January 9, 201412 yr Maybe Trials central stretches further than you think http://www.trialonline.org/01%20TRIAL.FIM/12.CTR.INFO/2014/14%20CTR%20INFO%2001.pdf
January 9, 201412 yr If current bikes are strong enough why does Sherco reinforces the area around the rear shock on the factory bikes and why did Belgiums top rider had to change the frame of his GasGas before he could sell it at the end of the season? I know that the top riders batter their bikes much more than us club riders, but still... And I find it hard to believe they increased the weight to suit Montesa, I think the factory Montesa's have no problem to meet the previous minimum weight of 67 kg. I stiil haven't heard of the official reason to increase the weight, or did I miss something? Anyway I couldn't care less if my next bike weighs 3 kg's more, I'm more worried about the loss of places to ride...
January 10, 201412 yr Maybe Trials central stretches further than you think http://www.trialonli...CTR INFO 01.pdf Great! At Least some sanity has returned to the FIM. Or maybe the Proof checker has been sacked!
January 12, 201412 yr Cost cutting and weight increase tend to be intertwined. World superbike used to have to use cast iron / steel discs rather than lighter more expensive carbob fibre. MotoGP has increased the minimum weight limit to the point where teams no longer need to use expensive light titanium exhausts = even the M1 works Yam of Jorge Lorenzo uses steel. If its good enough for the highly sponsord classes surely its good enough for the low cost sport of trials.
January 13, 201412 yr Relating trials to moto gp isn't a good analogy for lots of reasons. If you are so sure heavier is better start up a business selling heavy/reliable/cheaper parts and see what happens? whats light and unreliable on a trials bike anyway? baldilockies said above hes got 5 years out of his raptors whats wrong with that? they certainly last better than standard heavy steel ones that's for sure. Edited January 13, 201412 yr by nigel dabster
January 13, 201412 yr whats light and unreliable on a trials bike anyway? - As a gasgas rider you have presented an open goal - Pro kickstart mechanisms and the little chain link pawls in the gearbox selector mechanism for starters The steel footpegs on my CR500 have done a lot longer than 5 years! If you are so sure heavier is better start up a business selling heavy/reliable/cheaper parts and see what happens? - this is occasionally what happens as per my previous example of Ty ignition cases. However at present trial bike sales volumes hardly justify making anything. I would not try to make anything for the trials market at the moment, there are far better investments such as property. I am not in favour of heaviness for heaviness sake. I just think that increasing the minimum weight by a few kgs gives the manufacturer more scope for robustness and selection of lower cost materials. Edited January 13, 201412 yr by dadof2
January 13, 201412 yr I was told that if the road foundations in the UK were made 10% deeper, the road would last 25% longer. I would imagine you could say that with quite a lot of well used things.
January 14, 201412 yr A guy from a trials shop told me that almost every GasGas they took over when sombody bought a new bike had cracks in the frame to a greater or lesser extent...
January 14, 201412 yr whats light and unreliable on a trials bike anyway? - As a gasgas rider you have presented an open goal - Pro kickstart mechanisms and the little chain link pawls in the gearbox selector mechanism for starters The steel footpegs on my CR500 have done a lot longer than 5 years! If you are so sure heavier is better start up a business selling heavy/reliable/cheaper parts and see what happens? - this is occasionally what happens as per my previous example of Ty ignition cases. However at present trial bike sales volumes hardly justify making anything. I would not try to make anything for the trials market at the moment, there are far better investments such as property. I am not in favour of heaviness for heaviness sake. I just think that increasing the minimum weight by a few kgs gives the manufacturer more scope for robustness and selection of lower cost materials. had 5 gassers and never had a chain pawl go or kickstart mech so anecdotal evidence isn't necessarily true? Which as most circular arguments go comes back to WHOSE RULES, and what happens to the thousands and thousands of bikes that are underweight? Please answer this question.
January 14, 201412 yr As I've have asked before, what is the official reason from the FIM to increase the weight limit? No one seems to know the answer to that too...
January 14, 201412 yr had 5 gassers and never had a chain pawl go or kickstart mech so anecdotal evidence isn't necessarily true? Which as most circular arguments go comes back to WHOSE RULES, and what happens to the thousands and thousands of bikes that are underweight? Please answer this question. See, changing the rules has manage to attract thousands and thousands of new entries, all be it, there bikes are under weight !!! Nigel, don't worry about it, it's not going to affect you or anyone else, unless you intend to ride a WTC round. Maybe the CoC's can start each trial through a muddy hole, that will add a few kg to everyone's bikes, then they'll all be legal ;0)
January 14, 201412 yr It might affect me as I was going to do an over 40 European round this year but cant as my bike will be underweight. Really tempted to do the water in tyres trick or lead in airbox just to prove a point. Any volunteers for minder?
January 14, 201412 yr I was told that if the road foundations in the UK were made 10% deeper, the road would last 25% longer. I would imagine you could say that with quite a lot of well used things. that is why I am a bit more than 10% over the "ideal" weight. That way I have more material to use up and will last 25% longer.
January 14, 201412 yr Dabster # 129had 5 gassers and never had a chain pawl go or kickstart mech so anecdotal evidence isn't necessarily true? All I can say is that you are careful and / or have been very lucky. Just look at the number of GG gearbox posts and the fact that GG have partially modified them. Jon Stoodley has gone to the effort of GG pro gearbox rebuild videos as the problem is so common. Which as most circular arguments go comes back to WHOSE RULES, and what happens to the thousands and thousands of bikes that are underweight? Please answer this question. Whoose rules ? Many motorsports have minimum weights and detailed component specs to control costs. It would be up to the FIM to introduce them then filter down to National organisations. The problem of current machinery not meeting new rules could be addressed by exemptions for older bikes or bringing in the regulations gradually. For instance if it was now stated that from 2015 new bikes must have non perforated sprockets and discs and from 2017 ALL bikes must comply, manufactures and component makers would have plenty of time to adjust. Minimum weight increase on older bikes could be by adding ballast in specified locations and random use of scales in trials.
January 15, 201412 yr We are not talking about many motorsports we are Trials in the uk. One safety item like holes in sprockets (get changed anyway) is not the same as old bikes becoming obsolete, and you have to convince the manufacturers to follow wtc rules which might affect 50 sales a year? But YOU want the fim to dictate rules to the ACU which is our organisation run by our riders/organisations/clubs and you think they will just say yes? And you think peeps will actually add weight to bikes to compete in our club trials??????????????????????? Every club is going to buy scales and weigh bikes before events, and have an expert on hand who knows which year each manufacturers bike is made as to whether they are exempt or not? You really do live in la la land and just haven't thought this through have you?
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.