mich lin

I failed to mention that I was there when the Terminator came from the future in T-2. Then in T-3 the Terminator came from the future about 1/8 mile upstream from our house near a group of our training sections. Didn't see that arrival from the future however! A load of Brits came to the USA and did that film. da buggers!

Ok it's true I've got pink guards on my figure skates and high footpegs but it's a proven fact that I was banned from trials central not for remarks about men riders but about lady riders in lycra! Working in Hollywood, we simply don't ask don't tell to survive. How did I get involved in this subject anyway?

I'm not getting anywhere near this shoot-out, I've ridden rocks on both sides of the pond and fell on my duff! You men will have to settle this alone.

So there you go Ishy, you have revealed the secret of Yorkshire trials superiority to the world. I'd think twice about another trip to the scottish, you may end up at the bottom of the loch with a stone necktie. I've had a lot of experence with time machines by the way. I can just see the rollyeye clickable smiles on upcoming posts already but really these are true stories. We live accross the street from a movie ranch, the Speilberg movie that was a redo of the H.G. Wells story Time Machine was filmed there and we sometimes practice trials in the former sets. We have one section called Morlock's Hand because there was a rubber hand from a Morlock in the section. Another time I came out my front gate and there was the Back to the Future time macine car parked there. It was being driven and had been built by an advit fan who was hired to drive it in a movie being filmed on our road at the time. He had build it himself and he was fun to talk to because I have a real part I'd picked up and kept from the real Back to the Future time machine when it was destroyed by the train in the third part of the triligy. Sadly Ishy, if you remember Doc Brown's grey hair didn't go away during time travel. So you are an old fart here or during time travel! So, how do you propose we kidnap Raga and take him back in time to be spanked at this Gold Bar world round you are talking about Ishy? Consider this, he can't turn without hopping and everytime he stops to hops and balances he will be scored a five. Then when he does drop the hammer from a stop like he's used to to spatter, the bike will simply sit there and spin with those of hard tires, insted of hooking up and griping like he is used to. He will make a right pig of himself and make all the young riders of the future ashamed to have him as their world champion. If you remember, that's been the theme of all time travel movies, how not to screw up the present by fooling around with the past. Having Raga spanked by papa Lampkin, Jay Leal and all the riders of the past would upset the delicate balance of the present. It might upset the cenergy of self esteem, confidence and self worth of todays enthusiasts and cause some unrepairable rif in the time, balance equalibrium. Causing some sort of disaster only Doc Brown could foresee.

Atom, sorry about hacking your name! Consider a fuel injected motor needs a pump no matter where the tank is located. It may not be needded however depending on how the design of the fuel tank is layed out. I doubt that the machine would be much heaver or look much differnt. The lines would simply be a ltttle flatter on top, with slightly less sway back. Overall there would be very little weight gain but with the mass lower and more centralized handling would be better. What really excites me would be the cold air induction which improves engine performance. How a next generation trials bike would be designed would be simple! Lay it out on the cadcam and go to town.

Let me comment on Marland, Larry Girly and Adam Raga! Marland was amazing and a much better rider than Bernie! He just lacked the heart to live in Europe and Honda didn't have the infastructure in place yet to provide the support he needed to sustain a world championship campain with an American. They became much better organized for trials in Europe later with Lejune! Larry Girly was an MX rider who cross trained trials before competing at it and was good almost right away simply because he was on the bike training before he ever competed his first trial. He never was able to ride at the top levels but was always fun to ride with, we practiced together often and I helped with his riding technique. Much like if a current good young MX rider would improve really fast if he had a one of todays top level trials riders to train with. Now if you put Adam Raga and his bike in a time machine. Put vintage Dunlap trials tires on his bike when he got there required by the rules, made him ride the classic non-stop rules at this US world round. He might not be able win against the stars of that day, even with his more modern bike. It would indeed be an interesting contest! Raga's bike is designed to take advantage of the grippy tires! His bike witout a flywheel and the smooth power delervry of the bikes of that day simply would not hook up and find grip. He might not even finish in the top ten and score ANY world championship points at all. I know this is only speculation but it would indeed be an interesting contest. I'd also like to try the time machine experiment with Debbie and Sanz!

Ringo, thanks old buddy I live for your hazing! After all remember the proverb, what dosn't kill you makes you stronger!

Adam, the theory of centralized mass is well accepted for motorcycle design. On todays primitive bikes the fuel is mostly up high and fuel weight is heavy, 6 pounds per gallon. Moving it down into the unused hump of todays bikes lowers the center of gravity and centralizes the mass. We also open up a great deal of room in the old gas tank area for the coil and electric parts that are not exactly light now hung near the triple clamps. They could also be lower, less cramped and more centralized. Perhaps even cooler! Another problem with todays design is the position of the air intake. It's low and is subject to hot air induction because of the exsast being right next to the airbox inlet. More room, simply allows more design options, plus a gas tank with fuel weighs more than an airbox. So swapping positions of the two is a big plus not a negative. You guys can keep riding your same bikes if you like! I think that's great because my new 21st century bike will have a "cold and dry air" inlet and will simply run away from your bike on climbs and up steps. It will have a more centralized mass and a lower CG. Plus I will be more rested between sections and in the back of my mind I will not have to worry that I might run out of fuel. Then when the time limit is short, I have the option of carrying more fuel, which means less fuel stops saving time. Simply, I win with this new design over your 20th centery sway back broken down horse lookalike trials bike. I agree with what has been said above, it's the look that everyone has become used to and the manufacturers are afraid to change that styling of their bikes. They are worried the old fuddy duddies won't like the "new look". I also agree with the thought that mandates are not what trials is all about. Sadly we will have to get used to them! The FIM will require all bikes to be 4 strokes soon and have a weight minimum which is much higher than todays production bikes. Get Used to it!

Adam, think outside the box a little! The bikes would not be a reflesx or an alp! They would be next years world beating trials machine, much more refined and better than the trials bike your on now. They would simply have more range, a small but effective seat and a higher standard of performance because of the lower center of gravity and centralized mass. Why do some of you keep going back and think we are talking about a reflex or an alp? Also remember that the FIM plans a minimum weight rule of I think 160lbs at the same time they impose the 4-stroke only rule on you. So your bikes are going to get heavy but not because of a useable tank and seat rule! A bike with simply a larger tank and a minimal seat would not have to weigh more. Only with a full tank would the bike be heaver. When it's not filled to capacity air does not weigh very much. We are simply talking about utilizing the unused void of the sway back of the modern trials bike. Simply raising that unused area a couple of inches by putting some much needed fuel and a little neopreame on there, then the airbox up near the steering head for better access and waterproffing. A longer intake track might even improve engine performance but only dyno and section testing will prove that theory. Bingo, what you have is a better performing machine with a lower CG. More range and comfort and a wider sales appeal. Now if you insist on only a pint of gas and no seat, the manufacturers could build a speical indoor model for you. Hey you may save a quarter of a pound and have exactly what you have right now, except you will take off what is now the tank cover to clean your air filter insted of the rear fender. Everyone wins then, You guys and those of us who want sit once in a while.

Ishy, let me put an old patern Dunlap trials tire on Adam Raga's Gas Gas and he would have a hard time riding those same Gold Bar sections!

What a great question! Would have to say like sting that there is no right or wrong, ball or arch. Consider this, I've done a lot of testing of both positions and at my peak riding ability I would use ball for one situation and arch for the other. The bike is more nimble when you are on your toes! You are taller on the bike which gives you greater leverage or what's called "moment" on the bike. So when the bike needs to be nimble you ride on your toes. That's usally up hill with good visabiltiy of the obstacles your riding over. Now going downhill when you need greater stabiltiy I'd return to the arch position which also gave greater rear brake access. Sections where there is deep water that you cannot see the submerged rocks I'd also return to the arch, which slows down the speed that the bike reacts. Which gives you a slower handling bike and more time if you hit a hidden rock to correct. Overall when you want a quick handling bike, go to your toes. When you want a slow and stable platform, go to your arch. One last factor, knees out, faster handling bike, knees into the bibe, slower handling bike. So with my changed foot position I'd also jump between a knees in or knees out stance. Now all this knees in, knees out, ball or arch can really mess you up if your not training ALL the time. How you learn something best is take all your practice time and concentrate on ONE thing for as long as it takes to master it. When you get it down pat without having to ever think about it anymore. Go to the next technique and concentrate on it until you master that. I believe you can master one technique at a time only. I was also been testing footpeg positions before I stopped riding a few months ago!

Ishy, 75-76-77 were bad years for me, I could never come to grips with the 159 sherpa. And yes I was a whiney bugger about it! Where was the world round? Yes 9th at the US world round sucks even on a bike you hate! As for the chop sauce trick? No comment!

I don't have TV!

Alan, the point is not to reinvent the wheel but to cause a revolution! We are talking about bikes that will perform better than exsisting bikes in all areas and be more comfortable, have farther range and a wider appeal. The trouble with all the add on kits is that they are expensive after thoughts, not a design direction change or formula change for the sport. I don't remember the sales figures for the Alpena off the top of my head but sales were good. We are not talking about a modern day Alpena or a better Pampara which is a pig. We are talking about the next generation of world championship trials machines with larger tanks under the seats with a lower CG than now. Longer range, more traditional lines, more comfort and a wider appeal. The Alp or the Reflex were never good trials bikes! We are suggesting a new formula for what Raga, Fugi, Lampkin and company will compete the future world championship rounds on.

Someone has to be a crusader for Justice, Sportsmanship, progress, a better economy and fair play! It may as well be Team Mich Lin. It wouldn't work without differning opinions and an open dialog. Thanks, copemech! God Bless Texas!

Ishy, how can I argue that that? Come on, you will have to try harder to stir up a little heated debate. We simply have to stop this agreeing thing! Beave

Clive, I would have been in the 55 year old class this year! Would have had a good shot of winning it also but I could care less now. The NATC destroyed my interest in the US nationals. Well indeed the team has suffered with my loss of interest in the US nationals and riding but that is the NATC's fault not mine! I would have finished 7TH in the US Championship PRO class for 2005 if it hae not been for them. I even lost my airfare, which cost me a bundle of money as well as the frustration and loss of interest in the sport. I could have gone the lawyer route but why bother, they had that silly rule that you have to contest all the rounds to score championship points. Hey, if Bernie would have rode under that dumb rule he would not have won most of his US Championships. In fact he would not have even ridden in the US at all except the US world round. Unless the rule is taken back to the way it was in Bernie's day, every round counting, future US world round contenders will either have to ride only in Europe or only in the USA. The same dumb choice that Cody Webb, Chris Florin and the other US riders have to make this year for the US world round.

Simply study the dynamics of pushing, I've spent a great deal of time on this technique over the years. When the rear fender hits their behind they are actually creating "isometric gridlock." By that I mean the harder they push the less effort goes into moving the bike foreward because their behind is holding the bike back at the same time. The harder they push makes no differnce in their foreward momentum. The bigger the swayback on the bike the more this dynamic goes into play! A flatter profile bike does not create this isometric gridlock as bad. Thus making it harder to get a three on a sway back bike. Also if you watch US riders, they don't stand correctly, they stand much lower than the Europeans and Japanese riders. Don't believe me, check it out at the US world round! This is one of the biggest problems an American coach has to overcome with US riders who don't ride mud as much as the Europeans, Americans don't know how to push for a three as well as the Europeans. Or do they have as good a stance! This is not common knowledge in America and I would not expect most of our riders to understand these problems.

Clive, you are getting tougher! I simply can't seem to get a rise out of you anymore. It will be fun to watch Smage and Webb shoot it out. Like they say in the old Hollywood westersn, there is not room enough in this town for the two of us. Which will be bumped off the team? Say, you should be really mad at the NATC, their foremat steals your thunder, Clive! You have been top sportsmen on some nationals. Their combining the Pros and sportsmen at the same event keeps you from getting the credit and press you deserve. If you won the Lorretta Lynn Amatuer National MX title, you would get huge press in the medea. Likewise if the Sportsmen trials nationals where at a differnt place and time than the Pro Class nationals, you would recieved a lot more press coverage. As it is now, the Pro class steals your thunder Clive.

No Way!!!!!!

We are not talking about bringing back the 200lb Bultaco but a sub 150 pound trials bike with a tank and seat. One that looks and appeals to the average motorcyclist and is more fun to ride. Great point about the growth has to come from the outside. Current trials bikes are more expensive right now because they are very limited production! Sell some more bikes and the retail cost may just go down. Only by making trials bikes more practical will they appeal to a wider base of customers. The performance of the production bikes just might be better with flatter lines like I mentioned before. Most riders would have fewer fives and more threes with a flater profile bike. They would still be thin, have low seats but carry a little more fuel and allow you to sit a while. Plus trials bikes would no longer look like broken down sway back horses. They would weigh no more, unless the gas tanks are full of gas and it would open up the design options a lot for the engineers. They would for sure handle better on longer rides because the mass would be centralized with a full tank under the seat. Nothing messes up a bikes balance than having the extra fuel up near the triple clamps. Having fuel in your backpack is simply dangerous! In fact, trials bikes with larger gas tanks under the seats would outperform todays designs because the center of gravity would be lower. Now the engineers are afraid to raise that area of the machines because of fear of changing the status quo lines of todays competition trials bikes.

I don't beleive we are talking about Multi-Purpose bikes, we are talking about how highly speicalized trials bikes have become. They have NO seat and carry very little fuel making them impossible to do anything with but ride a short loop and some sections without refueling. All while riding on the pegs 99.9% of the time. The strange look of todays trials bikes also make them look so much differnt from a normal motorcycle, there is little point of reference between them and any other type of machine. What ordinary motorcyclist could picture themselves riding something like that? The concept of the FIM requiring a trials bike with a real seat again and a gallon and a half of fuel is not a radical one. It would also have very little effect on machine performance. Filling in the sway back of the modern trials bike with a gas tank and minimal seat would not take cause a poor handling trials bike! It might even lower scores for most riders because now the rear fender hump causes fives insted of threes during pushing. A flat profile trials bike actually is easier to push through a section for a three than a sway-back bike. Simply, it opens up the oppertunities available for us already in the sport. Instead of carrying gas on our backs, or in a front fork mounted extra tank that changes the balance of the machine. We all would be back on bikes that can go on adventures, look like the rest of the bikes out there and offer a little comfort. Has anyone tried to sit on a modern trials bike for very long?

Yes, yes, the team that energizes this information will indeed be EXTRAordinary. Will it be Smage or Webb? Taking bets Ishy?

The Pampara is a pig, not anything like the Alpena that Bultaco used to make. The Alpena was a Sherpa with a wide ratio gearbox, bigger seat and 3 gallons of gas. It was a good trials bike and enduro bike, while the Pampara is not good at either. What the FIM should formula into the world championship is a bike similar to the 1976-82 Bultaco Sherpa. It had a nice seat,way over a gallon of fuel on board and was comfortable on the trail and was the match of anything in the sections. If you take a ride on one of these bikes today after riding a modern bike you will be amazed at the comfort and fuel capacity. The 240 Fantic is also a nice ride!

darn Clive, I was hoping to catch you up but you didn't fall for it. You did miss the point of my post. I didn't see Craig's post before it was edited so I cannot comment. Here is what I see going on between you two. You two are in interesting positions, you belong to team Webb and he's part of team Smage. I have no dog in this fight, I'm simply on the sidelines watching the face off. These two teams will fight it out in the very near future providing all of us great entertainment. Simply the toughest team will win, who will it be? Now I've never told the story about Bernie not selling me the piston I needed for the 1980 season! I was simply bringing up the story as an example of his will to win. A will not seen in this generation of American riders and one that they will need to develope to be on par with the Europeans. Even after me giving him the title in 1978, Bernie was unable to put himself at any sort of disadvantage, which is the sign of a true winner. I realized then and there if the shoe had been on the other foot. Meaning if my bike had broken insted of his, he would never have given me the parts to finsih the trial, that's the point of that story. I've never mentioned this before, I've only told the first part of the story. Now the question is will these lessons be learned by our best riders? Webb, Smage or any other American hoping to be a world round contenders.They will have to learn this win at all costs attitude, because that's what they will face. Yes it makes riding at the top levels no fun but is playing Pro football fun? As for coming and riding with you guys, I've not ridden but once since I was told I could not compete at the nationals. I'm done, I really have no desire to ride anymore, it was snuffed out. Before I recieved the phone call from the NATC I was on the bike everyday and in the gym all the time. I had a great battle plan for the last season and this coming season but after having the rug pulled out from under me I simply lost all interest in riding this sport. Gee I've seen this happen to at least a half dozen, maybe a dozen US Pro riders since I came back to this sport. Simply if people are not allowed to dream and aim high, they never become extraordinary. The differnce between ordinary and extraordinary is simply a little extra put in front of ordinary. I don't want to be disrespectful to you Clive or anybody else but I don't really expect a lot of people to understand this concept. If they don't fine, yet the few that do will become EXTRAordinary! Now will it be Smage or Webb who become EXTRAORDINARY? Which one will it be? Will it be World Peace or winning?