British Twinshocks what would your eligability critera be?

[davetom]

I recall watching a feature on cheap car (banger?) racing in Scandanavia (poss Top Gear), where to keep costs below a certain figure,say

[twinshock]

I've been reading these comments with interest as I will be returning to the UK from Aus in March after 30 years and intend riding a pre 65 Tiger cub and I'm keen to know what is legitimate over there and what isn't. The sad fact of all the technical jargon that gets splashed about on TC is that there are guys around (like me) who wouldn't have a clue about fitting Marzocchi internals into pre 1935 Norton sliders to get round the latest set of rule changes etc etc etc. and I think you'll find the majority of pre 65 riders just want to compete against similar machines and guys in their 40's, 50's and 60's(in my case), I also understand there are guys who just want to win and take home trophies.

Surely there has to be a case for the guys who want the trick specials to compete in a class to suit them and leave the basic, genuine pre 65's to the average, non technical, poor sods like me who are as happy as Larry if our bikes start 2nd kick (three cheers for that sneaky PVL we fitted at great cost) and do actually slow down when we apply the front brake,,,, although the drum might be a bit oval.

Its not the amount we spend on our bikes or the amount of technical expertise we bend the rules with to make them go better, its still down to the nut behind the bars to point them in the right direction.

Great to see the usual characters putting the ideas forward but the more simple they are the less arguments will emerge.

Anyone got a good Cub for sale,,, seriously (twinshock2@gmail.com)

Edited January 29, 2011 by Twinshock

[monty_jon]

I've been reading these comments with interest as I will be returning to the UK from Aus in March after 30 years and intend riding a pre 65 Tiger cub and I'm keen to know what is legitimate over there and what isn't. The sad fact of all the technical jargon that gets splashed about on TC is that there are guys around (like me) who wouldn't have a clue about fitting Marzocchi internals into pre 1935 Norton sliders to get round the latest set of rule changes etc etc etc. and I think you'll find the majority of pre 65 riders just want to compete against similar machines and guys in their 40's, 50's and 60's(in my case), I also understand there are guys who just want to win and take home trophies.

Surely there has to be a case for the guys who want the trick specials to compete in a class to suit them and leave the basic, genuine pre 65's to the average, non technical, poor sods like me who are as happy as Larry if our bikes start 2nd kick (three cheers for that sneaky PVL we fitted at great cost) and do actually slow down when we apply the front brake,,,, although the drum might be a bit oval.

Its not the amount we spend on our bikes or the amount of technical expertise we bend the rules with to make them go better, its still down to the nut behind the bars to point them in the right direction.

Great to see the usual characters putting the ideas forward but the more simple they are the less arguments will emerge.

Anyone got a good Cub for sale,,, seriously (twinshock2@gmail.com)

Problem is somebody always wants to outdo another, that

[broony]

When I was more involved with road racing the club used to run

Forgotten Era which was fine at the start but the class wasn't

growing.So I made it open to different bikes(size/date cut off),

then the moaning started riders moaning that the new bread of

bikes weren't Forgotten Era and started quoting dates and bike

specs.what is and what is not Forgotten Era.Simple fix I changed

the title of the class to Post Classics,the main thing now is that

with the title change most riders are now happy with the exception

of the few.My point is change Pre'65 to British Twinshocks and this

would solve alot of the eligability/cost issues with current Pre'65's

and allow for more Affordable bike,which can only be good for the sport.

cheers the noo Brian

[b40rt]

Trouble is, you open the rules to make it more accessible and cheap.

But what would probably happen is the opposite, if you want to be vaguely competitive, that is.

Have these forks been repaired ?

Edited January 29, 2011 by B40RT

[woody]

Trouble is, you open the rules to make it more accessible and cheap.

But what would probably happen is the opposite, if you want to be vaguely competitive, that is.

Have these forks been repaired ?

And it is examples like this that highlight the sheer stupidity and inconsistency of eligibilty rules and their application.

The forks have been extended to accomodate modern internals, in the same manner as many other bikes. They look nothing like Pre65 forks.

The Pre65 Scottish, or SACU rules, have been mentioned as a potential template for unified rules as they are the most sensible. Well this is their criteria for front forks:-

"Fork sliders and yokes to be Pre65 design only. No Bultaco Ossa Yamaha etc or BSA/Triumph 4 stud. Fork maximum length 32 inches"

Now, someone explain to me how fork sliders like these are Pre65 design and when were there any yokes prior to 1965 that looked like that. Yet forks like this are allowed. But my standard framed C15 which had Montesa yokes (almost identical to those) and MK1 Ossa fork sliders (same as those but without the welding) were not allowed and I was pulled up for them. Even though bikes like that were 10 feet away during the scrutineering and were being allowed.

It's a farce, I have nothing against bikes like this and the mods don't bother me personally. I don't care what the class is called but I think all is needed is a pragmatic approach to allow people to build a modified bike on a budget.

Whereas the Miller series now has a new class to allow this, which is at least a start, I still find it ludicrous that full blown brand new Cubs and James with components like this can still go in the Pre70 class, whereas a standard framed BSA with a pair of Ossa foks is considered modified....

You'll never get unification.

Ultimately I don't care on a personal level as I'll ride my bike wherever I can and if it's not acceptable somewhere I just don't go.

Edited January 29, 2011 by Woody

[monty_jon]

Trouble is, you open the rules to make it more accessible and cheap.

But what would probably happen is the opposite, if you want to be vaguely competitive, that is.

Have these forks been repaired ?

My GasGas has less fork travel

[charlie prescott]

Hi Guy's.

Seriously.Brit-Shocks is the way to go. With the sort of format we are suggesting.

This will only help to encourage new blood into the Classic British scene.

If you can put together a bike cheaper using the parts suggested, turn up to a trial, and enjoy the ride on the bike you have put together without any hassle,riding along side similar machines, of similar build you would be encouraged to turn up at the next event. No doubt you would see improvement's that could be made to your machine, and you would in time probably make these! or not! but it would be up to you.

And you would not have the pressure of trying to find another trial within a sensible traveling distance,who would except your bike for what it is! and not stick you in the "specials class" along with all the trick bikes?

This is if a Brit-Shock class was universally excepted. It is time to make a stand for this consideration ,don't you think??

Regards Charlie.

[ask greeves]

After trying to digest all the input to this disscussion, it seems the class would consist of bikes to old to be considered 'pre 65' and to young to be a competitive 'twin shock'. Would you agree that a suitable name would be MTB Twinshock...MISSED THE BOAT

[old trials fanatic]

After trying to digest all the input to this disscussion, it seems the class would consist of bikes to old to be considered 'pre 65' and to young to be a competitive 'twin shock'. Would you agree that a suitable name would be MTB Twinshock...MISSED THE BOAT

Think a more relevant "name" for poeple who advocate valenced rims etc would be MTP ........ MISSED THE POINT

[old trials fanatic]

Just a little suggestion,maybe a 90kg minimum weight? easy to enforce,levels playing field a bit.(I have no clue as to the weight of a stock Bantam or Cub,maybe 82kg for Bantams?)

I think I'd outlaw fork braces mounted like these:

(Apologies to Mr.Gaunt )

If you outlawed those fork braces, owner would call them mudguard stays, then you would have to ban probably 20% or more of the entry, who lets not forget have already been accepted based on photographic evidence of their bikes being eligable, for the scottish "pre65" ?

[ask greeves]

I wonder what Neil Gaunts thinking ! Maybe it's....I know i'm under weight, wish I had those valenced rims, cos they don't weigh it until after the trial. An they'd all be filled up with mud.

[woody]

I wonder what Neil Gaunts thinking ! Maybe it's....I know i'm under weight, wish I had those valenced rims, cos they don't weigh it until after the trial. An they'd all be filled up with mud.

Neil Gaunt's probably at the burger van thinking about what burger to have. It's John Maxfield in the picture

[charlie prescott]

Hi Guy's

Even the picture of Neils bike is old hat(like the coments Greeves).

I think you will find the bike is a lot more "Trick" now.

We know it will be a fight because people Don't want to except change, But do we want the sport to GROW or DIE?????

This Brit-Shock class we are promoting is only one way that people on a low budget can get into the sport sencibly.

A few encouraging words from the ACU-AMCA would not come amiss??

Regards Charlie

[totalshell]

how is a bike where you can use what you want virtually a cheaper way to enter the sport than a cobbled together bantam etc. http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/BSA-D7-175cc-BANTAM-SUPER-1960-restoration-/150553731766?pt=UK_Motorcycles&hash=item230db3a2b6 -TYRES-UNUSED-/130479672526?pt=UK_Motorcycle_Parts&hash=item1e6131ccce http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Trials-mudguards-fit-Bultaco-Ossa-pre65-universal-ect-/150549183481?pt=UK_Motorcycle_Parts&hash=item230d6e3bf9 http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Trials-Yamaha-175-cc-Rear-Shocks-/220732264662?pt=UK_Motorcycle_Parts&hash=item3364ab10d6 http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/CLASSIC-MOTORCYCLE-TRIALS-TRAIL-SEAT-/120678005927?pt=UK_Motorcycle_Parts&hash=item1c18f83ca7 now chuck in some bars controls sprockets and chain and you 've very rideable bike for a lot less than a grand. why change the rules when you can have a genuine bike for that money.. no fiddle req.