alan Posted March 31, 2015 Report Share Posted March 31, 2015 (edited) I wish you good luck in your endeavour, however the situation in Yorkshire seems much healthier. Yorkshire Classic had over 160 riders on the results sheets last year, all club members. If you include the captains trial which is open to non-members this swells to over 200, mainly within a 20 mile radius of Keighley. Interestingly, the least well supported trials are the "big bike trials" designed to attract the older riders on more original machines. Conversely the best supported trials are those with a reputation for being on the more difficult side, and these naturally attract the highly modified machinery. The profit from these trials goes to support the big bike trials that run at a finance loss, despite all the organisers, observers and most land owners doing every thing for free. The club remains in a financially healthy position so must be doing something right. The machine examiners are fairly pragmatic, but do intervene when someone is clearly taking the mickey. And yes, there are some anomalies in the club rules, but these were voted in by the membership, and can be voted out by the membership at the annual AGM. Edited March 31, 2015 by alan 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laird387 Posted March 31, 2015 Report Share Posted March 31, 2015 Hi alan, You don't need to tell me about Yorkshire Classic, I was a founder member of Yorks and Lancs Classic, as you will see from the badge on my overalls in the attached photograph, taken before the club split into the Yorks Classic and the Red Rose Classic, both of which are still flourishing and perhaps prove that, whatever people think about their rules, they most certainly not only work, but have the added emphasis of longevity to prove the point. There are many images of early Captains and West Riding trials appearing in my digital magazine, ORRe, as well as photoreports of current Red Rose Classic events. Enjoy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan Posted March 31, 2015 Report Share Posted March 31, 2015 i do not believe that simply saying that Yorkshire Trials being so successful with an array of different classes and machines, having very few big bikes, is any marker of either successful rules or a healthy sport unless you view the big bikes and their riders as an inconvenience to the sport as a whole. I think you are missing the point, the big bike riders are not out there in the numbers you imagine. Look at the club video's from the 90's.. many of the riders on big bikes then are still riding now, but are all now in their 60's or older. Even a steady trial is a work out on a big bike, and a simple mistake can lead to a big injury. The older riders are choosing light weight bikes in order to carry on riding. The real problem is that there aren't many "young" riders coming in to replace the older riders. The natural progression is for riders to come from twin shock or modern trials as they get older, neither of these disciplines would lead to a rider to choose a big bike. Yorkshire Classic has a couple of very young members on big bikes, but these are the exception rather than the rule. The club does not see big bikes as an inconvenience, in fact quite the contrary. The pre-unit trials are aimed at the big bikes, but would not be financially viable without the support of the non-competitive lightweight machines. As stated previously the bike bike trials are run at a loss, which the club accepts to keep as many of these bikes turning out as possible. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallo Posted March 31, 2015 Report Share Posted March 31, 2015 Phew, this is all very confusing, and to be honest, all I want to do is ride my bike at the weekend, and fettle for the next weekend if work permits during the week. We aren't going to be world champs the next Toni Bou, Steve Allen or Jon Cull so just get the bikes out, choose the route that's best for you and enjoy it. Why worry what everyone else is doing, it's not worth it, enjoy what you have, make the most of it, simples........ See you all at the Red Marley trail this Sunday Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laird387 Posted March 31, 2015 Report Share Posted March 31, 2015 Hi, One final thought from me. When I created, with the help of two friends in the Rochdale area, the very first trial, which I later defined as 'pre-65' we did it because, as young working men with familiea, we couldn't afford to buy one of the new Spanish bikes that were flooding in, and they were so fresh on the scene that there were no second-hand ones. Organisers were tightening up sections to take marks of the Bultacos and Montesas - and our long and heavy old British bikes couldn't even be wheeled around the sections - so we created pre-65 trials USING SECTIONS THAT WERE JUST AS THEY HAD BEEN BEFORE 1965. So to use lightweight modern bikes in modern style sections IS NOT pre-65 - persuade the organisers to set sections to suit the old bikes and they will come out again. Put the lightweights and specials in separate classes and if they get bored with cleaning every section maybe they will go away and let all the real old bikes enjoy themselves................. Or stop spending a fortune trying to buy success - and enjoy riding proper bikes................ 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old trials fanatic Posted March 31, 2015 Report Share Posted March 31, 2015 Or stop spending a fortune trying to buy success - and enjoy riding proper bikes................ From what i remember and a recent test ride there was nothing enjoyable about riding what some including Deryk and TT spud consider "proper bikes" lets face it if they were so good why could people not wait to get rid of them. THEY WERE AWFUL AND THEY STILL ARE ! ok if your penchant is for masochism then fine but dont forget to book the Monday off work to visit the A&E dept. I love my sport and have been riding since 1967 when i first started on a Greeves Scottish and the only reason i wish i still had that bike is so i could sell it for the ridiculous sum that they seem to command from anoraks out there. Plus whats all these references to spectators ? Who cares Trials is not and never should be about spectators. The only spectators we should give a damn about are the ones holding a board who record our score any others unless they want to pay for the privilege are irrelevant. IMHO of course 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davetom Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 TT Spud, Your 'fantasy pre-65' regs throw up as many issues as they solve? Last year I sold my dead stock Ariel HT ( ex Bob Eyers, I'm sure Deryk would have known him?), now if I was to turn up on that to one of your trials, I'd be immediately disadvantaged by its steel rims and bars, original poorly damped suspension, standard pegs etc. Now steel rims and bars are easily available, levers too so why choose the mods that suit you? Can you explain why electronic ignition offers enough advantage to get moved out the class, but having say TY fork internals and nice damping front and rear follows your pre-65 rules? Suspension is a lot easier to scruitineer than ignition too. What suspension do you have, out of curiosity? I'll guess a purist like yourself has original shocks with 50's spec (lack of) damping? Do you run standard ( to your bike) forks too? Replica frames are ruled out too as no replica frame is ever as heavy as the original. I'd rule out tubeless rims too, as compression punctures happen much easier on 300lb bikes than 200lb, so the tubeless folks will get away with much lower pressures. And please do away with the hissy fits and fake indignation, the guy from the Yorks club offered reasoned arguments based on his experience, and you reacted like a typical Internet keyboard revolutionary 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big_red_bike Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 Wow, well done for having the courage to be so honest (and attracting multiple 'likes' to the same opinion so quickly, it seems you are not alone). I believe that your club is the Peaks club which has utterly loose rules allowing basically anything under a pre-65 or 'classic' banner, almost any modification goes, now I understand why, you have a deep distaste for the original pre-65 bikes. To you they are not just 'inconvenient', they are unenjoyable and their riders are masochistic. I really hope that you are joking or have downed more than one bottle of wine this evening. To me, it is amazing that you can run a classic club with the honestly held belief that no-one could enjoy the sport as it was designed to be, that is mostly riding original big, heavy, long, slow, loud, pre-65, British, four-stroke bikes. Are you sure this is the sport for you? If you cannot handle these bikes and believe that others that can are mad to do so and in need of A&E, perhaps you would be better off in the modern clubs where you can ride a much lighter, easier to handle machine, rather than trying to make pre-65 bikes into modern bikes that they were never meant to be? To me, you have described a common oddity amongst those modifying their bikes to such an extreme degree. Why don't you just ride a more modern machine, rather than mutilating a pre-65 bike to be something it is not. If you hate the heft of an original pre-65 bike, perhaps consider buying a modern one and riding it in modern events, and at the very least, do not run a club and effectively make it next to impossible for an original bike to have an enjoyable day because of a lack of support for rules which allow them to compete with similar machinery. i do not think it is a very good advert for any club, or the sport, to be so openly anti the riders that still ride the original pre-65 bikes, without such bikes there would be no integrity in the pre-65 sport at all. I am still amazed that you can say what you did without realising how damaging that viewpoint is, it is not 1st April until tomorrow, so you cannot even blame it on that. Well, at the events I have been to, there are always a lot of people watching. And they usually come to see the big, original pre-65 bikes, because they sound good, look good and represent a piece of British history. I for one care about other people's wishes and try to consider how I might affect them. Also, it is sometimes the case that those watching those events show an interest in the bikes and sport, ask questions and so on, and from that can develop the interest which results in new riders joining the sport, and that too is a reason to value spectators. If I am riding in a pre-65 event, then I enjoy the fact that the people watching are getting something out of seeing and hearing these wonderful bikes, as I do. If you do not realise how wonderful some of these old bikes are, then you are very much in the minority amongst those that I have witnessed watching such events. Wow. There are no words to express how inappropriate that is. But it does explain a lot. Hi TTspud i think you have forgot trials is a test of man against the course Peak Classic and many other clubs run trials with lots of routes some you could ride on a road bike.So why not just pick a route you can ride and have a good days sport.or do you want a trial and route just to suit your chosen bike to give you a chance to win . If you rode modern trials and bought a 1990 bike would you want your own route so you do not have to compete against 2015 bikes. You chose your bike just ride it ,do not blame the clubs because it is not competitive . By the way i ride a triumph twin and it dose not bother me that i have to ride against cubs and bantams i built it for the sound and enjoyment. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big_red_bike Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 (edited) Hi Big Red, This was discussed at some length in the 'Original Pre-65 Class' thread. It simply boils down to the fact that it is more enjoyable when you are able to compete, as in on equal terms, than not. I think Deryk pointed out that his entries rose dramatically when rules to separate out specials from originals were introduced, re-inforcing the point that fair competition counts. It is not about routes, as the rules state, the routes remain attached to a class, not the sub-class. It is the sub-class that identifies the type of bike, ie Original or Modified. And for me, I am not focused on winning, but I do not like competing on an unfair basis, I find competing on an unfair basis far less enjoyable and in the case of pre-65 trials, totally unnecessary. Funnily enough, from memory, I think that I have noticed some pre-90 classes, perhaps it was with twin-shocks vs monos in mind. Anyway, I have only entered events on the pre-65 and modern bikes throughout my life. For the twinshock classes, whilst I have ridden twinshocks when they were the modern thing, I haven't yet wanted to re-visit those bikes but I find it great that others do find enjoyment there. Well, the bike was chosen 30 or more years ago and is competitive against similar machinery of the period. This is the whole point. In the intervening decades, and increasingly over the last decade, the rules governing machinery have been broken, not enforced or have not existed, now this same bike has been made uncompetitive, not through choice but because clubs or governing bodies have failed to introduce and enforce rules, simply because it is being asked to ride against bikes which have no real resemblance to a pre-65 bike, and the exact metrics of that have been properly detailed earlier in the thread. If one has to aportion blame, then you have to level that blame mostly at those that have slowly allowed the bikes to get to the stage they are at without doing anything to stop them. Ultimately, if riders are allowed to cheat, some will, then others will feel forced to follow. Many will find cheating abhorrent, but some will see it as a justifiable indiscretion in order to win. And now, and for the last few decades, and as a direct result, the entries of original bikes are falling, and fast. And not by a few, but catastrophically so, again as detailed earlier. Yes, the Yorks club is successful, but perhaps not with retaining the original big bikes and perhaps part of that reason is to do with the current lack of fairness rather than riders being too old or riders just not wanting to enjoy the day. Brilliant. I think the evidence of few big bikes at the Yorks, anecdotal evidence from Deryk on the effect of separating the specials, my own experience, the evidence from the most prominent originals big bike event in the country, and the example quotes posted here, do all rather indicate that there is a problem which is causing riders to leave. That is interesting, so would the bike you built conform to the Originals sub-class or the Modified sub-class? Does it have an original frame? If not, is the modern frame lighter, shorter, higher? Does it have an original engine? Is the engine modified? The clutch modified? Brakes? Electronic ignition? 'Replica' hubs? Aluminium tank? Sprung seat? Any titanium or carbon parts? Original carb? And so on. Or have you restored an original bike with minimum modifications? In other words, are you expressing the situation where you are riding an original bike against modified ones, as described, as is the issue at hand that you say you are not bothered by, or is the bike you have built a modified bike in the first place and so you are not going to be bothered because you are not really experiencing the issue anyway (putting the possibility of you not wanting to gain any enjoyment from competing to one side)? One more thing. For many years, a couple of decades even, I did just take the hit, not worry and each year the gap got wider, I have watched as heros were made of riders on highly modified bikes and others be almost ignored despite being miraculously victorious on original bikes, a vastly more admirable achievement. It has seemed for a long time that it was not just that original bikes were being disadvantaged, but they truly were not as welcome to enter or wanted to enter. Why have there been no supportable rules in place? There were rumblings of course. People unhappy and ignored and leaving. But now, the gap is ridiculous and the situation is declining rapidly and really, if nothing is done, then there will be no original pre-65 bikes competing at all, and that, more than for just me, would truly not be a proud day for this sport. All the best, TTSpud Hi TT spud Yes my triumph is modified with an enfield frame but it is still a very heavy bike. The only way to have a truly fair competition would be for every one to ride the same bike. Even back in the day some bikes were better than others in standard form as most were converted road bikes.The part you wrote about old age not being anything to do with the lack of big bikes ,try getting into trouble big time it hurts a lot more with a big bike.Do you want to drop 300 pound plus on you if you are in your 60s. Edited April 1, 2015 by big_red_bike 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davetom Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 Out of curiosity TT Spud, what forks and shocks are on your bike? Are your rims, bars and levers steel or alloy ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old trials fanatic Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 Oh boy Dabster has Dad of 2 now i get you. You had a right pop at me personally and the Club i run on my own may i add so i am going to make a few points and i dont really give a damn TTspud what you think but making them just for the record. FYI i entered my first trial in 1967 and have ridden most weekends ever since so i ACTUALLY have experience of riding and before that observing at that time till the present day. What were YOU doing then ? I run Peak Classic Trials Club single handed and not only lay out the course i liaise with landowners and the governing body, do the results, sort the entries, maintain the website including write ups for T&MX News when they bother to publish them and even sort the soddin flags out EVERY MONTH thats 12 times a year in all weathers. The other year i shovelled the snow off the access road so that people could even get to the trial. ON MY OWN !!! I have been doing this for the last 5 years. You havent yet named, however you had to name mine, the club YOU run that YOU set out the course for every month that YOU officiate for ! Exactly how many Trials a year do YOU set out single handedly ? How long has YOUR club been running YOUR rules ? Also if you had bothered to do your research properly you might have noticed that we give bonus Championship points to riders of rigids and actually welcome, unlike YOUR assumption that we dont, riders of the bigger 4 strokes but in this area they are very few and far between. We regularly have an AJS both springers and rigids along with Ariels and even a pre World War 2 Japette competing. However YOU and YOUR rules would make them all ride as specials even the rigid framed JAP engined Vellocette c/w girder forks and a rider with one leg who is currently leading the Intermediate Championship standings after Sundays trial. Do you really think the owners of these highly original pieces of the British Motor Cycle "Industry" really want to smash them against rocks every weekend ? I dont know what planet you live on or what you are smoking but round here it aint ever gonna happen. You also had a pop about my attitude to spectators well in the world i have to live in they are irrelevant at best and a bloody nuisance most of the time. Most of the venues around here have very limited access and parking and every space is needed for competitors you know the people who take part in the COMPETITION i.e. the trial. These "spectators" usually just dump their car where they feel like sometimes blocking or severely restricting access for farmers and locals alike and they offer nothing whatsoever to the running of the trial. They more often than not get in the way of riders even sometimes in the sections so yes i dont think they are a consideration and quite often more of a pest. If we are talking about the Scottish 2 day then that is different as the club makes a lot of much needed revenue from programme sales and if not for that the costs would have to be passed onto the riders so in their case they are a necessary evil. As for what i call the Club I will call it what i damn well like and you can rename yours to what you like assuming you actually run one. what was the name of the Club you run by the way ? My opinion of genuine as in unmodified P65 bikes is exactly MY OPINION you have the right to dissagree but i respect your right to have yours so do me the courtesy of responding likewise. I think sorry know they are in desperate need of improvement you disagree lets just agree to disagree on that. My opinion again but if a club wishes to adopt your rules then seriously good luck to them but they need to start their own series Championship whatever. From my reading between the lines you favour more of a pageant and i believe a trial is first and foremost a competitive event. Yours seems to me anyway more like a Concours / rivet counters fest which is fine if that is what people want. Not for me. I dont even understand why people go to Telford and look at competition bikes NOT competing but thats me i would much sooner be riding in an event any day. So you have named and cited my Club so which Club do you run ? which Club is running YOUR rules ? when is your next event that you are laying out the course for ? How many entries have you got pledged ? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davetom Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 You still don't say what suspension your bike has, just that it fits into the appropriate sub class.. Maybe because you wrote the sub class regs ? Why are others bikes modified in ways that tear the sport apart, but you having non standard forks / shocks is a "sensible decision"? Let's face it, if you haven't got steel rims, bars and levers, it's because you chose to. Most back in the day used the heavier stuff,its cheaper, tougher and easily available so you've consciously decided that' it's ok. I love to see the big bikes too, I agreed with the previous post as it made me laugh when this debate was getting po-faced, and I hoped it might prick your pomposity a little. Off to the garage, I may be a while.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
totalshell Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 steel rims are significantly cheaper than alloy and readily available 19 inch trials tyres are as well the decsion to allow 18 is based on post 65 availability thankfully that is now resolved. it matters not a jot if the tyres arent very grippy we ll all be on the same ones and they ll be no outrageously steep hills or rocks to hop off.. as they ll be no rocks to hop off modern rear shocks are wasted , basic oil filled steel bodied shocks with rubber eyes should be the standard keeping costs down and bikes real forks should have OEM internals why do you need anything else ? let me know when the first trial is and i ll be along on my ajay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 You may have the best of intentions Spud but your rules can be easily exploited. In addition they do nothing to keep a level playing field of bikes in original Pre65 trim, which I believe, was the intention? Modified forks in the original class??? So if you have the money to pay someone (£500) or the machining skills to do it yourself, you can have a set of roadholder bottoms with modern internals, or even machine or cast your own new replica bottoms to take modern internals. Meanwhile, Joe Average with little money, no machining skills, is stuck with the original and utterly ineffective forks. You say it's for practicality but I see nothing practical about it. Surely it's the very thing you're criticising? And, it's where it all started back in the late 80s as forks were the first things to be modified (and disguised) You're allowing the people that can, to create modern exhausts, airboxes etc. If they are fitting alloy rims then whilst they're at it they'll fit replica alloy Cub hubs to lace them to and pain them black - that's running to £1000 a pair of wheels. Practical or just favouring the man with money or engineering skills? I can't see the difference between that and what's already happening. Joe average ends up in his original bike, someone with means and the desire to do so ends up with a modernised machine, superior in many respects, at a hefty price. Unless you have a scrutineer that is able to virtually dismantle certain components, there is no way your rules will stop modern parts being used. This is why they are now accepted. Because back in the 80s, when the modifications first began with the advent of the Sebac series and the increasing popularity of the Scottish, there were some very good riders (ex champions and world round and national trial winners) taking part - far removed from the disgruntled band of average club riders who formed Pre65 10 years earlier. They were still very good riders and just as when they were factory or supported riders they had a very strong will to win. Many had ridden genuine Pre65 bikes in that era but had experienced much better machinery in the intervening years. Better components were now available but obviously not allowed - yes, there were rules back then, just the same as yours are now in terms of what components could be used. These riders wanted the best machinery, just as they had benefitted from in earlier times. They had modern internals slipped into their forks. The forks looked standard but anyone with a bit of nouse could see they actually worked up rocky sections as opposed to the pogo action of the standard items. Then they wanted the engines better, so internal mods began on those. Then exhausts. Then the clutches and ignitions. All disguised in standard casings The bikes back then, late 80s, early 90s, still looked pretty well standard. How would any club official prove that illegal internal mods were being made using modern materials without taking components apart. Who would have time to do this and which rider would sit there and let someone dismantle a bike before the start of a trial - or at all... Then the quest for lightening the bikes began with replica frames. The frames were then modified to give better geometry but that's not exactly easy to spot. 'Ordinary' riders with money to spare or machining skills of their own began modifying their own bikes, or bikes of friends. And so it went on. So how can you blame any club or organisation for this? How can they be responsible? The rules were there, it was riders who bent them and there was little a club could do about it. The same would apply to your proposed rules and the rules originally drafted by Deryk. So what do you do? Follow what happens in other motorsports and have all competitors report for scrutineering the day before the trial in order that a team of expert scrutineers can thoroughly examine every bike, including removing components where necessary (a condition of taking part) and then where appropriate, move any bike they deem ineligible to the specials class? Unworkable with people having to stay overnight in accomodation for the event the next day, meaning two days away, increased costs and where does every club get this team of expert scrutineers? The 'problem', if there is one in Pre65, is that there are very few riders left now who rode these bikes in their era, that aren't below their late 60s in age. As has been mentioned before they can't or don't want to struggle with a big heavy bike any more, They want to go out and enjoy riding a modified bike. Hence the popularity of lightweight Bantams now. The remaining (most of) Pre65 competitors now have streamed through from late 60s and the 70s which was a different style of riding with harder sections (although some of the video I've seen of some earlier trials from 60s, I wouldn't call them easy) These riders don't really want a section that is akin to riding up a green lane. Neither do they want British Champs style severity sections. They want something that provides a challenge and that's why it has evolved like it has. It's just evolution. If the riders are still out there who want to ride a standard big thumper over traditional sections, then why doesn't someone put a series together and make it clear what it is for - Completely unmodified bikes. It's been done for twinshocks this past year so why can't someone do the same for Brit thumpers and create a series for unmodified bikes if the demand is there? Leave the rest alone, whether you or anyone else agrees with it or not, what's done is done and can't be reversed, the bottom line being being more people seem to prefer riding the modified bikes than the standard version - So did Sammy... I was watching a video of the Ilkley grand national recently, from sometime in the late 50s I think, and it was very difficult. Big rigids stuck up to their engines in mud with their fit young riders struggling like hell to free them. Riders, again fit young men, being bounced all over the place up rocky tracks which were just lanes. These were what are now referred to as traditional rather than modern sections, but show me many 60 to 70+ year olds who who are the riders from that era, who would want to ride a big bike like that at their age.Many? There is more than one reason they've been modernised 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old trials fanatic Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 As always well put Woody 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.