are "kit" parts legal in supersport. Say, kit valve springs in a suzuki 600 or a "kit" oil pump in a r6? they are oem parts, so Im not sure.....thank you in advance :thumb:
well a racing kit part is not an oem part -original equipment manufacturer and that has nothing to do with ss legality (a racing kit part is not original equipment). kit valve springs... no (i think). kit ecu... yes.
the rulebook says- "original equipment head, valves and cams must remain as produced..."
doesnt specify springs though so maybe??
Now Sean, you know that they dont care about all that stuff..as long as you have DOT's on the bike then it will pass..its hard to see the motor when all they look at is the airbox :cheers:
Quote from: fatboy122 on January 04, 2008, 08:02:56 PM
Now Sean, you know that they dont care about all that stuff..as long as you have DOT's on the bike then it will pass..its hard to see the motor when all they look at is the airbox :cheers:
Would you rather they tore motors down post race?
CCS. My opinion. I wouldn't fight them to do it, but I think it would legitimize things at times. Right now, there's speculation here and there. I know I've heard of people that do really goofy, completely illegal things. Seldom does anyone save their mortgage money to tear anyone down.
Yeah, we know that it's not about power, but it happens and it can help in some situations.
And, yes, this is club racing. I know. It won't happen.
Yeah I hear ya, my problem is it seems the only people who complain about cheating are the ones getting beat. When the complaints are coming from the back of the pack it kind of un/de-legitimizes it a bit. I mean I cant tell you how many people complained behind my back about how unbelievably fast my sv was back when it made 71 hp, IM 6'6 240lbs for cryin out loud :biggrin:. I dont doubt there is some strethcing of the rules at the top level. I do doubt, however, that it is as rampant as it is believed to be by the 6th -15th place finishers. But I agree a random tear down or three throughout the year could scare a few people away from rule stretching.
I was talking to a expert rider from the upper midwest who was trying to sell me his bike..i told him i wanted a stock engine because of the reliability factor of a built motor and he said "well if your going to run top 10 you will be in the motor because everyone else is" and ive heard that from others as well..
Still comes down to set up. There have been some stock motors in the AMA, sometimes not on purpose (broken, and that was all that was available). Chassis is still paramount, period.
My heavy SV1000 had a stock motor, and I almost won some heavyweight and unlimited races with it. Got second quite a few times, and the power wasn't great at all on the SV1000.
in the three expert weekends last year (before "the accident") i raced only mw stuff/gtu and got several podiums, even 2-3 second place finishes all on a stock r6 motor... but i did have about $2800 in the chassis!
When was the last time someone got tore down? That being said, its still much more sportsman-like to keep the bike within the rules. The rulebook should be read like a legal document- no "spirit-of-the-rules" interpretations. That's what make WERA's tech so ridiculous.
Supersport rules dictate DOT's, stock wheels, original (but modified ok) forks. When the rulebook says something must be OEM, that doesn't mean it has to be unmodified and OEM. If it says "must remain as produced", that means to can't cut it- that doesn't mean you can't add low-friction/heat shedding coatings- Technically, I'd consider a simple valve job to be illegal in SS as the valve seats "don't remain as produced" because you've resurfaced them, but I think everyone would be angry if they were disqualified for a stock-reconditioning of the seats.
Just look at the part your considering to replace, then look at the rulebook. If its not mentioned, feel free to do whatever you like. If it "must remain as produced" don't cut it. A really good example is the cams on an SV650. For years now, builders have been ditching the OEM exhaust cams and running two OEM intake cams per cylinder as a cheap upgrade, I'd consider that to be SS legal, even though your running a different OEM cam in its original position- there still both OEM cams. OEM doesn't mean it has to be the part that came on "your" bike, its just "an" original manufacturers part for that model. Don't over-complicate the rules, your just restricting yourself.
Hopefully I didn't just give away too many builder secrets!
Quote from: 123user on January 05, 2008, 03:27:28 PM
Hopefully I didn't just give away too many builder secrets!
I dont think anyone wants your secrets :biggrin: . Ohhh and I saw a CCS supersport built Duc 1000 make 103 hp at the rear wheel on a conservative dynojet dyno the other day. No inflated numbers, as the previous bike that ran made identical indicated power as it did at the GNF suzuki cup dyno. I think you need to start doing something different :ass: :biggrin:
Quote from: 123user on January 05, 2008, 03:27:28 PM
When was the last time someone got tore down?
I tore down a motor for a friend of mine that was protested, after he protested someone else's equipment and he admitted it was illegal. That was in the summer of 2000.
Friend's bike was in great need of a valve job.
I really should have put mine on dynojet before disassembling it after Daytona. I've done all my work on a FactoryPro, doing steady state pulls. I've never even did a real sweep test on it to see what it pulled.
I can't imagine why anyone would want my "secrets", I've got a good one though on how to stay fat by eating everything you want and not exercising.
Quote from: 123user on January 05, 2008, 03:27:28 PM
When was the last time someone got tore down? That being said, its still much more sportsman-like to keep the bike within the rules. The rulebook should be read like a legal document- no "spirit-of-the-rules" interpretations. That's what make WERA's tech so ridiculous.
Supersport rules dictate DOT's, stock wheels, original (but modified ok) forks. When the rulebook says something must be OEM, that doesn't mean it has to be unmodified and OEM. If it says "must remain as produced", that means to can't cut it- that doesn't mean you can't add low-friction/heat shedding coatings- Technically, I'd consider a simple valve job to be illegal in SS as the valve seats "don't remain as produced" because you've resurfaced them, but I think everyone would be angry if they were disqualified for a stock-reconditioning of the seats.
Just look at the part your considering to replace, then look at the rulebook. If its not mentioned, feel free to do whatever you like. If it "must remain as produced" don't cut it. A really good example is the cams on an SV650. For years now, builders have been ditching the OEM exhaust cams and running two OEM intake cams per cylinder as a cheap upgrade, I'd consider that to be SS legal, even though your running a different OEM cam in its original position- there still both OEM cams. OEM doesn't mean it has to be the part that came on "your" bike, its just "an" original manufacturers part for that model. Don't over-complicate the rules, your just restricting yourself.
Hopefully I didn't just give away too many builder secrets!
The cam swap is not SS legal that is not as produced, Suzuki does not produce a bike with two intake cams
The rest of the info is correct and the wa rulebook should be read.
Quote from: 123user on January 05, 2008, 06:27:40 PM
I can't imagine why anyone would want my "secrets", I've got a good one though on how to stay fat by eating everything you want and not exercising.
Haha, I need to get my dirtbike together. We need to hit up Jimmy's soon.
Quote from: Eric Kelcher on January 05, 2008, 06:51:07 PM
The rest of the info is correct and the wa rulebook should be read.
Eric- does that mean you cant do a valve job and be SS legal???
Quote from: sobottka on January 05, 2008, 07:24:35 PM
Eric- does that mean you cant do a valve job and be SS legal???
Valve seat is not a restricted item in SS
I can't imagine why anyone would want my "secrets", I've got a good one though on how to stay fat by eating everything you want and not exercising.
[/quote]
No secret bro, I have been doing it for years. Got it down to a science.
wow, this thread kind of went a different direction than intended......Thanks for the info guys.
Just want to play by the rules
yes, the board is an excellent place to get both good and bad information and waste time. Plots thicken!
Eric,
I realize that your the final judge, but I fail to find the line in the rule book stipuilating that all OE components must remain in the original locations. The fact that the cam is mentioned independently of the head implies that its separate from the "head assembly" There is no "head assembly" clause though, and, in fact, the intake cam is OEM regardless of if mounting position. I think this goes back the that "spirit of the rules" thing I mentioned earlier. Though we don't really think of the rulebook as a legal document, that's what it is. I'd consider the intake cam thing a "loophole". I don't race or build SV's so it doesn't really matter to me, but I'm sure there's a number of SS SV650's out there using this loophole.
Hey Ben,
Jimmy's still jackin with his new garage, but he did move all bikes over. I went to flat river over the holiday and dialed in the jetting on a new quad-vent carb, also I made a flywheel weight for it. The biggest commercially available is only 14oz. Mine weighs about 30oz. Suprisingly, its still VERY touchy, but at least you ride an hour before looping
123User
Here is the line
6.1.2.E.(3.) Original equipment head, valves, and cams must remain as
produced, with the exception of machining the gasket surface of
the cylinder head.
On the Suzuki it was produced with two unique cams, and placing a cam in the motor not in its original position is not as produced either. Creative interpretation of the way others' SS rules were written (requiring use of stock gaskets, must have vs as produced) before saw crushed up head and or base gaskets glued/fastened in the motor but not in their as produced location thus raising compression. The timing chain sprockets are not regulated thus allowing degreeing of cams.
If anyone has any specific questions about a mod to a bike, that is something I can and do handle via email or phone, in person, mail etc to insure a tuners secert is not spread to masses but that it is within the rules if there is ever a question.
all i can say is CCS SS rules/interpretations make alot more more sense than WERA SS.
How's that for stirring the pot? :pop:
esdit: except for the shade of yellow thing :spank:
:lmao: :ahhh: :lmao:
Stir all you want, our rules are pretty easy to understand just as CCS' rules are unless you're actively trying to find a way around a rule like 123 is doing. If his version of OEM parts made any sense then all 600's could use a 1k motor from the same OEM cuz it's all the same right? Of course all HRC parts are legal too since Honda makes them, same for GYTR stuff from Yamaha....
The biggest issue people have is they don't read the entire rulebook and just choose the parts they like to follow. Of course they also tend to whine the most when busted and DQ'd. Weird huh?
Well, not everyone whines. Can't complain when I didn't read them and execute...LOL!
Mongo, I respect the way both CCS and Wera have their rules. Just want to make sure Im within the rules. No playing games here, or I wouldn't be asking what is legal.
Can't wait for the season to start!
WERA rules are the simplest of all. If the rule book doesnt tell you "you can do this" then you cant. Kinda hard to mis-interpret that. Some people love it that way, some hate it, to each his own. Im not the biggest fan of the CCS SS rules, but I do appreciate the creativity they force you to use. Though I wish they were just a tiny bit more restrictive, as a talented fabricator can do some silly things to a SS bike to make it many levels above a true SS bike. But thats racin'.
just make it so the motor has to be stock
since i cant afford to modify the new bikes motor
Actually Mongo, you didn't read what I wrote correctly. A GSXR1000 motor would not be legal because it wasn't the motor type for the application. No GSXR600 was ever made with a 1000 motor by Suzuki. OEM means Original Equiptment Manufacture(r). An oem part would be one that was originally came on that application as delivered from the factory. I agree that this is a fine point. SV's were manufactured with both an OEM intake cam and and OEM exhaust cam. Whether there is an OEM exhaust cam or and OEM intake cam in a particular spot, they are both OEM for that application.
The point is moot because Eric has nixed it, but my argument has validity. Eric has merely made a less literal interpretation of the rules than I have.
And its not exactly unethical or unsportsmanlike to find a loophole. Finding an advantage is what racing has been about since the motors were horses and the cars were chariots. BMW has been calling their 1200 motor "air cooled" even though most of the cooling is actually done by the oil cooler.
The rulebook does not specifically spell out that cams must remain in their original locations. I read the "head" to be that chunk of aluminum with ports and holes. In other words, the casting. Eric is interpreting it to be a "head assembly" filled with valves, springs, and cams. The fact that the valves and cams are mentioned separately from the head the implies that it is, in fact, separate. I don't agree with his decision, but I can accept his point.
Quote from: Eric Kelcher on January 06, 2008, 03:59:58 PM
Here is the line
6.1.2.E.(3.) Original equipment head, valves, and cams must remain as
produced, with the exception of machining the gasket surface of
the cylinder head.
:lmao: 123user- what part of cams must remain as produced confuses you?
Are the cams being reground? Is any metal removed? Are they aftermarket? No, the cams are "as produced" if they're not altered. Their position has changed, but they are "as produced"
A cam is a piece of iron or steel with bumps on it, the head is a piece of aluminum with holes, the valves are valves, the springs are springs. The rule does not say the head assembly must remain as produced. It mentions each individual component, and requires that each individual component remain as produced.
If you interprete the rules to mean "the head assembly", then no, you couldn't swap oem cams. If you interpret them all individually, then you can. Eric has interpreted it as the "head assembly". As far as I'm concerned, Eric has settled the issue.
I'm not sure where one would put the extra cams and where the additional cams would come from. But it certainly isn't as the bike or the component was produced.
I think it's giving everyone a real laugh at the reach though.
If you don't reach, you'll never grab! Racing has always been about pushing the envelop, whether that envelop is traction, rpm, or the rules. Creativity is what made the Erion Brothers famous (won them some championships too).
Sometimes that creativity can go to far, HRC's NR500 is a good example. Its important to start a productive dialog on creative rules interpretation. Without that dialog, you end up with a static set of rules. If you look at WERA's rulebook (and I don't mean the vintage part) you'll see bikes referenced that have not been produced in 20+ years. I think we all realize that WERA is very inflexible and not open to creative interpretations.
CCS continues to succeed in the Midwest region (where WERA has failed) because they are inclusive. I'd say that (in general) CCS encourages new equiptment and creative solutions, but at some point they will put they're foot down... I found that point and started an interesting dialog.
The intake cam in the exhaust slot is not as the engine was produced by the OEM - therefore the same reasoning you use for the 1k motor not being legal is the same reasoning that makes the cam swap illegal. The intake cam is not the OEM part for that application.
I do agree on people pushing the envelope on the rules being part of it. It's my job to make the bikes as equal as possible.
WERA and CCS in the Midwest has to do with a deal Roger was willing to sign with Blackhawk in the 90's and nothing to do with rules sorry. If you look all over the US racers follow the rules they're given, very very few will refuse to race just because they don't like how a rulebook is structured.
+1
Actually I considered racing WERA this year when a friend of mine made the switch. WERA has a good reputation for fairness when applying technical standards. The lack of lightweight classes and the crappy tracks in my region made me decide to run CCS.
I don't know what kind of deal was made between WERA and CCS, but it seems that WERA got the short end of the stick.
Quote from: 123user on January 11, 2008, 08:16:48 PM
Actually I considered racing WERA this year when a friend of mine made the switch. WERA has a good reputation for fairness when applying technical standards. The lack of lightweight classes and the crappy tracks in my region made me decide to run CCS.
I don't know what kind of deal was made between WERA and CCS, but it seems that WERA got the short end of the stick.
I dont think it was deal between the two, rather a deal between CCS and blackhawk. With CCS having a lock on blackhawk, along with the demise of IRP, the problems with Putnam's track managment, and some problems the last time (or couple times) WERA came to Gateway, it wasnt so much a failure in the region, but rather a lack of a region. If you ever get another bike, you really should come run a WERA weekend with me sometime, I think you will appreciate the way they run their events.
What the PBR youngun said.
Roger made a deal with BHF, we wouldn't sign the 7 event deal and couldn't afford to pay the full rental plus $5/head through the gate, plus cash up front for concessions, plus $2.50 (I think, might have been $5) per rider listed on a grid sheet no matter how many actually made the race. The only way to survive that would have been to charge extra to race at BHF and with the condition it was in at the time it wasn't a good idea so we quit racing there.
Then toss in GLRRA undercutting everyone big time in MI and the loss of IRP and you have a very weak region - although it's far from the same as the CCS MW region since ours was always based further East.
Quote from: Mongo on January 11, 2008, 11:27:07 PM
Then toss in GLRRA undercutting everyone big time in MI
Sorry to thread jack but what ever happened to GLRRA? anyone know?
Was interesting to watch, but, ultimately, I think their expenses were beyond revenue. Can only have so much volume in loosing money before you have to give up and stop putting money in or looking for ways to suppliment it.
Seems like Eric was on the forum once.
Didn't he sell the program or move on to MX?
Ben,
If WERA could ever mend their grudge with Putnum. I'd have the Hawk back together in an instant. Putnam could be the biggest money makin' event for WERA all year.
I ride a 2006 ducati 1000ss, which is now SB spec. The crazy thing is that there isn't a sprint race class for this, but there's two that my 1988 Hawk could be competetive in. What gives!
This is what I mean about the CCS management and rulebook being more inclusive. WERA is totally the place to go if you want to endurance race, but I'd hate to drive 5 hours to run 1 class and risk DQ because of WERA's hairsplitting tech.
WERA may be more "fair", but CCS is more racer friendly. My money will stay with them.
I don't think Putnam has anything to do with WERA. CCS and AHRMA don't have dates there either.
I realize that neither WERA, CCS, or AHRMA have dates at Putnam. But I'm not going to try out WERA on a go-cart track 4 hours away to run one class. If WERA could get back in Putnam, I'd go and a lot of other people would too. That track is perfectly located for so many people.
I made a general statement that WERA rules are stricter and less inclusive for machine varieties. If you want to chase buell or ducati (aircooled) contigencies, CCS/ASRA is place to do it. If you enjoy modifying your machines heavily, CCSASRA is the place to do it. So, yes, there are people out their that don't run WERA because of their rules structure. And its more than just a tiny minority.
I have every respect for WERA racers, their management, and officials. But I choose not to race WERA because I think the rules are too restrictive. I doubt I am the only one.
Mongo may be correct about the rule decision, but his logic is still fallacious. There is no part in the rulebook that says the engine or its configuration must remain as produced. I does mention individual components, heads, cases, valves, cams, and it does say these must remain as produced and OEM. This is not the same as a motor transplant suggestion, its not OEM for the application. The SV did come with OEM intake cams, it just didn't come with 4 of them.
Just because you come to the correct conclustion doesn't mean you followed the correct steps to get to that conclusion. If the rule books said "head" instead of "heads" (the plural form) it'd make a better case for my argument. The plural form has traditionally been used to describe the "head assembly". However, the SV has more than one "head assembly" (as opposed to an inline). This complicates the issue. Now the rule could mean plural "head" or a plural "heads". This all seem way to legalistic, maybe we should move the thread in a different direction. I suggest we discuss ice cream flavors. I like Rocky Road, it tastes good and keeps me fat without really trying.
But I've got a real stretch for your entertainment. You could run race cams and duct tape the OEM cams to the side of the bike... even I agree this would be illegal!
I like pralines and cream. Those little pieces of whatever is what I like about it.
If we ever go back to Gingerman, I recommend Sherman's ice cream store. Its right on the way to the track. Everything is made from real fruit... It was a real relief in 2006 when it was like 97 degrees. I thought all those Canadian Can-Am guys were going to melt.
Our rules don't say it has to remain as produced or are you back to the CCS rules on that one?
Is Shermans the dairy right at the exit?
I've always been on CCS rules. I believe any references to WERA rules were to say that those weren't CCS's... sorry if I didn't communicate that effectively. I've never raced under WERA rules, so I wouldn't even try to interpret them.
Shermans is about 1/2 mile from the exit for south haven. Traveling east it would be on your left. Its just a little past the Walmart. I recommend 1 scoop. I have pictures of my wife and I trying to eat 2 scoops... its literally 6 inches about the top of the waffle cone!
How do you think CCS's change to the 800cc format in LW classes will effect WERA? I know that in the MA and SE regions many racer run both. It could go either way. The fast guys may build big SV's for CCS and make them uncompetetive for any legal class in WERA. Or they could keep they're 700cc SV's and struggle at ROC. Depending on how it goes, WERA could really lose on this one.
If I would have known that CCS was going to go to the 800cc's, I would have bought an SV instead of my Duc. Those things are really going to scream.
Almost no fast guys run superbike in WERA. All of the money is in SS and manufactur money, so no one wastes there time turning the bikes into SB (except me and 9 mil). Especially with how fast the 2nd gens are in SS trim.
Quote from: benprobst on January 14, 2008, 04:37:49 PM
Almost no fast guys run superbike in WERA, in the SE/MC at least. All of the money is in SS and manufactur money, so no one wastes there time turning the bikes into SB (except me and 9 mil). Especially with how fast the 2nd gens are in SS trim.
What Ben said. It won't have any appreciable effect.
Not trying to thread jack but i didnt think i needed to start another topic of supersport rules but are lightweight flywheels allowed in this class?
oh and i like any ice cream with dark chocolate
worship...
(https://www.ccsforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi184.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fx222%2Fchickenhawk049%2Fphishfood.gif&hash=9150263943d45fd7a0897530f9fa7c49e43028fe)