suzuki250 Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 Who actually says the sport has a problem, I don’t hear many moaning at trials? Most riders just seem to enjoy the events, ride their bikes and go home! If you don’t like the clubs rules, then don’t ride there….simple 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody Posted April 2, 2015 Report Share Posted April 2, 2015 Hi Woody, At this point, it will be a big and important step just to introduce unambiguous and inclusive rules, and in time I am sure that solutions will be found to many of the issues surrounding the scrutineering that will undoubtedly be brought up. I think this one has been answered before. Ultimately it is the responsibility of the club to have enforcable rules and enforce them. In no other sport would the player be blamed for not adhering to a rule that does not exist or is not enforced. The original rules in the Sebac series weren't ambiguous. There were three classes, Unit, Pre-Unit and Twinshock. Riders cleverly modified their bikes internally, externally they looked standard. How could a club prove that the bikes had been modified internally without removing cases etc? The rules were clear not ambiguous, riders bent them, the clubs couldn't do much about it. How would you have addressed it? How would you have known there was a problem to address? This one has been answered many times. There is a problem, very clearly, read the above. There are riders who will ride these bikes as long as they can enjoy a competitive days ride, and that depends on rules. Bikes are often handed down through generations, as is the case with me. They are getting a competitive ride now. The Northern bike series caters for Pre65 only. They have healthy entries for every round, Sunday's Poachers had over 100 with a mix of modified and unmodified bikes. Same with the rest of the trials in that series. If riders were fed up with the current situation there would be less entries wouldn't you say? The Miller rounds have twinshocks and sidecars as well so the spread of abilities for both rider and machine is wide. Most clubs cope very well with that spread and rarely are there complaints from the standard big bike riders that the trials are unsuitable - I could be wrong but they seem to keep entering them, so can't be all bad, but as one or two of them who post on here have said, the class does need splitting back to Unit and Pre-Unit. This one has been answered above. New events, clubs or routes are not needed, just the adoption of rules allowing original bikes to compete fairly. Your rules will not do anything to enable standard bikes to compete fairly, see next point This one has been answered above. Some alterations for practicality are included. Practicality in what respect. If I wheel out an original late 50s AJS I would have to ride it as it is. I have no skills to make any of the alterations your rules allow. For me to 'compete fairly' as you put it, or on equal machinery, with someone who has made your allowed modifications, I'd have to pay £500 for fiddle forks and £1000 for alloy rims with the inevitable pattern alloy hubs. I'd have to pay someone another few hundred for the alloy airbox, oil tank, titanium front pipe and modern spec alloy exhaust system. So far, keeping the bike 'original' has cost me over £2k, just to keep it on a par with what others will do. Those are the mods you allow in your original class and I'm dumfounded that you can call it original given your personal view on modified bikes when this is exactly what is happening now... Then there are the mods you won't allow but which will be made anyway because you can't see them unless you start dismantling components. More money on a modern clutch, gearbox, electrics, alloy barrel disguised, modern piston, altered stroke, lightweight materials, special cams. How will you police this as it will be your fault if the rider does it, seeing as it's the club's responsibility to prevent it happening? Well, one reason really, to gain a competitive advantage by making them easier to ride in the absence of enforced rules to stop them. Otherwise, why bother to modify them? If it is just that someone likes a light bike, then go buy a modern one. There a far more many riders who gain no advantage as their skill level doesn't allow it, they will never win. They don't ride to win, they ride to get out and enjoy the bike. If riding a modified British bike keeps them riding then good as they probably have no interest in riding a modern bike which will rip the shoulder sockets out of most pensioners, they're too much for most club riders if the truth be told. You keep blaming the rules. The rules have always been clear but evolved into what they are now because no matter how clear, riders were finding a way around them and how could it be proved in respect of every component of every bike? I'm still interested to know how you think it should have been approached, back in the 80s when it all started. What would you have done at the start of a trial with over 100 bikes to ascertain which should be moved into a specials class and which were considered standard? All the best, TTSpud 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laird387 Posted April 2, 2015 Report Share Posted April 2, 2015 Hi, For anyone interested in FACTS. 1. The original rules and discussions were in the 1970's not the '80's - I was there, I took part in the discussions. I wrote the initial rules. 2. From the outset the discrimination between unit and pre-unit, was in relation to the fact that a unit bike could be created in a shorter wheelbase, and therefore handled differently to the longer pre-unit bikes. 3. From the outset the Trifield was specifically placed in the unit category, it had a unit motor/gearbox mounted in a Crusader frame, which had the shorter wheelbase than any Bullet frame, which were all put in the pre-unit class, even though the Enfield Bullet motor and gearbox were bolted together and could be lifted in or out of the frame as a unit, the bolted up unit was still longer than any unit construction motor/gearbox. Enjoy............. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big_red_bike Posted April 2, 2015 Report Share Posted April 2, 2015 Spud you seem to be having a dig at me when i mentioned i ride i TRIFIELD trying to say i am cheating .For your information when i competed in the northern bike championship i entered in the specials class i knew my bike was modified and did not try to hide anything.You also seem to know little about pre 65 competitions when you keep mentioning trick trifields ,if you go to any trial and look at the bantams and cubs then it makes most trifields look prehistoric. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old trials fanatic Posted April 2, 2015 Report Share Posted April 2, 2015 "The situation though is very diffent down south where there are far more genuine, original bikes." I think this sentence explains a lot. He is writing from his perspective as a southerner and knows little of the real sport of trials on real trials terrain. TTspud may or may not have a arguable point based on a southerners perspective i neither know nor care. What i do know is i will be astounded if any of the real Classic Trials Clubs who organise month in month out real trials for real trials riders over authentic trials terrain will ever even consider adopting his "rules" let alone do so. Even on the easy Clubmen routes truly Original bikes, as against the effectively highly modified ones that his rules would encourage, would struggle to get round simply being unable to complete the course in one piece. Our club rules allow someone to build a budget P65 machine as long as the motor and frame come from a period machine or if replica then it is recognisable as the machine it purports to be. Want to use Ossa, Bultaco, Montesa hubs wheels forks then thats ok by us the same as using Ossa petrol tanks etc. Whats the big deal about that ? We are trying to encourage participation not deter riders from riding as are most Classic Clubs wherever they are. Excluding riders or worse will not encourage them to keep YOUR club afloat. Thats the real world i live in. We like most Clubs can not afford to exclude or discourage any riders and if enough of these riders of "Original" machines want to let me know they will turn up i will promise to make the Clubman route even easier. With five routes riders can always choose to move up a route or down as health and age takes it's toll. I feel that riders ride the bikes they have some kind of affinity to for whatever reason and as such we try, as do most other Classic Clubs, to provide them with somewhere that they can ride their bikes alongside like minded people. TT spud has his affinity to the 4 stroke P65 "Original" machines with modifications that he agrees with. Woody and Totalshell along with many others make very valid points that the current situation isnt broken as we experience it so why break it with these proposed rules and i agree. As i said earlier TT spud should if he doesnt already run a club and set out courses for these machines and their riders that are currently languishing in a crypt somewhere form one and if there is indeed a need for his kind of event then i am sure he will be inundated with entries and good luck to him and all who sail with him. I dont believe there is this burning desire for an event run under these rules so please prove me wrong and then all clubs will have to consider adopting them but i seriously doubt it will happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody Posted April 2, 2015 Report Share Posted April 2, 2015 Hi, For anyone interested in FACTS. 1. The original rules and discussions were in the 1970's not the '80's - I was there, I took part in the discussions. I wrote the initial rules. 2. From the outset the discrimination between unit and pre-unit, was in relation to the fact that a unit bike could be created in a shorter wheelbase, and therefore handled differently to the longer pre-unit bikes. 3. From the outset the Trifield was specifically placed in the unit category, it had a unit motor/gearbox mounted in a Crusader frame, which had the shorter wheelbase than any Bullet frame, which were all put in the pre-unit class, even though the Enfield Bullet motor and gearbox were bolted together and could be lifted in or out of the frame as a unit, the bolted up unit was still longer than any unit construction motor/gearbox. Enjoy............. Yes Deryk, we know you invented Pre65, as you keep telling us... But my reference to the 80s was to a specific series, the Sebac, not what you were doing a decade before. You formed your series for very different reasons, a group of club riders who found that trials had become too hard for your old bikes, you couldn't afford the latest, so you created a series to ride your old bikes in using more traditional and straightforward sections - at least that's how I interpret what you said, I don't mean it as a derogatory comment.. The Sebac was created to run within modern trials originally but quickly became its own series. The big difference between that and what you did was that the riders who took part in the Sebac also rode modern trials on the then current bikes which were monoshocks. As mentioned before it attracted some good centre riders as well as ex champions and British and world round winners. The latter were still very competitive and had lost none of their will to win and as before, I imagine they wanted the best chance of doing so by having the best equipment, as they had in their supported days. The difference now was that development had improved components and they knew people who could make modern components fit inside Pre65 skin. What they were doing was nothing different from what they had on their works bikes, better tuned components than customer bikes, but obviously this time using better components than were available in the machine's own era. In the spirit, no, not really, but when you've the mindset to win world and British rounds, it's the way it is, only the best will do. And the best was modern parts hidden inside a British shell. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody Posted April 2, 2015 Report Share Posted April 2, 2015 Spud, you're either being deliberately obtuse, missing the point altogether or are just so blinkered you refuse to accept anyone else's view. I wish you'd stop calling the earlier rules ambiguous. When an event is organised for bikes manufactured before 1965 then that is all the ruling you need. How else can that be interpreted. Bikes and therefore components of Pre 1965 origin, as they were at that time. There is no ambiguity If riders chose to start bending that rule by hiding modern components in Pre65 skins that is not the fault of the clubs. How could they know what was happening at first, what were the signs when the bike looked unmodified. This is a point you can't answer and just turn it back around to being the fault of ambiguous rules. They weren't, clubs simply didn't have the resources to check bikes once it became apparent what was happening. Whether you like it or not, your own rules for your original class are allowing many of the modifications you disapprove of...!!! The point of my example of me turning out on a late 50s AJS was completely missed or deliberately disregarded. Which is that your 'original class' rules allow modifications that people who can afford it or engineer it themselves will make the best use of with improvements using modern technology and components. Those that can't do it or afford it are immediately handicapped with an inferior machine because they are riding against a modified special in the original class. There is nothing ambiguous about that fact. As for this being a conscious decision on the grounds of practicality, you're having a laugh aren't you. I thought the 'original class' was to enable riders on original big bikes to enjoy a competitive ride against similar big bikes. Instead they're up against legally modified specials in the originals class. A bit like it is now.... If you want a trial for standard bikes, it's simple. With the exception of anciliaries such as tyres, shocks etc, you need just one rule - the bikes must be of a type manufactured before 1965 and so must any component not on the exceptions list. No replica parts whatsoever. Your team of scrutineers can visually check external components and I'm assuming they will have the experience to establish whether internal mods have been ,ade. Remember, if a rider bends that most unambiguopus of rules - manufactured before 1965 - it will be the fault of your club, not the rider. But as you seem confident that riders are out there who want to ride these big bikes in their hundreds, they should all be like minded, not cheat and you won't need any scrutineering, will you. That aside, it seems you just want to exclude every bike other than a big pre-unit. It's been seen before I know, but take a look at the film in this clip of fit young men, some of whom were top riders, struggling like hell on 50s machinery and ask yourself, how many 60+ year olds could hang onto one of those things now, over those types of traditional sections. And you might understand why many of them are riding lightweight bikes in order that they can carry on riding rather than lying in plastercast and being fed through a straw in hospital 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japes1275 Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 Woody, that is a fantastic link, thanks for posting it! I have to say that a lot of the competitors don't exactly look as young as you make out though! In fact didn't I hear AJ mention that one was competing back in the 20's? Anyway, they all seem to be enjoying themselves on big (and small) bikes that don't look to to be works specials. I can't beleive the audacity and bravery of the the Bantam riders with the standard spindly forks! To me those events look a lot more fun than trickling round stupidly tight turns and definitely a lot safer (even on a big bike) than some of the rocks and climbs you see now. The Barbour suits and footing coats look a lot better than a load of Middle aged men in modern Lycra trials gear as well!! The only trouble is that if you ran a trial like that these days you'd probably have some sort of hunt saboteur equivalents chasing us trials riders down for destroying the moors!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suzuki250 Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 (edited) Rider at 5:20 is using a all alloy GP barrel on a triumph …!!! Some of the moaners, and perfect rule makes would be up in arms about that Edited April 3, 2015 by suzuki250 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suzuki250 Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 How about this in the rules, all riders must observe at least 3 trials a season or your license will not be renewed? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davetom Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 Even Spud himself didn't believe what he was typing, he's deleted all his posts.. Maybe his bike fell on him and he's had a rethink? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 Seemed to me he wasn't really serious and was just doing it for a wind up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trickymicky Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 He has edited his first post in this thread - i suspect that he may surface on a Cricket forum somewhere quite soon. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davetom Posted April 3, 2015 Report Share Posted April 3, 2015 (edited) Hadn't realised how similar his thread last Jan was to this.. http://www.trialscentral.com/forums/topic/49428-original-pre-65-class/ He was very ' sensitive' in that one too, don't think he ever rides somehow ? Edited April 3, 2015 by davetom 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cleanorbust Posted April 5, 2015 Report Share Posted April 5, 2015 Seemed to me he wasn't really serious and was just doing it for a wind up. Succeeded then. 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.