49 replies to this topic

[B40RT]

wayne_weedon, on Nov 19 2009, 11:05 AM, said:

Nothing is all it seems!

Nothing is all, it seems!
Bit like Banks really.

[Woody]

That GOV 132 is a replica anyway built when Sam was riding Pre65 events

The real GOV 132 had two incarnations according to peeps in the know with set ups for radically different conditions.

As good as it was in its day, today's replica Ariels would destroy it in competition. A mate of mine has a nice HT5 with lightweight frame and all the other usual goodies. He tried Martyn Willmore's bike and was ready to throw his in the bin afterwards as it is light years away, it really was that much better - Martin's bike is Mick Grant's old bike, so imagine what Mick's new bike is like...

[wayne_weedon]

Yes I'm aware it's a replica*. Always amused me when I saw it ridden on the Road on GOV 132 Plates though! Possibly the one in Beaulieu Motor Museum is the original, I'm not totally sure. Maybe there's two with the same frame numbers

Wayne....

* A Replica that had a lot more development than the original

Edited by wayne_weedon, 19 November 2009 - 05:26 PM.

[charlie prescott]

Hi Guy's

There could be a lot more GOV132 's as we have discused in the past. We know all the Ariels that a current never saw the factory(well very little of them) but you can't stop a guy building a engineering wonder and then telling him he can't ride the machine. Are there overwhelming numbers of entrys in the Sammy Miller series, so they need to change rules to stop entry's? And is it a english machine trial series or a so called twinshock? I am fast believing that we must stop bitching about what is right and wrong about each class and just get an entry so that you can just turn up and RIDE. Life is to short !!!!

Regard's Charlie.

[wayne_weedon]

Charlie

I agree with you in the main. I personally can see merit on both sides.

Anyone with an engineering bent will want to improve and that includes me. I however also see merit in preserving machines in their original state.

Nothing being done now was impossible in the 60's that includes billet parts etc. Can't be certain they did or didn't exist though.

The Spanish classic series seem to have far stricter rules, but they also have more classes available, not sure about specials classes though.

Wayne....

[DaveD444]

I am not really sure what the organisers are trying to achieve by specifically focussing on the pre unit class, I am assuming that someone with a reasonably standard pre unit bike or a reasonably standard riding ability has complained that the sections are getting a bit hard which has caused a knee jerk response to consider that the pre unit championship class ought to be run on the easier route and therefore requiring an alternative solution to cope with either the trick pre unit bikes or the better riders of pre unit bikes who wouldn't want to ride the easier route.

I personally don't see why there needs to be different classes, after riding 2 stroke, 4 stroke and Pre Unit bikes (all modified with the usual trick bits available) I know that each one has it's own benefits and failings, depending upon the conditions, and there is certainly no significant advantage to be gained riding one bike over another during the course of a season or lengthy championship.

Managing the level of conversion is always going to be difficult, the more scrutiny that is applied then it just makes the excellent engineers out there more creative to hide the modifications. After all, there are already bikes out there with exact replica frames made from T45 at a fraction of the weight of the originals, forks internals hidden inside gaiters, re-lined and modified brakes inside original hubs, not to mention heavily modified engine internals where externally they look very standard etc etc so I cant see that it would deter anyone, merely make them more creative. After all Len Hutty's bike looks pretty standard to the untrained eye but I'll wager that it is not a lot heavier than the majority of C15's being ridden in most club events.

I think that it is now a case of closing the stable door after the horse has bolted. I turned up at a Miller round in about 97-98 on a Cub with a Delorto carb on it and was very directly told that I would have to ride in the Specials class. I doubt that would happen today so at some point the standards have been relaxed and that is always going to be a challenge to undo.

I think that simplifying classes could be the answer. Easy route and hard route then pre 70, post 70 Twin shock and Trail bikes (6 classes in total). Keep it simple and allow the riders of the bikes to choose their class. I didn't ride back in the 60's so I may be wrong but I doubt that there would have been a need for a Rigid, 2 stroke, Unit and Pre unit class back then - it was just trials and you chose your bike, turned up and the best rider on the day was the winner.

I understand that a vast capability gap now exists between the best and worst riders which calls for 2 routes and broadly categorisation between bikes of certain era's but the correct grouping keeps that reasonably fair or at least levels the playing field to a degree. I am sure that in the 50's and 60's there were not complaints about modifications made to bikes, more envy or interest in what the factory riders were doing to their bikes that the average club man would try to emulate.

With regards to grouping the riders into one specials class, I guess that could be the answer after all when you look at the results in the Traditional series or even the Classic Experts the other week there was not a lot in it at the top end of the results with Wilmore on a 'Pre 65' winning the trial (OK I know it was hardly an acceptably standard BSA) and Granty in the top 5. After all most of the really trick pre 65 bikes are almost on a par with the majority of the twin shock bikes and in the right hands are capable of better results.

[charlie prescott]

Hi Guy's
Dave you have said it all. One yes you did just turn up and ride what you brung in the Sixties and checked out all the works bikes to see what they had done ( on the outside anyway) we now know a liberal coat of black paint covered up many mod's and made them look like the bikes that came out of the factory for sale. If you wanted a billet part you got out your hacksaw and file, and made it, usally out of scrap or kitchen items parts used from tractors etc. So I just can't understand the problem. The only difference now is that we have the use of tools that were only avaliable in large factorys then . And the "Works Bikes" are now made by individuals, and we are still envious, and want to build our bikes like them.
Just a new thought, now if I had mounted a chair on my Chinese engined 250 Honda TLR, and entered Class seven in this years Sammy Miller Championship, and ridden in one round, I would now be a Champion? (wish I had got it finnished now). and would anyone have bothered.

Regard's Charlie.

[B40RT]

charlie prescott, on Nov 21 2009, 06:40 PM, said:

we must stop bitching about what is right and wrong about each class and just get an entry so that you can just turn up and RIDE. Life is to short !!!!

Regard's Charlie.

Lets apply that to all trials.

[Mellis]

After following many of these discussion's at Club Trials and on Internet Forum, I've come to my conclusion.

As a relative youngster (25 yr old) in the sport of Pre 65 Trials and a Mechanical Engineer by trade I have many options as to what I can build/ride. I have spent the last few years obsevering at many local events in the Stroud Valley, closely looking at the bikes being used.

I have noticed a massive increase in lightweight 2 Stoke Machines and small rigid's (250cc and under) and very few British Heavy Weight's appearing. Mainly due to the riders' getting older and not being able to ride large machines.

The bikes are getting more and more trick but the majority of people want to ride easier and easier trials?! Although in one mind I'd love to see all bikes as original as possible I wouldn't want to kill the sport off.

To try and increase the number of 'real' pre 65 bikes I would love to ride a Heavy weight springer.....but can I find one....at a sensible price......No chance!!

So what am I going to do....build a Rigid Ariel from a pile of bits I've raided from 'Dad's stock' as close to stock as possible. Probably struggle to ride it but if I do ever get close to a good result against a 'Trick' bike I will get a great sense of satisfaction!!

I think that is going to be the way it work's, Look at the results and decide for urself how well 'you really did', taking your chosen machine into mind.

Mike Ellis

[B40RT]

DaveD444, on Nov 21 2009, 11:04 PM, said:

I understand that a vast capability gap now exists between the best and worst riders which calls for 2 routes and broadly categorisation between bikes of certain era's but the correct grouping keeps that reasonably fair or at least levels the playing field to a degree. I am sure that in the 50's and 60's there were not complaints about modifications made to bikes, more envy or interest in what the factory riders were doing to their bikes that the average club man would try to emulate.

There are also a number of very capable riders that are succumbing to age. As the sections get harder to take marks from younger riders on trick bikes, it forces these riders out.
Is this really the intention ?
Envy is a frequently used word, and is often true, but when used as a defence for heavily modified bikes, its not always appropriate. I find these bikes of great interest, but wonder how much satisfaction can be gained in beating a "standard" bike.

[huntmaster]

B40RT, on Nov 23 2009, 11:24 AM, said:

There are also a number of very capable riders that are succumbing to age. As the sections get harder to take marks from younger riders on trick bikes, it forces these riders out.

Maybe pre-65 will soon have to refer to the rider!

[B40RT]

huntmaster, on Nov 23 2009, 09:06 PM, said:

Maybe pre-65 will soon have to refer to the rider!

Ageist

[DaveD444]

B40RT, on Nov 23 2009, 04:24 PM, said:

There are also a number of very capable riders that are succumbing to age. As the sections get harder to take marks from younger riders on trick bikes, it forces these riders out.
Is this really the intention ?
Envy is a frequently used word, and is often true, but when used as a defence for heavily modified bikes, its not always appropriate. I find these bikes of great interest, but wonder how much satisfaction can be gained in beating a "standard" bike.

Very true B40RT, however it is probably of no coincidence that the most heavily modified bikes are often ridden by the rider that least need them.... just like the factory riders back in the day.

[totalshell]

never mind the bikes ridden chack out the trails themselves. I rode in two SM rounds this year , in the lakedistrcit and in yorkshire. i chose to ride my gas gas trail bike. i rode the clubman route.
in the lake district i was the only trail bike and there were no sidecars.. it became immediately obvious why!
what a difference a couple of hundred miles made riding in yorkshire IDMC far from being a reguler organiser of trials yet alone p65 or twinshock laid on a trail that had 10 or so trail bikes and probably 8 sidecars. nice natural sections limited need to use the clutch a delight to ride.
i wont go to one next year but will do the other..

[B40RT]

DaveD444, on Nov 27 2009, 10:01 PM, said:

Very true B40RT, however it is probably of no coincidence that the most heavily modified bikes are often ridden by the rider that least need them.... just like the factory riders back in the day.

Maybe the organisers should bit the bullet and lay out the trial for "standard machines" (whatever they are) and if its to easy for ex-SSDT winners on "heavily" modified bikes, so be it.
They might then raise to the challenge of real pre-65's. Might.