ianw

kramit, the reason that you have to keep saying it is that it is simplistic, and not accurate. I understand your 'theory', but the problems that occur with current, (light), trials bikes are actually very few and far between if you buy a reputable brand. It would not have mattered if the earlier Ossas weighed 100kg, they were simply not tested properly and the design flaws fixed prior to production. You can't design and manufacture a highly complex piece of machinery and have it perfect first time, and it doesn't matter how much extra material you add. Trials bikes are difficult to get right because the production volumes are so low, the prices low, and it is difficult to amortise development and testing costs. That's why I would never buy a new brand until they have had a couple of years under their belts. I have owned many trials bikes from the first TL125 and 250 Hondas, through TY Yamahas then Betas etc, Six months ago, my son got into trials and bought a new Gas Gas. 150hrs later, the only problem has been a poor quality rear wheel bearing. We replaced it with a Japanese bearing, (same weight), fixed. It has been the most 'relaible' trials bike we have ever owned. I don't believe that the current crop of well engineered and tested, (light), trials bikes are less reliable than the old heavy ones. If you then look at the cost of the current bikes, which is, (in real terms), much lower than it was 20 years ago, they are bullet proof bargains. Another thing to consider, is the cost of adding weight. Raw materials globally are roughly 3 times the price they were prior to 2007. Adding 20% extra wall thickness to every part would add almost 15kg to the weight, and roughly 10% to the overall cost. Would it make them more reliable? Probably not.

Not so sure about all the brands, but a standard Gas Gas uses almost no exotic materials, and the price of a new bike is relatively cheap. When I was buying Betas and Shercos 10-15 years ago they were around $7000-$8000 in Australia, and a new bike isn't much more even now. The prices of raw materials used in making bikes are between 2 and 4 times the prices they were 10 years ago. Oil is many times more expensive. The current crop of 2t trials bikes are around the minimum weight limit with almost no 'exotic' materials, just good design. I know we would like things to be even cheaper, but bikes are not going to come down in price regardless of the weight. The 'middle class' in the entire western world is becoming poorer, and nothing is going to make them buy more bikes in the short term. The bottom line for me is that I am not going to go to the first round of the world championship here in Australia next week. While on one hand I would like to support the distributors, clubs and all those who work hard to hold the event, I am simply not going to support what the FIM is doing with my attendance. Unfortunately, not attending is the only voice I have. I hope others do the same.

For goodness sake guys, think about this for two seconds. Who would honestly say they prefer to ride a heavier bike than a lighter one????? There is no weight related reliability problem with current trials bikes, end of story. Talking about it just clouds the issue. I had a TY175 in 1975, and the frame broke in half, the brakes were constantly a pain, the shocks bent and leaked oil and I could go on and on. People seem to have very short memories. My son bought a new Gas Gas 6 months ago after riding pro level MX for many years. 150 hours later and basically NOTHING HAS BROKEN. One rear wheel bearing collapsed after 20hrs, but replaced it with a quality bearing, (same weight), and no more problems. The quality and reliability of these bikes is brilliant. A 250cc 4 stroke MX bike, by comparison, is written off at around 80 hours when used by a good rider. Don't blame what Ossa did on weight, it was just poor attention to detail and not enough testing. Luckily, logic is prevailing, and many countries are considering their riders and the sport, and ignoring the politics of the FIM. No reduction in weight limits, and no change to non-stop. The sad reality, however, is that fewer people will be riding FIM trials events, and trials will ultimately be the loser. The FIM should change the rules back urgently, but no doubt their ego's and wallets will not allow that.

What is extremely difficult to understand here, is why the trials riders of the world, (the people that buy the bikes), are really not being considered. A couple of lines of press release from the FIM when they institute massive rule change is not information and justification. Go on FIM, join this thread and tell us how your recent World Championship rule changes are helping us? Tell us the weight increase is not just because of pressure from Honda, and tell us truthfully how non-stop is working out globally? As far as I can see, (and I know many share this genuine concern), FIM world trials is simply becoming irrelevant to more and more of the worlds trials riders as a result of both the non-stop and weight changes.

There already was a minimum weight limit, and almost every production trials bike manufactured is very close to it. So who doesn't have a bike close to the limit, let me think?????? Not one single person is arguing that the weight limit should be reduced, but it has been increased for goodness sake! Go on FIM, explain how this makes sense to the overall trials community, and how it is going to increase bike sales, either short or long term? I believe the FIM is becoming increasingly irrelevant, and so is the World Trials Championship. The majority of the worlds Trials riders will ignore the FIM, ride the lightest bikes they can because they are more fun, stop when it feels right and the sport will suffer an accelerated drop in numbers.

I used to love Honda, but they have become increasingly narrow minded in a changing world. They have made a decision to stick with 4 strokes, and they will 'go down with the ship if necessary'. You can't help asking the obvious question though, when there are a couple of sprockets, a cam chain, an an oil pump and few other parts that add up to two kg at the most, why is their motor so heavy compared to a Euro, (well designed), 2 stroke trials engine? Four strokes have pretty much killed MX globally, yet Honda still exerts as much financial pressure as possible to stop a return of two strokes. The huge increase in perceptible noise from 4 strokes has caused land closures in every country, and 250cc 4 stroke MX bike costs roughly twice as much to run as a 2 stroke these days. If you look at the World MX championships, Honda sponsors an entire 150cc 4 stroke division now to try and kids to ride 4 strokes, yet their 150cc bike have pretty much disappeared from local MX tracks around the world and been replaced by two strokes. The only saving grace is that there is a 2 stroke class back in the world series again this year.

This decision can best be described as moronic, and follows closely on the heals of the non-stop rule introduced last year. There is nothing balsy about making stupid decisions, and this is the second stupid decision that the FIM has made in two years. The Australian riders currently preparing for the first world round are taking their standard bikes and bolting lead on to meet the changed requirements so they can enter the round. I know of top riders here who are simply not going to enter. With the non-stop nonsense and now this, why would they bother? Make no mistake, this is about Honda's inability to build a light production bike, so they are having the rules changed in a vain effort to fix their problem. The simple reason why it will not work, is that factories will still use carbon fiber everything, but with lead added in the footpeg area. I hear depleted uranium footpegs are also good, or maybe gold filled lower frame rails? The advantage will still remain with the most technologically advanced machine and the team with the most money. 'Average Joe' will still buy the lightest production bike he can because they are simply more enjoyable to ride.