Another Blow To Super Cub Trials Projects.

[ducman]

Well this is always the neverending story.Trouble is we have so much stupid rules in our sport that most of us do not understand the sence of them.

In my country we have to prepare the bikes for the german classictrial championship like this:Killbutton with wrist band,Handdlebarpad,closed back and front spocket and a finn at the swingingarm near the backsprocket.Then in the same regs it says the bike has to look like it was back in the day.

Sorry that makes no scence to me.We have a few nice trials over here which are not championship standart so we ride them or go to holland or belgium,as it is just down the road for us where we live.Going to Belgium.Pay,ride,enjoy.

[4stroke]

Minimum weight would cover pre65 and twinshocks. Easy to check as well.

[suzuki250]

Minimum weight would cover pre65 and twinshocks. Easy to check as well.

It’s hard enough to find observers, let alone someone to weigh all the bikes

Anyway who said there is anything wrong with classic trials, it’s only the same small minority that keep moaning about it!

To be fair if you turn up with a bike with a Chinese engine wheels & brakes plus a frame of your our design, do your really expect to ride and be included in the results?

Edited March 26, 2015 by suzuki250

[old trials fanatic]

Hi,

There were certain competitions - which never made an appearance in trials - where you had to agree that you would sell any bike that you entered for a flat rate of $x000 to any bidder after the event.

Make that a stipulation of twinshock trials with the level at £1800 and then watch the entries disappear...............

And why would a trial with no entries be a good thing ?

[old trials fanatic]

It’s hard enough to find observers, let alone someone to weigh all the bikes

Anyway who said there is anything wrong with classic trials, it’s only the same small minority that keep moaning about it!

To be fair if you turn up with a bike with a Chinese engine wheels & brakes plus a frame of your our design, do your really expect to ride and be included in the results?

We allow riders on modern bikes to ride on a non award basis at our trials just for fun. Why is Jons converted Raleigh Chopper any different ?

[jon v8]

So much has already been said which I both agree and disagree with I think, I thought I'd just as well join in ! The main problem I see is in the classes - esp in the Miller rounds,class 2 for instance is a complete nonsense,why are riders in the clubman class on Pre unit springers lumped in with Cubs,bantams and James's ? Not much to entice owners of pre unit stuff to join in when they are against bikes half their size and weight. And because the class is dominated by lightweights the section setters are forced to make the sections harder to test them out. Which can also makes it very tight for us in class 1 rigid.

I have nothing against the Cub thing that Jon rides,I have no interest in it at all,but its light and trick enough to have more in common with modern mono's than anything "Classic" by anybody's standards. Again,put in a class to test them in the Miller rounds and the sections end up getting harder - again going further away from being rideable for pre unit / concrete mixer bikes.Saying its a cheaper way into twinshock trials is stretching it a bit too, Ty's and the like can still be picked up for less than a grand.They might need work,so teach yourself basic bike mechanics and fix it up yourself - which is what I've been doing since the age of 8 with a Honda steppy,a D3 Bantam at 9 and a C15 when I was ten. None cost more than £30 back then,there was nobody to help me so I had to do it myself. If you want something bad enough you just have to get on and do it.

Trials is still cheaper than any other bike sport and can be done on a real shoestring,the bikes hold their money and don't have to cost a fortune.

So I think the answer is for the ACU to stop just taking money,get off their backsides and sort the classes out.When that is done and the picture is clear the section setters will have a better idea of section severity needed and all the old bikes will come out again ?

Or are people happy to let the current mess that allows all these arguments to fester on and on ? At least if there was some kind of statement / action / dialogue then we could thrash something out. I think the ACU hold the answer.

BTW, I think Dursley Dabber has found the sloe gin again...

[charlie prescott]

Hi Guy's,

Here is a question for you then, do you think whether or not having rules related to Classic trial-ling in the UK and the resultant acceptance of using ground up new bikes in the P65 class, has been a good thing for the sport as a whole ?

Or would we be happier riding anything we choose, and deem in our own view is a Classic machine , like they seem to on the continent of Europe and beyond. They seem so much happier than we do?

Regards Charlie.

[metisse]

I wasn t going to put my two euro's worth in ,but would like to correct the last but one post on Europe.

Pre 65 bikes are very few and far between in all but a few trials, both here and in France and Spain. The one's I have seen riding are pretty well within the spirit of the class with only one or two being more Fantic than triumph, but in these cases the riders if I recall correctly, ride them in twinshock classes.

Twinshock again are usually only lightly modded although word is spreading via the internet and modifications more akin to you would find in the Uk are being fabricated / copied this side of the channel.

Only in the Uk would someone have the brass neck to call it a pre 65 and I hope someone else has the broad shoulders to say its not welcome unless on a no award basis.. two euros worth..

[suzuki250]

Hi Guy's,

Here is a question for you then, do you think whether or not having rules related to Classic trial-ling in the UK and the resultant acceptance of using ground up new bikes in the P65 class, has been a good thing for the sport as a whole ?

Or would we be happier riding anything we choose, and deem in our own view is a Classic machine , like they seem to on the continent of Europe and beyond. They seem so much happier than we do?

Regards Charlie.

I’m quite happy with classic trials & twinshock as they are, 99% of the people I speak to are of the same opinion

And I’m very grateful people spend the time to organise them

Just seems to be the same few who moan all the time?

Edited March 26, 2015 by suzuki250

[japes1275]

Jon's comment about the ACU sounds right to me. Why do people pay them because as far as I can see they do nothing as a governing body to organise decent rules and regs. As someone coming to trials from a Motorsport background I can't believe how disorganised it all is. I pay the MSA (a lot of money admittedly!) every year and for that I get properly organised events by clubs that have to abide by their rules. The regulations pertaining to my particular motorsport discipline are properly written down and are pretty unambiguous.

On the other hand the classic trials rules seem open to misinterpretation and are poorly policed. Things like 'only pre65 manufactured or replica yokes can be used'. What does that mean? I know that obviously the yokes off my 1962 BSA are fine but where does replica come in? To me I would hope it meant some nicely forged steel reproduction ones that look the same and are made from the same material but aren't original. But I'm guessing a lot of people think it means some horrible aluminium 'billet' ones knocked up on a CNC milling machine. Does it mean that? I don't know because it's not clear.

Having said that I don't believe stricter rules and a more involved governing body are what most people want for classic trials and the more relaxed events are more important to people than bureaucracy. Unfortunately that will always benefit the people willing to bend the rules and lead to these little chats I'm starting to get used to on here!

[john b]

A bit off piste but I thought I would share....

Me and my son ride twinshock (on Hondas) and Pre 65 on genuine pre 65 bikes

We did our first vintage trial a few weeks ago, after joining the organisation, checking with the organisers etc. Had a great day, some very friendly guys, good trial.

The following week we were at another (twinshock) trial, and were told confidentially that after the trial there were a couple of dissenters who thought "kids shouldn't be riding pre 65"

Now my son is 13, a good rider, capable, organisation member, polite, respectful, helpful (he observed his allocated section for a lap no arguments) - and was riding probably one of the most eligible bikes there (1955 James) !

Are we put off ? Far from it - I thanked the guy for him telling me, and said we will definitely be at the next trial !

I understand this thread is about "rules" and invariably rules will always get bent to the point of breaking - what is that breaking point is the issue, but we cant let politics spoil a great days sport (which is the point of my post...... !

cheers

John

[old trials fanatic]

Hi Guy's,

Here is a question for you then, do you think whether or not having rules related to Classic trial-ling in the UK and the resultant acceptance of using ground up new bikes in the P65 class, has been a good thing for the sport as a whole ?

Or would we be happier riding anything we choose, and deem in our own view is a Classic machine , like they seem to on the continent of Europe and beyond. They seem so much happier than we do?

Regards Charlie.

Doesnt matter what the riders think Charlie. If you enter an event then you sign as part of the entry form to abide by the rules that the organising club have set down. If you dont agree with those rules dont whinge about it afterwards DONT RIDE THERE ride somewhere else preferably with a club whose rules you do agree with. Jon Bliss knew he was taking the p*** when he built the bike. He deliberately went out to create something that looks even on a dark night like NOTHING ever sold as a Trials or Road bike prior to modern times so he knew damned well what he was doing. He wanted to stir things up which he has succeeded in doing. I dont get it. I will say it again if it is all about having fun on a supposedly cheap bike which many have pointed out is no cheaper than the real thing then why all the whining about riding on a non award basis ? You still get to build it you still get to ride it you just get shown on the results as ineligible machine but you knew that when you entered if you had bothered to talk to the organisers before hand so whats the problem? if it's all about having fun and just riding your bike? surely you have but on a non award basis. the only other logical conclusion is that winning is more important than having fun on your bike therefore the bike MUST have been created to give the rider that can exploit it an advantage. QED I have shown a bike that could and has been created from not dissimilar components and i am sure would be acceptable to most clubs to ride as a twinshock but Jon wouldnt build a bike like this would he as it wouldnt give him that elusive advantage would it ?

This is just ridiculous the pit bike mob cant see the difference between Jon's aberration and a current evo Bantam, Cub, Whatever and the others can. Stalemate but it still doesnt matter because it's not about what the riders think is it it's about what the organisers think at the end of the day so if it bothers you that much do what you have previously offered to do run a series to whatever rules you decide then riders can choose to ride your event under those rules or not. Seriously i wish you success. Lead by example show the ACU and all the other clubs in the UK how it should be done.

[b40rt]

A bit off piste but I thought I would share....

Me and my son ride twinshock (on Hondas) and Pre 65 on genuine pre 65 bikes

We did our first vintage trial a few weeks ago, after joining the organisation, checking with the organisers etc. Had a great day, some very friendly guys, good trial.

The following week we were at another (twinshock) trial, and were told confidentially that after the trial there were a couple of dissenters who thought "kids shouldn't be riding pre 65"

Now my son is 13, a good rider, capable, organisation member, polite, respectful, helpful (he observed his allocated section for a lap no arguments) - and was riding probably one of the most eligible bikes there (1955 James) !

Are we put off ? Far from it - I thanked the guy for him telling me, and said we will definitely be at the next trial !

I understand this thread is about "rules" and invariably rules will always get bent to the point of breaking - what is that breaking point is the issue, but we cant let politics spoil a great days sport (which is the point of my post...... !

cheers

John

Re young riders, the Classic Manx has a rule which states the winner must be over (40?) Younger riders still ride, and may have the lowest score. The age rule is to sort the pot hunter from the genuine enthusiast.

[john b]

Re young riders, the Classic Manx has a rule which states the winner must be over (40?) Younger riders still ride, and may have the lowest score. The age rule is to sort the pot hunter from the genuine enthusiast.

Appreciate the response, but where does age come into 'pot hunter' and 'Genuine Enthusiast' ?

My son is 13 - if he won it would be on ability, and he has equal or more genuine enthusiasm for Pre 65 than most people (he lives and breathes it)

[old trials fanatic]

Re young riders, the Classic Manx has a rule which states the winner must be over (40?) Younger riders still ride, and may have the lowest score. The age rule is to sort the pot hunter from the genuine enthusiast.

Shame the Scottish 2 day doesnt do likewise IMHO