|
Advertise with us
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
| |
Current Topic Rating:  | Join the Forum to Rate this Topic at: Classic Motorcycling Australia Forums
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
39 Posts |
 Posted - 14 Jun 2002 : 11:34:16 PM
|
There appears to be a myriad of Race classes popping up all over the country, mostly based on capacity. I do not think that that these classes, as they currently stand), are conductive to fair and competitive racing. Why dont we all turn the clock back to when there were performance based classes. I am of course talking about TT Formula 1, TT Formula 2, and TT Formula 3.
when I started racing, (TT F3), the TT Formula classes were the mainstay of club and interclub race meetings. Blokes on 250cc 2 stroke Improved Touring Production bikes would run against others on 125cc GP bikes, there would also be a few 4 stroke 350's, and a couple of 500cc four stroke singles scattered throuought the field. The bikes may have been diverse, but the racing was close.
Exactly the same thing could be said for the TT Formula 2 and TT Formula 1.
If we run a broad performance based system rather than tying everone up in the current capacity based classes, I believe that it would be fairer for everyone concerned.
Consider this: - A man runs a slightly modified Suzuki T250 Post Classic Bike. At the moment he has to compete against Pukka GP machines of the same capacity. The poor Suzuki owner has not got a snowball's chance in hell, of even seeing which way the GP bikes went, let alone trying to beat them. Under the TT Formula rules, the Suzuki owner would be running in Formula 3, against bikes that have similar performance to his. The GP bikes, (and their replicas), would be in TT Formula 2, where the competition for them, would be much stiffer. Tougher competition means closer racing. And to me closer racing is the name of the game.
This way anyone on a small budget can be competitive within their class, running converted road bikes with minimal modifications. True the Formula seems to be weighted against those who own GP machinery, but in reality this is not the case. All it does is level the playing field so that everyone has a reasonable chance of being competive. I would however, expect opposition from GP bike owners, (I am one myself). as I can imagine that no one who currently enjoys a large advantage over his/her rivals would like to see their advantage pegged back. But in my opinion it is the better to have a level playing field for everybody.
As in my other posts, this is my opinion only. Agree or discard as you see fit
|
|
|
Former Member
deleted
63 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jun 2002 : 01:03:48 AM
|
I argree with you on the Formula 1,2 etc classes., why crucify the`few well heeled`blokes with big bore bikes when they were just trying to be competive.
All that will happen is fewer well heeled blokes will be able to afford short stroke high reving CR 750s etc and they will just not ride.
Anyway Rex built a CR 750 for Craig Trinder a few years ago for Daytona which proved to be very fast (and expensive). Will the Triumphs, Nortons etc still be able to keep up?
As for me I would give the post classic scene away and go Super stock racing or maybe bears.
TA |
 |
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jun 2002 : 10:24:59 AM
|
Trevor, BEARS sounds good to me too! If we don't get the historic rules right now, we never will, and the sport will die. I noticed in Allan Greenings post under the other forum areas, he asked whether P5 would be allowed to run in the Southern Classic. I asked the question of HMRAV and the answer was NO!. But at the last Austin Seven Winton Historic Meeting grids were half filled.
Seems a bit short sighted to have a mindset biased to maintaining racing as it was in the fifties and sixties and exclude a lot of later bikes. Spectators at Winton saw Craig Morris and Peter Guest have a go, and that was good, but the circuit was almost empty apart for them - breeds boredom!
The grids at Winton hold forty bikes, we should always try to run full grids even if the events don't really look like what was held in the past.
I like seeing manxes and velocettes race, us much as the next guy, but the 63 cutoff date is a bit silly, when the grids are half-empty. All we need to do is let Seeley G50's, Daytona Triumphs and 450 Ducatis run in the same events as the manxes and velos and we might generate a bit more interest.
It shouldn't be too hard to let P5 (TZ's etc ) run off the back of the P4 grids.
Alan Cotterell |
|
|
|
matcho mick
Advanced Member
New South Wales
570 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jun 2002 : 12:54:45 PM
|
Alan ,have you concidered that the reason for empty feilds behind Craig & Guesty might have something to do with the "C " word,not all of us are prepared to share meetings with our 4 wheeled "friends",i never quite recovered fully from childhood nightmares of mixed Amaroo's,not for me,i'm afraid?,as for big bores,as long as theres' money to be spent,some motors are going to be quicker,fact,only second place should winge,who cares!!,Mick.
|
|
|
|
acotrel
Advanced Member
Victoria
2147 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2002 : 09:39:57 AM
|
Mick, I agree that competing at meetings with the cars is a bit of a turn-off, and probably dangerous due to the oil spilt on the circuit by them.
Doesn't change the fact that several motorcycle events are run at every meeting where the grids aren't full.
I've seen races where every capacity in one period was represented. Better to run one capacity per race and include every period up to 1979. The racing would present a much more interesting spectacle.
Alan Cotterell |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| Classic Motorcycling Australia Forums |
© 2000 - 2025 |
|
|
|
|
Topic Locked
