Guys - I think you are all barking up the wrong tree. LW class rules should not be bastardized to "fit" whatever bike you have that isn't competitive in another class and isn't legal in LW now. We should not use the LW classes to try and create a new low cost class, nor should we be using it to morph into a new "classics" class (AKA - dumping ground for old MW class equipment). Look, I am sorry that the 748 isn't an effective MW bike anymore. Also, no, a pre 1992 CBR600 or FZR600 isn't going to win any MW championships - however, I don't think it is a good thing to transform the LW classes into a classic MW class . Lets just think this through further and let me know where does it stop? If you say 11 year old MW class bikes can step down to LW, then you have to allow the 1999 Yamaha R-6, in 2014 you will have the 2003 R-6 legal - that is way better than any modified LW bike that I can imagine... What about heavyweight and Unlimited class bikes - do we let them in if hey are old enough? Do we end up, at some point, letting Ducati 916's and 996's in (and what if somebody finds an old WSB bike and decides to grid up - talk about opening the wallet)?
If you want to mix and match frames and motors - sorry, that is what the GP classes are for. SS and SB should be production based. If you stray from that model, feel free but you have tlo limit yourself tho the GP classes. This would really open up the pandora's box of spending to the moon rather than going the other way around.
Racing isn't cheap. I really believe that however you write the rules somebody will spend more money than you expect to create a class overdog- just look at the $30,000 Bimota's that you are talking about. All these suggestions do is bend the rules from what has been a pretty stable class to benefit a contingent of riders of older machines. Both CCS and WERA LW class rules- while they have a different overall structure - have been respectively stable for at least 7 years now. I don't think that Mongo will argue the fact that WERA is really designed as a spec SV class; where CCS adopted and embraced a bit less restrictive approach with regard to the air cooled engines. One is not necessarily right, the other is not necessarily wrong, they are just different and gives racers a choice.
The one complaint that keeps coming up that I do understand and sympathise with is a desire to try to find a new "budget" or limited expenditure class. I don't think you should try and get there by messing with rules in any one class, least of all LW. Think about it, LW is the only class where many of us can actually benefit from building a motor or really shaving pounds off a bike. I couldn't ride a 200 bhp open class liter bike effectively - I just don't have the skill. Taking an extra 5 lbs off of that same bike won't make any difference either. However, every improvement I make to my superbike spec Ducati 1000SS does make a difference on the track.
If what we are trying to do is create a budget class or make the economics easier for a new racer, how about if we focus on creating a class were the rules are not about engine displacement, but rather are around restricted spending - I have suggested this many times before but bear with me again. the only way to do this is though a "claimer" class. No equipment limitations - only 2 rules - 1) safety per existing rulebook (safety wire, oil containing lower, etc); and, 2) after every race each contestant in the event can "claim" another rider's bike for some specified amount (for argument sake lets say $2,000.00). Think about it, there is no incentive to spend anything over $2,000.00 as if you do it probably will be claimed. It also would bring out some interesting backyard mechanics. There may be some refinement necessary - but it is simple and focused on the point.
I am sure some will disagree -but - lets focus on what problem you are trying to solve and not make the LW class overall worse off for trying to solve a problem that shouldn't be forced upon us.
George
