pete_scorpa3

This thread is going off topic now, my original point was that the ACU were accepting licence applications at the Dirt BIke Show from riders who had yet to join a club. The debate of being 'forced' to join a club is a different subject altogether. The fact remains that all licence (trials registrations) should include the unique code, by accepting licence applications without a code, the ACU was breaking it's own rule. If (as I have been assured) no licences will be issued until a correct code is supplied, remains to be seen.

When the ACU were discussing the on line licence applications, their preffered option was to scrap the need to join a club. Of course this would be their option as it would have made it easier for the ACU to issue licences online. Clubs in general were against this idea as it removed a revenue source. The ACU would not have lost anything, it was the clubs that would have been out of pocket. Some clubs give free memberships and that is fine, others rely on this income to continue running the club.

If it didn't ask for a code then how does the ACU know you've joined a club? How can this be a big improvement?

The assurance I have been given has come from the top man at the ACU. Only time will tell if the loop hole is closed.

I have emailed the ACU and recieved a reply on this matter; I am assured that no licences (trials registrations) will be issued without an upto date club membership.

According to the ACU's news release - "The ACU will again be offering new and existing members of the ACU the opportunity to renew their licences Online in readiness for the 2013 season. This is the second year this service has been offered at the Show following its inaugural success last year." Last year at least two of our club members got their Trials Registrations at the show and subsequently didn't join the club. During 2012, the new online system has worked really well (for our club), however the ACU issuing 2013 licences (Trials Registrations) at the show undermines the unique code system that we are trying to adopt. At this years show I enquired at the ACU stand about the club codes, I was told that riders were being given their licences but being asked to promise to join a club. How can this happen? Either you need to join a club to get a licence or you don't! Pete Membership Secretary Stratford-Upon-Avon MCC

All three of my children started on a 12.5 with stabilisers fitted. The oldest was three and a half when she started, but as the bike was already in the garage, the others started when they were a lot younger. Here's a picture of the middle one. (aged 2 years 4 months.) Incidentally, they could ride the Oset without stabilisers some time before they could ride push bikes without them! Here's a picture of her in a competition this year (aged 4 years 1 month.) The Osets have been brilliant at getting children into the sport of trials at an early age. Pete

Bought a new 12.5 in 2008 and its still going well (all three of my children started onthis bike using stabilisers.) I've got two sets of batteries for this one, each set will do a trial (ruoghly three hours) but don't have enough for any practicing afterwards hence the need for a second set. Constant riding around the garden gives about an hours use for each set. Only wear and tear (so far) has been one rear tyre. Also have a 36v 16 bought new in 2010, this has been fitted with hydraulic brakes. Run time for the bigger voltage bike is about the same as the smaller bike. Plenty of charge for a three hour duration club trial or for about an hours 'flat out' use around the garden. The bigger bike needed a new 'ignition' switch but I changed it for a waterproof toggle switch that is located under the 'tank'. I've been absolutely delighted with these two machines, it's allowed my children to take part in my hobby from the age of 2 1/2 and the older two both rode in events from their 4th birthdays. Fantastic value for money. Pete

The land owner could get this through the NFU. Each case will attract a different premium depending on the variable factors.

It is the riders responsibility to ensure that the machine meets the law. Once the ACU, Club or machine examiner starts being responsible for bikes being road legal, road trials will cease. In effect, every machine examiner would have to be an MOT inspector.

Is there an option to turn themoff? I keep starting to read them by mistake, I guess that's the idea!

Take a look below the exhaust centre box and see if the corner of the moulding that sticks up from the top of the gearbox has been ground off. If not, it tends to stick into the centre box which in turn splits. If the moulding is still square (rectangular) then grind the corner off. Not a big job if you do it when you have the carb off for cleaning.

Does anyone outside of the WTC still actually wear one piece suits anymore?

For those riding in the ACU Trail BIke Trial on the 16th September organised by the Stratford-Upon-Avon Club, the route card is now available to download from the clubs website at : http://www.stratford-upon-avonmcc.org.uk/ Entries for this event close tomorrow but can be submitted by email if you would still like to enter the trial. It will be a 75 mile route on and around the Cotswold Hills with 30 sections, suitable for trail/enduro bikes, the championship class will have six harder sections to give them a challenge. Although it is aimed at trail/enduro bikes, there is also a class for Twinshocks, Ladies and British Trials bikes, plus a 'no award' class for riders on modern trials bikes who would like to enjoy an easy day out. Pete

Welcome to TC.

Agreed. If the bike is as tidy as it looks in the picture, being a few years older doesn't make it worth any less. If it also turns out to be a 250 and not a 280 then that won't be a bad thing either. Although you may have been 'had' and no one likes that, it looks fine.

Here's some info on the SY250F fourstroke. http://www.trialssource.com/scorpa/sy250fr/sy250fr.html

If you have a 2006 two stroke SY250 it will look like this only with a flat sump guard, black wheels and an all blue rear mudguard.

Why change at all?

Almost every LDT in which I ride, I see riders who would benefit from a minder as they don't often ride trials and make the easiest sections look hard. And good riders who have a bad day. The potential for injury is present in any event. It is the organisers role to take all reasonable precautions. We had a similar incident a few years ago which very sadly ended up being fatal.

Out own LDT was "No inspection" until recently, it allowed the trial to flow faster and kept the sections wide and straight forward. But the ACU insisted that we allowed inspection, I will try to explain why. We all sign a disclaimer when we enter a trial, and should an injury occur in a section then that disclaimer should protect the organisers from liability. Providing they have taken all reasonable care. However, what if a rider attempts a section 'blind' and then finds an obstacle that they are not capable of negotiating and subsequently falls off and gets injured? The rider could claim in court that they would not have even attempted the section had they been allowed to inspect it before riding it. Suddenly a case begins to build against the organiser. What if the section in question had also been failed by the entire entry? This happens, sometimes the section plotters just get it wrong (or the weather changes etc). The injured rider stands up in court and says they were injured attempting a section which was too hard for the level of competition. The case for negligence starts to look even stronger. Then the injured rider points out that the ACU handbook states in TSR18 that "No penalty shall be imposed on a rider who wishes to inspect the section before riding it." As the Clerk of the Course, how can you defend your descision not to allow inspection? Maybe FIM rules are different?

We used to run a single lap trail bike trial (with easy straight forward sections) where inspection was not allowed. The ACU instructed us that we had to allow inspection onthe grounds of safety. Surely by day two of a two day event, the sections might have changed enough to need an inspection? Is this where reasonable care could be deemed to have not been taken by the organisers?

It might be the money, or maybe he likes a challenge, or perhaps he's been convinced there's something special coming for 2013.

I'm not sure how we've got onto the subject of the trials park from the question of late entries, and by the way I wish you all the luck in the world with this venture. You mention me having double standards; no just two different systems to two very different situations. Why "Pick one method and stick with and don't ask for others to chip in" the whole point of the thread was to discuss late entries? Just think back to your earlier post when you mentioned being asked to pre-enter when it didn't suit you. Fair enough, but then you complained that you didn't get a ride when you turned up and you wouldn't be going there again. If the organisers chose to apply a closing date (for what ever reason) then we should accept that and not take offence. Organisers don't make these rules because they like to offend riders, or turn away the chance to loose money! You also mentioned entering a trial by phone whilst on the way, again a brilliant idea providing the club can take the chance that you are going to turn up. So the hard working club members take a financial risk so that you can leave it to the last minute to make up your mind. You also wrote about sitting at home with a beer on a Sunday waiting for the results to arrive by email. Would this be the same hard working club members who've been out all weekend running the trial who would be doing this? I guess you are happy with all this providing no one asked you to do something terrible like pre-enter! And as for your finally comment, I have no idea what you think I'm going to "solve"?

I've no doubt that trials that enter on the day ARE popular, all of our club trials are enter on the day. If no one turns up, it's not a major loss. I agree that clubs that use fully automated entry methods are doing the right thing, it's they way we should all be going. My comment about relevance refers to the Gizza's original question concerning late entries. If a club stipulates a closing date, should riders be allowed to enter after that date?