Post by: nom de guerre on June 05, 2012, 10:52:21 AM
Post by: Charles Owens on June 05, 2012, 04:04:48 PM
2006-2010 YZ 250's
2006 RM 250
2006 KX 250
2006-2007 CR 125/250
2006 125SX
2006-2011 250SX
Post by: nom de guerre on June 05, 2012, 04:13:21 PM
Post by: VintageBlueSmoke on June 05, 2012, 05:43:25 PM
Post by: motoman356 on June 05, 2012, 06:12:53 PM
2007-2012 yz's
07,08 rms
and so on and so forth
Post by: scotty dog on June 05, 2012, 10:55:41 PM
Post by: Watson777 on June 05, 2012, 11:01:09 PM
"Bikes older than 5 years are not eligible to race in pro racing because regardless of how you maintain it, it is no longer safe to ride at this level. On top of that if you are racing pro you shouldn't have a bike that old anyway."
That is the reply I got when I asked.
Post by: scotty dog on June 05, 2012, 11:08:33 PM
From the mouth of one AMA Official (not mentioning a name)Oh OK, fair enough
"Bikes older than 5 years are not eligible to race in pro racing because regardless of how you maintain it, it is no longer safe to ride at this level. On top of that if you are racing pro you shouldn't have a bike that old anyway."
That is the reply I got when I asked.
Post by: Stusmoke on June 06, 2012, 08:17:05 AM
From the mouth of one AMA Official (not mentioning a name)Oh OK, fair enough
"Bikes older than 5 years are not eligible to race in pro racing because regardless of how you maintain it, it is no longer safe to ride at this level. On top of that if you are racing pro you shouldn't have a bike that old anyway."
That is the reply I got when I asked.
Pft yeah perfect justification. OOhhh wait on... By LAW those tracks and organizations aren't in anyway shape or form responsible for any form of injury sustained on the grounds... Damn they almost nailed that lie. But hold on... I seem to recall a 1996 KX 125 DESTROYING the 250F class in Toowoomba several years ago. And the weirdest thing is it ran better and 15 bikes grenaded that night.
I pray for the day that someone finds a major constitutional violation in the AMA rules and sues the pants off them. I would fly to America to see them defend their asses with that kind of bs.
Oh, and I have by estimate 200 hours on my current piston. By estimate. still running like a... whats the word? 2 stroke.
If these machines are so inferior and pieces of crap, let us race them and prove you right. It gives me laughs to rant all this evidence at a four joke supporter and then get the reply: yeah well they're out of date; this is the era of the four strokes. hehehehe
Post by: VintageBlueSmoke on June 06, 2012, 09:03:49 AM
OK, so the 5 year rule is not there for safety or anything. It is purely there so you have to ride a new bike (4$ or 2T). Manufacturers don't want to spend millions on racing only to have some punk show up on a 490 Maico and make them look bad. Racing, to the manufacturers, is just a means to an end (selling bikes). It's the same in many other sports dominated by the manufacturers. It wasn't so long ago that Toyota wasn't ALLOWED in NASCAR...
The AMA homologation rule, specifying what model and/or brand is allowed or not, was put there because the manufacturers were spending hundreds of thousands of dollars building one off bikes (Works Bikes) and every one complained that if you were not on a manufacturers team, you couldn't compete. Many blamed this for the demise of the European motorcycle industry (the truth was the European economy was at fault and the unions took them down). This was the AMA trying to do a good thing, but as usual mucked it up. Racing still costs hundreds of thousands of dollars but in stead of it being 10 bikes, the cost is shared across the entire field of 40.
Speaking of the AMA trying to do a good thing and mucking it up...is the rule that allows 4$ to be double displacement (which by the way is an FIM rule and being subordinate to them, was adopted by the AMA). It really was a good idea at the time. It kept the doors open for many manufacturers in Europe for many years. It was rare to see the VOR, CCM, and Rickman machines in America but in Europe and England especially, there were hundreds of builders using big bore 4$ engines. These bikes could be competitive, but not dominant, in motocross in their day. The problem came in the '90's when metalurgical advancements allowed them to build a better 4$ and the rules were not adjusted to keep it balanced.
Post by: TMKIWI on June 06, 2012, 09:06:51 AM
Not gunna happen mate.
Post by: Stusmoke on June 06, 2012, 10:03:29 AM
I am sorry Stu , but if you have nearly 200 hours on your piston you must have the best YZ ever built.
Not gunna happen mate.
Simply not true. For whatever reason it may be, the engine is all mid range. everyones heard of people getting 200 hours of 450s. Its the same thing. The engine doesn't need to be revved high, it never gets revved high. It makes TONS of power in the 4-7 grand range. I usually keep it around 4 or 5. Higher revs just aren't necessary
OK, so the 5 year rule is not there for safety or anything. It is purely there so you have to ride a new bike (4$ or 2T). Manufacturers don't want to spend millions on racing only to have some punk show up on a 490 Maico and make them look bad. Racing, to the manufacturers, is just a means to an end (selling bikes). It's the same in many other sports dominated by the manufacturers. It wasn't so long ago that Toyota wasn't ALLOWED in NASCAR...
The AMA homologation rule, specifying what model and/or brand is allowed or not, was put there because the manufacturers were spending hundreds of thousands of dollars building one off bikes (Works Bikes) and every one complained that if you were not on a manufacturers team, you couldn't compete. Many blamed this for the demise of the European motorcycle industry (the truth was the European economy was at fault and the unions took them down). This was the AMA trying to do a good thing, but as usual mucked it up. Racing still costs hundreds of thousands of dollars but in stead of it being 10 bikes, the cost is shared across the entire field of 40.
Speaking of the AMA trying to do a good thing and mucking it up...is the rule that allows 4$ to be double displacement (which by the way is an FIM rule and being subordinate to them, was adopted by the AMA). It really was a good idea at the time. It kept the doors open for many manufacturers in Europe for many years. It was rare to see the VOR, CCM, and Rickman machines in America but in Europe and England especially, there were hundreds of builders using big bore 4$ engines. These bikes could be competitive, but not dominant, in motocross in their day. The problem came in the '90's when metalurgical advancements allowed them to build a better 4$ and the rules were not adjusted to keep it balanced.
I agree. Both 2 strokes and four strokes were fine in the sport with double displacement until they churned out these high revving machines
Post by: cnrcpla on June 06, 2012, 12:01:54 PM
Quote
OK, so the 5 year rule is not there for safety or anything. It is purely there so you have to ride a new bike (4$ or 2T). Manufacturers don't want to spend millions on racing only to have some punk show up on a 490 Maico and make them look bad. Racing, to the manufacturers, is just a means to an end (selling bikes). It's the same in many other sports dominated by the manufacturers. It wasn't so long ago that Toyota wasn't ALLOWED in NASCAR...Man... What happened to the days where you could show up at a track and race what ever in the hell you wanted and could get as far as you wanted with it...
The AMA homologation rule, specifying what model and/or brand is allowed or not, was put there because the manufacturers were spending hundreds of thousands of dollars building one off bikes (Works Bikes) and every one complained that if you were not on a manufacturers team, you couldn't compete. Many blamed this for the demise of the European motorcycle industry (the truth was the European economy was at fault and the unions took them down). This was the AMA trying to do a good thing, but as usual mucked it up. Racing still costs hundreds of thousands of dollars but in stead of it being 10 bikes, the cost is shared across the entire field of 40.
Speaking of the AMA trying to do a good thing and mucking it up...is the rule that allows 4$ to be double displacement (which by the way is an FIM rule and being subordinate to them, was adopted by the AMA). It really was a good idea at the time. It kept the doors open for many manufacturers in Europe for many years. It was rare to see the VOR, CCM, and Rickman machines in America but in Europe and England especially, there were hundreds of builders using big bore 4$ engines. These bikes could be competitive, but not dominant, in motocross in their day. The problem came in the '90's when metalurgical advancements allowed them to build a better 4$ and the rules were not adjusted to keep it balanced.
Quote
I am sorry Stu , but if you have nearly 200 hours on your piston you must have the best YZ ever built.I don't know man, I got quite a few hours on my YZ. Granted the top end was a mess when I actually did it, and all those hours were from trail riding like Stu pointed out as well, it is possible. But racing my bike now I will do a rebuild after every season, which is approximately 75 hours or so including practice.
Post by: Stusmoke on June 07, 2012, 07:46:23 AM
QuoteOK, so the 5 year rule is not there for safety or anything. It is purely there so you have to ride a new bike (4$ or 2T). Manufacturers don't want to spend millions on racing only to have some punk show up on a 490 Maico and make them look bad. Racing, to the manufacturers, is just a means to an end (selling bikes). It's the same in many other sports dominated by the manufacturers. It wasn't so long ago that Toyota wasn't ALLOWED in NASCAR...Man... What happened to the days where you could show up at a track and race what ever in the hell you wanted and could get as far as you wanted with it...
The AMA homologation rule, specifying what model and/or brand is allowed or not, was put there because the manufacturers were spending hundreds of thousands of dollars building one off bikes (Works Bikes) and every one complained that if you were not on a manufacturers team, you couldn't compete. Many blamed this for the demise of the European motorcycle industry (the truth was the European economy was at fault and the unions took them down). This was the AMA trying to do a good thing, but as usual mucked it up. Racing still costs hundreds of thousands of dollars but in stead of it being 10 bikes, the cost is shared across the entire field of 40.
Speaking of the AMA trying to do a good thing and mucking it up...is the rule that allows 4$ to be double displacement (which by the way is an FIM rule and being subordinate to them, was adopted by the AMA). It really was a good idea at the time. It kept the doors open for many manufacturers in Europe for many years. It was rare to see the VOR, CCM, and Rickman machines in America but in Europe and England especially, there were hundreds of builders using big bore 4$ engines. These bikes could be competitive, but not dominant, in motocross in their day. The problem came in the '90's when metalurgical advancements allowed them to build a better 4$ and the rules were not adjusted to keep it balanced.QuoteI am sorry Stu , but if you have nearly 200 hours on your piston you must have the best YZ ever built.I don't know man, I got quite a few hours on my YZ. Granted the top end was a mess when I actually did it, and all those hours were from trail riding like Stu pointed out as well, it is possible. But racing my bike now I will do a rebuild after every season, which is approximately 75 hours or so including practice.
Agree to both. You don't need to scream my bike out to get the power out of it. Infact even though it would probably make a few ponies less than it did on top, the tractability makes up for it. I ride things tight and don't use the top end ever. Thus, 200 hours is within reach
Post by: VintageBlueSmoke on June 07, 2012, 10:40:35 AM
Quote
Man... What happened to the days where you could show up at a track and race what ever in the hell you wanted and could get as far as you wanted with it...
It is generally termed the Production Rule; a group of rules that basically mean you have to use a production or "stock" bike. The idea was to prevent the factories from churing out 1 off bikes that cost $100,000 and allowing privateers to race on an even footing. I remember in the early '80's that the 125 cylinders for guys like Tichenor were literally UNOBTAINABLE. When Tichenor lost his ride and tried to go it alone, he was left behind. That was a big reason he when to race in Japan.
The factories still dominated as they were able to thow money in the right places (their circumvention of the claiming rule, not protesting each other - only privateers who do well, etc.). But then guys like Mitch payton (actually....Mitch Payton) beat them at their own game.
Post by: Stusmoke on June 07, 2012, 10:51:24 AM
QuoteMan... What happened to the days where you could show up at a track and race what ever in the hell you wanted and could get as far as you wanted with it...
It is generally termed the Production Rule; a group of rules that basically mean you have to use a production or "stock" bike. The idea was to prevent the factories from churing out 1 off bikes that cost $100,000 and allowing privateers to race on an even footing. I remember in the early '80's that the 125 cylinders for guys like Tichenor were literally UNOBTAINABLE. When Tichenor lost his ride and tried to go it alone, he was left behind. That was a big reason he when to race in Japan.
The factories still dominated as they were able to thow money in the right places (their circumvention of the claiming rule, not protesting each other - only privateers who do well, etc.). But then guys like Mitch payton (actually....Mitch Payton) beat them at their own game.
I honestly like this rule. I think its great but I also think it should be taken one step further. If I remember correctly the rule states that in order for a bike to be race legal there must be four hundred at least manufactured. Example: Dungey's bike. This year it was a totally different machine to the 450 SXfs the public was getting fed. http://motocrossactionmag.com/Main/News/EXCLUSIVE-LOOK-INSIDE-RYAN-DUNGEYS-2013-KTM-450SXF-8333.aspx
Just looking over it in detail you can tell its a totally different machine. The chassis, the engine, EFI instead of carburetor its basically an entirely different bike to the ordinary 450 SXF. But in order to make it race legal they had to pump out 400 of them, I think they ended up making 430 of them or something. But its a cool article and just goes to show how much effort and money these factory teams put into these time bombs
Post by: VintageBlueSmoke on June 07, 2012, 04:32:08 PM
Well, the idea was good. Their hearts were in the right place. However, as usual, the AMA screwed up the execution.
Having to make 400 bikes isn't the issue (and the rule is IMPORTING...not making) as KTM have shown. Where the factories get away wit it is by limiting everyone else. Dungey don't like his frame geometry? Roger will make him a new one...and Hon/Kaw/Yam/Suz will not challenge it in protest because they have a special cylinder, or suspension, or whatever. If a privateer came up with a new technology (say DI) and got up in their ranks, they would get torn down and measured and harrassed to no end. Remember, you have to pay a fee to protest a bike and have it torn down. No privateer has thet kind of extra cash.
The rules are very explicit as to what you can do but we know that everyone is doing it. Unless it's too obvious, (Renner bragging about a 144, fuel injection on a non-FI bike, etc.) , no one is going to say anything unless you win (and are not on a factory supported team).
Do you know they even have a value for the suspension? I guarentee that the top 10 all spend more than "Both fork legs (less triple clamps): $4,500.00" and "Shock assembly: $1,750.00". The pro level PC front suspension is $7k.
Post by: bearorso on June 07, 2012, 08:34:48 PM
Speaking of the AMA trying to do a good thing and mucking it up...is the rule that allows 4$ to be double displacement (which by the way is an FIM rule and being subordinate to them, was adopted by the AMA). It really was a good idea at the time. It kept the doors open for many manufacturers in Europe for many years. It was rare to see the VOR, CCM, and Rickman machines in America but in Europe and England especially, there were hundreds of builders using big bore 4$ engines. These bikes could be competitive, but not dominant, in motocross in their day. The problem came in the '90's when metalurgical advancements allowed them to build a better 4$ and the rules were not adjusted to keep it balanced.
If you are going to write something, make sure you know what you're writing about.
The AMA had long standing 'over capacity' rules - rules that were used initially by KTM with their 540cc LC4 based bike? Rules that a lot of companies did not take advantage of, for a Long time. Anyone else here remember Rex Staten on the Works Honda 4t - it being only 410cc - at least that is what they said it was. Based on the XL350 - it probably was far from 500cc - it blew up enough as it was. It was Trick though!
Now, I'm not exactly sure of the capacity max allowed - I do think 540cc was the max allowed in 250 (2t) class racing, I never really knew what was allowed in 125(2t) racing, perhaps it was 170cc? (I'm Australian, we, like the Europeans, and other countries that held to FIM rules, had the same class maximum as 2ts), but I do know that 125cc 4ts were the capacity allowed against 85cc 2ts - before Honda brought out the 150. Honda, worked out that an affordable 125 4t would never stack up against an 85cc 2t, so made the 150. Most associations throughout the world, proceeded to 'bend' over for Honda, but, in a rare show of having a spine, the AMA did not allow it to compete against 85s. That may have changed now - the irony is, quite a few countries have now stopped the 150 from going up against 85s, after initially allowing it - citing the cost it brought to minicycle racing. I think the FIM, have taken that stance, along with introducing EMX125 racing - for a cheaper, entry level class to GPs.
I can't recall exactly if Jacky Martens Husky, the first modern era 4t 500 World MX Champion, was 500 cc - I'm fairly sure it was. The Bartolini Bros, raced Husabergs in 500GPs that were definitely just below 500cc. I'm pretty sure all Joel Smets Husaberg wins were on sub 500s - quite often, he raced a 470 capacity 'Berg. I know this, because I worked at OZs biggest 'Berg dealer for many years, and the owner, travelled with his Kiwi Mechanic for a few weeks during the GPs, after topping a sales contest. I just cant recall when the FIM allowed bigger 4ts - I think it was 630 /650?cc. Perhaps it was the year Smets went to / was transferred to, KTM? That eventually became the MX3 category - 500cc max 2ts, 650cc max 4ts.
All the '500cc' 4ts till the last year 4ts won (late 60s?), through to the last days of the BSA team, thence to the years of CCM 'tilting at windmills' with their magnificent BSA based engines, as well as Bengt Aberg on the Hallman / Enquvist (sp?) Yamaha, were limited to a 500cc Maximum. In 1977, there was much controversy, at the British GP, as the CCM riders, John Banks, and Bob Wright, had been doing well in earlier GPs, thus upsetting Hondas Steve Whitlock. You blokes might remember him - mainly from his tenure of being a 'boss' in AMAs MX structure - he very much presided over the 125 2t /250 4t and 250 2t/450 4t current set up, though he later shed crocodile tears over it, admitting it was a mistake. The CCM riders, were doing so well, there became some grumbles (Honda / Whitlock) about them being oversized. Well, Banks got second in the second moto (Wright and Banks were going 1-2, for the first 25 minutes of the first moto), behind Mikkola, ending up 4th overall.
Banks' bike was measured. It was officially found to be 401cc - BS - it was 498cc, 'on ya!' tech inspectors!, as were the others (2ts, of course) in 1st, 2nd and 3rd. Bob Wright had finished 6th . Whitlock was still pissed off, so found a loop hole in that the official fifth place finisher, was registered as a 250GP rider, so Wright was '5th 500 rider'. CCMs Jeff Clews, was incensed by this, feeling his team had gone through enough BS orchestrated by Whitelock, and took Wrights bike from the Parc Ferme. Hence, some people thought, to this day, Wrights bike " must of been a 580", a size offered by CCM - a size, that Wright disliked. He was a revver.
CCMs are something I know quite a deal about - having grown up with BSAs, then CCMs around me, as both my Dad and Uncle rode / raced them, right through to the last year the BSA based CCMs were made - including a couple of 630cc 3 speeders. They owned a variety of Rickmans as well - Rickman - made chassis only - any 4t Rickmans raced in the 500cc World Championships (in the 60s), was a 500cc.
VOR, grew from Vertemati, who came from Husaberg - the Vertemati brothers so modifying the 'Berg, that it became another bike - Smets rode for them, before being picked up by Husaberg proper.
Enough history - it's just to emphasise FIM World Championship racing Was 500cc - bigger sizing, later, was influenced by AMA Rules.
As I said, get it right. Get it wrong, you leave yourself / this site / 2t fans, open to being described as a bunch of BS artists, by the 4t crowd.
I like all sorts of Motorcycles / Engine types. And I've probably had / ridden more 4ts than 2ts - making 'specials' for many years, 'tilting at windmills' myself. But I love 2ts - cripes, I pretty much put endless crap on my dad and uncle on their exotic 4ts, whilst I hammered around on a succession of CR , RM and YZ 125s. Since the 'modern 4t era' began, I've ridden big capacity 2ts. I wanted simple, grunty bikes, that I could work on with half of one eye open..............and work on, rarely.
All I hate, are the p**s poor rules, and the idiots, who just don't seem to understand that 4ts, got to domination, through those rules - rules, that Should Have been rescinded about 10 years ago.
The sport, would be in a Lot better shape now, if equivalency was back - just as equivalency was in force, right up to the AMA Rules influenced the rest of the worlds rules.
Post by: nom de guerre on June 07, 2012, 09:03:04 PM
Post by: bearorso on June 07, 2012, 09:40:09 PM
Smets, rode 501s / sub 500s, till he went to KTM.
So, thank you for the clarification - I was/ am a bit iffy on the year of the Big Monster limit introduction.
Ironically, I'd like to see the 450 class, become unlimited / up to say, 650 /700cc - as I'd love to see some small company introduce an absolutely minimalist, BIG 4t engine. Something like a Motus KMV4s(?) engine internals - a modern, push rod (for low overall engine height, low spinning mass height. As much as I put s**t on my dads and uncles CCMs years ago, the 580 and 630s, were amazing engines, that I Loved riding. Really, some of last of the 4t MX bikes, to really have Grunt down low, into the midrange. They weren't slow, they weren't heavy. But, they could be bloody fragile!
We need variety in racing, not a bloody monoculture of 4ts. 0r 2ts, for that matter.
Post by: nom de guerre on June 07, 2012, 10:01:03 PM
Post by: Stusmoke on June 07, 2012, 11:51:41 PM
Well, the idea was good. Their hearts were in the right place. However, as usual, the AMA screwed up the execution.
Having to make 400 bikes isn't the issue (and the rule is IMPORTING...not making) as KTM have shown. Where the factories get away wit it is by limiting everyone else. Dungey don't like his frame geometry? Roger will make him a new one...and Hon/Kaw/Yam/Suz will not challenge it in protest because they have a special cylinder, or suspension, or whatever. If a privateer came up with a new technology (say DI) and got up in their ranks, they would get torn down and measured and harrassed to no end. Remember, you have to pay a fee to protest a bike and have it torn down. No privateer has thet kind of extra cash.
The rules are very explicit as to what you can do but we know that everyone is doing it. Unless it's too obvious, (Renner bragging about a 144, fuel injection on a non-FI bike, etc.) , no one is going to say anything unless you win (and are not on a factory supported team).
Do you know they even have a value for the suspension? I guarentee that the top 10 all spend more than "Both fork legs (less triple clamps): $4,500.00" and "Shock assembly: $1,750.00". The pro level PC front suspension is $7k.
I agree, and My bad for the importing not making thing. Its pretty poor how its come to that. I would love to be a billion air then challenge all those fagtory bikes. Oh yea but they'd just bribe the mechanics responsible for tearing it down to the nth degree so it wouldn't matter anyway. Damn shame.
Post by: VintageBlueSmoke on June 10, 2012, 09:58:16 AM
Not sure why you are attacking my post. Everything in my post is correct and agrees with what you said except the larger displacement rules for 4-strokes which originated with the FIM - although you are probably correct that it wasn't originally double displacement. Whatever, fact is there were a lot of 'specials' builders racing in Europe that didn't see our shores that American's rarely heard about after the Japonese Big 4 domination of American Motocross. Even, when KTM dominated the GP's, most people in American motorcycling didn't know that they made other than Enduro bikes.
And Martins 610 was a factory special The Husky 610 was the "base model". I'm pretty confident that it wasn't stock bore and stroke.
Post by: bearorso on June 11, 2012, 05:31:27 AM
@bearorso,
Not sure why you are attacking my post. Everything in my post is correct and agrees with what you said except the larger displacement rules for 4-strokes which originated with the FIM - although you are probably correct that it wasn't originally double displacement. Whatever, fact is there were a lot of 'specials' builders racing in Europe that didn't see our shores that American's rarely heard about after the Japanese Big 4 domination of American Motocross. Even, when KTM dominated the GP's, most people in American motorcycling didn't know that they made other than Enduro bikes.
And Martins 610 was a factory special The Husky 610 was the "base model". I'm pretty confident that it wasn't stock bore and stroke.
If I were Attacking your post, I'd be taking the approach that others do when attacking others. Well, no, I don't get into abuse, as so many seem to do.
I'm pointing out that you had it entirely wrong when you blame the FIM for the 'Oversize Rules'.
Pointing out that 4ts, had to race at the same capacity, until things were influence from the US' bad rules.
The AMA's rules, are the real culprit, and slagging the FIM, firstly / mainly, is the wrong thing to do. They had a litany of stuff ups that are entirely of their own doing.............. Oh, don't mistake me for an FIM supporter, whatever you do. FIM / Lloungos Youthstream , Dorna , Ezpolita, are great at '***king up the sport of motorcycle racing.
That US riders don't know of other brands - well, that's what being insular, and not looking at what is happening in the rest of the world, gets you.
So many US 'fans', seem to be proud that they know sweet FA about motorcycle racing history.
I put my info as correct 'educational' information.
Rickman - as I said, never made a motor - were chassis manufacturers. And they had nothing to do with 70s and onwards high level MX.
CCM, held on for quite a while, at very high levels, too.
VOR, as I said, came through from the Vertemati Brothers, so modifying Smets 'Berg, that they went on to make Vertematis, sold the company, re-appeared as VOR. This being a more recent part of Moto History.
Hundreds of manufacturers - no, but, quite a few small makers, did trick 4ts in the years 2ts dominated. As small manufacturers, have always done - making bikes, 2t / 4t, even rotaries. Sadly, the vast majority have gradually disappeared. TM, are a success, Ossa have come back, Jotagas have emerged, so there are still people willing / wanting to 'tilt at windmills'. All, people / companies that I admire.
Let's not get into Maico...................................................... as a Maico owner in the past, I'm so disappointed. Hopefully, I may not be, sometime down the road.
If you're going to put something down in writing, get it right. Impart accurate information - that's what I'm saying.
Far too much BS is put into words in here, at times. Yours, in that post, are far below being BS, just a bit 'sweeping'.
If you've got your knickers in a knot, well, I do apologize. But, as I've said, try to impart correct information, that others may learn from. Sadly, I think, most won't / don't want to learn. Knowledge is power, even in the realm of something as inconsequential as Moto history.
When I get it wrong - as I thought I may have regarding the transition of rules, re GP oversizing allowances, which were something I am / was fuzzy on - I thanked Nom de Guerre
for his correction / help.
Off course Jacky Martens bike did not have a std. Husky 610s bore and stroke - it was a full on Works bike - probably at least 30 lbs lighter than std, and certainly a hell of a lot more powerful and Much better handling. That is not a hard thing to deduce. Pictures / reports of the bike, confirmed that, but they made a hell of an effort, to make it look the same, in essence, as the production bikes - it's a great way to promote your product.
Post by: Stusmoke on June 11, 2012, 07:16:16 AM
@bearorso,
Not sure why you are attacking my post. Everything in my post is correct and agrees with what you said except the larger displacement rules for 4-strokes which originated with the FIM - although you are probably correct that it wasn't originally double displacement. Whatever, fact is there were a lot of 'specials' builders racing in Europe that didn't see our shores that American's rarely heard about after the Japanese Big 4 domination of American Motocross. Even, when KTM dominated the GP's, most people in American motorcycling didn't know that they made other than Enduro bikes.
And Martins 610 was a factory special The Husky 610 was the "base model". I'm pretty confident that it wasn't stock bore and stroke.
If I were Attacking your post, I'd be taking the approach that others do when attacking others. Well, no, I don't get into abuse, as so many seem to do.
I'm pointing out that you had it entirely wrong when you blame the FIM for the 'Oversize Rules'.
Pointing out that 4ts, had to race at the same capacity, until things were influence from the US' bad rules.
The AMA's rules, are the real culprit, and slagging the FIM, firstly / mainly, is the wrong thing to do. They had a litany of stuff ups that are entirely of their own doing.............. Oh, don't mistake me for an FIM supporter, whatever you do. FIM / Lloungos Youthstream , Dorna , Ezpolita, are great at '***king up the sport of motorcycle racing.
That US riders don't know of other brands - well, that's what being insular, and not looking at what is happening in the rest of the world, gets you.
So many US 'fans', seem to be proud that they know sweet FA about motorcycle racing history.
I put my info as correct 'educational' information.
Rickman - as I said, never made a motor - were chassis manufacturers. And they had nothing to do with 70s and onwards high level MX.
CCM, held on for quite a while, at very high levels, too.
VOR, as I said, came through from the Vertemati Brothers, so modifying Smets 'Berg, that they went on to make Vertematis, sold the company, re-appeared as VOR. This being a more recent part of Moto History.
Hundreds of manufacturers - no, but, quite a few small makers, did trick 4ts in the years 2ts dominated. As small manufacturers, have always done - making bikes, 2t / 4t, even rotaries. Sadly, the vast majority have gradually disappeared. TM, are a success, Ossa have come back, Jotagas have emerged, so there are still people willing / wanting to 'tilt at windmills'. All, people / companies that I admire.
Let's not get into Maico...................................................... as a Maico owner in the past, I'm so disappointed. Hopefully, I may not be, sometime down the road.
If you're going to put something down in writing, get it right. Impart accurate information - that's what I'm saying.
Far too much BS is put into words in here, at times. Yours, in that post, are far below being BS, just a bit 'sweeping'.
If you've got your knickers in a knot, well, I do apologize. But, as I've said, try to impart correct information, that others may learn from. Sadly, I think, most won't / don't want to learn. Knowledge is power, even in the realm of something as inconsequential as Moto history.
When I get it wrong - as I thought I may have regarding the transition of rules, re GP oversizing allowances, which were something I am / was fuzzy on - I thanked Nom de Guerre
for his correction / help.
Off course Jacky Martens bike did not have a std. Husky 610s bore and stroke - it was a full on Works bike - probably at least 30 lbs lighter than std, and certainly a hell of a lot more powerful and Much better handling. That is not a hard thing to deduce. Pictures / reports of the bike, confirmed that, but they made a hell of an effort, to make it look the same, in essence, as the production bikes - it's a great way to promote your product.
People like you are really beginning to push my buttons. Disagree by all means, you don't have to go and blatantly call someone a bullshit artist. I feel like I'm dealing with a bunch of ten year olds.
Does it bother you that a 17 year old guy has more maturity than you?
Call me a hypocrite? I wouldn't need to stoop to that if people were just nice to others. Its not a hard concept
Post by: TMKIWI on June 11, 2012, 09:13:56 AM
Why do you feel you need to jump in and have a say. ?
VBS & bearorso are big boys and can look after themselves.
Chill out and dial it back a bit will you.
There has been far too much bullshit around here lately. And NO this is not directed only at you.
While I am at it. This is directed at everyone.
Think before you post. There is far too many crap replies to people who are having bike issues.
There are plenty of experienced guys on here who can help.
Don't post what you may have heard from Brother/cousin/uncle etc.
Bad information is just that. We can all learn something if the correct info is posted instead of reading heresay crap.
So if you don't know don't post.
If you want to take the piss or have a little wind up that is encouraged.
But no more attacks please.P.S. Yes i am pissed off with teenages at the moment. Long story.
Post by: VintageBlueSmoke on June 11, 2012, 09:46:38 AM
'The Production rule' (the group of rules known as) were very much an AMA construct that had far reaching effects on motorcycling.
Post by: Stusmoke on June 11, 2012, 11:07:15 AM
Are you here to shit stir Stu.? What bearorso said is how you debate. Re-read his posts.
Why do you feel you need to jump in and have a say. ?
VBS & bearorso are big boys and can look after themselves.
Chill out and dial it back a bit will you.
There has been far too much bullshit around here lately. And NO this is not directed only at you.
While I am at it. This is directed at everyone.
Think before you post. There is far too many crap replies to people who are having bike issues.
There are plenty of experienced guys on here who can help.
Don't post what you may have heard from Brother/cousin/uncle etc.
Bad information is just that. We can all learn something if the correct info is posted instead of reading heresay crap.
So if you don't know don't post.
If you want to take the piss or have a little wind up that is encouraged.
P.S. Yes i am pissed off with teenages at the moment. Long story.
Ok first off: How in the name of christ is defending someone else from that sort of shit "shit stiring?"
Also, I accidentally quoted the wrong bearoso post, I meant his first one saying: if you're going to write something, make sure its right. That was the one I was referring to I think it was uncalled for aggression.
Why do I feel the need to jump in and have a say? Wow... god thats a real head scratcher... Maybe cos thats the purpose of a Forum? Lol
That is NOT how someone debates something. It might be in federal parliament but its NOT how it needs to be done, not with civilized people.
Chill out? Uhhh you're the one having a go? yeah that sounds about right.
I don't post on technical things unless it is actually something I have genuine advice for. You said it was directed at everyone which I assume includes me.
So you've got a problem with teenagers... how about the fact that you're acting like one? Randomly attacking me just cos I'm a teenager. Sounds like the thugs that haunt my local shopping centre and swear/throw garbage at random passing people.
Post by: TotalNZ on June 13, 2012, 09:13:18 AM
I didn't see any problem with their debate. You coming in all guns blazing is what's stirring it up.
Just saying..
Post by: Stusmoke on June 13, 2012, 09:27:02 AM
Read that last post by VBS stu. He really didn't care, and prob didn't need sticking up for.
I didn't see any problem with their debate. You coming in all guns blazing is what's stirring it up.
Just saying..
Defending was a very poor word. I shouldn't have used that its not even close to what I meant. What I meant was calling someone out on their crap.
I felt it was uncalled for aggression. Bearoso charged in sword in hand, that was really crap. Completely unnecessary. What stirred ME up, was Kiwis comment.
Post by: SachsGS on June 13, 2012, 03:42:13 PM
Post by: nom de guerre on June 13, 2012, 04:11:58 PM
Post by: Stusmoke on June 14, 2012, 08:39:43 AM
it is rather comical how far off track these threads get.... Current US Nat eligible bikes and Jacky Martens '93 Husky in any engine configuration being mentioned... ah, the internet....
I've often thought the same thing hey. In a recent thread we managed to get off topic to the different countries we've "visited"... I can't even remember what the original topic was...