laser1 Posted November 4, 2011 Report Share Posted November 4, 2011 (edited) If your 2 top flight riders know more than the current MFG's - then they should start there own company. Thats how it works here anyway. If there right, they will reap the rewards. Glad my original post led to a significant number of comments. Laser1. situation may be diffentent in US, my experience is northern England. A weight limit is hardly over regulation - its simple and easy to check / enforce. Manufacturers could still compete by other improvements. The fact is that despite all the development / loss of weight trials bike sales in UK are very low and a cut in price would lead to increased sales (price elasticity of demand) A bit of extra metal on the exhaust system for example would reduce noise - a problem for land access in some areas. As an example from another sport (100 national karting). This used to be heavily price regulated and 3 to 4 grids of 20 to 30 karts were common at club meetings. The price regulations were relaxed resulting in significant cost increases and within a year or 2 entries were down to about 30, ie about 25% to 30% of the previous numbers. I know the general drift of my views is in line with the views of at least 2 top flight riders (Multiple Scott and Scottish six days wins between them) Cheers Edited November 5, 2011 by laser1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toofasttim Posted November 5, 2011 Report Share Posted November 5, 2011 There is not much difference between alloy and steel regarding strength to weight I was always told alu is one third the weight of steel and one third the strength. Your statement above re-inforces this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camberman Posted November 6, 2011 Report Share Posted November 6, 2011 I was always told alu is one third the weight of steel and one third the strength. Your statement above re-inforces this. That is why a steel frame will always be more compact than aluminum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbybobby Posted November 8, 2011 Report Share Posted November 8, 2011 I find it retarded that there is a minimum weight rule at all?? Imagine the sick stuff that could be done on a bicycle with a chainsaw motor? :-D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toofasttim Posted November 9, 2011 Report Share Posted November 9, 2011 (edited) I find it retarded that there is a minimum weight rule at all?? Imagine the sick stuff that could be done on a bicycle with a chainsaw motor? :-D You get a big chainsaw Actually the minimum weight thing goes back to MX in the early '70's when Husqvarna and Maico watched the works Suzukis getting lighter and lighter and thought Suzuki were using noweightium and unobtainium. Husky and Maico complained to the FIM stating that Suzuki were a) pushing costs out of reach of the Euro factories and playing a dangerous game because titanium isn't very robust in stress reversal situations like MX. Many years later the contested bike, Roberts RH72 was found and restored and guess how much titanium was on it? Answer: not very much. The low weight was as a result of clever engineering. Here's a link to that bike: Roberts RH72. Edited November 9, 2011 by TooFastTim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laser1 Posted November 9, 2011 Report Share Posted November 9, 2011 IMO - they should get rid of the min weight rule, but have a claim rule to ensure they ride what the public can buy. Might make the WTC more competitive as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toofasttim Posted November 9, 2011 Report Share Posted November 9, 2011 (edited) IMO - they should get rid of the min weight rule, but have a claim rule to ensure they ride what the public can buy. The Americans tried that in MX. Didn't work very well. If a privateer excercised the claim rule the factories would step forward with similar claims and the winner would then be drawn from a hat. Of course that meant that another facory would probably gain possession. They would then sell the bike back to the orignal owner for the claiming rule money ($3500 I think it was) without tearing the bike down (honour amonst thieves?). This detered privateers. Another thing that detered privateers was that excercising the claiming rule would rule that rider out of any possible factory ride. It did work once, a privateer claimed Marty Tripes works Honda CR250. The story is on the same website I posted earlier (Tripes CR250). Edited November 9, 2011 by TooFastTim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadof2 Posted November 9, 2011 Report Share Posted November 9, 2011 If your 2 top flight riders know more than the current MFG's - then they should start there own company. Thats how it works here anyway. If there right, they will reap the rewards. The two riders have in their time either led manufacturers with their development programmes or were a top team rider with a significant infuluence on develoment so it is fair to say they know a fair bit. What they have now come round to is the view that bikes developed with WTC in mind and moderen riding techniques are not in the best interests of the sport overall. As I have said previously I know of a number of riders who are sickened and have retired due to modern bike poor build quality. They bought a Pro - gearbox failed, they moved to BETA then pushed it home several times, then they try a Sherco and the bearings went or the fuel tank split. At this point they say sod it and go off and do something else. Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laser1 Posted November 9, 2011 Report Share Posted November 9, 2011 The Americans tried that in MX. Didn't work very well. If a privateer excercised the claim rule the factories would step forward with similar claims and the winner would then be drawn from a hat. Of course that meant that another facory would probably gain possession. They would then sell the bike back to the orignal owner for the claiming rule money ($3500 I think it was) without tearing the bike down (honour amonst thieves?). This detered privateers. Another thing that detered privateers was that excercising the claiming rule would rule that rider out of any possible factory ride. It did work once, a privateer claimed Marty Tripes works Honda CR250. The story is on the same website I posted earlier (Tripes CR250). Your right about the past, but I think they can learn from the mistakes and do it better. Never-the less, the aim would be to get riders on nearly stock bikes. The argument for the one off bikes used to be so that the technology could be tested and readied for future production; Sounds goods, but some mfg's developed bikes that were never intended to be sold publicly. Currently, with established companys offering "reasonably" priced replica bikes and brand new company's offering cutting edge designs and leading edge technology right from the get go - I dont see a need for any limits on the bike other than making sure its not an unobtainable ride to the rest of the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laser1 Posted November 9, 2011 Report Share Posted November 9, 2011 The two riders have in their time either led manufacturers with their development programmes or were a top team rider with a significant infuluence on develoment so it is fair to say they know a fair bit. What they have now come round to is the view that bikes developed with WTC in mind and moderen riding techniques are not in the best interests of the sport overall. As I have said previously I know of a number of riders who are sickened and have retired due to modern bike poor build quality. They bought a Pro - gearbox failed, they moved to BETA then pushed it home several times, then they try a Sherco and the bearings went or the fuel tank split. At this point they say sod it and go off and do something else. Cheers I think some people here feel the same way and I has seen a local uptick in twin shock interest so that opens up options for the sport. It also appears that most of the twin shock competitors have a modern bike as well - so they get to experience and enjoy both worlds. As I mentioned previously, if many people feel the quality of a product is poor, I doubt that mfg will survive. If its over priced - it wont survive either. I think your argument belongs more in the stop vs no stop debate. I see that as a different argument, but my opinion is similar. Have both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motovita Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 When Gas Gas introduced the Pro model in 02 the word in the USA was that the TXT would continue to be available for club level riders at a lower cost. Within a year or two the novice class was full of Pro models so I think Gas Gas abandoned the idea of providing a club level bike and just sold the market what they wanted, whether it was in their best interest or not. I can't blame them for that. Now I regularly see beginning riders quit Trials after a few months because they can't control the pro level bikes that they were sure they needed. So I think rider education and carefull section design might help the market demand more versatile, durable bikes. Making the pros ride bikes that bear some resemblance to a regular motorcycle might help as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmyl Posted November 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 The two riders have in their time either led manufacturers with their development programmes or were a top team rider with a significant infuluence on develoment so it is fair to say they know a fair bit. What they have now come round to is the view that bikes developed with WTC in mind and moderen riding techniques are not in the best interests of the sport overall. As I have said previously I know of a number of riders who are sickened and have retired due to modern bike poor build quality. They bought a Pro - gearbox failed, they moved to BETA then pushed it home several times, then they try a Sherco and the bearings went or the fuel tank split. At this point they say sod it and go off and do something else. Cheers should have tried a 4rt instead -may still be riding trials Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baldilocks Posted November 11, 2011 Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 should have tried a 4rt instead -may still be riding trials Jimmy I am a self confessed 4 stroke hater who has recently finished a bottle of wine. IF you sell a newcomer a 4rt and they go to the start field when its raining they wont be able to get up the grassy bank to the secretarys car due to incessant wheel spin and will quit the sport. Without even paying a single entry fee. 4RT great on the road in scotland, so is a Harley !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmyl Posted November 11, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2011 Jimmy I am a self confessed 4 stroke hater who has recently finished a bottle of wine. IF you sell a newcomer a 4rt and they go to the start field when its raining they wont be able to get up the grassy bank to the secretarys car due to incessant wheel spin and will quit the sport. Without even paying a single entry fee. 4RT great on the road in scotland, so is a Harley !!! If they can't get up a grassy bank even if it is a 4rt then no great loss. Simple throttle control and body weight - simples!!! Red or white wine. Just enjoyed red so you probaly hate that and had white. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toofasttim Posted November 12, 2011 Report Share Posted November 12, 2011 I think if you look at the price of bikes now they are pretty much what they were in real terms (hrs worked) 30 yrs ago. Just had a look at the average UK salaries (UK salaries) 1980-GBP7585. 2009 GBP37,580 AFAIR in 1980 a trials bike would hit you about GBP1,000 or about 12.5% of your annual income. Now we have 5000/37000 or 13%. So, I was right, trials bikes are about the same price in hours worked as they were 30 years ago. 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.