Bantam Forks For Scottish Pre65

[carl ekblom]

MC-nytt (MC-news) trials project bike 1964. Ceriani front fork. They were not uncommon on off road bikes in those days. Modified Husqvarna engine

..

[340villiers]

Hi Woody. The Pre 65 Scottish has always allowed the use of Ceriani, REH,and MP fork,s and yokes. Its interesting to note that you may also be getting it wrong South of the Border!!! Retaining that period look YES. The use of Yamaha, Ossa, Bultaco parts etc NO. The rule book say NO, Its that Simple.

Willie

Edited January 28, 2014 by 340villiers

[old trials fanatic]

Hi Woody. The Pre 65 Scottish has always allowed the use of Ceriani, REH,and MP fork,s and yokes. Its interesting to note that you may also be getting it wrong South of the Border!!! Retaining that period look YES. The use of Yamaha, Ossa, Bultaco parts etc NO. The rule book say NO, Its that Simple.

Willie

what rule book? Or rather whose rule book?

[woody]

Hi Woody. The Pre 65 Scottish has always allowed the use of Ceriani, REH,and MP fork,s and yokes. Its interesting to note that you may also be getting it wrong South of the Border!!! Retaining that period look YES. The use of Yamaha, Ossa, Bultaco parts etc NO. The rule book say NO, Its that Simple.

Willie

ok, I'm happy to be corrected on that if that's the case but I really didn't think they were accepted. There are definitely stranger rules in force just south of the border, yes....

I know what the rules say about Ossa etc forks but this is where the reasoning is flawed (seeing as they look just like MP etc)

The rules actually say nothing about billet parts, they just say forks/yokes must be of Pre65 design. But as we know, new billet yokes are allowed. They aren't Pre65 design. Montesa Cota yokes look identical but you can't use them. Ossa yokes/forks are of a design almost identical to MP, but you can't use them

Same logic applies just south of the border where the rules are actually a lot more explicit than the Scottish rules, stating that replica parts are allowed as long as they resemble the original (see last paragraph) which makes them even more of a contradiction of purpose, as the purpose is supposed to be to keep period appearance.

Ultimately the clubs are entitled to run whatever rules they like but for me, taking a purely pragmatic view, the rules are flawed and fail in what they are supposed to achieve, hence my opinion that it's all contradiction and bollocks...