1990 - 92 Honda CBR600F2s are legal in LW 40 and Thunderbike. If an F2 is legal in LW 40 what is the logic behind not allowing an F2 in LWSS LWSB and/or LWGP?
Probabaly in LWF40 because that class doesnt count for championship points.
Thunderbike because of the age of teh bike and Thunderbike used to be Heavyweight Sportsman which mainly was olderbikes lik F2's, Hurricanes, Interceptors, FZ600's, GPZ's and the likes.
because to F2 is too slow, it will get in the way to all the +100 hp buell's, bmw's and ducati's. lightwieght class is for liter bikes!!! duh!
:lmao:
Quote from: Racingxtc7 on October 02, 2006, 01:21:22 AM
because to F2 is too slow, it will get in the way to all the +100 hp buell's, bmw's and ducati's. lightwieght class is for liter bikes!!! duh!
Jeff makes an interesting point. There are not too many classes for a small displacement motorcycle anymore. To run in ultra lightweight you need to have a 750 air-cooled Duc. LWSS is going to be over run with SS-1000cc Ducs. Wait, wait, wait, I am starting to see a pattern here.... Ducs are taking over the lightweight classes with heavy weight bikes. Our current rule structure is eliminating real lightweight bikes, or at least rendering them uncompetitive. I think that stinks.
1000SS Ducati's were introduced in 2003. Why are they suddenly going to take over now, did something change?
They are discontinued for 2007, BTW, so all you "LW invaders," good luck finding one.
I am just speculating. I have races against a few of them this year, and am very impressed with their performance against an SV
Quote from: xseal on October 02, 2006, 05:27:28 PM
1000SS Ducati's were introduced in 2003. Why are they suddenly going to take over now, did something change?
They are discontinued for 2007, BTW, so all you "LW invaders," good luck finding one.
Ducati is likely going to pay contingency for the Sport1000 in 2007 as well now that the SS1000 has been discontinued, and you can purchase them on the same race program from Ducati as the SS was available on. Just doesn't have full bodywork on it, but most of those "in the know" feel that the Sport chassis is even better than the SS for track use. Belly pans are already available to make them race-legal. I rode a Sport (actually the Paul Smart model) at the track last week and was very impressed. Personally, I think the new Ninja650R could be the dominant bike in the LW class once there are some more serious power mods available for it. It's already competitive from my experience with only 69HP as far as running lap times with the SV's, the chassis is quite a bit better than the SV as every SV racer who has ridden mine has said. There has just been very little development done on it this year, so things like hotter cams and piston kits are not available yet for the superbike classes.
In my region the LW classes are SV650 IROC races. Wouldn't a few F2s make it a little more interesting.
I really like the LW classes but being a Honda motorcycle dealer my only option currently is a Hawk GT which is hard to find and not competitive. I race an F2 in LW 40 and the bike is competitive but not dominate to the SV650s.
Guy,
Is change and new applications of technology in racing a bad thing (if you can call an air cooled 2 valve head "new" technology)? Let me find my soap box and do some preaching.
First point:
If you want a spec SV class go race WERA - that is almost exactly what they have. If you like the CCS class structure, either live with it on your SV or figure out what you can do to have the best bike allowed under the rules (either modify what you have or buy something new, -whatever - the choice is yours).
Second:
Historically the LW class was all about FZR400's and Hawk GT's. The Hawk was "allowed" in the LW class despite the increased engine size as it had a 3 valve head and the two bikes were reasonably competitive. Suzuki built the SV 650 with a water cooled 4 valve head and took over the class. The Hawk and FZR400 riders complained (based on the 4 valve vs. 3 valve head design) and were told to shut up and buy an SV if they wanted to be competitive because it was allowed in the rules of the class.
Now you have the liquid cooled, 4 valve head Suzuki in stock form at a disadvantage in power output to the air cooled 2 valve Ducati's and the SV riders are complaining. Don't you see the irony here?
In that vein, if you want to go back in time - AHRMA and WERA do vintage racing, there are no 1000SS classes in true vintage racing (of course the SV is allowed either so you need to find a different weapon of choice)...
third point:
I still believe that in full superbike specs at the same cost an SV, a Ducati 1000 and a Buel will be in the same neighborhood. In terms of development the SV riders have had more time to fully explore what the bike can do and the aftermarket is very deep. The problem is a crank that can't hold up reliably as you start getting to the 100 hp level.
The 1000DS is just an evolution of the 900 SS engines anyway. Ducati developed the engine, took out the week points and made it better out of the box. In the old days with a lot of tinkering, parts, time and effort you could get the 900SS engine to where the 1000 is so - just not that many bothered so why wasn't it an issue then? If Suzuki fixes their crank problem so you can reliably put more power the the engine - will we be able to cry foul? Did everyone complain when buel increased the engine size from 900 to 1200? What about if the SV becomes a 700 stock vs a 650?
Last point:
The rule structure if the rule structure. The Middle Weight and Unlimited guys are fairly used to needing to upgrade every 2-3 years to stay competitive. Its just a fluke that the SV has remained top dog for as long as it has with little competition. Just because old bikes are less competitive doesn't mean the rules should change so the old bikes stay at the top. If that's the case, the MW class rules would be written so that my 1992 F2 would still be competitive as a MW bike rather than just being primarily a Thunderbike class weapon.
Frankly - if the other bikes are so much better - buy one.
Racing is not about being "fair" to older bikes as they become obsolete. Racing is about the organization (in this case CCS) setting some rules that stay consistent and the manufacturers (to some extent) and the racers (to a larger extent) figuring out the best mix of cost, power, reliability and handling that allows them to win under the rules.
George
CCS #773
Lightweight class assasin on my "cheater" 1000 cc Ducati
F2's in lightweight...
Again, same topic, different year.
In the early 90's, decent supersport F2's made 90+ HP. If we want to use Blackhawk as an example, the fastest F2 times were in the high 14's. By 2001/2002, times on current GSXR's and R6's dropped that time to the upper mid 13's. The track was unchanged during that time.
In 2003, we raced on the new surface, and because of the extra grip, times dropped two seconds pretty much overnight. In April of 2003, 600's were running in the 13 range in nearly freezing temperatures.
There is no reason why a well set up, well ridden CBR600F2 in supersport trim couldn't run 1:12's at Blackhawk Farms Raceway. I don't know of any current lightweight superbikes at Blackhawk that do those kind of times, and there are the machinery and riders available to exploit good times.
HHMMM, 400lbs 90hp bike can run 1:12s at blackhawk? So.... why aren't any of the buell racers running 1:12s? They even have the huge advantage of have more than twice the torque. I even know of a guy who won 7 national championships last year who rides a 350ish lbs 90ish horsepower bike and he only runs 1:14s at blackhawk.
Reasons "TO" let the old school middleweight f2 in lightweight:
1) its of simular wieght and power as current lightweights
2) it would INCREASE grid size(more money for CCS) because many racers show up EVERY weekend with them.
Reasons "NOT TO" let the old school middleweight f2 in lightweight:
1) I dont want to
2) I don't like money
Personally, I would like to see F2's allowed in Lightweight GP and GT Lights - give them two more class to race where they can be competitive in addition to Thunderbike. It also puts another type of bike on the grid which makes it more interesting and makes the grids bigger. The 250 GP bikes are already legal in the LWGP and GT Lights - the LW bikes are at a disadvantage to a true GP bike with a good rider at almost all tracks. The only tracks I see the F2's having a really big advantage at would be Road America and Daytona.
I guess here is another side of the issue though - conceptually, is it the obligation of the sanctioning organization to make sure you have a lot of classes where your out-dated and obsolete bike can be competitive, or is it your obligation as a racer to find a way to be compeititive with equipment that complies with the rules as they stand?
I love my F2 and had a great time running it in Thunderbike this year but, in order to run more races I bought something that was LW legal under the existing set of rules rather than waiting for the rules to change.
All those that want to let the F2's in can send a letter to CCS. I already sent Eric an email proposing the rule change and giving him my logic about why I think it makes sense. I don't think their minds will be swayed but the more people that put the suggestion forward the better a chance there is that they will make the change. If the rules change and F2's are let in - I will happily race against them!
George
Quote from: George_Linhart on October 03, 2006, 10:45:23 AM
Guy,
Is change and new applications of technology in racing a bad thing (if you can call an air cooled 2 valve head "new" technology)? Let me find my soap box and do some preaching.
First point:
If you want a spec SV class go race WERA - that is almost exactly what they have. If you like the CCS class structure, either live with it on your SV or figure out what you can do to have the best bike allowed under the rules (either modify what you have or buy something new, -whatever - the choice is yours).
Second:
Historically the LW class was all about FZR400's and Hawk GT's. The Hawk was "allowed" in the LW class despite the increased engine size as it had a 3 valve head and the two bikes were reasonably competitive. Suzuki built the SV 650 with a water cooled 4 valve head and took over the class. The Hawk and FZR400 riders complained (based on the 4 valve vs. 3 valve head design) and were told to shut up and buy an SV if they wanted to be competitive because it was allowed in the rules of the class.
Now you have the liquid cooled, 4 valve head Suzuki in stock form at a disadvantage in power output to the air cooled 2 valve Ducati's and the SV riders are complaining. Don't you see the irony here?
In that vein, if you want to go back in time - AHRMA and WERA do vintage racing, there are no 1000SS classes in true vintage racing (of course the SV is allowed either so you need to find a different weapon of choice)...
third point:
I still believe that in full superbike specs at the same cost an SV, a Ducati 1000 and a Buel will be in the same neighborhood. In terms of development the SV riders have had more time to fully explore what the bike can do and the aftermarket is very deep. The problem is a crank that can't hold up reliably as you start getting to the 100 hp level.
The 1000DS is just an evolution of the 900 SS engines anyway. Ducati developed the engine, took out the week points and made it better out of the box. In the old days with a lot of tinkering, parts, time and effort you could get the 900SS engine to where the 1000 is so - just not that many bothered so why wasn't it an issue then? If Suzuki fixes their crank problem so you can reliably put more power the the engine - will we be able to cry foul? Did everyone complain when buel increased the engine size from 900 to 1200? What about if the SV becomes a 700 stock vs a 650?
Last point:
The rule structure if the rule structure. The Middle Weight and Unlimited guys are fairly used to needing to upgrade every 2-3 years to stay competitive. Its just a fluke that the SV has remained top dog for as long as it has with little competition. Just because old bikes are less competitive doesn't mean the rules should change so the old bikes stay at the top. If that's the case, the MW class rules would be written so that my 1992 F2 would still be competitive as a MW bike rather than just being primarily a Thunderbike class weapon.
Frankly - if the other bikes are so much better - buy one.
Racing is not about being "fair" to older bikes as they become obsolete. Racing is about the organization (in this case CCS) setting some rules that stay consistent and the manufacturers (to some extent) and the racers (to a larger extent) figuring out the best mix of cost, power, reliability and handling that allows them to win under the rules.
George
CCS #773
Lightweight class assasin on my "cheater" 1000 cc Ducati
Sorry George, my comment was not meant to offend, it was supposed to be a little tongue in cheek. You are right about buying the bike that is best suited for the class. If rules stay the same, and things work out the way I would like them to, I will be riding a Duc. I never referred to them as cheater bikes, They are legal in the current rules structure and that is that. I do however feel that the places to run a small displacement bike have disappeared in CCS (this is due in part to the SV). That was the reason for my comment. The lack of classes for small bikes is probably related more to the racers than CCS, for the most part we choose not to run small bikes because they do not seem to have the same creditability as riding a middleweight bike. CCS restructure the classes to get more people on the track generating income for the sanctioning body. I personally think it might be more difficult to go fast on a slow bike. ( I am sure that comment will come back to haunt me.)
I for one, do not want a spec class at all, I love to work on my bike. If the rules were too restrictive, I would loose some interest in racing. I am sure that when the SV came around all of the same comments were made by the real lightweight bike owners. So you are right evolution is a good thing, depending upon which side of the rules you are currently on. I totally agree that all of these bikes will be very equal in superbike trim. I am not so sure about in supersport trim. I guess that we will see next year.
As far as the F2 is concerned, Let them in GTL and GP, It would be fun!! That is one of the things that I like about CCS thunder bike, many different bikes that do certain things better than others. LWGP should definitely be dominated by 250GP bikes, and I do not think an F2 would pose any threat to a good rider on a 250.
Guy - no issues - I just felt like getting on a soap box. :blahblah:
I was poking fun of myself as well calling it a "cheater" bike (the power is nice though).
I have been on the other side of the argument more often than not as I tend to get emotionally attached to my obsolete toys!
George Linhart
CCS #773
Quote from: George_Linhart on October 03, 2006, 05:49:42 PM
Guy - no issues - I just felt like getting on a soap box. :blahblah:
I was poking fun of myself as well calling it a "cheater" bike (the power is nice though).
I have been on the other side of the argument more often than not as I tend to get emotionally attached to my obsolete toys!
George Linhart
CCS #773
Cool!!! I was begining to think that I should not speak my opinions out here anymore. I seem to have the ability to piss people off quickly. That is not what I am trying to do. Just sticking my .02 in that is all.
Quote from: Racingxtc7 on October 03, 2006, 01:24:32 PM
HHMMM, 400lbs 90hp bike can run 1:12s at blackhawk? So.... why aren't any of the buell racers running 1:12s? They even have the huge advantage of have more than twice the torque. I even know of a guy who won 7 national championships last year who rides a 350ish lbs 90ish horsepower bike and he only runs 1:14s at blackhawk.
Reasons "TO" let the old school middleweight f2 in lightweight:
1) its of simular wieght and power as current lightweights
2) it would INCREASE grid size(more money for CCS) because many racers show up EVERY weekend with them.
Reasons "NOT TO" let the old school middleweight f2 in lightweight:
1) I dont want to
2) I don't like money
Ed's done 13's. After a few years of doing this, Ed has lost some of his reaction time that he had 20 years ago. If we could make him younger, he could go faster with the skills that he has. Does Ed's SV even weigh 350?
Quote from: Super Dave on October 03, 2006, 08:12:59 PM
Ed's done 13's. After a few years of doing this, Ed has lost some of his reaction time that he had 20 years ago. If we could make him younger, he could go faster with the skills that he has. Does Ed's SV even weigh 350?
No
Quote from: Racingxtc7 on October 03, 2006, 01:24:32 PM
HHMMM, 400lbs 90hp bike can run 1:12s at blackhawk? So.... why aren't any of the buell racers running 1:12s?
Ummm. Because we're all old and fat?
Oh wait, some of us are just fat. Or old.
Quote from: Super Dave on October 03, 2006, 08:12:59 PM
Ed's done 13's. After a few years of doing this, Ed has lost some of his reaction time that he had 20 years ago. If we could make him younger, he could go faster with the skills that he has. Does Ed's SV even weigh 350?
I have no doubt that Ed can still do 13s at Blackhawk.
He just doesn't have to.
From the responses it sounds like most racers are OK with F2s in the lightweight classes.
So far the only reason I have heard that sounds likely is that CCS will not allow F2s in LW classes due to advancement points for amatures.
Quote from: jarelj on October 02, 2006, 09:09:43 PM
Ducati is likely going to pay contingency for the Sport1000 in 2007 as well now that the SS1000 has been discontinued, and you can purchase them on the same race program from Ducati as the SS was available on. Just doesn't have full bodywork on it, but most of those "in the know" feel that the Sport chassis is even better than the SS for track use. Belly pans are already available to make them race-legal. I rode a Sport (actually the Paul Smart model) at the track last week and was very impressed.
I think a bunch of Paul Smart replicas would be very cool to see on the track ... mandatory open megaphone exhausts.
George & Guy:
I can understand you running the Duc but don't you feel you've lost a bit of credibility as a rider because if/when you win, you (and others) will be asking, did I win because my skills have improved or because I've got a faster mount. To me the attraction of club racing is the competition and the unwritten rule that this isn't the type of racing where $$$ rule. I was pretty disapointed after talking with Marshall by the fact the he felt that in order to be competitive in MW, he had to drop $2000 a weekend on tires. So, is the winner the person with the deeper pockets?
It is really about the rider. If the Duc. is that much faster than the SV then the obvious question that arises is whether they should be racing against each other in the same class. I suspect that they are pretty close when it comes to power/weight ratio. We do know that the Duc is almost twice the cost of an SV...
Given that there are so many SVs out there, I'd love a class where we race these suckers stock or with very strict mod. guidelines. This is the purest form of racing - who can go fastest on the same machinery.
Steve.
F2's in LW classes :cheers:
I would love to run my F2 in any LW class.
So I can get rid of the GS. And the GS is slow but the track time is
all good. Cause I can only run the F2 in thunderbike without getting
run over. I say LW for the F2, ED KEY will still win! :biggrin:
Steve,
No and NO!
If you want a spec SV class - go race with WERA, they have almost exactly this class. However, if you don't think some people spend a lot of money on "Legal" SS engine builds, suspension modifications and going through tires in WERA, you are kidding yourself.
Isn't part of the skill of being a club racer reading the rules to figure out what are the best bikes for the class and then setting it up the bike to maximize its performance within the scope of said rules? Is it wrong that some people like to run superbike rules rather than SS or should we just make every weekend a double sprint SS only event? Win or lose I like the sport and spend my money as I want - and where/when I have spent money on motorcycles and parts really doesn't directly equate with with when and where I have won or even placed well. Also, winning doesn't directy relate to the fun I have in the sport - nothing beats a good dice to the finish line or an incredible & smooth pass irrespective of if its for the win or if its for 25th place.
Personally, I like series with different bikes, each of which has a different balances of power and handling. If one is clearly better than the others, that bike eventually will become commonplace (as happened when the SV replaced the FZR400's and Honda Hawks). My Duc has more HP than a stock SV but a well build SV should easily get there. The Duc weighs more than the SV stock so there is some dis-advantage. Another dis-advantage is that I can't swap parts or find spares as easy as an SV racer can - this requires more preparation on my part to do well.
Frankly, I have ridden SVs before - nice bike and I have nothing against them. I just don't want one for a variety of reasons including that everyone else has one and it doesn't inspire any passion in me - it does everything you ask, it is a very forgiving platform and is good for racing. The Duc seems to me to be a bit harder to set-up and more difficult to ride fast, but done right it is very rewarding.
Do I like to win - yes. Do I need to win in order to keep racing - no. I really don't mind being beaten as it gives me motivation to go faster.
For what it is worth I have less into the Ducati than I recently saw being asked for a superbike SV listed on the board and I know I have way less into than what people have spent to convert stock SVs into race bikes. Further, the sum total of tires I have purchased between the last 2 races (Autobahn practice day & racing + BHF racing) is one set (albeit I was lucky to have an old set of used rains on hand that held up through all the wet races). I don't think you can say that I "bought" the races I won this year by throwing money at them...
So back to the topic at hand - what's your opinin on letting a cheap, used 15 year old Honda CBR600F2 that costs way less than an SV race in the LW classes for those opposed to throwing money into a newer, modern V-twin racebike?
George
Quote from: SVR6#231 on October 06, 2006, 01:43:58 PM
George & Guy:
It is really about the rider. If the Duc. is that much faster than the SV then the obvious question that arises is whether they should be racing against each other in the same class. I suspect that they are pretty close when it comes to power/weight ratio. We do know that the Duc is almost twice the cost of an SV...
Given that there are so many SVs out there, I'd love a class where we race these suckers stock or with very strict mod. guidelines. This is the purest form of racing - who can go fastest on the same machinery.
Steve.
This is wrong thinking. Buells are taking over the LW class from SVs, not Ducs. Racing remains 80% rider and 20% bike. There will ALWAYS be people with more $$ and better equipment than you, and there will ALWAYs be people with less $$ and worse equipment (my hats off to the guys that can only afford take offs and reverse their tires b/c they can't afford not to).
The other race org has much stricter rules, if you want SV-spec, that is as close as you can get. Ed Key has an SV built to our rules (I presume he enjoys tinkering to optimize the bike almost as much as racing it), and its way faster than any Duc I've seen and 99% of Buells.
Seriously, getting beat by an air cooled 1000cc v-valve bike ... sounds to me like the credibility problem is coming up with excuses for losing to George (b/c its not the bike), the engine design is so old its closer to a vintage bike than a modern race bike. Besides, if its "all about the competition," why do you care if George is winning.
Enough silliness. More different bikes make for an interesting and competitive class. Some of the fastest Ducs aren't the "new" 1000s, but 15 year old built 900s. I wonder what the excuse is for losing to those.
Oh ... and I'm for letting the F2s into at least the LWGP/GTL classes, ... I'll let greater minds figure out SS and SB, but it certainly seems like a reasonable request that would help with grid diversity.
In in for letting the F2 race in GTL and LW GP along with my lowly '91 FZR600. This is old news which I tried last year with my petition. The powers at be just won't budge.
Mark
Quote from: xseal on October 08, 2006, 09:00:02 AM
This is wrong thinking. Buells are taking over the LW class from SVs, not Ducs.
Isn't that related to the fact that Buell put up money for contingency?
And back to the F2...
Is there anyone else other than me that remembers what happened a few years ago at Daytona with an old Supersport F2 in Thunderbike?
Quote from: Super Dave on October 09, 2006, 09:34:52 AM
Isn't that related to the fact that Buell put up money for contingency?
And back to the F2...
Is there anyone else other than me that remembers what happened a few years ago at Daytona with an old Supersport F2 in Thunderbike?
ASRA Thunder is power to weight controlled. Barny beat everyones ass at Daytona because he is a very good rider. I do not see anything wrong with letting the F2s in lwgp. Not sure how it would work out in LWSS or SB. I would think that in SB trim someone could get 115hp out of one, but it might have a short fuse. Dean Hagemann ran a stock one in Tbike year before last, and got into the top 3 several times against Ed and Lacys SB SVs, both around the mid to upper 90hp range.
Barney is a good rider. But he stunk up T-bike badly with the win that liquid cooled bikes like the F2 have different power to weight ratios following that.
CCS doesn't have dyno enforcement. I think the F2's will mess up lightweight a lot. Am I one of the few that has raced one? If CCS puts it in lightweight, I'm buying.
If the F2s are too fast for standard lightweight classes than isn't wrong to allow F2s in to the old men class of LW40?
Is the F2 an offical cheater bike of the LW40??
That would be my opinion. Great option. :cheers:
I just don't agree that the F2 is a cheater bike in LW F40. I have been racing the LW F40 class and Thunderbike for the last three years competing in the Florida region. I ride a '91 FZR600 in these classes. When I first started racing it was on a bone stock machine. in the last year after 50K plus miles the motor needed a rebuild. I did so with some speed goodies in the form of a wiseco kit and other general mods.
I have raced against Bob Cole's Ducati 1000 (won Daytona this past March), Scott Robertson's Superbike SV and SS SV (LW F40 AM National Champ), Andy Hamblin's Buell, Tim Hall's Buell (reportedly 108 hp), Joe Bruce's stock F2. Rob Burokers Superbike SV (100 hp Prieto bike that Barnes rode at Daytona).
I have found on the track that the stock FZR600 is a close match for the stock SV, where the SV pulls stronger out of corners but the FZR600 comes back at the upper rpm range. The F2 is just a strong runner in all areas with the FZR lacking in tire choice.
The modified FZR630 is closely matched to the Robertson SB SV and no match for the Prieto SV. The Ducati, and Buell pull away from me on the straights and I must rely on luck and my best attempt at maintaining corner speed to match their speed. As it goes my competition generally have a lower lap time. I am only competitive by getting a good start (usually first into T1) and with luck I will amke good headway through traffic (the HW F40 riders grid in front).
The same bikes and competiros that I race against in LW F40 and Thunderbike are also the same guys competing in GTL and the LW Classes. I would go on to say that the F2 or the FZR600 should only qualify for the modified classes and not the Supersport.
Mark
Agreed, the FZR lacks tire choices for the stock wheels. It was it's problem in the early 90's when the F2 arrived.
But one year, we watched a CCS race at Daytona with Larry Schwartzbach and Tom Kipp...Larry's FZR pummeled the F2 on the banking. I know that my Supersport F2 made 93 RWHP on a Dynojet dyno in 1993 at the beginning of the year. FZR's, well prepared made more.
F2's did everything well, and that's why they won more races in their era.
Dave,
I don't doubt what you say. I am only going with what I know through my own experience.
I wish I had your F2.
I did have my FZR630 dynoed at Prieto and was told I was a tad shy of the 100hp mark. I was told in comparison with the Superbike SV the FZR had less power. I am not sure what dyno they have.
I believe that the F2 and FZR are a pretty good match with probably the engine builder making a big difference. I do know that Joe Bruce being heavier on his F2 and me being lighter on my FZR were a pretty equal match in acceleration and top speed, this on stock motored bikes.
I do think that the F2 and FZR are a good match within the Thunderbikeand LW F40 classes and against the likes of current LW class bikes (Ducati, SV, Buell, and even the BMW).
Maybe I am asking the wrong question.
What is the difference in class standards between the LW classes and LW40 other than age restrictions and advancement points? The rule book as well as the last post indicate that F2s should not be allowed in the LW classes but are OK in LW40. Do olders riders not ride F2s as well as younger riders so any advantage the F2s would have is LW classes would be eliminated by older riders in LW40? I know I am be silly here, but really what is the difference in LW 40 and the other LW classes??
If I have read the info posted in this thread correctly the issue is that LW F40 allows SuperBike prep rules while allowing the F2 into the LW classes would put it at an unfair advantage in the SuperSport classes. In prep level the LW F40 is different than the General LW classes.
Doesn't LW F40 allow Thunderbikes? F2 is allowed in Thunderbike. Thunderbike also allows 1990 GSXR750's, which make about as much power in Supersport trim as a current 600.
LW F40 have essentially adopted Thunderbike rules.
Thunderbike is essentially Superbike rules for the older bikes. I have raced against Donny Wrights ZX7R of the early '90 that reportedly had 109 rwhp.
Thunderbike was Heavyweight Sportsman.
One of the differences between the LW classes and LW F40 that I can see in the rulebook is that there is a larger displacement limit for the LW F40 as compared to say LW SB. A twin in LW SB can be up to 700cc and in LW F40 that same twin can be 750cc if I remember correctly.
I still would like to see F2's in LW SB and GTL.
Mark
My 1990 GSXR750 had 114RWHP on a Dynojet dyno in 1991 with a valve job, cam timing, and new rings after a ball hone only.
Wow, that is some good power from a bike such as that.
I guess in the end there has to be a cut-off and the F2 or FZR is in that cut-off. If you are on an F2 or FZR you will have to ride your ass off to be at the front.
Mark
For Thunderbike, the non water cooled GSXR is legal... 114 wasn't great power in 1990/1991, but it was decent. The GSXR didn't handle as well as the F2, but with some of the opportunities available today, yeah, it could be made to work.
That's also a two valve head correct? there is a fella in the Florida region that runs one occasionally. My FZR630 is a little down on power to it but I get him going into the corners. I can't imagine how it would be if he did motor-work.
I think that the F2 is probably a better platform to start with than my FZR with cost always being a factor. I bought my FZR for $1500 and I have made minor improvements totaling about $3500. For me at the time it was what I could afford. My weekends usually cost around $500 for everything.
Mark
No, all GSXR's have been four valve heads. But the old ones were not water cooled.
I've seen race prepared F2's in the $1000 to $1800 range. Not sure how good they are, but it's a platform.
good points by both of you. and i think that being able to play around with your bike and be creative and still legal is part of the fun of racing. this is racing thats whats its all about. as long as were all having fun.
~Jim #444
"Its just a fluke that the SV has remained top dog for as long as it has with little competition"
Hmmmm?
I didn't see to many on the top spot in the LW classes. Must have missed them.
:)
Happy friday!
The lightweight market isn't so performance driven.
At one time, the RZ350 was king. The EX500 came and gave some competition. Then the FZR400 was brought to the US market, and it was generally the bike to have.
One thing to recognize is that Suzuki still offers contingency money for SV's. It's a good bike for pretty much every club racer.
I can see that it would make sense to run one of the popular bikes, but don't you get a kick out of seeing one of the old bikes (F2, FZR, GSXR) run with and sometimes even beat the new bikes? The contigency money can be helpful and would probably be a smart move. What year bike would I need to purchase in order to receive Suzuki contingency?
An F2 just can't run against the new bikes competitively. Maybe on occasion in the AM group but certainly not the EX. So why not have it run against the modified SV?
There have been many that give me the advice not to run the SV even when they are using one. Their thinking? If I started racing an SV there is a good chance I would be able to run with them.
Mark
Generally, manufacturer contingency is for select expert races for bikes of the current and previous model year.
F2's good bike. Insert a good rider on a well set up bike, and it should be more than fast enough to pummel just about anyone on an SV. But the set up must be exploited. And the rider needs to be properly competent with it.
I raced a CB400F against FZR400's, 650 Hawks, etc. Yeah, it's fun to beat them.
Same goes for racing a 125 GP bike.
I have in my stable a '90 FZR400 with a stock motor and a '94 RS125. I am attempting to get a grip of the 125 and how to ride it proficiently. Both of these bikes are way of in the performance department as compared to the competition.
The FZR400 competes in the UL classes but it is no match for the Motards or the Ducati 750. It also races against the SV.
The 125 is too old and outdated for the current newer 125.
I always must get back to reality and why I race. I love doing it and sometimes the little guy wins.
Mark
Quote from: Super Dave on October 03, 2006, 11:03:30 AM
F2's in lightweight...
Again, same topic, different year.
In the early 90's, decent supersport F2's made 90+ HP.
You gotta consider though that the Ducati 1000 makes 93-96 hp as per the MotoCorse shop of Chris Boy. Just ask Jason Edmonds AM #17.
http://www.ccsforum.com/index.php/topic,14936.0.html
Mark
I want to see 50cc pocket bike races pulling another person behind on roller blades.
that's just my two cents.
(https://www.ccsforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi113.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fn235%2Fcourtjesterracing1%2F100_1211.jpg&hash=af467225b59296f21b3e7e19824bba997e0aecdb)
hey bartz! thanx for the props. ahhh! what a fine subject we have here! i last raced the f2 in oct. of 04. did 17"s with a set of greens from barber team challenge race that me & danny rode in. is dave correct with someone being able to run 12"s at blackhawk? most likely yes. but as he said it needs to be set up and putting out some good numbers like prince's f2 had. i don't think the average jo like myself really wants to build a time bomb to go have fun. so with that said i believe an f2 should be allowed in some but not all lw classes. i think top 5 midwest lwt riders would agree that for an f2 in ss or sbk is probably not a good choice. but gtl and gp i would think so. so lets talk sportsters!!!
Quote from: moto dino on October 28, 2006, 08:09:21 PM
hey bartz! thanx for the props. ahhh! what a fine subject we have here! i last raced the f2 in oct. of 04. did 17"s with a set of greens from barber team challenge race that me & danny rode in. is dave correct with someone being able to run 12"s at blackhawk? most likely yes. but as he said it needs to be set up and putting out some good numbers like prince's f2 had. i don't think the average jo like myself really wants to build a time bomb to go have fun. so with that said i believe an f2 should be allowed in some but not all lw classes. i think top 5 midwest lwt riders would agree that for an f2 in ss or sbk is probably not a good choice. but gtl and gp i would think so. so lets talk sportsters!!!
Blow the dust of that bike Dean, Lets go racen!!! I need a rabbit to drag me up to speed, your my hausenpheffer ( I am 100% sure I did not spell that correctly) buddy!!!