Jump to content

ttspud

Members
  • Content Count

    84
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ttspud

  • Rank
    Member

Previous Fields

  • Bike
    AJS

Profile Information

  • Location
    Kent
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

2,173 profile views
  1. Yes, could not agree more. The proper bikes are the essence of Pre65, and people turn up to enjoy watching them, Lawrence AJS and Gregory HT5! We can all ride a modern pre-65 bike, that is easy and not very interesting to watch, but riding a proper bike, that is a much bigger challenge, a much better spectacle and much more enjoyable for all.
  2. What a wonderful trial we had this year. Just perfect. 200 riders, all ages, all types of bike. Sections set out as they should be, to allow riders of proper iron a chance to make a difference against the ever more tricked out machines. Proper sounds in the air and proper smells of leather, oil, and burning petrol as bikes roared happily up every one of the sections cheered on by the masses of people straining to find the best angle to watch the action. Better still, brothers won both over 300cc sprung classes on original, unmolested, standard bikes from the period, a truly unique occurrence recording for all that you do not need to spend £12k to gain every advantage over other riders, you just need to enjoy the day with winning being just a bonus. As long as this trial exists, among very few others, the spirit of pre65 that Deryk so thankfully created can exist no matter the damage done by those openly breaking the rules that still exist. One day the original bikes will be acknowledged as such but until then we will keep calm and continue regardless. Thanks to all that made the day happen, especially the Allaways, looking forward to next year already and long may it continue. Good luck all.
  3. @collyolly Thanks for your contribution, completely useless and abusive as always. I hope you had a nice holiday wherever you were!
  4. I know, they are weedy, unfit buggers, all of them!! Back in the day they were sinuey, athletic types, the post-war, rationed lot, none of this takeaway generation. Should really stick to darts and pottery, whinging all the time, how dare they. Why do we have to have riders at all? And do they enter the events, no, all they do is moan. All they do is complain. Awful. Oh well, not to worry, it is all water under the bridge now. Good points all. Enjoy your championships and don't worry about it, I am sure that you will beat them all!!!
  5. Well, whatever their motivation, the ACU series events look to have been cancelled and so solving the problem for that series is moot now. The problem that apparently was never there and did not need solving for so long has finally bitten. I just hope that other clubs & events wake up and stop denying that there is an issue before they are lost too. And if they are, well, there is always fishing!!! Take care all.
  6. That is a good question. The simple answer is why not? The sport was created to save the original bikes in the first place against bikes that make them uncompetitive. That is happening again. The theory has not changed. Fair sport breeds popularity, unfair sport kills it. There are riders who want to ride original bikes fairly, there are bikes that can be ridden and that can help the sport for everyone by keeping numbers up, entry fees down and hopefully help prevent events failing. Just by adding a sub-class, twinshocks wont be affected, nor would modifieds, so what exactly is the problem in trying to include original bikes fairly (the rules for modified bikes do not change, nor do the classes or courses)?
  7. @on it You are going off the deep end. If you had taken any notice at all, I do still ride an original bike on the hard course. No, I am not in my 80s and I see no riders of original bikes in their 80s in the hard course in my class. As I understand it, you don't ride pre65 at all, as you say " NO I do not ride or own a pre 65 bike ". So before drawing the wrong conclusions perhaps you could start by getting your facts straight. Well, the new ACU rules/classes have obviously failed and to be fair they are terrible, most people could have pointed that out before they made it to the entry form. Overlapping classes and so on. Some classes have not even attracted any entries at all. I am sure that the committee worked hard to come up with those classes, but perhaps they should have consulted someone more experienced to help, such as the person who was part of the original creation himself. And the failure is not something that has just happened nor that will quickly be solved by any means., nor just for that series but across the entire sport. It has taken decades of deterioration (though an ACU representative was reported to have called it 'evolution') to get to this point, and it will likely take decades of work to put it right, if ever. You may attack my idea, you may attack anyone who dares to put forward evidence that actually preserving the machinery works (as it does in all other vintage sports of which pre65 is) at keeping entry numbers up, you may get visceral and abusive, ranting, putting forward things that are untrue, as others here do, and so on, but in the end, as you say, it is the sport that is suffering, when the original series that had 450 entrants who made the final standings by entering at least x different events is now down to just a few modified bikes, one or two original bikes, and a few more pre85 bikes and even that cant sustain an entry worth putting on an event for for that series, perhaps it is time to not discount all ideas about allowing machinery to be nothing like pre65 and pushing out all original bikes. To at least try? But this has been said a thousand times, nothing changes, and it all falls on deaf ears. "Closing the barn door after the horse has bolted", just means that people seem to have given in. Then, usually, in the end when the discourse becomes overly abusive, it becomes a waste of time discussing it at all and then no-one gains, not the sport, no-one. I will continue to enter, continue to get my fives, as I have done for years and enjoy the day greatly as long as the event in my area survives, and touch wood, it is. There are many other issues affecting it too, but for now it goes on. Next year the cost will go up dramatically or they will need to find another venue, neither an easy choice given it is already under pressure and has always been at the same venue. So it obviously isnt just the decline of original bikes due to the flouting of the rules, but the sport is under pressure from many other factors too. I have simply been trying to address an issue that I can help with hopefully without affecting much else. To me, Improving one issue is always a good thing even if it is not the solution to all of the problems facing the sport. Yes, it is terribly sad, my heart goes out to those clubs trying to keep the events going, which is exactly where we came in.
  8. There is no extra bother, just add 'sub-class' to the entry form, no big deal there, and display that on the results. The scrutineering is a small issue at the events I go to given only the originals (the few) would require it and of course other means, if it brought bikes back in larger numbers (isnt that a good thing?), could be explored also to help prior to the day. So, draw the line somewhere else if you think it should be tighter than that, if you ride an original bike you are of course entitled to a different opinion (or perhaps you want a prestige sub-class). Probably best though to ask original riders (as in those that already ride to the original rules on original bikes) or draw the line where the original rules had it ie original frame, forks, engine, gearbox, hubs and ignition. The reason for including the rerouted exhaust etc is for the same reason, those were mods done in the day, as you see in the 1962 picture, mostly for practical reasons and were accepted in the original rules.
  9. Go a page back and you can see it, AJS 16C as the one pictured at the bottom with rerouted exhaust and modified oil tank (in other words the bike has not changed since back in the day). Obviously with so few original bikes left, no. Hence the 'sub-class' concept that changes nothing for modified bikes and incidentally re scrutineering the modifieds would not need scrutineering either. Obviously some form of validation/scrutineering would be need for originals but that could be done in many ways to ease pressure on the day. Given that there are so few originals, it would be a good step to take. Doing what, changing the rules/classes again?
  10. @trialsrfun With all due respect, there is plenty there to get the point. It is really up to the ACU now, as the body that sets up the rules and classes, to decide whether they want to put in place a better set of rules to enable any of this to happen, to have a sub-class to distinguish between bikes across all classes, whether that just be for the failing series or across the pre65 sport as a whole. There are certainly very capable and informed members of this site that have not properly been consulted, one in particular who should have been included from the outset and never excluded in the first place. We are where we are, we can only hope that the future is better thought through than the past. Anyway, I do not see that I can add much more at the moment but I will certainly keep an eye on it and keep hope for the future. Best of luck to you.
  11. @trialsrfun That is a very good question and key to helping to sort out the loss of original bikes from pre65 trials. It is best that others, other than me, understand the answer. It is certainly key to the point that I have been trying to get across over all these years. I will add a little of my thoughts on the answer. Although it is perhaps hard to answer in terms of riding one if you havent ridden one, but a recent comment on here might come close to some understanding " Taking the Cub on a modern training course I would expect to be quite disruptive, as we'd rapidly hit the point where I'd be struggling to do stuff that everybody else was mastering. I tested that point by putting a very experienced modern and twinshock rider on the Cub, and he was extremely shocked at the difference. ". If you want to read the full comment, it is in Trials Training And Technique - classic training. On the simple, differences in terms of parts. The bike at the top, ie the upper picture in the first posting, the modern pre65, looks to have no original pre65 parts at all, certainly frame, engine, gearbox, forks, hubs and ignition are all modern or modified. To my understanding, the engine was never used for trials where the long-stroke was used, and the modern engine even looks a good deal shorter than the original short engine below. Whereas the comerfords bike, in the other posting, is all original in terms of as was ridden in 1962, so has original frame, engine, gearbox, forks, hubs and ignition, and the mods.. oil tank, rerouted exhaust, rims, seat which were obviously all done back in the day. Which is why that was chosen as the logical point to split the two types of bike, it is where the original rules stand and now should probably be where the sub-class line is drawn should the sport ever get that far.
  12. @trialsrfun Here you go, the 16c with a comerfords example below it with the modified oil tank, slightly different frame and higher exhaust routing, someone with more knowledge of detail could probably help you understand exactly when the changes may have occured though the second picture is 1962....
  13. @davetom @on it Sorry fellas, it was a sponsored bike, not an ex-works, so basically an unmolested bike from the period and yes, of course it is a good thing to retain these bikes as they were, and no, I want to see them ridden so I am riding it not keeping it in a shed or in a museum. And yes, when these discussions become silly, the only way to prevent further upset to those who seem to react badly, is to shut it down in any way that is possible including removing not all posts, but enough to shut it down. Smile, be happy, don't worry about it, this sport was always just a bit of fun, I'd certainly like to pass it on to my kids but I fear at this rate that will not be possible beyond by a 5k trick machine. Most adults dont know much about these bikes and if this generation fails to keep them out there, then they will be lost. It doesnt mean that much in the end, but it would be nice to try to keep original bikes in.
  14. For context, here we are (I can hear the groans from here), the modern pre65 machinery (apparently a bike articled in Classic Dirtbike).. A very nice bike indeed but is it really a pre65 bike or is it a special? And is it really no advantage at all over the original? Does it really conform to the rules there are? Well, it is almost uncanny how the silhouette matches the original machine pictured below it (in this case the on-road AJS 16MS (G3LS) to grab the short-stroke engine presumably) that it is presumably meant to be, you almost cannot see any difference at all!!... why would anyone want to ride the trick machine, it is so obvious!! Anyway, a picture paints a thousand words. Again, it is not that trick machines should not be ridden and enjoyed just as much, they should. It is that it would be nice to acknowledge that others would also like to ride the original bikes (at least original frame, engine, gearbox, forks, hubs, ignition) and have them distinguished in the rules and/or entry.
×
×
  • Create New...