Converted mono's in spain?

[woody]

The unrest in France is pretty widespread, but worse in the big cities. Fuel where I live in the Dordogne is pretty unaffected, but delieveries are being disrupted so on the motorways it may.. and I say may, as I m not really sure, be tricky getting diesel.

You may have to come off and search for it... I would certainly throw a rug over a couple of cans and bring a reserve with you.

The lorries have been doing go slows and the odd blockade on the roads too, however being a cynic I cant see they will be about Friday or the weekend as well, as its the weekend .......,

There is a forum for Brits in France called "Totalfrance.com" have a look on there over the next couple of days its quite up on information when there is a bit of flap on.....will give you a better idea.

As to the bikes in Spain, to be honest they are extremely well prepared and in my opinion don t come under the cheat heading at all.

They are modded for sure but all look like they came out of their perspective factories only they shine a lot more...

There are a few special pre 65 bikes but its a small class compared to the uk, and apart from one tiger cub I saw with a Fantic front end looked pretty standard fare.

Its a long drive Woody, watch the speed as they have cottened on to the money it brings in and the speed traps are everywhere, see you Friday night hopefully safe journey.

Thanks for the info, fingers crossed I don't run into any problems

[greeves]

Hi all: It is true you can see a few number of bikes here in Spain that have gone a step too far in the preparation. Although they are not legal attending to our rules.

Our rules are simple, classic trials bikes are those that use drum brakes, air cooled and a pair of shocks, and you can not use any part of a bike that comes from a more modern machine than the one you are using (with the exception of handlebars, footrests and some other small stuff). This means it is not legal for example to use a Montesa

[woody]

With fantics there really is a difference in pwer its not the reeds that are unfair. If you accept the fact that wiffen and pye use the later engine then the line may never be drawn as to whats fair, a Sherco engine in a 340, why not?

It's the thin end of a wedge yes, but if you know what to do and have the facilities, a 240/300 can be ported and fitted with a reed to make it perform like a later engine anyway and there is nothing wrong in doing that. It's just totally unecessary as more power doesn't have any real benefit in either the Miller or Normandale rounds. One or two riders regularly put TY175 and Whitehawk/Majesty 200 at the sharp end of the results. More power has no bearing on success in the sections in these trials. There is nothing, even in the hardest round (Colchester when it's wet) that a standard 200 Fantic can't do. Of more concern would be bikes appearing with hydraulic clutches and discs as they do offer a significant advantage regarding machine control and placement of the bike in sections.

[nigel dabster]

It's the thin end of a wedge yes, but if you know what to do and have the facilities, a 240/300 can be ported and fitted with a reed to make it perform like a later engine anyway and there is nothing wrong in doing that. It's just totally unecessary as more power doesn't have any real benefit in either the Miller or Normandale rounds. One or two riders regularly put TY175 and Whitehawk/Majesty 200 at the sharp end of the results. More power has no bearing on success in the sections in these trials. There is nothing, even in the hardest round (Colchester when it's wet) that a standard 200 Fantic can't do. Of more concern would be bikes appearing with hydraulic clutches and discs as they do offer a significant advantage regarding machine control and placement of the bike in sections.

Definately, but there needs to be a more active administration of the rules whereby anyone can pick up a ty or whatever and have a go. The more mods the better the bike = harder sections?

And if the later fantic engine isn't ness why not pick up on it?

first engines then forks then hydraulics it needs nipping in the bud, or "formulaising" where you can buy the bike after an event for

[old trials fanatic]

Good luck on the diesel front. A friend of mine is ging to France this coming weekend so i've warned him to for a change fill his tank up this side of the channel instead of as soon as he gets off the ferry.

Have a good trial and hopefully bring back some piccys especially of the "cheat bikes" as i am thinking of building one just in case i want to ride over there as though i dont agree with them the engineering interests me.

Just wanted to clarify that i did not mean that the Puma etc bikes are "cheat" bikes far from it. I meant that any converted monoshocks to twinshocks are "cheat" bikes.

I dont condone them and i agree they must be excluded but i also agree with others who have posted on here that disc brakes and hydraulic clutches etc are a no no too. In fact there was a competitor at our trial on sunday who rode a RL suzuki with discs and i have had to reclassify him as a guest and he has not scored any championship points.

As for "now the acu / amca could do the same for twin shocks if they wanted and that would be a clear line in the sand.. frames as std, brakes as fitted to that machine, forks as fitted to that machine engines as fitted to that machine.. theres no end of if's but's or maybes clear simple rules that anyone can follow the acu is democratic mr wren contributes to these pages it can be done befors next season if enough people want it to.. how much do you want it is the question?" Reading the above would a Majesty be eligable? After all what does constitute a std frame? Would a Majesty with TY mono forks be elegable? What about Fantic 300 wheels in a 240? theyre drums after all. Do we now have to strip the steel liners out of Bultaco drums and have them chrome plated? do we all have to throw our Falcon, Betor, Magical shocks away ? Perhaps you would like to talk Dunlop into remanufacturing the Trials Universal too or god forbid we are made to fit Pirellis

Sounds a barmy set of rules to me that you could drive a bus through.

There thats covered most of it. Oh yes and i think the spanish have the right idea about nothing newer than the bike, read Javiers post to get the full idea, makes a lot of sense to me however they, the organisers over there, have the knowledge and the balls to enforce it where as over here as also mentioned earlier half of them dont know the difference and the other half dont care and nobody is going to scrutinise or exclude anybody cos they are all desperate for entries. Dont count on the ACU as they arent really interested and most dont ride or know bu66er all about Classic and Twinshock trials bikes. Big generalisation i know but pretty accurate IMHO

Edited October 19, 2010 by Old trials fanatic

[monty_jon]

The problem with all these modifications is out-prices the average competitor, take for a example fiddle forks in pre65. Basically they are just cheating, and killing the sport

I have no problem with fitting spanish forks / brakes to a pre65s as long as it

[old trials fanatic]

The problem with all these modifications is out-prices the average competitor, take for a example fiddle forks in pre65. Basically they are just cheating, and killing the sport

I have no problem with fitting spanish forks / brakes to a pre65s as long as it

Edited October 19, 2010 by Old trials fanatic

[monty_jon]

Thing is as most people fit Bultaco, Montesa, Ossa etc forks and have them fitted into "period" sliders that is fundamentally what is happening anyway. Most riders would also happily fit Montesa or Ossa fork yokes too but they arent allowed to. Instead they are made to fit billet fork yokes instead. Woe betide you if you turn up at some events with fork yokes that have the pinch bolts outboard of the fork legs oooh nooo they must be inboard. As if that made any performance advantage? It's not the riders that are trying to spend extra cash for nothing it's the organisers who make stupid ill thought out rules that force the riders to make these expensive needless modifications.

That

[turbo]

What makes me laugh is that people seem to highlight the mods that the top boys make to their bikes ie Dave Pye and Phil Whiffen, the lesser runners like myself can go un noticed ,ideal. My point is ,is just sour grapes?.Its their bikes ,their business,most of the people complaining could not perform like these 2 chaps even if they were on a modern bike .

[metisse]

It could be possibley true Turbo, however can you imagine the comments if someone turns up with a Majesty with a Mono ty engine grafted into the frame...Is there any difference...

I might add also, that I feel without doubt, the top riders would do just as well on bikes that did nt court controversy, so why do it in the first place, where is the satisfaction....

[monty_jon]

What makes me laugh is that people seem to highlight the mods that the top boys make to their bikes ie Dave Pye and Phil Whiffen, the lesser runners like myself can go un noticed ,ideal. My point is ,is just sour grapes?.Its their bikes ,their business,most of the people complaining could not perform like these 2 chaps even if they were on a modern bike .

Why not just let the top riders use modern machines then or not score lesser riders??? Surely everybody deserves a sporting chance or what’s the point in competing!

I’ve seen the same happen in the Classic Motocross, and a lot of my friends have stopped riding for this very reason!

Edited October 21, 2010 by Monty_Jon