cvgmmartin Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 I agree with your idea of a set of sensible rules that makes it less expensive and easier to build a complying bike. However as totalshell says there is a lot of "free" in the initial concept that this will result in even more specials, for example by only specifying rear shock length it stiil allows room for unique non 1970s rear suspension designs. So if the intent is to cut out the specials and maintain a 1970s look then your going to need a lot more detail in the rules. If the specials are welcome then the rules are fine. There are lots of riders and builders out there who will want to stretch the boundaries as much as possible to either win or just because they enjoy building specials, so at this stage I think it is important that besides defining what is to be allowed, you sort out in more detail what you don't want this class to become. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ask greeves Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 I personally think that in all classes upto but not including Twinshock that all rims should be as the era, meaning either Valanced aluminuim or Steel non valanced with coresponding spokes ie if your machine was manufactured with 40 hole then the wheels should be laced with 40 or 36 as the case maybe. This still leaves the (i've got more supertrick bits than you brigade) option to run aftermarket hubs (that look standard)and titanium spokes. The wheel situation with regard to what can be done, is in my opinion becoming stupid, there will soon be 28 spoke rims, with aftermarket magnesium tiger cub hubs, titanium spokes etc etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old trials fanatic Posted January 28, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 I personally think that in all classes upto but not including Twinshock that all rims should be as the era, meaning either Valanced aluminuim or Steel non valanced with coresponding spokes ie if your machine was manufactured with 40 hole then the wheels should be laced with 40 or 36 as the case maybe. This still leaves the (i've got more supertrick bits than you brigade) option to run aftermarket hubs (that look standard)and titanium spokes. Why ? whats so special about valenced or steel rims? both are anacronisms only used then because we didnt have the ability to make non valenced and both are over heavy, expensive in the case of the valenced alloy and add nothing but needless expense detering anybody from building and riding an affordable Classic bike. Sorry i just dont follow your logic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie prescott Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) Hi Guys, OTF, I totally agree what you say about forks, I was just trying to clear a point up why I have 38mm forks in my rules, this would only be allowed with standard movement, and not motoX, enduro,8" movement forks. But I see your point this would open up a new ball game. And I agree every thing should be done to keep the cost down on a build, if you have just not got money to burn and want to build a Brit-Shock to ride. Same goes for the stupid yokes argument, does it matter where the clamp bolts are???. As I have said, Just build the bike up so that it looks "British" in most parts, as for rims they have always been mostly foreign from when we started using alloy rims, and valanced are more expensive now. And we know all the trick bikes use tubeless rims, so why bother what anyone uses as long, as it keeps the tyre-tire on. Although they are frowned upon in some circles.(Why)? I still think that If you want to build a decent Fourstroke Brit-Shock bike up a "Otter" framed bike is the best bet and you can build one to the formula that OTF has started for around about £2000, has I have proved. And it could be cheaper if you could get a good BSA or Triumph engine for less than £1000 or rebuild it your self. (I did build my own frame though for this build)Faber frame I think about £585. Let's Just get out there and RIDE!! ((if you can). edit! forgot words. Regards Charlie. Edited January 28, 2011 by charlie prescott Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ask greeves Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 Why ? whats so special about valenced or steel rims? both are anacronisms only used then because we didnt have the ability to make non valenced and both are over heavy, expensive in the case of the valenced alloy and add nothing but needless expense detering anybody from building and riding an affordable Classic bike. I must be missing the point here, what exactly are you trying to achieve. Is it a cut price/cheaper to build 'pre 65' class. Or are you trying to sort out a set of rules that would be acceptable to everybody. Surely just by wanting or building a 'pre 65' your accepting that the old technology/looks of that era is part and parcel of the overal project. I think most people in thier heart of hearts know the limitations of whats acceptable and whats not. Would a Beta Rev 3 frame, converted to twinshock painted black and fitted with a 32a engine be acceptable, no of course not. Would plastic mudguards be acceptable, yes probably. Would 0ne inch taper handlebars be acceptable ! I think we all have to work towards a unified set of rules, acceptable to everyone, ACU, SACU, Europe, USA, Japan. And do you know what, the SACU are the nearest that anybody has come to achieving that. OK maybe it needs a little more 'fine tuning' but these things don't/can't happen overnight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie prescott Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) Hi Guy's, Hi Greeves, We are not saying if you want to build a bike back up to how it came out of a British factory, there is anything wrong with that, I have done it myself. But really what we are saying is,that there should be an alternative to,what is mostly built and named Pre65 because most of these bikes, are modern engineering marvels ducking under this tab.these bikes should not be labeled Pre65 because they are not!! Putting them aside for a minute, If someone wants to build a bike with the parts we are suggesting to make a bike that is basically British, But using other parts that are available a lot more cheaply than the billet parts,etc and do not hide parts that we all know are there, and has cost a lot of money to hide. They should be allowed to compete on these "Brit-Shock" bikes without the stigma,of being told [You cant ride that mate them forks are not allowed] ETC. Just because the guy who built the bike has not got a bottomless pocket. Do you see where we are coming from? Edit Spelling! Regards Charlie. Edited January 28, 2011 by charlie prescott Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie prescott Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 Hi Guy's This is what we mean. Regards Charlie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monty_jon Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 Charlie, that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old trials fanatic Posted January 28, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 Thats my old girl "Bessie" still brings a lump to my throat. First "Pre65" i ever built. OK she isnt scottish legal but is a good example of what we are aiming at with British Twinshocks. Glad she has gone to a good home Charlie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monty_jon Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 Thats my old girl "Bessie" still brings a lump to my throat. First "Pre65" i ever built. OK she isnt scottish legal but is a good example of what we are aiming at with British Twinshocks. Glad she has gone to a good home Charlie Are they bultaco forks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old trials fanatic Posted January 28, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 Are they bultaco forks? OSSA but they looked "period" enough to me and i had them lying around in the garage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monty_jon Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 OSSA but they looked "period" enough to me and i had them lying around in the garage. Yes, they suit it very well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b40rt Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 Like the exhaust, much nicer than the more common horizontal. Is it home made ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old trials fanatic Posted January 28, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 Like the exhaust, much nicer than the more common horizontal. Is it home made ? Yes but sadly at that time i didnt have a TiG welder and it blew up at the bikes first trial. Design was right but needed better tools. Eventually she ended up with a more conventional silencer. Very kind of Charlie to post the piccy. It illustrates the comcept of British Twinshocks very well as most of the parts were sourced relatively cheaply and the bike was good enough, shame about the rider LOL, to win me a couple of Clubman Championships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
htrdoug Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 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 ) 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.