I see the new ACU rules for class 8 and 11 require that the twinshock suspension be "as fitted at time of manufacture". No more canting forward of suspension units then?

Edited January 24, 201115 yr by 2/4

Quick Linky for those that don't check the front page

I see the new ACU rules for class 8 and 11 require that the twinshock suspension be "as fitted at time of manufacture". No more canting forward of suspension units then?

Think it means no early mono's converted to twinshocks.

The laying down of shocks was pretty commonplace with alot of the bikes at the time privately or by the factorys. Not always an improvment on some bikes.

The drum brake rule is commonsense as well.

No! It means the bike must have exactly the same shockers fitted as when it was made.... hope they are not knackered!

Now I'm off to start a disc brake aftermarket company called 'drum brakes' ......

Edited January 24, 201115 yr by Rosey

"....as fitted at the time of manufacture."

No grey area there then, it means unmodified from original.

Perhaps this line could have been worded better, or perhaps it means what it says. Protests anyone?

Told the ACU rep when he told me what they were proposing that the wording was wrong. You could drive a bus through the rules for twinshock.

What allegedly they intended to infer was that a twinshock should be a twinshock at time of manufacture. However as i pointed out what is "at time of manufacture"?.

If i build a "replica" frame tomorrow of ooh lets say a Fantic but make to take a much later reed valve or even a section bottom half it would be legal because it was a twinshock "at time of manufacture".

Loads more loopholes but ho hum if only they would ask the right people.

Used to be the same when i was rallying Escort twin cams. Every year the RAC blue book comes out and every year you go through it with a fine tooth comb to find what you can and cant get away with.

Anyway as previously said laid down shocks are'nt really much of an issue unless you ride Yorks Classic Pre65.

Edited January 24, 201115 yr by Old trials fanatic

So let's say that I, as a newbie with no previous knowledge of trial bikes, rolls up to buy an advertised twinshock.

If the mod had been done well how would I know if the suspension was original or not ?

My guess is that I wouldn't have a clue.

Of more interest to me at the moment, been aware of it for a while, is the "recommendation" re route marking.

Changes to 2011 Trials Standing Regulations

Section/ Route Marking

It is recommended that routes be marked as follows: -

Route A - Principle Route - Blue ( left) Red ( right)

Route B - Yellow both sides

Route C - White both sides

Any further routes to be marked in a colour chosen by the Organiser

In the above, the letters denote the severity of the sections in descending order ie Route A

would be hardest, Route B next hardest and so on.

Routes may be marked in their entirety in the colours shown, or the Organiser may mark

appropriate diversions in these colours. Ideally, the coloured section of markers should

be in the shape of an arrow, with the point toward the centre of the section

So let's say that I, as a newbie with no previous knowledge of trial bikes, rolls up to buy an advertised twinshock.

If the mod had been done well how would I know if the suspension was original or not ?

My guess is that I wouldn't have a clue.

Cavieat emptor. You see loads on flea bay, been a few converted Montesa's of late, and the poor sap who buys one them finds they cant ride it anywhere or has to find a Club that turns a blind eye.

As the Brookside characters would say "calm down, calm down, calm down"

I think if I read the amendments correctly the twin shock item is specific to the 2 classes in the Sammy Miller championship

And the flag colour is a recommendation not a stipulation and is something that has been requested on here several times.

I consider that at last, a sensible solution has been found regarding the 'twin shock' class. Let's hope that everybody, clubs/individuals take on board this sensible resolution. Also with regard to Pre 65, i'd like to see the regulations employed at the Pre 65 Scottish, as the standard set of rules throughout the UK, with regard to Pre 65.

Also with regard to Pre 65, i'd like to see the regulations employed at the Pre 65 Scottish, as the standard set of rules throughout the UK, with regard to Pre 65.

ACU - SACU see the differenced ? Never going to happen !

Edited January 24, 201115 yr by B40RT

Am I missing something here, surly the Twinshock rear suspension amendment is only for the Sammy Miller Championship??????

It seems they've just changed the wording to match the wording used for the twinshock class of the Traditional series. It just means no converted monos, not that you can't move shock position. If that were the case there would be quite a number of twinshocks that were modified from new that couldn't be used.... Imagine Vesty not being able to ride his Commerfords bike.

I think the renaming of Class 7 in the Miller series to British Twinshocks is a good idea, as last year's title of Replica and Pre-unit was very confusing.

I consider that at last, a sensible solution has been found regarding the 'twin shock' class. Let's hope that everybody, clubs/individuals take on board this sensible resolution. Also with regard to Pre 65, i'd like to see the regulations employed at the Pre 65 Scottish, as the standard set of rules throughout the UK, with regard to Pre 65.

You ARE joking re machine elagability are'nt you!!!!

Give me strength.