run a clubmans class in Queensland it will be run concurrently with the open class - not separate classes. If it took off to the extent that we could run separate events, wouldn't we all be stoked? even if it was just one race.
People keep on about Period 5 in our racing. Why can't Period 5 riders organise themselves? In NSW there's a post classic association. I'm sure they work with HRR when joint events are run. In Queensland we currently run one Qld Championship meeting, which has a tried and proven program. Period 4 riders complain that they don't get enough rides, but they get the same as everyone else (except that we allow lower capacity classics into the larger capacity classes, so they can potentially get a few more races, but they're not eligible for points). How would you feel if we had to cater for Period 5 as well? And I don't think Alan Cottrel's solution is a good one as a lot of Period 4 riders would be pretty miffed at having to compete against Period 5 in the same event. Think of the people who have put a lot of effort into sourcing genuine Period 4 bikes and bits, only to have to compete with RDs and the like that are as common as the proverbials and a lot more competitive with little expenditure. I think you would kill off a lot of Period 4 riders, particularly mid fielders. |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
![]()
4 Posts |
Posted - 30 Nov 2001 : 10:49:34 AM
|
Bill,how can you be suggesting another class be run when for the past five years I have been trying to get some interest shown by the club of which you are the secretary of, for forgotten era classes. The reply is always that we don't have enough time to run the exisitng classes let alone introduce another class.Your reasoning that the Clubman class would allow the "everyday Joe" to be able to afford to run a race bike is outweighed by the rumoured large increase of licencing costs and the lack of events in Queeensland for the calendar year without travelling interstate.The majority of riders are struggling financially to support the already sad state of road racing in general. The support needs to be lifted by the organising bodies with more interest shown to road racing.
Bill,your comments also mention staying in tune with the other states re; clubman class, but don't the other states run forgotten era? How is Queensland staying in touch in that regard? Your previous comments about "post classic riders should organise their own events", well this has already begun to take effect as the existing riders are disillusioned with the lack of support shown by the club.Races for Post Classic and Forgotten Era are already being organised for the new year with the introductions of these classes,we will be offering more entertaining racing for the public which we hope will result in more races for the riders and anyone interested in these classes can contact me (chuck)by email or phone 07 3203 1364 / email nucton@bigpond.com.au |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 30 Nov 2001 : 11:26:54 AM
|
Steve,
I don't really care about modfield P4 riders who 'get miffed' by being blown away by P5 bikes. Most of the big P5 fourstrokes are slower than P4 bikes, in Victoria. I really get a bit confused whem people don't recognise P5 bikes as 'historic'. Historic bikes have tubular steel frames, eighteen inch wheels and usually wire spoked wheels. Modern bikes have aluminium deltabox frames and seventeen inch wheels. I think it would be really easy to set up fields of competitive bikes including all 'historic' eras. The main problem comes with two strokes. The class capacity limits would have to be halved for them, as they usually make twice the horsepower for similar capacities.
I think our curent practice of having 'post classic association', 'forgotten era association', etc. , is counterproductive. The machines in each era are all motorcycles which have raced in open competition against each other, at some time.
I challenge anyone who has a post eighties 750 japanese fourstroke to race faster than a fifties or sixties Triumph, BSA, or Norton 750. There really isn't that much difference, particularly when Darren Mercer or Karel Morlang is on the British rubbish.
So what I'm saying is that we all get blown off sometimes, so let's have better fields, and create a better spectacle. |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
![]()
18 Posts |
Posted - 30 Nov 2001 : 12:42:46 PM
|
Chuck
Please read my last comment again. I said clubmans would predominantly be run concurrently with period 3 (350s and 500s if we are serious about replicating the era), which won't impact on the race program. As you know we've also talked about a pushrod class in post-classic, which would also be run concurrently. As far as I know, it's only Victoria that runs period 5 in their normal race meetings. This year's Australian titles was the first to do so and I've heard a lot of complaints about lack of rides and reduced length races, even over a three day program. I know a few people who won't be going to the Island Classic this year because of the low number of events for each class. There is no doubt there is room for period 5 and it's great to hear you're doing something to get it going in Queensland. |
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 02 Dec 2001 : 10:25:19 AM
|
I think we somehow have to cater for Yamaha RD two strokes if we are ever going to get young riders into our sport. Two strokes are a problem in any class of historic racing. I don't mind what anyone rides as long as it is historic and doesn't finish too far in front of me. I suspect we should run two strokes and four strokes separately.
It would be very nice to build a bike based on the Laverda Alpino (1975) for period 5, but every two stroke of the same capacity would crap on it. In case you don't know the Alpino is the basis of the late model (1990's) Ghost. It has four valves per cylinder and a six speed box.
It would be possible to build a bike which would handle and go with one of these motors, and the late model parts would fit (build your own frame). The fact that two strokes run in the same class puts a bit of a stopper on it. I think we shoot ourselves in the foot with some of our eligibility rules. |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 25 Feb 2003 : 11:35:30 AM
|
fOLLOWING AN ABSOLOUT TROUNCING OF A SINGLE 500CC COCEPT THE SUGGESTION HAS COME ALONG TO LOOK AT CLUBMANS AGAIN. BELOW IS A VARIATION OF ONE SET OF RULES CURRENTLY USED IN NSW. COULD IT BE ADAPTED TO SUIT CLUBMANS
PRODUCTION CLASS '57:
(for machines complying with the following requirements)
Machines are meant to represent the make and model, as produced by the factory, in these events:-
Machine must be as manufactured before December 31 1957.
Capacity must be as manufactured, allowing for 5% capacity oversize.
Gearbox must have the same number of gears as original model. Operation must be as original specs i.e.; hand or foot change.
All major components must represent the same manufacturer and model i.e.; frame, motor, gearbox, forks and wheels.
Motors should be identical externally to original model. Different heads, barrels etc, are not allowed.
Brakes must be as produced, twin leading shoe modifications and double sided hubs not allowed.
Rim and tyre sizes as per of GCRs
Classes:- 0 - 250cc: 263 - 350cc: 368 - 500cc: 526 - 1300cc
A trophy for 1st place will be given for each class in the scratch races. Handicap events; the first three machines home will receive 1st, 2nd and 3rd trophies irrespective of capacity or class
|
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
Allan
Site Moderator
National
599 Posts |
Posted - 25 Feb 2003 : 11:43:32 AM
|
| South Australia run a class with 57 cut off The Les denia trophy maybe we should check that out ARE we the only state THAT do's not have this class? |
Allan Greening |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 25 Feb 2003 : 12:12:22 PM
|
| It could well be that we dont run the class, but that may be a reflection of a lack of interest from riders as much as any other issue. I am aware HMRAV did fiddle with a 1959 cut off but it does not seem to run now. But as I have learnt from recent history which came first the chicken or the egg. I will certainly be more careful about putting my head on the block until I get more concrete support for any idea. But I will if the support is there. |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
john
Forum Moderator
Victoria
3130 Posts |
Posted - 25 Feb 2003 : 2:07:47 PM
|
I had this comment come in separately "John I believe the object of the Class(whatever it is called) is to represent the vast majority of machines which raced in the era.
Most people did not have production racers so most competitors rode machines built out of ordinary Road Bikes. Many of these were mixed models and makes. ie. Tribsa-Norbsa-Triton-Norvel-Norvin Enfield/Ariel and no doubt others.
They must have been manufactured originally prior to 31.12.1962.
Motor Capacity +5% wear allowance only.
Gear Box max. 4 speed.
Brakes can be sls double sided hubs made from ROAD MACHINE COMPONENTS.
ALL Mojor Components(as defined in G.C.R.) must have been originally produced for Road Models(registerable machines).
I think that this is a sensible recreation of the period, of the machines that we rode and rode against.
Regards Richard." |
John Daley Sidecar #68
' there are those who do, those who dont do and those who undo. We must lampoon the latter." |
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
79 Posts |
Posted - 25 Feb 2003 : 10:13:11 PM
|
John. That off site Email you got from Richard reads like a very good starting point. I guess the first thing that has to decided is whether or not to limit it to 500 singles or accept anything pre 63 that complies.
Richard is very correct in saying that most bikes raced back were not production racers but rather they were specials (nothing really changes does it).
The other proposal for the "Clubmans" limits the field to as built street production bikes. I think this would be too limiting and probably a bit expensive, and I reakon there would be a lot of petty protests too.
Richards idea is well worth pursuing to see if the interest is really there.
|
Al Kidd |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
