guys Posted November 24, 2013 Report Share Posted November 24, 2013 My 1975 Bultaco Sherpa 350 tips the scales at 211,8 lbs or 96,1 kg ready to race Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nzralphy Posted November 25, 2013 Report Share Posted November 25, 2013 Holley sh!t...... They obviously didn't give a monkeys when they were developing the bike 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b40rt Posted November 25, 2013 Report Share Posted November 25, 2013 Holley sh!t...... They obviously didn't give a monkeys when they were developing the bike They were "lightweights" in their day. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
breagh Posted November 25, 2013 Report Share Posted November 25, 2013 My dad used to call Bultaco's plastic bikes. I had a C15 I couldn't lift on the trailer. That would sort out your bathroom scales. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
htrdoug Posted November 26, 2013 Report Share Posted November 26, 2013 OK ... so just so I knew , bathroom scale came out , and my son is a wrestler so I've got a trick one ... Set aluminum loading ramp on scale and rolled the 240 up on it and let it settle .... 178lbs full of fuel .!!!! Meh,mine weighs 193lbs. SWM about the same. 1 gal or so of fuel. Fantic has CT fuel tank,no saddle,no lights, rear tubeless rim off a 307,Dunlops,Beta tr34 forks,Yamaha front wheel(Worth it for 1 finger drum brake action),alloy footpegs,custom alloy airbox,allot silencer,I guess I've added as much weight as the removal of the OE lights and harness.Think I will cut the exhaust apart and clean it this winter(Could be worth 5 lbs maybe) Fantic rides much lighter than SWM,SWM more graceful crossing big logs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brownee Posted November 26, 2013 Report Share Posted November 26, 2013 Just seen this thread!! Cant believe it!!!... the guys at "BPS" have been working on this project over the summer... Tricked up Cooper Bantam bumped up to 200 CC...weighing in at 68.8KG... Can or can't we get an entry?? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
axulsuv Posted November 26, 2013 Report Share Posted November 26, 2013 Meh,mine weighs 193lbs. SWM about the same. 1 gal or so of fuel. Fantic has CT fuel tank,no saddle,no lights, rear tubeless rim off a 307,Dunlops,Beta tr34 forks,Yamaha front wheel(Worth it for 1 finger drum brake action),alloy footpegs,custom alloy airbox,allot silencer,I guess I've added as much weight as the removal of the OE lights and harness.Think I will cut the exhaust apart and clean it this winter(Could be worth 5 lbs maybe) Fantic rides much lighter than SWM,SWM more graceful crossing big logs. And mine has the works shocks and I'm pretty sure my frame isn't quite a production one ... Wish we hadn't missed each other at the WR , You shoulda ridden my 240 ! Glenn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spenser Posted November 30, 2013 Report Share Posted November 30, 2013 I would have to think that the rational behind the increase in weight is to allow the 4 stroke and electric bikes get in on the competition. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickl Posted November 30, 2013 Report Share Posted November 30, 2013 I think Spenser is right on the rational behind this, This is likely the first small step in making the two stroke no longer a competitive option. I would expect to see displacement limits imposed upon bikes in the near future, with favourable limits given to four stroke machines. (For example new rules to allow competition on a 4T limited to 350cc, or a 2T limited to 200cc.) It has been seen in other forms or motorsport that the FIM favour 4T, and there have been rumours for years that Honda has deep roots of influence in FIM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twinshocked Posted November 30, 2013 Report Share Posted November 30, 2013 (edited) Maybe its a way to keep the factories from building disposable bikes that financially devastate owners with high repair costs and miserable resale value. Disposable bikes that don't serve the needs of the second hand buyer looking for an inexpensive and reliable bike to get started in the sport. Disposable bikes that end up forsaken in a shed somewhere with no one riding them. Or you could choose to believe some wacko conspiracy theory. The world is full of them. Edited November 30, 2013 by twinshocked 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie_lejeune Posted November 30, 2013 Report Share Posted November 30, 2013 I would have to think that the rational behind the increase in weight is to allow the 4 stroke and electric bikes get in on the competition. I think Spenser is right on the rational behind this, This is likely the first small step in making the two stroke no longer a competitive option. I would expect to see displacement limits imposed upon bikes in the near future, with favourable limits given to four stroke machines. (For example new rules to allow competition on a 4T limited to 350cc, or a 2T limited to 200cc.) It has been seen in other forms or motorsport that the FIM favour 4T, and there have been rumours for years that Honda has deep roots of influence in FIM. so will sherco & scorpa dig out the 4 strokes again? Or maybe even Yamaha make an appearence- I'd like to see that 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel dabster Posted November 30, 2013 Report Share Posted November 30, 2013 Note the magazine article describing Ferrers' bike has lead in the front spindle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadof2 Posted December 6, 2013 Report Share Posted December 6, 2013 Well done the FIM. Hopefully minimum weight will be increased further. The drive to reduce weight has only resulted in increased cost and decreased reliability. It would be relatively easy to run a chain inside a swinging arm / oil bath with epicyclic gears in the rear hub. No chain wear and no pollution Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel dabster Posted December 7, 2013 Report Share Posted December 7, 2013 Well done the FIM. Hopefully minimum weight will be increased further. The drive to reduce weight has only resulted in increased cost and decreased reliability. It would be relatively easy to run a chain inside a swinging arm / oil bath with epicyclic gears in the rear hub. No chain wear and no pollution Do you ever read whats put in threads?My post above says ferrers bike already has lead in it why would weight limits make any difference? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pa. Posted December 8, 2013 Report Share Posted December 8, 2013 Minimum weights for World round bikes will have very little affect on the bikes that we ride. The manufactures will always try to build the lightest possible bike and then add weight were the rider wants it. This is the same in Formula 1 were all the cars (even Marussia) are underweight and are then weighted to balance the car and bring the car upto regulations. i would not expect to many local clubs would want to start weighing bikes at events so the manufacturers will still have no problems selling under weight bikes to you and me. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.