jon v8 Posted July 20, 2017 Report Share Posted July 20, 2017 On 7/18/2017 at 4:19 PM, turbo said: Well guys, 4th round cancelled in Yorkshire due to lack of entries 19 I believe ,not looking good really and the last 2 rounds (in IOM ) approx 35 each day . With revitalised classes etc the series is still not attracting a lot of interest . This is a shame as I fear it could be the beginning of the end for the traditional ,single lap classic road based trial that some of us enjoy . I feel sorry for the stalwart club members in various parts of the country that are prepared to carry out the hard work needed to run these events. I also note that about a year ago when I posted a local interested parties thoughts on the series there was the usual avalanche of advice on how the series should be managed and run, however it seems few of you are actually prepared to support the events . There is no simple answer to this,I think there are riders who would like a go,but... There are so many things pulling on peoples lives now,family and work pressure etc. I probably won't be able to ride as much in the near future because of my close family,I need to be at home. The other thing is the classes are a mess,I can't think why they did what they did,but it hasn't helped. I also think that there just aren't enough good riders who want to ride old bikes,some of the sections now are just too much for many riders who own pre unit or rigid bikes. I like a challenge,but I also need to go to work the next day,so even if I defected to a Fantic there would still be sections to worry about. I guess all good things come to an end, it will be a shame if single lap road trials finish,I would encourage any rider to try them,in general they are way better than a single venue event. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttspud Posted July 21, 2017 Report Share Posted July 21, 2017 (edited) It is so sad. You all know why this has happened. Because there are no useful rules, no ethics, lots of cheating and the bikes have become very expensive, all absolutely against the original highly popular idea. It is not that hard to understand. It has nothing to do with age or machinery or type of event. Pre65 trials have morphed into post65 trials with almost no pre65 bikes anywhere. What exactly are the principles of pre65/classic trials? When you have modern pre65 bikes, as collyolly said last week, that are better than 90s machines with no pre65 bits on them and little to no understanding of how tough riding a proper pre65 bike is, then what are the principles? Obviously the sport will fail because there is no sport. If you want an example of very popular classic series (in fact all of them are popular except for trials and none of the others have allowed the real bikes to disappear), they have principles. Here, for example are the classic road racing principles.. very obvious really.. 1. The preservation of the machines....... 2. The preservation of the machines...... In other words, if the sport does not preserve the machinery and entrants dont know what a pre65 bike is, and lets face it, there is no 'pre65' bike anymore, then obviously the sport dies. Or are we all still believing that there is no problem? Anyway, I expect most to deny that there is a problem and that cheating never had anything to do with it, nor does the sport need any rules nor does it need or want original bikes or riders of original bikes, and then to back that up with the usual abuse that is typical of people who know that they are in the wrong probably because they cheat themselves. But if you actually wanted to understand what a proper set of rules looks like (very similar to the ones posted many years ago on this very board which incidentally were trying to leave the cheat bikes in).. albeit for another classic motorcycle sport... then here you go CMCR Rules Edited July 21, 2017 by ttspud Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
on it Posted July 21, 2017 Report Share Posted July 21, 2017 2 hours ago, ttspud said: It is so sad. You all know why this has happened. Because there are no useful rules, no ethics, lots of cheating and the bikes have become very expensive, all absolutely against the original highly popular idea. It is not that hard to understand. It has nothing to do with age or machinery or type of event. Pre65 trials have morphed into post65 trials with almost no pre65 bikes anywhere. What exactly are the principles of pre65/classic trials? When you have modern pre65 bikes, as collyolly said last week, that are better than 90s machines with no pre65 bits on them and little to no understanding of how tough riding a proper pre65 bike is, then what are the principles? Obviously the sport will fail because there is no sport. If you want an example of very popular classic series (in fact all of them are popular except for trials and none of the others have allowed the real bikes to disappear), they have principles. Here, for example are the classic road racing principles.. very obvious really.. 1. The preservation of the machines....... 2. The preservation of the machines...... In other words, if the sport does not preserve the machinery and entrants dont know what a pre65 bike is, and lets face it, there is no 'pre65' bike anymore, then obviously the sport dies. Or are we all still believing that there is no problem? Anyway, I expect most to deny that there is a problem and that cheating never had anything to do with it, nor does the sport need any rules nor does it need or want original bikes or riders of original bikes, and then to back that up with the usual abuse that is typical of people who know that they are in the wrong probably because they cheat themselves. But if you actually wanted to understand what a proper set of rules looks like (very similar to the ones posted many years ago on this very board which incidentally were trying to leave the cheat bikes in).. albeit for another classic motorcycle sport... then here you go CMCR Rules As for the CMCR rules ok then tell me what has changed over the years in road racing NOTHING they still go round and round on tarmac so bikes dont need to change. Now tell me what has changed in trials YES the sections so the bikes changed to suit the sections . The type of event you dream of is it ? a concourse scrutineer ,ride on a grass field ,stand and talk about your bike and then go home. As for the preservation of machines i would rather see a bike used than a immaculate bike parked & polished, if thats the sort of bike you want fair play, just dont think everyone else dose alot of people want to use the bikes . is poor entrys down to the trials being on the roads ? & NO I do not ride or own a pre 65 bike 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody Posted July 21, 2017 Report Share Posted July 21, 2017 As usual Spud, you're not in the same solar system with your reasons for its failure. In case you hadn't noticed, it hasn't been a Pre65 only series for decades, so Pre65 rules have nothing to do with it. And if they did, how do you explain the bumper entries in Pre65 only series like NBBC and Pre65 Scottish, not to omit the Manx classic. All of these series attract the same type of bike and rider so Pre65 rules have no bearing on the Miller series going down the pan. Ultimately there are too may trials and a lot of the classic bike riders have modern bikes too and can drift between modern and classic events. Date clashes mean you can do one or the other, not both, so it depends on which the rider considers the better trial on the day. Some have said the Miller trials have got stale because the same route / sections are used year in year out, but that can be said of most trials. As Jon has pointed out the class structure introduced this year for the Miller (now ACU Classic) series is a mess. Far too many classes and this caused a lot of disinterest amongst riders and organisers when it was mooted. The ACU sent out questionnaires before introducing these classes, asking for opinions. I sent a detailed reply which was ignored, as was my follow up - didn't even get an acknowledgement. I know the same happened to others. I don't see the point of canvassing the people who run and take part in the events and then ignoring their opinions. I don't know of any rider or organiser who thought the classes were a good idea. Rather than run the risk of losing entries as a result of the disinterest in the class structure, Stratford still ran their trial but opted out of the series and ran 'normal' classes. Result - decent entry, which puts another nail in the coffin of your self agendered rules argument. South Birmingham have also followed this approach with the Greensmith in October. There is no single issue that stands out as to why this series is failing but the class structure is definitely very unpopular. Pre65 rules however, have got nothng to do with it. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttspud Posted July 21, 2017 Report Share Posted July 21, 2017 (edited) Quote how do you explain the bumper entries in Pre65 only series like NBBC Well, just had a quick look and what do you find? Lots and lots of tricked up 2-stroke unit bikes, some cubs and a handful of the big pre-units many of those tricked up too, which is exactly what I had expected to find given the current rules environment. That is good but a long way from a healthy pre65 sport in general but yes, it is great to see the bikes being ridden, it would be nicer to have more of the big bikes out too and some acknowledgement of the difference between a tricked up bike and an original one since obviously the original ones are staying at home outside the event we know about. It is good that the event has kept to pre65 bikes (modern albeit) without the 80s, 90s bikes and long may that series be supported and popular. Quote Pre65 rules however, have got nothng to do with it. We always disagreed there. I believe you have to have better rules than pretty much the vague sihouette type efforts. The event I shall not name, does have rules specifying original frame, engine, gearbox, forks and hubs, plus no electronic ignition (i think that is still it) but in the competitive classes that is entirely flouted so almost all original bikes (as you know, probably from the recent photos) have been pushed out to the clubman course. I will carry on riding an original, unmolested bike and lose all fives if need be, as you also well know. It is a shame though that there is only one other rider now with an original bike in that class. Anyway, maybe one day we will have some way of distinguishing between these bikes and others will then be inspired to come back and try. Quote on it: Now tell me what has changed in trials YES the sections so the bikes changed to suit the sections I think the sections are always set to suit the bikes, not the other way around. Originally, pre65 came into existence, said those that know, to allow pre65 bikes to continue in the face of superior Spanish machinery that caused the sections to become too hard. That is happening all over again (the original bikes find the courses for trick bikes too tough) except it is modified bikes that are pushing out original bikes except this time nothing is changing to deal with it. Last time it was a new sport, this time hopefully all that is needed is to distinguish between bikes. Edited July 21, 2017 by ttspud 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttspud Posted July 22, 2017 Report Share Posted July 22, 2017 (edited) For context, here we are (I can hear the groans from here), the modern pre65 machinery (apparently a bike articled in Classic Dirtbike).. A very nice bike indeed but is it really a pre65 bike or is it a special? And is it really no advantage at all over the original? Does it really conform to the rules there are? Well, it is almost uncanny how the silhouette matches the original machine pictured below it (in this case the on-road AJS 16MS (G3LS) to grab the short-stroke engine presumably) that it is presumably meant to be, you almost cannot see any difference at all!!... why would anyone want to ride the trick machine, it is so obvious!! Anyway, a picture paints a thousand words. Again, it is not that trick machines should not be ridden and enjoyed just as much, they should. It is that it would be nice to acknowledge that others would also like to ride the original bikes (at least original frame, engine, gearbox, forks, hubs, ignition) and have them distinguished in the rules and/or entry. Edited July 22, 2017 by ttspud Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davetom Posted July 22, 2017 Report Share Posted July 22, 2017 These rants are just wasting everyone's time. At what point will you throw your dolls out the pram and go through the thread deleting all your posts, as has happened in virtually every ' discussion ' you take part in . Yes, you are very lucky to have inherited an ex-works big four stroke, and understandably don't wish to alter it, but for the rest of us mere mortals who want to get to work on Monday, riding something with a few lighter bits and nicer suspension is less of an issue. Have you ridden many events in the last 12 months, I know I would if I was lucky enough to have been gifted such a bike..? The pre 65 eligibility Horse has not only bolted, the stable has been developed into a barn conversion . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
on it Posted July 22, 2017 Report Share Posted July 22, 2017 ttspud so a ex works bike -was that not a cheat bike back in the day ? is that the route cause of the all problems now ,as people copy it and with 60yrs of EVOLUTION here we are today with bikes the way they are . As you say sections to suit the bikes ok they do your bike dose not suit the sections ? change all sections for 1 bike ? Ive seen so this is Yorkshire dvd do you really think people want to travel 100s miles to ride sections like that, & go clean at every round .Heres a wild thought why dont you run a trial how you want it with your rules then your happy good luck with that ! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttspud Posted July 22, 2017 Report Share Posted July 22, 2017 @davetom @on it Sorry fellas, it was a sponsored bike, not an ex-works, so basically an unmolested bike from the period and yes, of course it is a good thing to retain these bikes as they were, and no, I want to see them ridden so I am riding it not keeping it in a shed or in a museum. And yes, when these discussions become silly, the only way to prevent further upset to those who seem to react badly, is to shut it down in any way that is possible including removing not all posts, but enough to shut it down. Smile, be happy, don't worry about it, this sport was always just a bit of fun, I'd certainly like to pass it on to my kids but I fear at this rate that will not be possible beyond by a 5k trick machine. Most adults dont know much about these bikes and if this generation fails to keep them out there, then they will be lost. It doesnt mean that much in the end, but it would be nice to try to keep original bikes in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trialsrfun Posted July 23, 2017 Report Share Posted July 23, 2017 On 22/07/2017 at 8:58 AM, ttspud said: For context, here we are (I can hear the groans from here), the modern pre65 machinery (apparently a bike articled in Classic Dirtbike).. A very nice bike indeed but is it really a pre65 bike or is it a special? And is it really no advantage at all over the original? Does it really conform to the rules there are? Well, it is almost uncanny how the silhouette matches the original machine pictured below it (in this case the on-road AJS 16MS (G3LS) to grab the short-stroke engine presumably) that it is presumably meant to be, you almost cannot see any difference at all!!... why would anyone want to ride the trick machine, it is so obvious!! Anyway, a picture paints a thousand words. Again, it is not that trick machines should not be ridden and enjoyed just as much, they should. It is that it would be nice to acknowledge that others would also like to ride the original bikes (at least original frame, engine, gearbox, forks, hubs, ignition) and have them distinguished in the rules and/or entry. The VMCC run numerous trials in several areas of the country where you could ride your bike, why not enter those? How about posting a photo of your bike so that we can see the differences between it and those pictured above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttspud Posted July 23, 2017 Report Share Posted July 23, 2017 @trialsrfun Here you go, the 16c with a comerfords example below it with the modified oil tank, slightly different frame and higher exhaust routing, someone with more knowledge of detail could probably help you understand exactly when the changes may have occured though the second picture is 1962.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttspud Posted July 23, 2017 Report Share Posted July 23, 2017 (edited) @trialsrfun Quote How different really though is the bike in the upper picture to the one being held by I think Mr. Jock Wilson of Comerfords in your other posting? That is a very good question and key to helping to sort out the loss of original bikes from pre65 trials. It is best that others, other than me, understand the answer. It is certainly key to the point that I have been trying to get across over all these years. I will add a little of my thoughts on the answer. Although it is perhaps hard to answer in terms of riding one if you havent ridden one, but a recent comment on here might come close to some understanding " Taking the Cub on a modern training course I would expect to be quite disruptive, as we'd rapidly hit the point where I'd be struggling to do stuff that everybody else was mastering. I tested that point by putting a very experienced modern and twinshock rider on the Cub, and he was extremely shocked at the difference. ". If you want to read the full comment, it is in Trials Training And Technique - classic training. On the simple, differences in terms of parts. The bike at the top, ie the upper picture in the first posting, the modern pre65, looks to have no original pre65 parts at all, certainly frame, engine, gearbox, forks, hubs and ignition are all modern or modified. To my understanding, the engine was never used for trials where the long-stroke was used, and the modern engine even looks a good deal shorter than the original short engine below. Whereas the comerfords bike, in the other posting, is all original in terms of as was ridden in 1962, so has original frame, engine, gearbox, forks, hubs and ignition, and the mods.. oil tank, rerouted exhaust, rims, seat which were obviously all done back in the day. Which is why that was chosen as the logical point to split the two types of bike, it is where the original rules stand and now should probably be where the sub-class line is drawn should the sport ever get that far. Edited July 23, 2017 by ttspud Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttspud Posted July 23, 2017 Report Share Posted July 23, 2017 (edited) @trialsrfun With all due respect, there is plenty there to get the point. It is really up to the ACU now, as the body that sets up the rules and classes, to decide whether they want to put in place a better set of rules to enable any of this to happen, to have a sub-class to distinguish between bikes across all classes, whether that just be for the failing series or across the pre65 sport as a whole. There are certainly very capable and informed members of this site that have not properly been consulted, one in particular who should have been included from the outset and never excluded in the first place. We are where we are, we can only hope that the future is better thought through than the past. Anyway, I do not see that I can add much more at the moment but I will certainly keep an eye on it and keep hope for the future. Best of luck to you. Edited July 23, 2017 by ttspud Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
on it Posted July 23, 2017 Report Share Posted July 23, 2017 (edited) ttspud I think you will find the ACU are doing it /clubs are doing it ,the problem is the rules are NOT as you want , Do you really believe making all pre 65s back to bog standard will increase entries ? who will have the knowledge to scrutineer these total original standard pre 65 bikes with old tyres,(theres your first problem a 55 yr old tyre ) Ride it as it is or put it on a plinth in a museum its your bike. Dont expect people want /will change there bikes to make yours competitive , I think you will find most series are failing as cost makes them restrictive not the rules , Just how long are the trials in you ideal world, seems to me there will be more time spend with the scrutineer and less time riding sections with the rules you want .Most classic/ historic scrutineering takes place the day before the event ! Edited July 24, 2017 by on it add more 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elliseng Posted July 24, 2017 Report Share Posted July 24, 2017 Some really interesting views above, as a younger generation interested in PRE 65 trials I can see the appeal to both sides. I am heavily involved in Classic Car Trials and we too have similar issues with vehicles being modified/modernised with fors & against continually causing upset. The only organisation I have experienced that have kept things in control are the VSCC (Vintage Sports Car Club). Amazingly they have kept rules enforcing period parts with no modern gizmos (no modern electrics etc) and there trials events are always over subscribed @ 100+ entries. You would imagine these events to be all softy softy but they are far from it using historic style sections giving they old cars a serious work out. The class structure is very simple (like Deryks original setup) and the cars are incredible. The cars are all log booked for eligibility before they can be used. Within the rules people still develop their cars to make them more competitive but this is all nice basic tinkering which makes for good fun........one major downside is the ever increasing value of the base vehicles Not saying this could be done retrospectively but food for thought.... 1 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.