old trials fanatic

Hi Mark i can not speak for other clubs so i will just put my own clubs point of view on this. At face value your comments make a lot of sense however you have to remember some of the riders in the Clubman class are over 60, some very much over 60, and they ride this class because they are unable to tackle the more severe routes. Same with the Intermediate class BTW. Riders of this age, without trying to be ageist as i'm one of them, are not bothered about their personal development just grateful to be able to still ride their bike in some cases. Incidentally i will be riding up a class this year i just hope i'm up to it Looking at it another way a rider may be good enough to win the Clubman or Intermediate class but feels the extra challenge of riding the harder route in full too daunting for them, remember again with older riders some have given up on development they are just happy to be able to still ride, now this is why i have introduced the two Classic routes which are basically 50/50 routes but as 50/50 implies that they will be half and half i didnt want to call them that because i wanted the option of at some venues perhaps running just 3 harder options and at other venues maybe 6 or 7. Trials is a sport that is, or should i say should be, more easy going than some other forms of Motor Sport, ok there are rules but nothing like the RAC Blue book and scrutineering happy memories of rallying an RS2000 when scrutineering was like going to the dentist , and sometimes forcing somebody to ride sections that are too daunting just results in the person packing it in. Then again there are the dreaded Health and Safety implications. You see one of the biggest differences between Moto Cross and Trials is that all classes in Moto Cross ride the same course which is not the case in Trials with the classes riding routes of differing severity. Same as in Road Racing anybody can get round Silverstone but only a few could get around a BTC or higher course. Well thats my viewpoint and i hope it helps somewhat to explain why we have done what we have?

I cant agree with you more Tam. Well said.

Was they why he was so bow legged

Great sections but you can see why the clip took 27m56secs what with the riders all doing the hokey cokey thanks for sharing though

Will do my best to make sure the sections are not as tight this season.

Trust you.

OK OK Steve and Dave perhaps i was being a bit OTT on those two. Kill switch was for safety reasons having been traped once under my bike with my arm stuck between the rear tyre and the rear shock with the bike reving it's nuts off in gear and the only way i could stop the engine was to rip the plug cap off. That made me hair stand on end and i've still got the scars on my arm to prove it. I'll mark the kill switch as advisory and delete the chain guard rule. Thanks again for the input logical and well considered.

Thanks for the input Mick but dont agree with you on the class issue i feel we need the 5 classes. Firstly to encourage more class winners to move up and give others a chance. Secondly i need to keep the clubman route on the easy side, probably even easier this coming season, to encourage newcomers Novices or just people wanting a less challenging ride and lets not forget the more std British Bikes so many keep telling me are just waiting for a suitable route to ride. "less classes would be better providing more of a challenge and the championships more worthwhile." Just wondering if you will be riding the beast in the Expert class this season?

Just had a look at your rules and have one or two genuine observations. Twinshock minimum wheelbase 50" - TY175 and mini-Majesty and possibly Whitehawk are less than this. *** Good point Woody i was more than a bit concerned about this one myself. I was just trying to deter super short trick bikes. Rule will be deleted. ***** Forks max 36mm - Why 36mm all were 35mm apart from SWM at 38mm. Is it intended to allow Yama Mono front ends (which I don't have an issue with as Yam monos were competing against twinshocks in 1983/4/5 so it was a possible mod then. *** Yes Woody a lot of Majestys already competing at our club with TY mono forks so dont want to deter them and mono forks are cheap and easy to source plus most 35mm yokes can be cheaply machined to take 36mm legs. **** 38mm Forks - it's a bit woolly. Can only SWM use them or any twinshock. As there are no dating classes in t/s, it's one class that spans 1970 - 1985, therefore it stands to reason that any bike can have 38mm if they are all competing against each other? Maybe needs rewording to clarify exactly what the rule means. *** Yes was intended not to exclude SWM which is why they had an exemption. But i get your point. Dont know how else to include std SWM but exclude front ends off a modern Gasser etc? Personally agree with you re Marzocchi and would prefer those were used. Trouble is if you introduce date splits like another local club has you get people fitting earlier tanks and engine covers to make their bike look earlier when it's not.*** Fuel carried in tank above the motor - There is a genuine Bultaco modified in the 70s by Steve Wilson that had the fuel tank and air filter positions reversed (like the later JCM) John Collins owns it now and still rides it. It was ridden in the 70s like this but by definition would be in the specials. There could be other bikes out there like this as people were creating all sorts back then. If someone copied that Bultaco now, does it make it a trick/cheat/special? *** There will always be a one off special somewhere. Monoshock OSSA comes to mind. You cant make a rule that accomodates one offs. Although you couls give a one off a dispensation to allow them to ride. Down to the CoC. That rule will stay because it keeps costs down. If somebody turns up on one they can still ride but as a Special or guest non championship points ride. *** Tubeless rims - I've said my bit on them... *** I do follow your point but for the time being this rule will stay. *** Later engines - How much of an advantage are they, really? It's mainly Fantic or Beta we're talking about. Again, I'm not keen on it but have no real objection. If I fit a 240 Fantic with a reed valve it is perfectly acceptable. Tamaha TY250 had them in 1973 as a production bike and set a precedent. Ossa UK were using them in 1975. Numerous privateer bikes were converted in that era. So there can be no objection to any twinshock (in the absence of cut-off date classes) being fitted with a reed. So, back to the Fantic. What is the difference between me fitting the reed to the 240 or putting in a 245 reed motor which saves me trying to find someone to convert the 240 for me. I can't see any. I also wouldn't bother I have to add, as the Fantics 200, 240 and 300 have more than enough GO for today's classic sections - see previous post. But if some choose to do it I'm not going to object. If I had a Fantic 240 and put the latest 307 motor in it, I'm not suddenly going to win this year's Normandale championship. My results will be the same. Similarly, if David Pye removed his 38mm forks and later motor and put his 300 back to standard, he isn't going to drop behind me in the results. *** Dont totally disagree but previously we made monos converted to twinshock ride as air cooled monos. They were one of the type of bike along with say a Fantic with a Bantam or Cub motor entering as a British Bike etc etc which i had in mind when i added the Trickshock class. This also mirrors the East Midlands Centre ACU Classic Championship rules so will keep it as is. *** I can see what you want to do and that you have concerns over the direction you think twinshocks is heading, but I see the reality differently. I don't think it will ever go the Pre65 route. Even the oldest twinshocks are quite reasonable to ride in terms of handling, weight, steering and suspension. Even the worst of them like the KT250 (sorry KT, I loved you but you weren't the best ride) is still competitive in a modern B trial and I actually won a few B standard modern club trials on it, against other twinshocks and modern bikes. So there isn't the need for them to be heavily modified to make them rideable like a god-awful standard Pre65 bike. These 'super' twinshocks don't really exist. Most of the mods are cosmetic and remodelling, performance wise they aren't putting those bikes light years ahead of the standard machine - like in Pre65 Things can always change I guess but I know from competing all over the place that most riders agree on where the boundaries are. There will always be one or two who want to 'push it' but that is human nature - in all walks of like. ******* Can i just say thanks Woody for the first constructive response to the rules i put forward. Good logical arguement and i will on reflection amend the Elegability rules tonight. *******

Fabulous thanks for that. Suppose it makes the point if you want to compete at the top level today you will probably have learnt it all on a bicycle first. Also shows you dont need a super trick bike just loads of talent

You havent read the rules either have you Mick? I have never looked that close at your beast but which of the rules in British Bike would reclass it as a Trickshox ?

Interresting how so many people keep saying they fitted a modern front end ONLY because they "picked it up cheap at Telford etc" Just read this on Classic Trials website so at least somebody agrees with me that 38mm forks etc offer an "unfair advantage" ???? "To match the greatly improved rear suspension, we will be fitting modern 38mm forks, as while the stock Honda forks can be uprated, the internal damping system is relatively crude, and is not ideally suited to serious competition use. As well as better suspension the 38mm forks increase the rigidity of the front end, which means more precise steering." Nah they are just cheaper mate.

Just thought i would add this pasted from Classic trials website. "To match the greatly improved rear suspension, we will be fitting modern 38mm forks, as while the stock Honda forks can be uprated, the internal damping system is relatively crude, and is not ideally suited to serious competition use. As well as better suspension the 38mm forks increase the rigidity of the front end, which means more precise steering. " Somebody thinks 38mm forks offer more than bugger all advantage over a well set up pair of standard Marzocchis.

Hmm learn something new every day. Shame it appeared so late just as the monos were about to take over. Does the bike still exist?

Interresting. Tell us more

Hi Charlie. You musnt let people get to you just because they are too blinkered by vested interest. Your idea was a good one but good ideas dont always get off the launch pad because they get swamped by the aforementioned vested interest brigade. Witness the amount of revolutionary powerplant developments that the motor industry have stomped on because of their vested interest and massive financial investment in the conventional combustion engine. Still dont see what was so abhorrant about having a seperate class for modernised bikes but hay ho Thing is with horses the mods take a lot longer before you can use them. Thats genetics for you Keep at it mate

Be nice to see it at the scottish pre65 two day

Interesting bike. Shame they never took off. What year is it? I assume it's yours if so are you thinking of riding it or is it too precious as it would be a shame not to use it once in a while

So what did we learn from all this? apart from you can always become more unpopular than you think you can Well firstly and i am going to look at Twinshocks in particular because i dont personally think Pre65 or whatever you want to call it has the same "problems" because to some extent the Scottish and other clubs like Yorkshire Classic, Red Rose etc help to put a brake on "modernisation". There are a growing number of Twinshock riders who want and have a modernised bike with front ends from 2000 or later right up to the present day even Maxton forks are now appearing. These riders will also have fitted many more modernisation updates to make their bike perform more like a conventional modern bike including tubeless rims and tyres, monoshock motors, super light frames that are called replicas but bear no resemblance to the frame they are replicating etc. Now these riders have a vested interest, not least a very large financial one, in maintaining the status quo as if not and there was a swing back to more "standard" Twinshocks with just small mods say footrest position, bars and choice of shocks but still retaining standard size allowed their modern twinshock would plummet in value. These riders will fight tooth and nail to maintain their advantage. All that was proposed was that the modernised bikes run in a seperate class, with similar modernised bikes, from the more traditional standard machines. Incidentally this also applied to British bikes as even Yorkshire Classic have a "specials" class which i understand is well supported so shouldnt have been a problem as it works there well enough. However and heres where it all fell apart as soon as the riders of the modernised Twinshock thought they would no longer be competing against std bikes for class victory and awards there was uproar and the accusations started flying. In fact nobody was told they couldnt ride. There was no suggestion of the "clipboard police", that one did make me smile wish i'd thought of it, inspecting every bike not that anybody bothered to ask me how i was intending to implement the eligability rules. There was even a class now for bikes, air cooled monos with twin shocks fitted, which we previously didnt allow but again uproar. I remember when we first said that any air cooled mono fitted with twin shock could still ride but in the air cooled mono class not against the Twinshocks there was uproar about that too which i couldnt understand either. Riders who had a bike that didnt comply with the eligability rules but didnt want to ride as a Trickshox also had the option to ride on a no Club Championship points scoring basis but that wasnt acceptable, judging by the response on here, either as they still wanted to ride their Gas Gas/Sherco/Beta/Bultaco/OSSA/Montesa/Fantic/Whatever Hybrid in the Twinshock class against more std bikes. Now just forgetting that you may own one of these are you seriously saying this if fair and right? The intention of introducing the Trickshox class for me, other people not Charlie BTW involved in discussions about this which have taken place not on TC may have other agendas some of which may be business linked as they provide a lot of services advertised on the web that cater for modernised twinshocks and air cooled mono conversions, was to try to keep the competition fair and have bikes with an obvious technical advantage competing like for like whilst also encouraging riders of more standard Twinshocks to keep riding. A std Bultaco,OSSA, TY etc bought off e bay is still a relatively affordable entry to the sport. I also didnt want to discourage, as usual i have seemed to acieve exactly what i set out not to achieve, people who enjoy building and pushing the limits. I really love the engineering on some of the modernised Twinshocks and British Bikes. Anyway i will keep the Trickshox class, might rename it the Evo class or something because i feel some egos cant accept the term Trickshox, and riders can enter their bike in whatever class their conscience tells them is right. There is always the opportunity for another rider to protest the bike is not eligable for the class it's running in as per the eligability rules which incidentally i did also say i was open to sensible discussion on. Not that anybody bothered to discuss them with me. Oh well.

like your style