looks like no f2's in LW but sv650's are now Ultra Light'shttp://www.ccsracing.us/forms/2008/rules/2008%20rule%20change%20requests%20determinations%20v2.pdf (http://www.ccsracing.us/forms/2008/rules/2008%20rule%20change%20requests%20determinations%20v2.pdf)
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
ULW is a superbike class so do the SVs run superbike prep rules?
Wow, Ultralightweight...
Um, that will be interesting. Completely eliminates a class for competitive odd ball bikes. Interesting. I'll wait for the rule book.
If they allow SB prep then domination is now spelled SV.
I wouldn't feel right about entering my SV in ULWSB.
Quote from: Hawk on November 15, 2007, 10:40:33 PM
I wouldn't feel right about entering my SV in ULWSB.
Can I borrow it??
Quote from: dylanfan53 on November 15, 2007, 10:47:23 PM
Can I borrow it?? :kicknuts:
Fixed it for ya. :thumb:
I'll bet in another year you'll be able to run that Harley of yours.
:whine:
looks like FZR400 is finally dead in CCS
Wow... I'm thinking that pushing the SV down to ULWT is a bit premature given that it still dominated most MW events at both AM and EX levels. The only place it did not prevail was @ Daytona. The Buells were not a factor at all however the Ducs are coming on strong to say nothing of the BMWs
FZR's, EX's, Hawks, RZ's... All the former lightweight bikes will be pretty hammered. How about the guys like Palmer & Wright with their 750 Ducati's? They've had the bikes for a long time, and they've raced CCS for a long time.
I thought that's what the former Sportsman classes were for, which were merged into Ultralightweight, older or non common configurations.
Quote from: Super Dave on November 16, 2007, 08:32:12 AM
How about the guys like Palmer & Wright with their 750 Ducati's?
I ran against Palmer at Heartland Park, and that Ducati ate my lunch down the straightaway. I was on a SS SV, but that bike pulled me similar to the fastest Buells entered in the ASRA race. I was real impressed, especially when I learned the bike was eligible for ULWSB. Anyway, I'd be surprised if even a built SV would be that much quicker than his Ducati, but I could be wrong.
I do agree with Dave, it sucks that the oddball bikes are now even that much more outclassed.
Those Ducs are strong but keep in mind they are SB prepped, if you are SS prep then it is not all that difficult to get another 15 HP in a package that will last the season if the SVs are allowed in under SB prep rules.
I just think an awful lot of bikes just got handed their death knell.
I loved racing with the SV guys and hope some of them will still race in the Lwt classes as well or we will not meet min numbers for some of the sponsors contingency. There was times last year we did not make it and this may make that worse.
I'm so mad!! So, so very mad - I think mostly because it was so completely unexpected. Yeah, this is the end for all the little oddball bikes in CCS. :(
I mean, yeah, I know, we had a teeny class with barely any entries, so I should just get some newer machinery and stop my bitching or whatever, but I'm still mad.
We were running ULWSB with LWSS this past season, I was always in the back, so how did stuff shake out in the front? Is that what precipitated this change? I have no fears for Gary and Barney, cos it seems they can hold their own just fine... The old little twins are dead meat with SB prepped SVs though.
Its really nice that I have already spent quite a bit of money on my bike to be somewhat competitive for next year in ULWSB only to find out that SB prepped SV's are now allowed to run in this class. umm, aren't they already quite competitive in LW? F.
maybe i wasn't paying attention or since i am pretty new to all of this i didn't know where to look, but is there a post that mentions "proposed" rule changes prior to them being approved?
You ULWSB guys and gals need to get together, ALL of you, and send a message to CCS ( Eric.Kelcher@ccsracing.us ) loud and clear that you oppose this change. Backlash last year moved the R1200S prevented the R1200S from competing in LWSS. Change is possible if you show management there is a need but you need to make your voices heard.
Like I mentioned, I think I'm as upset as I am, because this was completely unexpected. I'm curious to see what the actual rules will state, and what the prep level of the new bikes allowed in the class will be. I'm *hoping* that they'll be no more than SS spec, and that SB spec SVs will stay in LWSB.
I'm guessing that any of the SV riders that had issues with Buells being LW bikes didn't intend to be dropped down a class, but it still would have been nice to know that this was the route that was being considered.
Edit: Thanks Paul, it's good to know that there may be some recourse.
This is very unexpected. I guess the final decsion will be made when they print the rule books?
Does the SV still hold the lap record at Daytona (AMA course) for the Thunderbike class? And it is now a Ultra light bike? This doesn't make sense. I could understand the argument to not allow the F2 into the Lightweight SS classes and maybe even the LW SB but to make the SV legal for Ultralight SB seems ridiculous. I would have loved to see that SV proposal because the same goes for the F2 into LW.
Dave any comments?
Mark
Why not bump the Buells and Ducs up to MW and allow SB specs? That seems like less of a stretch.
Yep. Don't agree with the direction this is pointing to for LW at all. Going to need 90 - 100HP to play soon?
Unfortunatly I believe the 2 bikes driving this rule change will make the cost of being competitive in LW more than MW. Kind of a change of role.
Which bikes?
I don't know of any place where there is a list of proposals other than just popping them up someplace.
I have proposed running grids by points for years, but I will admit that I became tired of trying to drum up support for a lot of road racing things for a few reasons. One, it's hard to generate support for effective change with riders that rotate out in a matter of two to four years. Second, club racing is what it is. It's participant driven, but it could be better.
I'm still mad that races at Blackhawk Farms Raceway, where there have been four to six rounds of CCS regional racing every year for over ten years, gets no written coverage support. As a CCS operated region, this is what supports a lot of what doesn't make money in the nation.
Back to the approval stuff...
Just stating "approved" doesn't say to much. Until there's an actual list of the new rules structure, things are kind of on the edge. Additionally, there might be other rules that we don't know anything about. For several years, CCS rules for fuel was written in a way that made pump gasoline illegal for CCS competition.
I don't know when we'll see rules, maybe someone from the office would leak and info out, I don't know.
I think LW was pretty stable till the BMW and DUC popped up last year. There was quite a little firestorm about that which ended up seeing the BMW outlawed in LWSS but the current SV riders might consider that this rule change may well find the BMW moving into the LWSS class as well.
Like was mentioned, 95+HP to be able to run in LW? Then what is that going to do to reliability?
Of course the SVs will probably remain competitive in LW for a couple years but the damage to ULW will be done overnight.
Quote from: Hawk on November 16, 2007, 01:09:07 PM
Unfortunatly I believe the 2 bikes driving this rule change will make the cost of being competitive in LW more than MW. Kind of a change of role.
Middleweight bikes are probably the most over-engineered vehicles available today. It makes sense that building competetive machines out of less engineered/refined design is going to be expensive. In the same respect, it follows that engineer/mechanic/tinkerer types are going to be drawn to the LW classes, while the MW classes are (and will continue to be) comprised of less "handy" racers.
I guess I'm biased because I race one of the "cheater" bikes... but if I look only at the results from this year I would be convinced that the SV is the dominate bike because it dominated every class it is legal for!
Obviously, some SV's racers won't be happy until they have a spec. class! Which is what the Ultra-light will become with the inclusion of super-biked SV's
I don't have a ton of history on this topic but.....Moving the SVs to ULWSB doesn't make much sense to me. I have seen them race with Buells and be competitive. Guess what I am saying is that HP doesn't always win races. Understanding that boundaries need to be set. But what, is MOTO-ST going to have a 4th class as well. Or what about a competitive 450 Supermoto, seen them run well, just look at Hallet this year with Eslick.
Oh, yeah, you had to bring up the Supermoto bikes...LOL!
I believe that they are in UlwSB, right? I smell an additional class coming on.
I started racing in ULW and progressed to LW but it had nothing to do with being a tinkerer, I did it because I didn't see jumping into deep end as a logical starting point. For the record I am an SV rider, I oppose the moving of SVs to ULW and while I see the SV slipping in comparison to the current bikes coming into LW I have no problem with that. If you do some searching on this forum you will find that I supported the inclusion of the BMW and DUC in LW last year ( http://www.ccsforum.com/index.php/topic,14589.15.html ) and my position has not changed on that. I point out that the BMW may find it's way into to LWSS ranks to try and motivate the current SV riders to also oppose this rule change as it will not only creat a spec class for the SVs in ULW it will also set the stage for their exit from LW. I'm not looking to push the BMW or the DUC out of LW, I would like to avoid seeing the current ULW class destroyed.
As far as the SV moving to ULWSB, 90HP is easy on a superbike SV while 70 is playing with a live granade for most the the ULWSB croud. I would like to see the ULW crowd given a little warning, some of these guys have spent time and money on bikes that will be annihilated by this move, let them know that this is comming in 2009 and that they should make some decisions.
My 2 cents....
If there was a semantic change in the rule book from "water cooled" to "liquid cooled" it would place BMW where they should be. Since they are "dual cooled".
If I were in ULWSB, I'd be pissed too! Oh yeah, now I am.
I don't think the new BMW was an issue in LW. It wasn't in the parameters, correct? Or was there a slight modification of the cc's for twins from 2006 to 2007.
I don't have my 2007 rulebook handy so this is off the top of my head. The BMW is legal for LWSB, the original ruling last year was that it would be legal in LW but after a considerable debate it was allowed to only run in SB.
I think you can still race up a class. I can't wait to beat a Beemer on a now UL bike. :biggrin:
Yes you can always race up a class, I think you will still see a lot of SVs on the LW grids next year. I just recieved an e-mail from Eric and there will be different prep rules imposed on the SV in ULW so you will now need 3 SVs. One for ULWSB, one for LWSS and one for LWSB as there will now be
3 levels of prep. I'm a little concerned about the $5000 I just invested in a SB motor for my SV.
Quote from: Gixxerblade on November 16, 2007, 03:56:16 PM
The BMW is legal for LWSB, the original ruling last year was that it would be legal in LW but after a considerable debate it was allowed to only run in SB.
Well, I think my point is missed. As you know, there are lots of BMW's. But there was a model added to the line for 2007 or maybe even 2006. I think its displacement was larger, something, or the rules were changed that moved it's classification. Maybe that was already in place.
Displacement plays into the rules.
As an example, in HWSS, as the rules are currently, you can run up to a 1000cc liquid cooled twin. That displacement goes up in HWSB. As an example, as the current rules are written, the Ducati 1098 and the Buell 1125 are legal for HWSB, but not HWSS. I never looked at it that closely as I was racing an SV1000 which isn't over the 1000cc limit as it is.
So, having those changes for SS vs SB would be reasonable.
We're talking semantics, I suppose. Again, I'll be interested in seeing the whole rules package.
Doesn't develop extra motivation for me and spending money to enter my H1 project, forever unfinished, in UlwSB. But I've been working on it for longer than some people have been racing. I'll keep working on it.
Hawks are screwed!
Yes Dave you are correct, the BMW went from 1100 to 1200 last year, the 1100 has been SS legal for some time the 1200 was the one that created the controversy last winter and ended up SB only. Bmw has upped the power and reduced the weight for 2008 with the HP2. BMW claims 136 HP at the crank, and 392 lbs dry weight for the 1200cc HP2. I believe the sticker shock er price is said to be $15000-$20000 although BMW only says TBD.
Back to basics-
Displacement, cooling type.
At least running with air cooled Buells was competitive. It's never any fun getting your ass handed to you by liter bikes on long tracks. Kind of the same rules that apply to the Ducs and Aprilia's. At least we were all competitive. Getting back to the F800 BMW....
As for running 3 SV's for different classes; I wonder if it's really true that there will be "different prep rules" being imposed on SV's and possibly the Kawi's? Guess us LW guys have given the impression we have deep pockets.
Wouldn't it have made more sense to impose these supposed prep rules for the upcoming BMW's instead of ruining the ULWSB class?
As always, you can race up a class. But if we find there are 3-5 BMW's on the LW grid, why bother; why waste your money and your equipment? BMW has always been one to be the "Standout" in the crowd, but this may bring them to be left standing alone.
Lets not forget that the sv is a 5 year old design. Suzuki could come out with a new imporved sv next year that would be right on pace with the ducs and bmws. Then what? Change the rule again to move them back to LW?
Seems odd to me that the 984cc Buells were kicked out of ULSB and bumped up to lLW to race against the SV which they were deemed to be more competitive with. But now the SV's are bumped back to UL but the 984cc Buells are not?
All seems a waste to me.
Ok, thanks for shedding light on that. I though there was something about the XB9R in the past.
Again, we need a complete list of the new rules.
Quote from: L8brake731 on November 16, 2007, 05:12:48 PM
Back to basics-
Displacement, cooling type.
At least running with air cooled Buells was competitive. It's never any fun getting your ass handed to you by liter bikes on long tracks. Kind of the same rules that apply to the Ducs and Aprilia's. At least we were all competitive. Getting back to the F800 BMW....
As for running 3 SV's for different classes; I wonder if it's really true that there will be "different prep rules" being imposed on SV's and possibly the Kawi's? Guess us LW guys have given the impression we have deep pockets.
Wouldn't it have made more sense to impose these supposed prep rules for the upcoming BMW's instead of ruining the ULWSB class?
As always, you can race up a class. But if we find there are 3-5 BMW's on the LW grid, why bother; why waste your money and your equipment? BMW has always been one to be the "Standout" in the crowd, but this may bring them to be left standing alone.
All good points. They should be made to Eric at CCS, if there is enough noise we might be able to get this change revised. The rulebooks have not been printed so it is not yet cast in stone. I think this one caught a bunch of us off guard so make some noise if you disagree.
Quote from: ducatiboy on November 16, 2007, 04:28:20 PM
Hawks are screwed!
Yes! But they've been screwed for a long time now. Even with last years rules, hawks are for dedicated "hawk people". I raced one for a couple of years... even won a regional and track championship on one. Mine was pretty fast in its final incarnation, but still strugglled with SV's. There's one exception... if you put a kx500 in one it'll really cook... but only for a couple of laps. After that, parts start falling off.
Seems to me that in the LWT classes this year the mix of bikes were all very competitive and that the rules were pretty well sorted out. Racing with Vtwins, inline 4s and air cooled bikes that are all competitive is what makes LWTs fun. Even at the ROC where hp rules there was many SVs on the podiums even though most went to Duc and BMW. I think L8break731 is right on the money, if the change is because of the BMW and Duc then impose the rules on the new bikes not the ones that are the bread and butter of the class. If there is a change that major it should be announced a year ahead of time.
Where do I sign up to bitch and complain to the powers at be? In writing or a phone call? Will they answer the phone?
Mark
Track days are looking a lot better.
Mark
i won the midatlantic & and southeast ulsb class with my 63hp FZR 400.While i only won 1 race, i finished all my races and got the points.I only used 2 sets of tires for the whole year and did over 700 track miles for this year,this bike is cheap to maintain and the only time i work on it is in the winter.Compare with my 72 hp SV 650 i have,my SV is an average 6-8 seconds faster per lap on any track and my 86hp ducati 1000ss is another 1-2 sec faster then my SV.I guess now i got to retire my favorite bike to ride from racing,and get my SV running again.An SV is NOT an Ultralight bike.The rules that there is now is good and should be left alone.
(https://www.ccsforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi50.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff301%2Fapriliaman%2FB1.jpg&hash=bed91b110fe315f931bd0f4a250d01a2769ea388)
I tried calling today to get a better understanding and to voice my opinion but... They aren't open on Friday's. So I guess we all have to call on Monday.
If you want to make some noise then please write Eric, He is open to discussion and has already told me that the rule books are not printed so nothing is cast in stone yet. I brought up many of the same topics that are being mentioned here with Eric earlier today and he was very open minded about it. Send Eric an email and let him know that this is not what you want if enough complain then things can be changed.
Eric.Kelcher@ccsracing.us
I'm going to email Eric also. That is a load of crap. I'm OK with the Am - Ex split but the SV and EX650 racing in ULWSB is nuts!!!
I just got a response back from Eric. Attached is the three e-mail thread (starting reading from the bottom):
That response makes for a nice snippet, but we both know this will do nothing but make yet another SV dominated class and alienate anything outside the mainstream, or interesting.
I had planned on racing a CRF450, which will make a whopping 55hp, compared to an SV which is pushing 70hp. A low power dirt bike racing sportbikes with 15 more hp is not comparable.
Say you do alienate the growing 450 trend and aim towards the big bore bikes, these are comparable hp to the SV, but faaar less dependable.
I'm just saying it don't make sense. Why open up yet another class to a bike that already dominates several? How is that a smart business choice or providing a service to your customers; aka racers?
----- Original Message -----
From: Eric.Kelcher@ccsracing.us
To: badboyrr
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 2:30 PM
Subject: RE: ULW classes?
The current level of hp that is available from a single cc 4 stroke is in line with the hp that a SV will make with the limits that are placed on it. The difference in handling and top speeds between the two is going to lend one to be better at certain tracks and less competitive at others.
Eric Kelcher
Director of Competition
Championship Cup Series
American Sportbike Racing Association
(817) 246-1127
(817)246-2977 fax
-----Original Message-----
From: badboyrr
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 12:48 PM
To: Eric.Kelcher@ccsracing.us
Subject: ULW classes?
I just heard that the SV's may be legal in ULW next season. Is this true? If so, what class will older or odd bikes race in? I was planning to come out with some motard friends and run ULW, but we would be even less competitive with them than those currently allowed!
Don Allen
Track days, WERA or AHRMA are looking better and better...
This is my active inclusion to the cause. Email sent to Mr. Kelcher.
Eric Kelcher,
I am writing to you regarding the most current information pertaining to the 2008 Ultralight Superbike rules change. You must understand my dismay to see something like this even mentioned for this class.
I have chosen to use the Ultralight class as a training ground for my sons and niece. It offers a medium where rider smoothness will benefit without the extra care needed for larger horsepower machinery. One can debate what high horsepower machinery is but I would venture to say that a 60 hp FZR400 is plenty for a novice rider. Riding on the track provides and environment of safety where my disciples can learn as opposed to the street. This class also gives them the added satisfaction of doing well in comparison to the other current legal machinery with Experts aboard them.
Some technical stuff:
The FZR400 (my son's bike) in stock form produces some 60 hp. Weighing in at 370# stock it is remarkably the same weight as an SV. The SV in the same stock form produces 70+ hp and certainly a dominant figure in racing in the lightweight classes. I know that there are many other machines out there that can develop the hp a stock SV does but at what cost to those owners on that machinery. My son can only afford so much with registration and tires taking the bulk of it. The FZR400 is also limited in tire choice due to it's 18 inch rear wheel sizing making it limited in it's performace levels. In other words, the bike will only be as good as it's tires.
Some stuff that doesn't make sense:
I believe the Thuderbike Daytona lap record (AMA course) is still held by an SV (Barnes) but yet this bike will be allowed into the Ultralight class? The current SV is still very competitive in many classes and many regions (Hastings) beating out the newest Ducati 1000, a bike I believe should not be LW at least not Supersport.
An SV shown in the past as a dominant machine in the LW class is now being downgraded to a lesser machine in the rules. Did Suzuki start making them slower? But yet a bike such as the '91 FZR600 or F2 is considered "potentially dominant in the right hands" to run in the lightweight class. When was the last time that an FZR anything won a race? Was it a big race or regional stuff?
In summation, please consider Mark Evry's scenario where he rides an FZR400, SV and a Ducati 1000. He is competitive but not dominant on the FZR400, yet he is much faster on the SV and marginaly faster on the Ducati. The changes that are being spoken of just don't make sense for competiton sake and also for business sake. In the Florida Region the Ultralight class has had upwards of 14 riders attending an event. The inclusion of the SV will most likely erase those 14 competitors only to add how many SV's to the race?
As a monetary investment in this hobby, it seems that the "track-day" is looking more inviting and most probably the more likely choice.
Mark Tenn
Florida Region CCS #22
I Thought I would Post My letter to CCS as well
(draft)
My Name is Daniel Carr I have been involved with
racing in CCS for 2 years now and I love every second
of it. However, I am a little concerned about the
propose rule change to allow newer Post 1999 Liquid
cooled twins into ultra-light superbike. Ultra-light
superbike is my focus event I race a honda Hawk GT My
bike makes approx. 50 Hp on a good day (the amateur
ultra-light superbike champion this year Bike was
dyoed at Daytona and made 49 Hp to the wheels).
Ultra-weight superbike is the class as it stands as a
haven for oddball ball bikes such as Hawks, FZR400's
Honda CB1's and non GP spec 2 Stoke 250 Road bikes.
You will find in the pits that the people who race
these these so called oddball machines are some of the
most involved and dedicated racers who take pride in
being part of the racing community. By allowing
theses post 99 Twins i.e. (SV650's and ex650's) in the
class who are essentially eliminating all these
oddball bikes from competion, to wait around until the
Vintage community welcomes us. or move to WERA or
other racing organizations.
At Loudon my home track The lightweight class is
dominated by SV650'S who are very competitive against
the bigger ducati's We have almost no buells and I
have never seen a BMW on the track (except with a
sidecar attached at the classic weekend).
The below Dyno sheet were prepared by JD hord a former
AMA pro Champion in the twins class and is widely
respected as the foremost authority on Both Hawks and
SV's
Stock and lightly modified HAWK
http://www.hordpower.com/gallery/album06/hawkairbox
Stock and slightly Modified SV650
http://www.hordpower.com/gallery/album08/03sv650
As you can see The power difference is tremendous. as
well as the hawk being 20 years old this year. VS a
newer bike.
Contrary to the CCS bulletin. It is my understanding
that A Honda Hawk can not safely be modified to 800CC
with out spending a ton of money and it most likely
will not last a few races. There is only so much power
you can safely get out of a three valve head thats
design is nearly 30 years old (Honda ascot)
Please also consider that there is not an Ultra-light
Super-sport class so many bikes in ultra-light
Superbike races are close to Bone stock without any
power modifications, so there will be 50 horsepower
CB-1's GS500's-Hawks sharing the track with
95+Horrsepower SV650 Superbikes in competition is
kinda of scary. At loudon the Lightwieght class is a
big class second only to the middleweight classes.
that is alot of fast bikes.
The same bikes do share the track in the GTL race. The
GTL race is always red-flagged and very rarely runs
its full distance.
Lastly, As a member of the CCS racing community I ask
you not to expand the Ultra-light Class to include the
The far more powerful and advanced SV's and EX650's
Those bikes are true lightweights not Ultra-lights.
and would certainly banish some of us from
competition
Sincerely,
Daniel Carr
CCS/LRRS # 441
Quote from: 123user on November 16, 2007, 06:41:46 PM
Yes! But they've been screwed for a long time now. Even with last years rules, hawks are for dedicated "hawk people". I raced one for a couple of years... even won a regional and track championship on one. Mine was pretty fast in its final incarnation, but still strugglled with SV's. There's one exception... if you put a kx500 in one it'll really cook... but only for a couple of laps. After that, parts start falling off.
Hawks work fine in ULSB at LRRS where there are NO Sv's
They can even win the 2007 Amatuer ULSB crown at Daytona.
Sorry but I don't want motards in ULSB either. :D At least they are better than Sv's :lol:
Can the track series make there own rules? Might it be different at Firebird than it is at NHIS?
Quote from: BadBoyRR on November 17, 2007, 12:08:16 AM
I just got a response back from Eric. Attached is the three e-mail thread (starting reading from the bottom):
That response makes for a nice snippet, but we both know this will do nothing but make yet another SV dominated class and alienate anything outside the mainstream, or interesting.
I had planned on racing a CRF450, which will make a whopping 55hp, compared to an SV which is pushing 70hp. A low power dirt bike racing sportbikes with 15 more hp is not comparable.
Say you do alienate the growing 450 trend and aim towards the big bore bikes, these are comparable hp to the SV, but faaar less dependable.
I'm just saying it don't make sense. Why open up yet another class to a bike that already dominates several? How is that a smart business choice or providing a service to your customers; aka racers?
----- Original Message -----
From: Eric.Kelcher@ccsracing.us
To: badboyrr
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 2:30 PM
Subject: RE: ULW classes?
The current level of hp that is available from a single cc 4 stroke is in line with the hp that a SV will make with the limits that are placed on it. The difference in handling and top speeds between the two is going to lend one to be better at certain tracks and less competitive at others.
Eric Kelcher
Director of Competition
Championship Cup Series
American Sportbike Racing Association
(817) 246-1127
(817)246-2977 fax
-----Original Message-----
From: badboyrr
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 12:48 PM
To: Eric.Kelcher@ccsracing.us
Subject: ULW classes?
I just heard that the SV's may be legal in ULW next season. Is this true? If so, what class will older or odd bikes race in? I was planning to come out with some motard friends and run ULW, but we would be even less competitive with them than those currently allowed!
Don Allen
Quote from: ducatiboy on November 17, 2007, 11:01:47 AM
Can the track series make there own rules? Might it be different at Firebird than it is at NHIS?
Well, kind of. LRRS, which is held at NHIS, is a CCS affiliate. Trackaddix, which is the CCS Great Plains. Florida region is Henry DeGouw's.
Anyway, affiliates and independent regions do offer specific things that can be different. Trackaddix eliminated HWSB and Thunderbike from their schedule, as an example. CCS Midwest is owned and responsible to CCS Ft Worth.
Regardless, at the Race of Champions, everything is under the standard CCS rules.
In LRRS, there's amateur, junior, and expert. At ROC, the juniors race with the experts.
I think this may have tipped me over the edge to run a MW bike next year. Starting to look like the economical way to go vs. LW the way things are going.
I don't have the time or $$$ to deal with multiple tear-downs per year, or going with a big-bore air-cooled machine.
Take or leave it BUT...
before everybody runs out and buys a MW, or swears off racing for trackdays, I think Paul has said it repeatedly now:
Make your feelings known to CCS BEFORE the rules are set in stone
Yes I understand that this may not change a thing, but at the same time, could it hurt?
Its like voting --- Don't bitch about the government if you've done nothing to change it.
My 2 cents....
flame on.
Ridgeway I agree, I think in the long haul that this ruling is going to cause LW to become a much more expensive playground. BMWs are very expensive up front and 800cc SV will require a lot of maintenance. I see this rule change as renaming LW ULW and creating a new class that will be called LW. If judged in supersport trim the BMW and SV1000 are not very different from one another.
Thanks Mark, I think a number of racers have contacted Eric Eric.Kelcher@ccsracing.us about this topic and I think it may be having some effect as well.
Please remember when you do contact Eric to be polite, give valid reasons for your disagreement and don't threaten. If your email or letter is constructive it will carry much more weight than if you are threatening.
Well, before anyone gets cound up about building, I don't think Ed Key's fastest times on his Superbike are substantially faster than his Superbike.
As for going to another class, you've got to factor in the cost of tires.
I would still be interested in seeing what the actual structure of rules are.
Dave the tire argument is pretty much based on sub 100HP bikes in LW but the new rules seem to be going in the direction of 110+ HP LW bikes. If I read the replies I have received from Eric right, the SV will now be allowed 800cc, as if to bring it on par with the new bikes. This will certainly have an impact on tire life as well as reliability. Don't get me wrong, I understand that the class structure is a moving target and will always evolve. I'm just not sure there are enough of the BMWs running to make this necessary at this point in time and I think this is going to have a devastating impact on the ULWSB class.
I think that this is something that should be put out there with the statement "This is where we are going in 2009". I think this is just too big a change to address in one offseason. Not to confuse for one second what we do with what they do but take MOTOGP for example, 500cc -> 990cc ->800cc. Each change was made in an overlapping fashion, both machines ran at the same time for a year or two so as not to create massive turmoil. Yes there a couple bikes coming into LW that are raising the bar but let's find a way to transition into this rather than yesterday it was this and tomorrow it will be that.
For those that would say that I am against any bike that "beats my SV" let me point out that I don't want to forbid any bike from running in LW if it meets the rules. I also don't want to have the rug pulled out from under me overnight either. I think this ruling pulls the rug out from under 70% of the ULW class and 50% of the LW class. All I am asking is that this rule be made now and implemented in 2009 so that everyone has time to adjust their programs.
Well, to go with the email you're receiving...
If this is all based around the 800cc BMW that weighs as much as my SV1000 and makes a claimed 80HP, which will be less at the rear tire, I'm not sure where the excitement is. I don't think it's hard for a Supersport SV650 to make 73HP+ and weigh in at 370, is it?
Overlap in MotoGP? Only one they had was between the phasing out of 500cc two strokes and 990cc four strokes. Wasn't any from 990 to 800.
I think the orginal lightweight classes were limited to 500cc's in the 80's. The Hawk came out, and it was a 650. Similar questions were brought up comparing things to the FZR400 and the EX500. EX500's didn't die over night at all. There were still guys racing them pretty regularly up until a few years ago as their popularity started to die out and the used SV650 market became more affordable.
Even if you were allowed 900cc's on the SV, why would you do it? Someone will have to quote Ed Key on what he has, but I believe that he could probably go bigger on his motor, but there's a point of efficiency in power, cost, and maintenance that always should be considered. Certainly, Ed has found a reasonable combination that suits his needs. Would you really be served better though a 800cc SV vs a 700?
Who had the lap time quote of SB vs SS in this or that similar thread?
Actually I was comparing your SV1000 to the R1200S with 122 HP at the crank and and 418lbs dry or the HP2 with 130 HP and the crank 392 dry. Both of these are be LW legal in SB trim and with this rule change I can see them eventually being moved into SS as well. This is progress and I think that is fine, this all relates to my statement that LW is going to get much more expensive. Bikes like these will eat tires almost as fast as MW bikes.
My head is spinning...
Alright I stay on this side for a while. :biggrin:
Quote from: Hawk on November 17, 2007, 04:24:04 PM
Actually I was comparing your SV1000 to the R1200S with 122 HP at the crank and and 418lbs...
Well, I think comparing the SV and the R is a hard one. The SV1000 is a simple bike. I don't think it's intentions as a race bike were in the design parameters.
True, I just think the specs are pretty similar for one to be a LW and one a HW bike. I wish I could afford the BMW, I think it would be an fun ride.
Quote from: Super Dave on November 17, 2007, 04:11:00 PM
Overlap in MotoGP? Only one they had was between the phasing out of 500cc two strokes and 990cc four strokes. Wasn't any from 990 to 800.
The Ilmor was an 800 running around with the crowd of 990 machinery in Valencia. Does that count?
Mark
Like someone else already said, I'm sure CCS will be instituting a new "Super Duper, Double Secret, Really Freaking Light Weight Class" to work in conjunction with the change being discussed here. :thumb:
I'm positive that CCS would not make such a glaringly poor business decision, nor would they alienate a whole section of their regular customers just to give SV's yet another playground. :jerkoff:
So just calm down and pop another Zanex! ::)
Hey backMarkr:
The dialog that is going on for the last couple days is not just banter for the sake of argument; more-so food for thought, to intelligently place the facts to CCS (E. Kelcher) that may make a difference before the 2008 Rule Book actually goes in to print.
May I add more "food" here; PERFORMANCE INDEX along with taking the consideration of LAP TIMES.
Quote from: L8brake731 on November 17, 2007, 11:15:32 PM
Hey backMarkr:
The dialog that is going on for the last couple days is not just banter for the sake of argument; more-so food for thought, to intelligently place the facts to CCS (E. Kelcher) that may make a difference before the 2008 Rule Book actually goes in to print.
May I add more "food" here; PERFORMANCE INDEX along with taking the consideration of LAP TIMES.
Steve
I was pretty sure the discussion wasn't simple conjecture to occupy time. My comments were meant to encourage action to illicite the desired changes that the majority here seems to want, and unless I am mistaken-- that is to leave the ULSB class as it is.
My comments were not made lightly and were not intended to make light of anyone's thoughts or perspective.
Mark
I'm concerned with the idea of where it leaves people, such as myself, that run the XB9R's. What bikes will be allowed in
LWSS now? Will I be allowed to run in ULSB? Or does my bike now become the "odd ball"?
Quote from: xb9racer on November 18, 2007, 07:21:36 AM
I'm concerned with the idea of where it leaves people, such as myself, that run the XB9R's. What bikes will be allowed in
LWSS now? Will I be allowed to run in ULSB? Or does my bike now become the "odd ball"?
You are just not a majority vote so you don't count.:)
Mark
Quote from: xb9racer on November 18, 2007, 07:21:36 AM
I'm concerned with the idea of where it leaves people, such as myself, that run the XB9R's. What bikes will be allowed in
LWSS now? Will I be allowed to run in ULSB? Or does my bike now become the "odd ball"?
You need to contact Eric at Eric.Kelcher@ccsracing.us and voice your concerns. If you object to this rule change make sure you let him know that as well. Send him a clear, polite email telling him how you feel about this rule chage and either what you feel would make it a better change or why you think it should not happen.
email sent with my concerns. I guess now it's just a waiting game.
I wonder how an F2 would stand up against an 800cc SV? :pop:
Did someone mention Performance Index again? That kinda talk's not allowed here. Go run trackdays. Racing is for purists. It's heresy to talk about anything that might level playing fields, make racing cheaper and/or increase grid size back to where it was a decade ago. Keep babbling like that and you'll just be talked down to and have the validity of your statements ignored. :wtf:
Hey K3,
Don't ever go away. I love hearing what you have to say.
I bet on the SV800. I've run against them and they are ultra-fast.
I dont agree with this rule. Was it done to generate more revenue. Think about it. You open up another class to SV's and split it amateur and expert again. Somtimes the grids for LWSS were 25 bikes in the Mid Atlantic in 2007 for expert and perhaps close to that in amateur. ULSBK may have had a max grid of what, 8 - 10 on a good weekend. Think about it, if there were just say 25 more entries at the minimum $35 for a race, thats an additional $875. The class will be dominate by SS SV's, and the occasional Ducati 800SS :)
Sean, more than likely the net revenue impact will be nothing. Chances are you are going to chase away most of the ULW riders by placing the SV into ULW. These are riders paying $75 to race in that class while the SVs will be paying as you note $35 as an additional class. Factor in the SV riders that will give up a LW class to run the ULW class and it will probably be a wash.
Everyone here who feels this rule should not be adopted please write to Eric.Kelcher@ccsracing.us and tell him why. Please don't simply rant to him but give him valid, constructive reasons not to adopt this rule. Things like the riders in ULW that this rule will hurt, the fact that the SV already has more than enough classes to run in, or the older or lighter bikes that will be displaced including the recent influx of motards in ULW.
Keep in mind as well that the newer more powerful bikes coming into the LW class will make this rule necessary soon regardless of the outcome this year. While the extra power of these new bikes might not mean much at most of the local tight tracks, the rules have to make sense at Daytona as well. The more riders that contact Eric with legitimate opposition to this rule the more likely it is that this rule will be rescinded or at least delayed.
Finally, please remember that the organizers at CCS ride a fine line, they have to keep the series profitable AND keep the riders satisfied so they keep coming back. I think for the most part they do a very good job at it but unfortunately they usually only hear from us when we disagree with them. Try to make the disagreement polite and constructive and maybe consider a letter thanking them for all the good work they do later.
How about a Lightweight twins class and run it with say Lighweight GP. I guess with this same reasoning for the SV going to a lesser class, the F2 will someday become a Lightweight bike.
I certainly believe that changes are made for revenue. But that's not a bad thing. If CCS cannot survive, or it becomes less profitable, we won't be racing with them or the costs to race with them or potentially with others might increase.
I have been lead to believe that the change is being made because of some changes related to up to 800cc liquid cooled non desmo twins.
Is that only the new BMW or are there others that I'm not recognizing?
Aprilia SL 750 Shiver.
With regard to the BMWs, I don't think the 800 will be much of a threat to the existing LW bikes I believe the changes are related to the R1200S and possibly its new big brother the HP2 which is also an 1170cc air cooled motor. The R1200S which is legal for LW is proving to be a worthy adversary and thus the evolution of the rules. The HP2 should be legal as long as the valve train is not desmo. I'm certainly not an expert on desmo http://www.bluming.com/projects/desmo.htm but I believe it involves a valve train that does not use springs but where the cam both opens and closes the valve. The HP2 seems to have springs so I believe it to be legal in LW.
http://www.motorcycle.com/manufacturer/bmw/first-look-2008-bmw-hp2-sport-67658.html
And as just mentioned by klebs01 other new bikes as well.
Let's see, a valid, constructive reason not to adopt this rule.
How about....................... it sucks!
I think Eric's probably heard that one a few times.
Hey K3, you can't possibly ignore this! The absolute possibility that the inclusion of SV SB's into the ULWSB class will drive hose guys away from racing (with CCS). How much money do these guys need to throw at their current bikes to keep them competitive? These are the bikes that will be driven to do track days; with no class to be competative in.
The playing field is never even, only if defined by a "spec" class.
There are many reasons, IMO that are not conducive to our sport growing by leaps and bounds. This decision that affects the ULWSB class is not going to help at all.
BTW--BMW made it a BIG deal back about 1994 when the R259 OIL COOLED BOXER was introduced, it's not AIR COOLED. babble,babble, babble :pop:
Quote from: L8brake731 on November 20, 2007, 06:56:47 PM
The playing field is never even, only if defined by a "spec" class.
:pop:
The Aprilia Shiver is going to have a serious HP advantage in Ltwt SS
I'm so confused about all of this. I guess I'll just wait until the spring and see what happens.
Low budget suspension may keep the Shiver from doing well in SS, but the motor sounds strong!
417# and 95HP? So, it's gonna weight over 400# with gas and oil and make maybe 80HP. And potentially over $10k? Good luck!
Quote from: L8brake731 on November 20, 2007, 06:56:47 PM
Hey K3, you can't possibly ignore this!
Sure I can. I'm not qualified to comment on any of this. I'll just go do track days. Rosno will save you.
You're right. I can't leave it alone.
:preachon: "A-hem!" tap tap "Is this thing on?"
Let's just get right down to the heart of the situation. CCS doesn't WANT old bikes to be competitive, and they don't give a damn about providing an outlet for budget racers. This thread is altogether too familiar. It's been written before about 883 Sportsters, then Buells, then BMWs, none of which fit the black ink or the spirit of Lightweight rules when they were introduced as Lightweight racers. Every new bike that comes in means the death of an old bike, especially when the rules have to be bent to accommodate the new machine. What's that quote about those who ignore history being forced to repeat it? How about the one that says you can't fight City Hall?
This is about money, plain and simple. CCS as a corporate entity doesn't give a damn about making racers happy, since most will roll over and be gone in 2.5 years anyway. What they DO care about is keeping manufacturers happy and giving them a place to showcase their products. Manufacturers are more or less forever. They affect the advertising dollars and ultimate bottom line far more than a few whiny little piss-ant customers who'll probably just leave anyway when their old stuff isn't competitive any more. You REALLY don't have to like it, but that's the way it is when you get right down to it.
Anyone who wants to argue against Performance Index is a straight-up fool. Look at how well it works in Thunderbike and MotoST. A given bike needs to weigh a given amount and make a given amount of horsepower. Play with those numbers for awhile and everybody's even. Hell, you could even find a competitive class for the poor, maligned SV1000. Yeah, it requires a dyno and a set of scales. Seems like a professional organisation could manage that much, doesn't it?
Thing is, it's never going to happen. Dynos and scales cost money. Getting them from place to place and running them costs money. Arranging class rules to accommodate factories and their advertising departments MAKES money. The racer as an individual represents a few thousand dollars per year to CCS. The entire "Older than SV" Lightweight crowd probably only represents $40K to CCS nationwide. Compare that to the revenue rolling in from the manufacturers. Plus that, manufacturers don't pay contingency for people to race their old technology. Lastly, why even bother to provide an entry level racing class? One already exists, and it's called trackdays. Ride cheap on whatever you want to ride until you get good enough, then go racing. (It's ironic that trackdays have so severely eroded racing's market share even as they've become racing's farm league. There MIGHT be a lesson there....)
Lightweight racers don't have to LIKE any of this. You guys can holler that you're getting screwed all day and be 100% right, but it doesn't matter. Let's forget about CCS and think McDonalds. If you and a small group of others think the McRib sandwich is the best-tasting food in the world, that won't get McDonalds to give it a regular spot on the menu. You just aren't spending enough money to matter.
I realise that none of what I've just written is pleasant or popular, but you'd have to be a pretty special kind of idiot to argue the truth of it. As Americans, we expect things to be fair. Nothing could be more important to racers than racing, so we expect to be treated fairly there most of all. Unfortunately, racing doesn't have a Constitution. It's all about the money and you don't have any rights beyond making the decision whether or not to write CCS those checks. Sorry! Wasn't my doing! But that's the bottom line.
Send those cards and letter bombs to K3 at....
Quote from: K3 Chris Onwiler on November 23, 2007, 10:41:43 PM
Sure I can. I'm not qualified to comment on any of this. I'll just go do track days. Rosno will save you.
Good luck on that. No one listens to me. That's pretty consistent.
So, from what I'm reading, SVs can be up to 800cc in LTWT SB, but have to maintain 650 and SS rules for LTWT SS, and 650cc and SB rules for ULTWT??? Is this correct??
Can those of you who have raced in the past honestly say the statement "I'll just go do trackdays" makes sense?
Personally, trackdays have lost most of their value to me since I started racing. As someone said above, it's a good breeding ground to build the basic building blocks of the sport, but I don't forsee myself going out to a trackday 'just for fun' in the near future. It's the competition, and the potential for reward, that draws me to racing.
oh yeah, i want to run my SV as a LW machine.
Quote from: MACOP1104 on November 24, 2007, 09:48:52 AM
So, from what I'm reading, SVs can be up to 800cc in LTWT SB, but have to maintain 650 and SS rules for LTWT SS, and 650cc and SB rules for ULTWT??? Is this correct??
This is the PROPOSAL from CCS. It's not set in stone. But it is a recommendation that was given to them, and they are looking at it.
Quote from: LongDogRacing on November 24, 2007, 10:37:44 AM
Can those of you who have raced in the past honestly say the statement "I'll just go do trackdays" makes sense?
Personally, trackdays have lost most of their value to me since I started racing. As someone said above, it's a good breeding ground to build the basic building blocks of the sport, but I don't forsee myself going out to a trackday 'just for fun' in the near future. It's the competition, and the potential for reward, that draws me to racing.
oh yeah, i want to run my SV as a LW machine.
Yeah, me too on the track day v race day gig.
Even if I'm on a non current machine, I get a bit more out of racing than a track day. It is a different mindset.
These new rules are preliminary, and they are not adopted at this time. But it is a strong recommendation based on information compiled from different CCS regions. It might not represent what happens in particular regions at all, and that will certainly leave some upset.
These are guidelines that some of the race directors and others came up with as things that would be changes in the LW/UltW structures to potentially overcome things they feel they see on the horizon or happening.
Something similar happened in 1998/1999 when the SV650 was released. It wasn't a MW bike, and it was outside the regular structure of LW's being four valves up to 500cc's, I think if I remember right, and 650cc's if three valve for Supersport. Superbike was different. I've got rule books lying around someplace, but it was a change. "Overnight, there were complaints about EX500's not being competitive anymore, and there were those that were looking for places to race those.
Most of them are gone (EX500's), I do believe, regardless of the opportunities that other organizations gave them.
I don't think the SV650's are going away at all, but I do thing some of the bikes are going to struggle a bit more to get seventh place in UlwSB vs when they could get first or second on a '91 NT650.
Many of us see the rule change as unexpected.
Quote from: LongDogRacing on November 24, 2007, 10:37:44 AM
Can those of you who have raced in the past honestly say the statement "I'll just go do trackdays" makes sense?
Well, it has worked for me and others. I simply couldn't afford competitive machinery or multiple sets of tires per weekend. Participating in trackdays as a coach has allowed me to continue to enjoy something I love.
Let me ask you this. Does the statement "I'll just never ride a bike at a racetrack again since I can't afford to continue racing" make sense to you? It sure wouldn't have worked for me.
Never did for me. I always looked for ways to reduce my costs in traveling in groups, entering fewer races to use less tires.
Ridin' and racin' are different, period. Racers race. It never meant that it was affordable or even doable all the time. Even with an unlimited budget, racing costs rise to the level of unlimited.
I just read the generic response sent out by Eric. Seems to me that no matter what is said, written or implied on the racers end, this rule is going through.
Stating that it isn't fair for sv650's to be considered LW because of the new bikes coming out, they will be allowed to run ULSB.
Again,where does that leave us running the Buell XB9's that were bumped up to LW because we're more competitive with the SV's? To powerful for ULSB, yet not powerful enough to compete against the new bike being allowed in the LW classes. May be time to switch to a different race organization I guess.
I would think that there would mean a bump back to UlwSB.
There hasn't been anything stated, but I would expect something similar. You'll want to contact Eric on that directly.
Hope I don't sound like I'm bitching about it. Just seems dumb to allow one bike in and keep one out when they were deemed direct competitors. I will be emailing Eric. For the record, I don't believe either the SV or the XB9 should be in ULSB.
Ok....got this all figured out ( at least for me!)....took my brother 's '03 TLR1000 ( it's crashed anyway) and made SV 650 decals for it. :thumb:
Mooowhahahahahahaha!!!
Aint skeered a no Beemer, no damn Buell neither....
I felt the conversation could stand some levity....anyway....carry on with the discussion. :biggrin:
Hey Mark, That sounds like a wonderful Idea!!
Could I disguise my SV1000 as a 650??? Same tank, seat, fender, everything else exceopt for a little 350 extra cc but what is that between racers......
The weight is hard to disguise.
He'll just say he gained a couple pounds :)
1) Isn't Ed Key's SV650 too light for the ULWSB class?
2) The problem with the Beemer isn't 1170cc, its a 4 valve, overhead cam engine.
3) The Ducs that "came on the scene last year" in 2007 (??), were the aircooled, 2 valve, SS1000s. That bike was introduced in 2003 and discontinued in 2006.
I race a Duc. I never saw the rear end of Arnie Hasting's SV SB for more than about a lap (Arnie will say I'm exaggerating ... it was more like 1/2 a lap). The bikes I raced with competitively included the Buells, SVs and fellow Ducs. Nate Kern didn't ride his BMW in the lw classes this year (admirable, I thought). Seems to me like the only SVs at a disadvantage were the SS spec SVs racing in the LWSB/GP classes.
The LW and ULWSB classes were working pretty well, I can't imagine why they changed them, and I liked seeing all those homebuilt/ratty FZ400s running against the vintage Duc750s, etc. ... put it back.
Xseal,
Eric has reopened the LW/ULW rule change and is considering all input. Please send him a letter asking that things be left as they are. Eric.Kelcher@ccsracing.us He hopes to have a final ruling Nov 30 so hurry.
Quote from: Hawk on November 25, 2007, 10:25:25 PM
Xseal,
Eric has reopened the LW/ULW rule change and is considering all input. Please send him a letter asking that things be left as they are. Eric.Kelcher@ccsracing.us He hopes to have a final ruling Nov 30 so hurry.
Quote from: Hawk on November 25, 2007, 10:25:25 PM
Xseal,
Eric has reopened the LW/ULW rule change and is considering all input. Please send him a letter asking that things be left as they are. Eric.Kelcher@ccsracing.us He hopes to have a final ruling Nov 30 so hurry.
Done.
Quote from: xseal on November 26, 2007, 12:33:35 AM
Done.
:thumb:
I think some of the new bikes are going to make this change necessary in a year or two but I believe that this is an overkill response at this point.
Quote from: Super Dave on November 25, 2007, 11:29:19 AM
The weight is hard to disguise.
According to my annual fitness testing I am just as fat as I was in 2001.
I can understand that CCS isn't about vintage racing. Especially since the ULWSB and LWSS classes are teeny. I took that chance when I bought my bike, I knew its days were numbered. My biggest issue is that the rule change was a total surprise.
...but it's a bummer that old bikes now seem unwelcome because there's no money in them. It's also a little sad that the nature of all of these rules favor those with a lot of money. Those that can buy new bikes, or those that can afford to pay their full season's worth of entry fees in January. You're kind of alienating those who choose the cheaper path. With both my husband and I racing - he on a modern 600, and me on a 20 year old bike - I've got a pretty clear grasp on the expense of running each. (I bought two sets of tires last season. Two. I rode on those two sets of tires at six race weekends and jeebus, probably over 20 trackday weekends?) Michelin may not have made a whole lot of money off of me, but CCS still got my 2-3 classes of entry fees per weekend.
With the clarification that the new 650 twins in ULWSB not being heavily modified, I can live with the rule change, still, I fear the ramifications for the other LW classes. I don't really have a choice. I'll be running Torro the Hawktractor next season either way.
Quote from: roadracer22 on November 26, 2007, 08:42:15 AM
According to my annual fitness testing I am just as fat as I was in 2001.
You need a new scale. LOL!
Quote from: xseal on November 25, 2007, 10:05:37 PM
2) The problem with the Beemer isn't 1170cc, its a 4 valve, overhead cam engine.
The current oilhead BMWs are not overhead cams. Te cams are in the head, but they are located on the side (bottom as mounted on the bike) of the head. Push rods and rocker arms are used to actuate the valves. They are referred to as cam in head engines.
The HP2 Sport will have DOHC (DSHC?) heads.
Just got a reply from Eric. Although he insists that the rules are not yet set in stone, the XB9R won't be allowed in ULSB because it has 90hp. Wow. There is no way in hell that bike puts out 90hp. But I believe the "spec sheet" says so. Funny but Paul James Moto-ST 12R puts out less than that!
Also sighted that the winning ASRA Thunderbike of Dave Estock is a 9. May have started life as a 9 but...
Oh well.
Um, yeah.
In the Supertwins race at Topeka, there was a real 9, and it was no match for Estok's bike nor my SV1000.
What does the spec sheet say about an SV650? 100?
A super sport legal XB12R only makes about 84 rwhp so a XB9R is only around 74. The spec sheet is at the crank and on a good day.
Quote from: truckstop on November 26, 2007, 01:30:50 PM
With the clarification that the new 650 twins in ULWSB not being heavily modified, I can live with the rule change, still, I fear the ramifications for the other LW classes. I don't really have a choice. I'll be running Torro the Hawktractor next season either way.
Did I miss a post. The only limit on the SV 650 modifications in ULWSB I recall seeing was 650cc displacement. Erick's post said SB rules for SB. to me, that means I can have a fully modified superbike, cams, carbs, rods, porting, gsxr front end.... all that good stuff and run it in ULSB. I assume that you would still be able to have a 1mm overbore on that displacement like LWSS is today.
If I have missed something, please point me to that info
that is definitely something that needs clarification considering those mods can put it an SV in the 80 HP range.
So, a bore problem would only be fixed under the rules structure by cylinder replacement/bore repair/etc?
I'll agree that it seems like there would be easy opportunities for reliable 75 to 80HP engines. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but there were plenty of supersport FI SV650's going across the dyno (dynojet) with 72 to 75 HP with minor modifications...meaning nothing had to be taken apart to get into the engine.
I'll just ramble...
What else is new, right? LOL!
As more of a middleweight guy, I always had supersport bikes. You could run in MWSS, HWSS, ULSS.
But once someone pointed out to me that there wasn't a great reason to have a LWSS bike because you're not really going to bump up into MWSS. I used to bump from D production on my RZ350 into C production, but that doesn't happen much anymore.
Seems like allowing the SV650 to run 650cc Superbike rules would pretty much kill any idea or reason to run LWSS. Seems like it would really hurt it. Not that a Superbike SV would go three seconds a lap faster with the same rider compared to a Supersport SV. Someone can flame me on that if they would like.
Just another reason to have an SV, I guess.
OK, I can't find my 07 rulebook (didn't really need it as I couldn't get on a bike this year) but could someone please help me out here. I am reading a lot of posts that are calling the R1200S an overhead cam, while what Brian has pointed out is true about the actual cam placement do the LWSB rules specify anything with regard to cam placement? The 06 rules only specify 1210 cc limit for aircooled twins, they don't even care about number of valves. Did this change in 07?
Quote from: Super Dave on November 26, 2007, 06:16:37 PM
Seems like allowing the SV650 to run 650cc Superbike rules would pretty much kill any idea or reason to run LWSS. Seems like it would really hurt it. Not that a Superbike SV would go three seconds a lap faster with the same rider compared to a Supersport SV. Someone can flame me on that if they would like.
I'm not sure what you are getting at here Dave, From what I have read the SV will have 3 prep rules under the current proposal, LWSS, ULWSB and LWSB. We still don't know if this rule allows the BMW into SS or if the SV displacement limits in SS will change.
I can hardly wait. I can hear the screaming now... SV riders will be crying foul because they are getting beat by 25 year old ducati's. On the internet horsepower scale, "Desmo" will be worth 20 HP. And aircooled motors will have an unfair advantage because they're lighter.
Shame on Ducati, BMW, and Buell for building bikes that fit into an existing class structure. Nevermind the buy-in cost is double or triple that of an SV. Suzuki did a wonderful thing... making club racing affordable for so many. Instead of being thankful for making club racing affordable again, they complain. Stop looking your gift-horse in the mouth. The SV crowd has complained itself into the lowest rung of racing!
Scott, have you read the thread? Everyone posting here is opposed to the rule change. We DON'T want the rule change. I have posted Erics email address no fewer than 5 times and urged everyone to send a polite well thought out email asking him to not pass this rule at this time (more because I don't want to see your old playground annihilated than anything else). The original post that started this thread was from a LW rider that was shocked by the ULW eligibility of the SV and what it was going to do there. My only complaint right now is that I don't know what specs to build my motor to for next year. And yes, I have noted that the bikes that are driving this rule change are rather expensive, and that it's a shame that the LW class which was both an inexpensive and more docile class great for entry level will be losing that appeal but I really have not seen anyone crying foul over it. The great majority of the posters here want things to stay as they are, which BTW includes you running in LW against SVs, giving you even bigger grids and better contingency than if the rule were to change.
We're on your side here.
Quote from: Hawk on November 26, 2007, 06:38:24 PM
I'm not sure what you are getting at here Dave, From what I have read the SV will have 3 prep rules under the current proposal, LWSS, ULWSB and LWSB. We still don't know if this rule allows the BMW into SS or if the SV displacement limits in SS will change.
Riders in general only have so much money. So, their choices in classes are limited. As more classes have developed and others have changed because of entries, some classes suffer.
With few riders getting into 250GP bikes, LWGP is a great place for SV's. Another class in addition to LWSB and Thunderbike that allow modifications above supersport. Some of the old LWSS guys will have to talk about their past experience with the grids in LWSS. Certainly, it might be different region to region, but it seems that I see more SV650 riders that are spending more money on modifications above supersport: lots of fork changes, wheel swaps, big bore, carbon, etc.
It's cool because it's not as expensive as trying to do it to the latest and greatest hyperbike, but, well, change happens. Manufacturers' contingency usually keeps riders involved in certain classes, and I don't know of many that do so in LWSS. How many guys buy SV650's to chase Suzuki Contingency?
Actually Paul, I'm pretty indifferent. I feel confident in saying that this won't effect the LW grids, and can only bolster the ultralight. I just find humor in the fact that some people will never be satisfied. Depending on the spec-rules, its probably a win-win for SV riders. Its a losing proposition for anyone on an FZR, hawk, CB1 (when was the last time you saw one of those), but it just evens up the game for the small-case ducati crowd. On the record, I'm completely against spec classes, tires, leathers, fairings, etc. That's my only problem with this rule change..
Besides, I ride a "cheater" bike!
I have a headache...
Quote from: dylanfan53 on November 26, 2007, 09:28:56 PM
I have a headache...
Crap, does that mean I'm about to get one too.
Would one of you take your medication.
Quote from: Super Dave on November 26, 2007, 06:07:55 PM
So, a bore problem would only be fixed under the rules structure by cylinder replacement/bore repair/etc?
I'll agree that it seems like there would be easy opportunities for reliable 75 to 80HP engines. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but there were plenty of supersport FI SV650's going across the dyno (dynojet) with 72 to 75 HP with minor modifications...meaning nothing had to be taken apart to get into the engine.
Under the current SS rules you can have a 1mm maximum overbore. You would have to resleeve or replace a 1mm overbored cylinder that is worn out.
I have seen 2 74+hp FI SVs on a dynojet. The only mods to the bike was a pipe and a map.
Under the proposed ULSB rules you could probably make a reliable bike in the upper 80 hp range.
Quote from: Hawk on November 27, 2007, 12:01:20 AM
Crap, does that mean I'm about to get one too.
You two are freaking me out. Stay in the closet!! LOL
Quote from: EX_#76 on November 26, 2007, 05:37:26 PMIf I have missed something, please point me to that info
No, I think it was just wishful thinking on my part. I've been reading several threads on several boards about this and got confused.
My thought process being that if the ULWSB specs for SVs were closer to current LWSS spec that it would be ok. I think I was actually able to pass a few LWSS bikes, and didn't get lapped by Ed until late in the race. :P Unlike LWSB where I think I was getting lapped after lap 2. :D
Quote from: 123user on November 26, 2007, 08:37:20 PM
Actually Paul, I'm pretty indifferent. I feel confident in saying that this won't effect the LW grids, and can only bolster the ultralight. I just find humor in the fact that some people will never be satisfied. Depending on the spec-rules, its probably a win-win for SV riders. Its a losing proposition for anyone on an FZR, hawk, CB1 (when was the last time you saw one of those), but it just evens up the game for the small-case ducati crowd. On the record, I'm completely against spec classes, tires, leathers, fairings, etc. That's my only problem with this rule change..
Besides, I ride a "cheater" bike!
Roger was intending to bring his back out next year for ULWSB, but we may reconsider. It's a fairly stock configuration and cannot compete evenly with SB legal SVs.
That said, I know Mike Lower was making 90+ HP FZR 560s back in the day. They were championship material for sure. I do not support allowing SVs into the ULWSB class, simply because the SV has quite a few classes it can compete in with a variety of configurations, and bikes of a more (ahem) vintage flavor mostly enter a very limited number of classes, this being the most competitive.
Quote from: spyderchick on November 27, 2007, 10:42:37 AM
Roger was intending to bring his back out next year for ULWSB, but we may reconsider. It's a fairly stock configuration and cannot compete evenly with SB legal SVs.
That said, I know Mike Lower was making 90+ HP FZR 560s back in the day. They were championship material for sure. I do not support allowing SVs into the ULWSB class, simply because the SV has quite a few classes it can compete in with a variety of configurations, and bikes of a more (ahem) vintage flavor mostly enter a very limited number of classes, this being the most competitive.
Alexa, did you .....
[wisper] Eric.Kelcher@ccsracing.us [/wisper]
Not yet, but I did even out your karma. :biggrin:
Thank you Alexa.
Please keep in mind that Eric is currently reconsidering this particular rule himself and hopes to have an answer by Friday. Now would be the time to place a vote to keep the ULW class as it is for at least another year. I would enjoy lining next to Roger with my Hawk. :thumb:
:thumb:
I'd certainly like to race my H1 in UlwSB, not that it makes a big difference as I'd still like to gun for LWGP with it.
This should set Rosno howling. Here's my letter to Eric.
"Hi Eric,
I vote no to the SV in ULSB. ULSB is the only class where beginning, budget racers can race old, low cost bikes and hope to win a trophy. The SV will take that class over and drive dozens of full and part time CCS racers away from the game.
In fact, on the subject of budget racing, I think you should devise a class called Old School 6, where 600cc bikes from maybe 1999 and older compete under SB rules. That would also be a great class to allow 650cc SB prep SVs to compete if you feel they need another class."
Let me see, where is my Karma at?
I'm not sure what basis you think it would. I'm all for budget racing, just there's no good way to enforce it without costing money.
125GP bikes are great. But no one wants to race them. The 450GP thing only looks expensive to me.
I raced the Suzuki Cup Final with stock forks. What to do?
i think everyone in ulwsb just got ahrmadilloized . the differance between sb and ss is a joke i've never seen anyone in the fla region pull there head off get there bore and stroke mesured . all they check is wether your running an air filtter. they don't have time . and if they had a hp spec. which is the fair way. we would be there ti'll midnight trying find out who won . now with creative electronics a hp spec might not work either.someone must have put a bug in eric's ear about this. I don't think they will gain total enteries I race 4 races that's my budget I think most racers figure how many races they can race the same way. please eric let my old crusty 900 carberated ducati race in ultra light too i promise it does not make 70 hp at the rear wheel
If you want cheap racing get a 125.
My 03 SV with Hyabusa rods and pistons, M4 exhaust, no mods to the injection or intake (stock bore and stroke, slightly more compression) made 80hp. Weighed 350lbs.
The best way to handle the diversity of bikes would be to have max power and minimum weight for each class (not weight to power ratio as used in thunderbike). Any bike that fit could be used. The rule book would be much thinner. Only problem, each region would need scales and a dyno, someone to run, tow, and store the dyno. I never see it happening
I don't know about the effect of this change on other regions, but last year every weekend at Blackhawk 1st and 2nd ULW places were won by the same two Duc 750s anyway. Meaning no disrespect to anyone who was able to dice with those guys (I've lost to them plenty in the other classes) but having them place 1 and 2 every event has to get old.
I'm sure the older bikes have fun racing each other behind the Ducs but there were generally only a few out there. Couldn't bringing more bikes into this class be viewed as a way to make it more economically viable and save the class?
Putting the SV in ULW will only make the class an SV spec class. The SV has plenty of classes to run in and for the most part the bikes currently in ULW only have that class. The SV is competitive in LWSS LWSB GTL LWGP Thunderbike and SuperTwins, how many more classes does it need? I'd wager at least half of the current SV riders can't afford or don't want to run anymore classes than they already are. Ask the Hawk and FZR owners if they feel the same.
As far as the same riders placing 1, 2 getting old what's the podium look like in LWSS and LWSB in our region? This won't change that either.
In the Florida region this has been the attendance during 2007 for the ULWSB. It seems to be pretty healthy without the SV inclusion. I am not sure of what the other regions are like. We shall see what happens for 2008.
Homestead 14
Daytona 11
Moroso 13
Jennings 9
Jennings 6
Moroso 7
Roebling 4
Homestead 14
Jennings 10
Jennings 9
Homestead Dec 2nd
Quote from: Hawk on November 28, 2007, 10:26:54 PM
As far as the same riders placing 1, 2 getting old...
Yeah, they're getting old alright! Older, but not slower. I'm finally legal for Formula 40, but I still have to chase the same two old farts as in every other LW class. You know who you are...
I resemble that remark Paul
Quote from: barney on November 29, 2007, 08:04:20 PM
I resemble that remark Paul
I didn't think Barney knew how to work a computer!!! That slide out coffee cup holder sure is nice though!!
He's more elusive than Eeky!
Eeky's not elusive, you just need to look further through your turns. :thumb:
Quote from: Hawk on November 29, 2007, 10:41:23 PM
Eeky's not elusive, you just need to look further through your turns. :thumb:
:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :thumb:
Quote from: Hawk on November 29, 2007, 10:41:23 PM
Eeky's not elusive, you just need to look further through your turns. :thumb:
ouch...
:biggrin:
Hello!
This topic has made its way to Minnesota.
I apologize for being late to topic. I am one the "unfortunate" few to race a fzr400 in the lightweight (not ultralight) class in the CRA. Last year it was decided that we would race against buell 1200's, big ducs, etc.
We, hell even the SV guys, were all bit nervous being as we got this real long straight part in the track. In the end, the SV's still dominated the class, expert and novice. To point, the best riders were on SV's. If the best riders spent a bunch of money to buy newer bikes and parts for it, they would have still won.
Ironically enough, a bone stock SV (stock engine, stock suspension, stock exhaust) was consistantly in the top 3 expert all year. Take this observation for what it is worth.
Perhaps if the SV is ULW legal, maybe 560 fzr's could be ULW as well????
Pleased to meet you,
Tony Legueri
CRA #560
1988 FZR 400
noob expert for 08
Quote from: Hawk on November 29, 2007, 10:41:23 PM
Eeky's not elusive, you just need to look further through your turns. :thumb:
Don came through Tech one weekend and asked for an exemption - wanted to mount a mirror on his bike.
Said he'd never seen the front of Ed's bike before and figured his only chance was to catch a glimpse as Ed lapped him!! :ass:
Quote from: Burt Munro on November 30, 2007, 11:30:34 PM
Don came through Tech one weekend and asked for an exemption - wanted to mount a mirror on his bike.
Said he'd never seen the front of Ed's bike before and figured his only chance was to catch a glimpse as Ed lapped him!! :ass:
"Hello...My name is Rick and I am a professional shit disturber .:biggrin:"
Quote from: dylanfan53 on November 30, 2007, 08:55:36 PMQuote from: Hawk on November 29, 2007, 10:41:23 PM
Eeky's not elusive, you just need to look further through your turns. :thumb:
ouch...
:biggrin:
I generally try to catch a glimpse of him in 5........while I'm on the front straight........a lap down.......... :banghead:
Quote from: tjay on November 30, 2007, 11:09:30 PM
Hello!
This topic has made its way to Minnesota.
I apologize for being late to topic. I am one the "unfortunate" few to race a fzr400 in the lightweight (not ultralight) class in the CRA. Last year it was decided that we would race against buell 1200's, big ducs, etc.
We, hell even the SV guys, were all bit nervous being as we got this real long straight part in the track. In the end, the SV's still dominated the class, expert and novice. To point, the best riders were on SV's. If the best riders spent a bunch of money to buy newer bikes and parts for it, they would have still won.
Ironically enough, a bone stock SV (stock engine, stock suspension, stock exhaust) was consistantly in the top 3 expert all year. Take this observation for what it is worth.
Perhaps if the SV is ULW legal, maybe 560 fzr's could be ULW as well????
Pleased to meet you,
Tony Legueri
CRA #560
1988 FZR 400
noob expert for 08
Tony,
Welcome. Please allow me apologize for the adolescent thread jacking by a few attention disordered lugnuts (j/k) who disturbed this thread and welcome you with your first post. :biggrin: :biggrin:
Here's my attempt to get back on topic. FWIW, I switched from a mildly Superbike, as in 85 hp, SV650 (700 really) to a stock Buell XB12R that I now race. In my experience, there wasn't really that much difference in lap times between those two (at short tracks anyway) and anything could happen with two different riders. I happen to be faster on the Buell. The stock SV650 before that was a different matter.
Okay official word. sorry I had a rough couple of days and just able to get to posting.
Changes to Ultra-Light Superbike have been delayed until the 2009 season. We will announce the exact wording by mid-season 2008 if not sooner.
Good. Glad you see it our way! :biggrin:
I think you made a few people here pretty happy....at least for another season.
Off topic, anyone know when the "bump up" list and new schedule will be coming out?
Quote from: Eric Kelcher on December 01, 2007, 04:13:54 AM
Okay official word. sorry I had a rough couple of days and just able to get to posting.
Changes to Ultra-Light Superbike have been delayed until the 2009 season. We will announce the exact wording by mid-season 2008 if not sooner.
Eric,
Are there any changes to the LW displacememt rules?
Quote from: Eric Kelcher on December 01, 2007, 04:13:54 AM
Okay official word. sorry I had a rough couple of days and just able to get to posting.
Changes to Ultra-Light Superbike have been delayed until the 2009 season. We will announce the exact wording by mid-season 2008 if not sooner.
Good call CCS. It's great to see your responsiveness to racer concerns.
As a former FZR 400, GS 500 and Honda Hawk racer, I'll always have a soft spot in my heart for them and all the other interesting bikes that populate the lightweight and ultra lightweight grids.
Way to go Paul,
Kevin, Eric and all the rest of the CCS people who make it possible for us to indulge our passion too often hear the complaints but not the thanks.
:thumb:
Eric had exchanged a few emails with me during this controversy. I hate to say it, but he had VERY strong arguments. To paraphrase what his thoughts were, the SV is now a 10 year old bike. The FZR, EX, CB400, Hawk, ect were ten year old bikes when the SV came along. To make an SV competitive now with the new machines in Lightweight, you have to spend huge money on it, just as you had to do with the abovementioned bikes when the SV was new. By letting SS spec SVs into ULW, it gives the low buck guy a place to be competitive.
I hate to admit it, but I think Eric's reasoning is correct. Breaks my heart due to my emotional connection to the older iron, but the logic is hard to deny. My guess is that 2008 will be a last hurrah for the old school machines, so anyone who's got one in the garage had best bring it out this summer.
I see the point there, except that the SV is still being made and refined, and Kawasaki just started making the 650 Ninja. These bike do not compete with the big AC twins on the showroom floor as they're around half the cost and cater to beginner riders, just as IMO, the LW classes should cater to beginner racers. I guess with the rule change, that would make Ultralight the "starter" class option, but with ultralight only having one race, it's a pretty limited option for someone starting out. It seems to me that a lot of people have been taking everyone's advice over the last few years and have started out on an SV in LW. I think this trend will push more beginners back into MW.
Considering that actual bike weight has almost nothing to do with this anymore, maybe they should take a fresh look at all these classes and start from scratch. LCTwins and ACTwins? SS and SB for each? LC can race up into AC, and AC can race up into TB and SuperTwins?
Splitting the LS class into air and liquid cooled camps is not possible, we have too many classes as it is. Without the currently proposed change the SV would soon be outclassed in LW with no options, at least this way the many SV owners have a place to race and you can always race up. Actually the liquid cooled twins have long had an advantage over the air cooled when it came to HP/cc effiency, that's why the air cooled bikes are allowed larger displacements. The manufacturers however have been able to narrow the advantage and are now making much stronger air cooled bikes that can stay together. Eric's new rules as proposed will allow the liquid cooled bikes larger displacements to bring back parity. This works well from the manufacturers end as they can alter the design and come back with a competitive bike next season but proves to be more problematic for the racer who has the older design. While it is possible to increase an SV to 800cc the means of doing so available to the owner of a 650 tend to overwhelm the reliability of the 650 bottom end. The result is what we currently see, the SV650 will go to ULW and the manufacturers will begin to offer 750-800cc liquid cooled twins. Eric's willingness to delay this change for a year is to be applauded as it will give the racers of the many machines that will be affected a year to regroup and reduce the cost and headache of the change.
Just what we need, more classes
Right now, you've got UltraLWSB, LWSS, LWSB, & LWGP. My idea was to replace all those with LCTwinSS, LCTwinSB, ACTwinSS, ACTwinSB. Class count would stay the same. Not a perfect solution by any means, but a clean slate idea.
I don't think Suzuki or Kawasaki are going to come out with dramatically more powerfull entry-level bikes any time soon. The moderate power level is part of what makes them an ideal entry-level bike. The XB12, 1000SS, BMW1200's etc. are not entry level bikes in the consumer marketplace so they don't compete on the showroom floor, and I doubt race-bike sales make up a significant part of the sales #s for either group.
Your class idea is actually very similar to what Erics proposal will do except that there will be no SS class for the LC twins. As far as Suzuki and Kawasaki stepping up their twins, I agree that the racing crowd is not much of a driving factor. That said the new 750 and 800 water cooled twins coming out from other manufacturers such as Aprilia and BMW will take street market share from them and force them to step up or step out. As easy as it would be to redesign the SV into a 750 I can't see Suzuki walking away from the market. The Aircooled bikes have stepped up their game and there is no reason the think that the Watercooled manufacturers won't do the same so CCS is going to send the SV to ULW and welcome the new more powerful Watercooled twins to the LW ranks.
Quote from: Ridgeway on December 02, 2007, 10:08:02 AM... the LW classes should cater to beginner racers.
Nice idea, but most people start racing with their street bike. 600's are still the most popular. Racers might recognize the lower cost opportunities of lightweight bikes, but some riders may never race them, focusing on moving up from 600's and up.
The beginner class is amateur, isn't it?
at the moment the ducati 800SS is allowed to race and it is as fast as an SV. So if you had that bike you could win every race.So if the SV or KAW650 is allowed it will even it up.I do race an FZR in the class and there is no way i can catch that bike.I also have an SV so it will be good for me if they change the rules and i can have a better back up bike if my ducati has a problem with it.
Quote from: backMARKr on November 30, 2007, 11:55:09 PM
"Hello...My name is Rick and I am a professional shit disturber .:biggrin:"
Do you mean that Rick is the code word for the "Brown Tone"?
Quote from: Super Dave on December 02, 2007, 07:59:32 PM
Nice idea, but most people start racing with their street bike. 600's are still the most popular. Racers might recognize the lower cost opportunities of lightweight bikes, but some riders may never race them, focusing on moving up from 600's and up.
The beginner class is amateur, isn't it?
The 600 class is the most popular because both the bikes and riders are cheap and plentiful. I could bought 2 new 600's, or 3 SV's for what I spent racing my 1000ss this year! The only thing light about lightweight is our wallets... If racing was really about fun and affordability, there would be 30 bike grids in 125gp. For many, its all about bling. Most people spent more on their bodywork than on their motors and suspension... what does that tell you about the "us"
+1
Well stated.
I'm always impressed by all the mods in lightweight when some try to sell it as a budget class.
Quote from: Super Dave on December 03, 2007, 05:22:58 PM
+1
Well stated.
I'm always impressed by all the mods in lightweight when some try to sell it as a budget class.
Guilty :biggrin:
Thanks Eric and the CCS staff for all the work you do. I have a better understanding about the arguments presented and also some of the issues that has to be dealt with. I know that enryone won't be pleased and I applaud your effort.
Mark
Quote from: Super Dave on December 03, 2007, 05:22:58 PM
+1
Well stated.
I'm always impressed by all the mods in lightweight when some try to sell it as a budget class.
Yeah, but you can dump a lot of money into anything, and I get that the top runners in the LW classes *do* dump a lot of time and money into their bikes, but I still kind of agree with the idea that LW is good for the budget minded.
When I added up our expenses for '07, it came out that the cost of running X's 600 vs. my Hawk was over twice as much.
We both bought used, race prepped bikes, at the beginning of the season, we both upgraded our front brakes, the bike and brakes cost more than double for the 600. Neither went overboard on upgrades and we both bought spare sets of wheels and various other miscellany. We both ran the same number of events. He bought tires almost every weekend, I bought two sets of tires for the whole season. There's no way we could afford to both run 600's mostly based on cost of buying tires alone. I dealt with the cheap bike, hand-me-downs, and buying used parts because I have less talent and am not competitive. I still had a blast.
I also didn't have to worry about tossing a spendy bike (or a streetbike that still had a loan on it) and wadding it up. Had that happened I would have been able to afford a replacement pretty easily.
Can and do people dump piles of money into LW bikes? Sure, but as a "cheap" way to get into racing I still think the LW classes are the way to go if cost and getting experience are more important starting out than winning championships. Then again, I'm doing this for myself, for fun, and to spend time with X, more than for winning stuff. That's not really normal for racers.
Nah, you're more normal. In thirty races in a CCS event weekend, there aren't thirty winners of different races. Most of us are losers, some first place losers (2nd overall...LOL!). We do this because it's fun, and we like doing this vs planting tulips, softball, or PS2 all day long.
And I'll add that I think we keep doing it because we enjoy the people we meet so much in racing, even if we hate them and want to beat them.
Having raced a Hawk, I know that the only parts available are used! But seriously, the lightweight class is affordable if you run a bone-stock SV. I figure you can run a stock SV for a full season for $12000, including the cost of the bike. After the bike is paid for... maybe $6000.
But how many championships were won on a bone-stock SV? uhh... none. You can have fun though. But then again, you could buy a brand new 125 for $10,000 (with a full spares kit) and spend another $5000 on travel expenses. If you only ran GT lights and 125 GP you can easily go a full season on a crank and replace 3-4 pistons, maybe one or two clutches. Now, with the bike paid for, a full rebuild would cost you $1500 (maybe $800 if you did it yourself) So, for $7000 a year you could race a GP machine, fully capable of winning a championship. The only thing I don't understand is, why are the 125GP grids so small?
They're small because most people want to go fast, not win. This is why racer turnover is so bad. People of limited means spend too much money on bling (like fairings w/paint jobs), they race too many races in one weekend instead of concentrating a few classes, and they crash too much trying to go fast. At the end of two years, the average racer has no championships and no trophies...just scars and debt.
Quote from: Ridgeway on December 02, 2007, 03:42:49 PM
Right now, you've got UltraLWSB, LWSS, LWSB, & LWGP. My idea was to replace all those with LCTwinSS, LCTwinSB, ACTwinSS, ACTwinSB. Class count would stay the same. Not a perfect solution by any means, but a clean slate idea.
I think this is a terrible idea. If you have LW SB, you go from having two classes to race in (SB and GP) to one (either AC or WC SB). This is isn't even good for guys who's bikes are in SS trim, they go from 3 classes to 2.
My LW bike is elligible for LW 5 races (LWSB, LWGP, TB, GTL and LWF40). I race those 5 classes each weekend and don't want to have to ride against 600s just to have enough races in a weekend to make it worth the drive.
You're forgetting Thunderbike, Supertwins, and the GT. A SB should be reasonably competetive there. I just don't see an appreciable difference in the grids for LWSB vs. LWGP, other than the the occasional 2-stroke which could be allowed in the merged class.
I don't really have a vested interest anymore. I bought a 600 two weeks ago, so I can pick from about a dozen classes now...
Quote from: Ridgeway on December 06, 2007, 10:20:04 PM
You're forgetting Thunderbike, Supertwins, and the GT. A SB should be reasonably competetive there. I just don't see an appreciable difference in the grids for LWSB vs. LWGP, other than the the occasional 2-stroke which could be allowed in the merged class.
I don't really have a vested interest anymore. I bought a 600 two weeks ago, so I can pick from about a dozen classes now...
I listed thunder bike ("TB") and the GT ("GTL"). I am forgetting Supertwins, which I occassionally race, but when people show up with 999Rs (or 1098s), its hard to run up front, ... though I did finish 3d once this year and it was worth a couple hundred $$ from Ducati.
what kills the 125and the 250 is nobody can or wants to work on them anymore .in the old days everyone started on 2 strokes and learned how to work on them . now the average rider dosen't have a clue .its everything the can do to change tires.I had sometime to kill at homestead walked around seeing some friends . i noticed my 2 stroke friends were thrashing away while my 4 stroke friends were setting drinking gatorade .I like the 2 strokes because there a dedacated race bike and can be raced and repaired for years .you seize one you take it apart and fix it you break a four stroke and you put it in the trailer . with all the rule changes where does this leave Roland Sands new wammy singles bikes
I really like the idea of racing a 2 stroke GP bike, but it seems like they're getting hard to find, both bikes and parts, including tires. When less than a half dozen new ones are brought over each year, it makes me question how long it'll be before the supply completely dries up.
I have no problems getting parts for my bike (1997 TZ125). I even have WGP (world gp) parts on mine. Try to get those for a 4 stroke. Never had problem getting tires (other than the year Dunlop 'forgot' to order them)9.
You really only have to work on one at the track if you choose. Rejetting is not all that difficult, especially if you only have 1 cylinder.
maybe the 2 stroke guys overmechanicalize (i'm sure that's not a word) by working on them even though they don't have to. I enjoy trying things at the track so I constently work on my bikes although this becomes a problem with the limited time during a race weekend.now I have a friend riding for me while I recover I have a little more time to play with the bike .as the world shifts away from the average guy having some mechanical ability . I think you will see less mechanic racers and more ride and drop off to the mechanic in the next garage. my friend brings 2 mechanics and a helper to the races just to work on bikes. they always have more bikes in the trailer when they leave then when they show up.
Lately I have been working on my bikes a little too much (4atr stroke). It is great fun though to take a bike that is built by "oneself" and run with the best of them. Of course we are talking club racing and not National stuff such as AMA.
Mark
Does a 125 require more maint. than a 600... yes. Is it cheaper to race... yes. Just think about the all the aftermarket crap needed to race. A 125 or a 250 is already setup. If your a little fatter than normal, maybe you'd need different springs. I considered buying a new one last year when I decided to quit the hawk thing... but I weigh 230lbs. So, I went for the Duc. For me, working on the bike and trying new parts is 70% of the fun. Racing is just a "proof of concept" for me. My duc spent about 7 hours on the dyno this year, had 3 different exhausts, and 2 different set of pistons.
RS125's don't really require dyno time for club racing... they're so pipey it should be pretty obvious when the main jet is correct + the setup manual (also available of honda's HRC site for free) is pretty accurate. If your really concerned you could buy a detonation counter for $1000 and have optimal jetting.
A 125 is small and light enough to fit in a hatchback Civic (sideways), hardly ever needs tires, uses very little fuel. If your less than 170 lbs its great
If a 4 stroke is maintained at the same level as a 2 stroke, then a 600 is more work.
How much time and money does it take to do a complete rebuild of a 600 engine? How much can the average rider do themselves (such as servicing valves and heads)? How long to check valve clearence? Leak down (or at least compression) check?
I have raced both 2 and 4 stokes. The 4 stokes were more work overall. The between race checks take longer. Striping and rebuilding during the winter takes longer. Hell, changing wheels takes longer.
The average 600 racer is a knob, barely capable of pumping gas... let alone changing wheels and (God forbid) mounting a tire. What percentage of 600 racers run a full season, even Brian Hall sat out Gateway. For me, a 600 would be more work because I'd maintain it properly. Again, the average 600 racer is here for 2.5 years... a 600 can probably run for 2 years on one oil change. Then the motor would blow and he'd quit. So, for many the 600 is cheaper. Nothing is as much work as a "class-killing" Ducati, not even my singles bike.
I still don't understand why 125's are so unpopular... goes back to that "want to go fast" thing.
[quote author=123user link=topic=18980.msg161814#msg161814 date=1197413246
I still don't understand why 125's are so unpopular... goes back to that "want to go fast" thing.
[/quote]
Neither do I. Probably the most fun I have ever had racing a bike.
Probably because there is little room for error, you screw up and you see on the stop watch (seconds, not tenths of a second), there is no extra power to save you. That is what I really like about 125s.
ditto on the 600's as for my ducati's I just screw them together and go homestead proved it's not the bike but the rider fernando rode my clapped out 900 to third in gt lights and 3rd in thunderbike ( the 748 had a chassis problem) turning a 1.33 in the tbike race as a new team owner i'm delighted as a rider I feel like a fat pig I own a 89 rs 125 and its a really neat bike but need a 250 to haul my butt around
My feeling is that any of the desmoquatro or testaretta powered bikes are much better engineered than the airheads, after all they're designed to be raced.
Edit : on reading the rest I think I did the right thing. Still I am not sure I did the form correct. Hope they let me know.
OK I didn't read all 14 pages but I think I got the idea.. I'm new to this. I have an SV Superbike and I just faxed my entry. I think I entered LW SB with it and Formula 40 LWSB. To race Formula 40 on Saturday and LW SB on Sunday. For Summit Point May 3rd. Did I enter the wrong class? Honestly I was not sure what I was doing. :(.