Now that things are kind of changing, maybe if we b*itch about it enough we could get a real supersport class. I will use Ed Key's bike as an example. And before anyone goes squealling to Ed that I wrote this, I talked to him multiple times on the subject. He, suprisingly is all for it and stated that he was sick and tired of the way the rules were written and could not get them changed, so he decided to build a bike that highlighted all the gray areas.
That being said how can a "supersport" SV weigh in at just over 300# and put out almost 85hp be legal for supersport. Ram air, no charging system, and lots of Ti and carbon fiber sounds like a showroom stock SV to me, RIGHT? It was told to me that there is not enough time to properly tech the rules needed to have a true supersport. Fusa did it with a dyno and scales. OK a dyno might be expensive but two bathroom scales are accurate enough and cost about $20. How about making protests cheaper with higher penalties if you are cheating. And for the person that protests where it involves a tear down...The protester must provide and have on hand the gaskets to reassemble said parts (incase they are wrong) and an example of the parts in question( for comparison. This keeps Larry from holding a set of cams up and saying "yup, looks stock to me"). For example: I want to protest a 600 for having a 3mm motor. I must then furnish a head gasket, and possibly a few other gaskets, and the measurements from a service manual for the machine in question. Or I must show a set of stock cams that measurements can be taken from there on the spot if the cams would be in question. This I think might keep some cheating in check.
Any other thoughts I just kind of started thinking about this. Supersport is intended for you to show up with your nearly showroom stock bike and be competitive even if you don't have Shawn Higbee like talent.
I would LOVE to see a supersport class that is much closer to stock. It makes for much more fun racing.
It would worry me to have all the parts and specs for all the bikes in a class that I am going to protest, but even if they could just tighten the wording of the rules, it could make it better. --I believe if the rules are written very specifically by listing only what you may do and state that you can do absolutley nothing else it would help. Cheaters are going to cheat one way or the other, but it may be much more noticable if they are totally gaping people on the straights when the rules are strict.
This was my first season running some WERA races and it seems like they have a more strict supersport class and I liked that.
Yes, Kevin Elliott, please tighten the wording of the rules.
My 2cents. Now go buy a calendar. www.AmericanRoadracer.com
While I understand your rant Jason, my opinion is that you could change the rulebook to say a supersport engine must remain completely stock and sealed as it came from the factory and you would still have the exact same amount of cheating.
Ed will still win and one guys 600 will still seem to be way faster than anothers.
Just my two cents.
yea, and right now triple clamps, brembo radial masters, and cut subframes are all legal in CCS SS.
That just seems wrong.
I agree super sports classes should be as produced.You should not be able to alter base gaskets in sv motors or mille heads but every one is doing it.The first year I built my 03 sv I got out powered by a bunch..Last year I went and did somthing about it.I built a quote supersport legel motor making 84hp on fusa dyno.I also did all the tricks subframe,brembo and a bunch of TI stuff.. It all starts with CCS TO ENFORCE IT ALL! :-/
I'd like to see something reasonable.
But sometimes it can go both ways. If one makes it so that one has to use stock bolts, etc., how do you enforce it? Do you make riders wait for back ordered parts? There isn't an easy way to tell if something is "titanium". Might look like something else.
But I don't think that Supersport should allow no starter, no charging system, etc.
Radial master cylinder? I don't know if that is a performance advantage, but, for me, it's a lot of help for my wrecked forearm. It doesn't allow me to go into a corner later, but it allows me some consistent ability to maintain even pressure over the course of a race. That's safer for me. And with the cost of a Brembo master cylinder through one Japanese manufacturer, it's inexpensive.
Protests...first, each tech should have a whistler that will give the engine displacement without tear down. Remove plug, insert, turn over. Easy.
Disregard for the rules should be handled accordingly. Unfortunately, I have been in the secondary postion of helping do a tear down for a rider that was protested....because he protested another rider...and he admitted that he was illegal. There were no ramifications for specific or general deterrence for that knowingly committed act. And the resulting protest was deemed to be in retaliation by the tech inspector and the referee, but the race director upheld the protest.
Why should some riders try to be legal?
You have specific ideas Jason.
It would help if the tech guys actually worked at the race track and did their jobs. It seems to me they just want a smooth uneventful weekend so they don't have to work so hard. Just collect a pay check and go home kind of attitude.
Honestly the tech guys should have a book with all the information needed to check the specs of all the bikes that could possibly be running in each class. They should also have all the tools needed to check those measurements in question. The tech guy must also know how to use the tools and know what their doing.
Funny the end result is that there will always be cheating in any level of racing no matter what. If the AMA guys don't cheat the R&D will take longer to make better & faster bikes. The manufactures competing against each other by making better bikes results in the average street squid or racer getting all excided about the new better bike and going out and buying one to race. If they never changed that would be supersport. In my opinion if you want to race true supersport go race ARMHA or some series like that where the development doesn't change.
I can just about supply all the spec #'s for all the bikes measurements needed. It just takes a tech guy who is serious about his job and brings that information to the track along with the tools needed. You can measure cam lift but unless you have a cam doctor you can't actually know the cam degrees.
CCS should supply that tool for the tech guys.
I agree that the rules should be written more clear on what can be allowed and anything other mods can't be done period. It helps the guy with less green in his wallet be able to be more competitive through his riding skills.
Honestly I think HP rules are crap. There are so many ways around that. With all the new fuel injection & ignition programs it is very easy to cheat the dyno.
Grey areas are part of racing. They will always be there no matter what the rules.
You could say to run sealed motors but its not fair for the guy who got a motor that was build on a Monday or Friday. Nothing is fair I guess.
I see it as racing is the whole package and you need to play within the rules and grey areas. Pushing those grey areas only makes for new rules to be made the next season.
Honestly Cut subframes shouldn't be allowed nor should aftermarket triples be allowed. But those are the rules so you can do it.
So my final say is that they should changes those a little bit although I don't think it will make one guy faster or slower especially on a regional level. Maybe thats why they allow it.
Another thing to consider is the cost of racing will go up with the more staff needed to check all the bikes for legality.
It's so scewed up when you are in top 3 of a supersport race when you go to tech and they say oh you showed up to tech, good job now get out of here you passed. Thats so dumb. Talk about laziness! At least check the simplicitys.
I wonder if they don't check anymore because they don't want to disqualify someone and then piss them off and lose yet another series rider with the already thinning fields we have in racing?
QuoteI'd like to see something reasonable.
But sometimes it can go both ways. If one makes it so that one has to use stock bolts, etc., how do you enforce it? Do you make riders wait for back ordered parts? There isn't an easy way to tell if something is "titanium". Might look like something else.
Actually there is an easy way to tell the difference between titanium and steel - a magnet works great.
hi there, I hope all is well. In no way was Jason D. saying that if you make Supersport really Supersport that the outcome of the race will change. To tell you the truth if everyone was riding equal bikes, riders like Ed k. would still win by a half a lap. That will never change. The real reason we need to make the rules more strict is not so more people have the chance to win, but so more people can afford to come out and race with us without having to get a second job. Like Jason I am a lightweight rider. To come out to the track with SS lightweight bike it will cost you about $4000.00 (not bad). Now what do you think it costs to have an Ed Key SS bike? I am only using Ed's bike as an example because we all know him and we know the effort that he has gone through to make an exceptional SS bike. Making the rules more strict won't take true riding ability away from any one, it will only allow our sport to grow by allowing more riders to join CCS.
Now don't play the school girl role and come back at me to argue or to ask how I plan to make this all happen, because I don't have a great answer for you right now. All I want to know is if there is anyone else who thinks that we should pursue the change in the SS rule book. (We all know we will never be able to stop everyone from cheating, but I think we can revise the rules enough to shut guys like us up).If there are enough of us out there, then let's stop talking about it and find out what our next step is to making this happen. If know one else cares, then let's not make it a big deal and have some fun in the 2006 season
HAVE A GREAT HOLIDAY AND GOOD LUCK IN 2006 !!!
First let me say Ed Key does not cheat but, he does use the rule book to his advantage. CCS has changed the rule book several times due to Ed's wily ways but, he still wins......and he keeps beating up the rule book because CCS leaves the gray areas in there.
The rule book needs to be written not telling racers what they can't do but what they can do, and only what they can do. If the rule book doesn't say you can replace/alter/modify something then you can't, it's as simple as that.
It's not a secret that Ed has a much different SS bike than anyone else but then Ed's been playing this game a long time and he knows his way around a bike. I guarantee no one else out there spends as much time going over their bikes searching for ways to get more speed, more of advantage over his competitors than Ed does.
As for other "cheaters" I guess if the tech people are not doing their jobs, as has been reported in other posts, maybe you riders need to follow up on that and get someone in charge to pay attention to that situation.
I also agree the tech people need the tools/specs to do their jobs. Those should be provided by CCS. I'm quite sure the specs are all available from the manufacturers. Truthfully, the reason FUSA and WERA went to dynos and scales is to avoid all the specs, there are only two to worry about, HP and weight. Makes the tech job much easier
I am completely supportive of making the sport easier for new people to get into, as I'm sure everyone else is.
So what needs to happen? What rules need to change SS for the better? Do we need Tech inspectors to have more education and more literature on motorcycles that race in SS? Do we need Tech inspectors to care more?
Is the Dyno and the scale that big of an issue to get? Is that the answer to catching the cheaters?
Let's start a scenario.
Let's say I win LWSS on my SV. What should the procedure when going straight to Tech. Do not pass go, do not collect 200 dollars, straight to Tech.
BESIDES CHECKING MY AIRFILTER INTAKE HOLE...LOL.
I could have CAMS, OVERBORE, PORTED AND POLISHED HEADS... But the guy checks my freakin airfilter. LOL!!! Now thats funny, I don't care who you are....
QuoteActually there is an easy way to tell the difference between titanium and steel - a magnet works great.
Aluminum...
And if we'd like to talk about how it's done in car racing, getting around the rules for steel driveshafts and magnets...
It's easy to over come.
Are you going to be able to tell internal modifications without REALLY getting into a motor? Probably not.
If a person has to carry the gaskets and an example cam to tear me down, let me know and I'll build the biggest cheater on the planet, because NOBODY would be able to do that...
But let's look at this... In supersport, you can run:
Full Exhaust
Power Commander (or the like)
Quickshifter
Slipper clutch
And a dozen other HIGH-END go-fast goodies.... IMHO, the only thing "supersport" about the "supersport" class of today is that you have to run DOT tires.
I say OEM exhausts, No fuel injection/carburetion modifications, quickshifter or slipper clutch (unless OEM Factory installed).
As it came out of the showroom less lights/mirrors/bodywork. Allow for external gearing changes, suspension upgrades (limited) and brake lines/pads, clipons/rearsets. That's it...
I don't think tech inspection says that a bike is legal for a class. I never saw that as the intention. Yeah, if you're entering a GSXR1000 in Lightweight Supersport, that's just being nice...send the guy back to registration.
Tech inspection in the AMA, CCS, and the FIM is for generalized safety aspects of a motorcycle.
Some manufacturers don't make certain information available. In the early 90's, the CBR600F2's were good all around bikes. But there were HRC parts available. I was told that there were certain aspects of the archetecture of the bike that was not made available to the AMA. And, like Jason said, you'd need a cam doctor to really tell what's going on with a cam, etc.
I'l agree with Gordy about the rules needing to state that you can do certain things, and the other stuff needs to be left alone. Ed Key is an outstanding rider that focuses on his riding in an efficient manner, his bikes are well prepared, he follows the rules very carefully, and he works on his set up a lot!
Yes, I agree that supersport should be tightened up a bit from it's previous language...but it's December...a bit late.
Has anyone made a draft of ideas or attempted to submit anything to Kevin or Eric?
QuoteIs the Dyno and the scale that big of an issue to get? Is that the answer to catching the cheaters?
Let's start a scenario.
Ok... lets say just for conversations sake, I was able to bring a Dyno to most of the midwest events. Would one be willing to pay for a Dyno run? If so how much would one pay concidering the time and effort involved? Would CCS be willing to rent the Dyno for tech? Ans if so how much would they pay?
And if it was agreable to everyone involved, how much more would CCS entry and gate fees go up?
I personally think that a dyno being availble at the club level is a waste of time.
Opinions?
Stock exhaust would increase costs. How much does Honda charge for an OEM exhaust system? And aftermarket unit is lighter and less expensive to replace.
With the EPA standards being tightened on emissions, I think one needs to allow FI mods. If not, how hot does your CBR600RR run in GTU at Blackhawk in 95 degree weather. Again, we want riders to have reliable bikes that don't pop etc. If a PC, or other kinds of FI boxes work for you...that's going to help.
Even in production based classes of old, there were modifications that were done that were not picked up by tech inspectors.
Disassociating the aftermarket from the racing isn't a good thing, in my mind. It won't cause the manufacturers to step up and put in more money. Look at the contingency sheets for the names of companies in various production based racing programs.
QuoteQuickshifter
Slipper clutch
Those, I agree, don't follow with the "intent" of club racing supersport.
QuoteAs it came out of the showroom less lights/mirrors/bodywork. Allow for external gearing changes, suspension upgrades (limited) and brake lines/pads, clipons/rearsets. That's it...
I might have been on of the few that has raced that kind of series.
Here comes the problem. Manufacturer builds bikes. People purchase. Racers purchase. Over time, parts get bought through the channels.
Some parts are now out of stock from the manufacturers distribution. Now what? You're supposed to race, but an OEM part, one that is available through the aftermarket, isn't available for months.
Yeah, ok, we're talking reasonable parts. Exhaust, air cleaners, clutch plates, brake pads, (rotors of similar size), wheel bearings, tires...
Dave--know what the real problem is:
every year the manuf.'s come out with a new or upgraded bike with new parts, new trick stuff, etc.
As much as I hate to admit it, letting people update older models with parts comparable to the new bikes prolly DOES make it more affordable as I don't believe the spirit of the rule is to require a rider to buy a brand new bike every year to stay competitive.
So, while a slipper clutch, radial masters, triples, etc take a bike further away from the intended SS rules--they do make them more competitive with the brand new 06 model which have those items as stock (just not enough)
While I agree a little with that, I don't agree with it completely.
Bikes have changed. We can agree on that. But how much does it all change everthing given a similar playing field.
Blackhawk was relatively unchanged for some period of time. The track we raced on in 2001/2002 was similar to the one we raced on in 1993/1994.
The fastest 600 lap times that I knew of in 2001 were in the low 1:13 range. I believe that was Dave Ebben in July. I had a decent GSXR600 that year. Weighed in at 385 or so with 104 to 108 HP.
In 1993 I know that Todd Harrington was turing high 1:14's. I had a bike similar to his...a CBR600F2 with 93 HP and I remember going over the scales at 410 at the Brainerd AMA round that August.
The F2 did not have ram air, it had a 4.5 inch rear wheel, twin piston non-opposed brake calipers with fixed rotors, non-cartidge forks, no FI, no rear sets, and the tires of the period.
Certainly, the Honda weighed more, made less HP, and wasn't as advanced as the later GSXR. The lap time difference was about a second and a half max.
Buying a new bike every couple of years is about remaining elligible for contingency, not necessarily about being competitive at the club level.
Where do you draw the line?
QuoteWhile I agree a little with that, I don't agree with it completely.
Bikes have changed. We can agree on that. But how much does it all change everthing given a similar playing field.
Blackhawk was relatively unchanged for some period of time. The track we raced on in 2001/2002 was similar to the one we raced on in 1993/1994.
The fastest 600 lap times that I knew of in 2001 were in the low 1:13 range. I believe that was Dave Ebben in July. I had a decent GSXR600 that year. Weighed in at 385 or so with 104 to 108 HP.
In 1993 I know that Todd Harrington was turing high 1:14's. I had a bike similar to his...a CBR600F2 with 93 HP and I remember going over the scales at 410 at the Brainerd AMA round that August.
The F2 did not have ram air, it had a 4.5 inch rear wheel, twin piston non-opposed brake calipers with fixed rotors, non-cartidge forks, no FI, no rear sets, and the tires of the period.
Certainly, the Honda weighed more, made less HP, and wasn't as advanced as the later GSXR. The lap time difference was about a second and a half max.
Buying a new bike every couple of years is about remaining elligible for contingency, not necessarily about being competitive at the club level.
Where do you draw the line?
1.5 seconds in a top level club event is a huge difference.
C'mon, you know what we tell the new guys--you'll drop 10 seconds your first weekend, 5 seconds you 2nd year, and chase that last 10th of a second the rest of your life.
In the last few years, the 'fast' times for a top level SS prepped bike has dropped 2-3 seconds.
Rules that are more strict can help and hurt at the same time. The thought that a more strict rule book will stop cheating and make racing more affordable is unrealistic. I think the current CCS rule structure is not all that bad. Why are there almost NEVER any protests? I know this is a never ending arguement, but this is just my two cents.
shouldn't the supersport standard be modified each year to include new technologies as well?
Slipper clutch for example, if the new bikes come with it stock, then the old bikes should be allow to run an aftermarket unit. Or to be competitive you must go and buy a new bike.
Isn't the spirit of supersport is to prevent people from running expensive, trick, or exotic modifications or components to limit the cost of racing? But when a formally "trick" part is now availalbe as a standard, OEM part, then shouldn't that part not considered "Trick".
Besides, paying $700 for slipper clutch is a LOT cheaper than running a $2000 full titanium exhaust system. It is also cheaper than to sell your old bike, get a new one and build that new bike up.
Besides that, why would anyone NOT cheat with an older bike? if it is not eligible for contigency anymore, all you loose is your finish if (big if) anyone protest you. You wouldn't mind loosing the points anyways because if you are serious about a championship you would go get a new bike (or if you are fast enought o finish top 5 all the time you would go get a new bike)
I hate to think my 03 now have to retired to the status of "trackday bike". If I am allowed more mods to keep it on par with a new bike then it wouldn't have to. Vintage racing allows more modifications based on the vintage of the bike, maybe supersport should do the same.
Or maybe a horse power/weight limited rule would make more sense alongside the chasis/tire restrictions. But that is not really realistic as far as enforcement goes...
Hmmmm....
I recall of doing my fastest lap in 2004 on a ZX6RR at Blackhawk at a 1:10.6.
Thats a 3 second drop in 3 years. Plus Mark Junge beat that with like a 10.3.
Leave the bikes without being able to upgrade to slipper clutches like I had. Thats supersport racing if you ask me.
Keeping the bike as close to stock. If your allowed to make a major change to one model because its behind in technology that isn't supersport really. If brand x is better I guess you need a brand x. Thats what sells the bikes. Then brand y will decided like they are doing on all bikes now (hence the slipper clutch) to build their bikes with better parts. Like the AMA does with their rules. Disalvo claims he can be in the hunt this season because he has a slipper clutch now. It will keep his rear tire from overheating since their is less sliding & chatter from the rear without the slipper clutch.
I understand riders want to make it so everyone has a fair chance without breaking the bank but you still have to spend $1000 for an aftermarket slipper clutch that isn't proven yet. How is that cheaper.
No matter what someone will always be unhappy with any rule change. How is it fair that someone does their homework and buys the best bike out there and leaves it basically stock and starts beating everyone and then the guy with a bike of which is 3-5 years old is crying cause he doesn't have the goodies the newer bikes have.
Here is a suggestion: Sell it and buy a newer one. It will make you more money in the long run anyways. You don't see Larry Denning riding a 2001 ZX6R and buying an aftermarket slipper clutch for it and doing crazy motor work. Larry is a great rider but if he did that it would make his life on the track hell.
The example of the lap times from Todd & Dave are like apples & oranges. Todd was supreme for his time as a rider. Don't get me wrong but has Dave ever finish on the box 3 times in 1 AMA season?
Don't get me wrong Dave is a good rider but not a top AMA rider caliber.
My theory is I don't have a growing bank account at the moment so I choose not to race. I will only run money races on a properly setup supersport bike if I even ride at all. John Ulrich explained it very well to me one day.
Do it right or don't do it!
If you can only afford 3 rounds make it so they are your best races ever.
Just my thoughts on the moment.
-Farrell
Another issue - how do you deal with the "special" bikes?
Supersport just states that the bike needs to have been sold for street use in North America.
So if you have an R1, you can't change to forks, but the guy with the R1LE already has Ohlins. Or the guy that spent $30+k on a 999R, still supersport legal.
I really don't see a lot of need for supersport classes in club racing. Most of the top guys are winning superbike races on supersport legal bikes (or 1000cc classes on 600s). How much of an avantage are SB aftermarket forks over a set of SS legal OEM forks with $2k aftermarket cartridges? We already have too many classes that are run by the same people on the same bikes. Just eliminate the supersport classes.
A good set of superbike rules will keep out things that are TOO exotic (require frames with VINs, stock engine castings, stock throttle bodies, etc.). This would make Tech much easier and the classes much less confusing to outsiders.
The facts would remain: Those with the most money will have the trickest bikes (but maybe not the best setup), the best riders will win races, and if you "deserve" to win races because you're a better rider but the other guy has a better bike, maybe you should race AMA supersport and try to win there...
-z.
Now instead of complaining about all the series rules think of this. Even us racers can't agree on a rule while on this thread! ;D
So I say pick the series you think has the best rules for your race purpose and run that series.
Talking about it helps people understand the differences in riders purposes of being on the track.
Imagine what Kevin Elliot or Ron Barrick goes through!
-Farrell
Farrel, I agree with what you said... thats why I went and bought a 06 ZX6RR. I want a newer bike for supersport.
I was just saying for the hobby racers who race when they want to stay competitive, rules can be a little different to keep them in the game.
The serious racers are going to buy newer bikes, go to money races and make their races count. I don't have unlimited funds either and I have decided to do what you are saying.
I am just thinking in terms of keeping the field fair. But seriously, selling my old bike and buying a new one would see me loose at least $2000, then I have to spend another $4000 to buy everything that I had on the old bike (Since they all don't fit the new bike). Thats $6000. I could buy a slipper clutch, 25mm cartridges and get the motor built. and I may end up with a faster bike.
I still think being able to update older bikes is more cost effective to a hobby racer than getting a new bike. But thats just my opinion. besides the Team Green support and contingency make the deal just unbeatable ;D
QuoteNow instead of complaining about all the series rules think of this. Even us racers can't agree on a rule while on this thread! ;D
So I say pick the series you think has the best rules for your race purpose and run that series.
Talking about it helps people understand the differences in riders purposes of being on the track.
Imagine what Kevin Elliot or Ron Barrick goes through!
-Farrell
kevin and ron can't walk through the paddock once without hearing 3 different racers complaining about something... :D I know this first hand lol
Quote1.5 seconds in a top level club event is a huge difference. .
The point is, will the changes allowed to older bikes still allow them to make up the time?
Doubt it.
How much faster does a 1000 make a 600 rider?
QuoteHmmmm....
I recall of doing my fastest lap in 2004 on a ZX6RR at Blackhawk at a 1:10.6.
Thats a 3 second drop in 3 years. Plus Mark Junge beat that with like a 10.3.
On a track that was completely ground down and repaved.
The track surface and the traction that was available in 2003 was completely different in 2002.
Re read my post.
QuoteThe example of the lap times from Todd & Dave are like apples & oranges. Todd was supreme for his time as a rider. Don't get me wrong but has Dave ever finish on the box 3 times in 1 AMA season?
Don't get me wrong Dave is a good rider but not a top AMA rider caliber.
-Farrell
It was an apples to apples comparison. Todd wasn't on the box in 1993. That came later. He'd win club races handily, and he was regularly inside the top ten and sometimes just outside of it in 1993. Dave was cleaning house locally at the time also.
QuoteThe point is, will the changes allowed to older bikes still allow them to make up the time?
Doubt it.
How much faster does a 1000 make a 600 rider?
i went faster on my 1k than on my 600, back to back at the same event by several seconds.
don't think you can make an older bike more competitive? remember what Barney did with an F2 seriously worked over a few years back.
QuoteSlipper clutch for example, if the new bikes come with it stock, then the old bikes should be allow to run an aftermarket unit. Or to be competitive you must go and buy a new bike.
Isn't the spirit of supersport is to prevent people from running expensive, trick, or exotic modifications or components to limit the cost of racing? But when a formally "trick" part is now availalbe as a standard, OEM part, then shouldn't that part not considered "Trick".
In ways, that does have merit. It is at least reasonable. But where do you stop? Do all manufacturers have to have it or two? Do you allow updating with any kind of product? Or could you replace your 2000 R6 forks with Ohlins R&T forks? Or would you be required to source Yamaha spec forks? Then what about triple clamps?
Those are the problems....
QuoteBesides that, why would anyone NOT cheat with an older bike? if it is not eligible for contigency anymore, all you loose is your finish if (big if) anyone protest you.
I've got a couple of answers to that.
First, I don't have the income that other people do, so, my first answer is that I, and even some other people, can't afford the cost of cheating.
Then, the other side, is that some might feel that cheating might not be honorable.
QuoteVintage racing allows more modifications based on the vintage of the bike, maybe supersport should do the same.
Vintage racing rules are usually developed because of the availability of parts that are hard to get. Honda made ten sets of factory four into four racing pipes for CB750's. If those were the rules, use an OEM pipe, you'd be way out of luck...
QuoteIn ways, that does have merit. It is at least reasonable. But where do you stop? Do all manufacturers have to have it or two? Do you allow updating with any kind of product? Or could you replace your 2000 R6 forks with Ohlins R&T forks? Or would you be required to source Yamaha spec forks? Then what about triple clamps?
Those are the problems....
I am fully aware of the gray and problem areas. So to be fair, really, is to have a complete list of parts and specs that each bike/model can or cannot have and change it year to year, much like NASCAR, but that would be very very very unrealistic.
So to beat the R1 LE in supersport is to go buy another LE right?
I guess it never really is fair. and you just have to go play in SB.
;D
Well all this is just a discussion, not a rule proposal... just our immediate, un-thought-out ideas.
QuoteI've got a couple of answers to that.
First, I don't have the income that other people do, so, my first answer is that I, and even some other people, can't afford the cost of cheating.
Then, the other side, is that some might feel that cheating might not be honorable.
I suppose. But I do see many people cheating, and some don't even know it.
Well I haven't raced supersport in a good 2 years so I wouldn't know what to say about that lol
QuoteI really don't see a lot of need for supersport classes in club racing. Most of the top guys are winning superbike races on supersport legal bikes (or 1000cc classes on 600s). How much of an avantage are SB aftermarket forks over a set of SS legal OEM forks with $2k aftermarket cartridges? We already have too many classes that are run by the same people on the same bikes. Just eliminate the supersport classes.-z.
Cost.
If you want to attract new riders, one needs a reasonble set of rules that are consice and obtainable. I believe that Supersport should be a reasonable class that focuses on set up.
Superbike? Has anyone been motored? It does happen that riders that have a lesser set up and even potentially are lesser riders can go faster because of hopped up machines.
And the extra classes create a needed thing called revenue for racing organizations.
QuoteI suppose. But I do see many people cheating, and some don't even know it.
Many? So, like six out of ten? Or are we talking about assembly/technical issues...incorrect number size...
Quotedon't think you can make an older bike more competitive? remember what Barney did with an F2 seriously worked over a few years back.
I raced F2's.
Has Barney only won in Thunderbike on F2's? If he has, then it was all the bike...but...
Quotei went faster on my 1k than on my 600, back to back at the same event by several seconds.
Track?
QuoteAnother issue - how do you deal with the "special" bikes?
-z.
Isn't that covered in the current rules?
QuoteIn the last few years, the 'fast' times for a top level SS prepped bike has dropped 2-3 seconds.
Rider, tires, HP, track, or set up?
QuoteRider, tires, HP, track, or set up?
same track layout and rider. tires and hp maybe.
back in 2001 top times overall were 13's. (wood, greenwood, chouniard). this year 11s were the norm for those top guys
QuoteRules that are more strict can help and hurt at the same time. The thought that a more strict rule book will stop cheating and make racing more affordable is unrealistic. I think the current CCS rule structure is not all that bad. Why are there almost NEVER any protests? I know this is a never ending arguement, but this is just my two cents.
I'm with ya, Tommy.
Racing isn't affordable, but it can be maintained to something. Remove Supersport, and I'm sure that there will be more that find a way to have higher HP engines that might allow those riders and advantage that they could not attain in other ways.
No protests? Risk. It's expensive enough to race, but the cost of protesting, which needs to be relatively specific and the inspectors need to be capable of recognizing the potential infraction, makes that risk higher.
And then, when caught, the riders that have been shown to be illegal have been given relatively light punishments, in my opinion...
Quotesame track layout and rider. tires and hp maybe.
back in 2001 top times overall were 13's. (wood, greenwood, chouniard). this year 11s were the norm for those top guys
I think Jeff is refining his riding and going better? I think most tire manufacturers have gone through a couple of tire design changes since 2001. Thoughts?
maybe, but Scott has stayed right there with jeff. In fact, Scott still holds the club record when he got the new R6.
Quoteback in 2001 top times overall were 13's. (wood, greenwood, chouniard). this year 11s were the norm for those top guys
http://www.roadracingworld.com/news/article/?article=23206
Given the money available here...
I'm not sure if I'd say that 11's are the norm. You got another link?
I counted one 11 (tires?), and six 12's.
Ok, so, who's writing a rules proposal?
he did a whole bunch last year, one race there were almost all 11's.
I'm trying to find another link, all I've found is this one so far: http://www.lrrsracing.com/results/2005/results07232405/laps/sun6Lap.pdf
here's another: http://www.lrrsracing.com/results/2005/results08060705/laps/Sat14Lap.pdf
also to note that he's doing the 11's on a 600 where the previous fast times used to be on 750s
QuoteProtests...first, each tech should have a whistler that will give the engine displacement without tear down. Remove plug, insert, turn over. Easy.
Uh ? what is this ?
QuoteUh ? what is this ?
simple tool to measure cylinder displacement through the sparkplug hole
i got that, but i never seen one or hear of one, got a link to one somehwere ?
google is your friend. :D
(hard to find, but its out there)
http://www.katechengines.com/corporate_services/whistler.php
For a start....
Quotei went faster on my 1k than on my 600, back to back at the same event by several seconds.
Jason DiSalvo Formula Xtreme 1:41.646
Jason DiSalvo Superstock 1:40.465
I think you need more set up time.... ;D
available supersport mods. exhaust, fork internals, rear shock, bodywork, steering stabilizer. no modifying of motor or lightening of anything. no overbores, must retain stock displacement. raise the SS fees only $10 per race to cover dyno and scales, on a 12 race year thats only $120, much cheaper than $2000 worth of engine work just to be competitive in a class that should have no motor work. I averaged 3 weekends at random and out of the 4 SS classes am and ex there where about 110 riders. this would give ccs $1100 a weekend to cover either local rental or purchasing dyno and scales. only the top 3 riders would be tested. have HP to weight ratios not just numbers this would allow for bikes that weigh more and have more hp to also compete. the bottom line is I think racers would rather pay just a little more for stricter rules that would allow them to have closer racing and less expense on motors. lets take vote. Who likes building motors for SS racing? I thought that is what suberbike and all the other classes were for. trick wheels, gas tanks,titanium this and that. even race gas should not be allowed in SS.
Ok this may have gotten blown out of proportion. First would Ed still win races on a stock bike? Damn right he would! And I didn' t call him a cheater, like I said he made a bike to highlight the gray areas. I think it is crazy that his bike has ram air and is legal. And a ss 600 can have carbon bodywork, a brembo radial m/c, and a full Ti kit. Thats the part of the rules that I think suck. Ok some of this comes out of jealousy, and I can't afford to keep up with the Jones'(money wise, jerks ;)). But looking at a new guy coming into the sport who is not quite competitve and has a shoestring budget, it can be pretty fustrating to see this superbike kit ss next to him on the line. For the lightweight stuff the rules need to be rewtitten to ensure a Key bike is not legal. For the other classes if there was just some type of real Tech, a real inspection or rules in place to make it reasonably close to real ss. Yes people are still going to cheat. And just because people have gotten complacent and not been protesting each other does not mean the system works.
I have been reading everyones comments about rules and keeping some notes and if I feel I have an idea that is fair and easy enough to enforce I will jot it down and let ya'll take a look and comment on it. If everyone likes (or doesn't b*tch) we could at least show it to the powers that be and see what they think and refine it from there.
Totally agreed, Jason.
Write it up, post it, etc., please.
I understand your point. Ed ain't no cheater. But Ed has the time, resources, and opportunity to follow the rules as they are written. Most recognize that the intention of supersport is not in the current rules structure.
Quoteavailable supersport mods. exhaust, fork internals, rear shock, bodywork, steering stabilizer. no modifying of motor or lightening of anything. no overbores, must retain stock displacement. raise the SS fees only $10 per race to cover dyno and scales, on a 12 race year thats only $120, much cheaper than $2000 worth of engine work just to be competitive in a class that should have no motor work. I averaged 3 weekends at random and out of the 4 SS classes am and ex there where about 110 riders. this would give ccs $1100 a weekend to cover either local rental or purchasing dyno and scales. only the top 3 riders would be tested. have HP to weight ratios not just numbers this would allow for bikes that weigh more and have more hp to also compete. the bottom line is I think racers would rather pay just a little more for stricter rules that would allow them to have closer racing and less expense on motors. lets take vote. Who likes building motors for SS racing? I thought that is what suberbike and all the other classes were for. trick wheels, gas tanks,titanium this and that. even race gas should not be allowed in SS.
Horsepower enforcement and SS rules are two entirely different things.
If horsepower limits were imposed on a SS class, what would you do to the guy with the showroom stock bike that makes too much power? Or the guy that feels justified to make mods because he's 20 HP down.
-z.
QuoteHorsepower enforcement and SS rules are two entirely different things. -z.
Agree.
you have the rules, and you enforce the rules with the dyno and scales. similar to the Fusa. not a hard concept
the guy that is over hp would have to add some weight to not be disqualified. the guy that is 20hp less might need to make sure he has all his plug wires on.
Quotethe guy that is over hp would have to add some weight to not be disqualified. the guy that is 20hp less might need to make sure he has all his plug wires on.
the difference between a 99 F4i and a 06 636 in power is probably more than 20hp. if you are going to enforce hp then you can't limit mods so everyone has a fair chance of obtaining that hp.
on that subject, how is a 636 fair compare to the other 600's? why can't the other bikes bore to 636? oh wait that wouldn't be ss legal...
and who says SS can't have motor work, you can still do work to the motor and stay within SS rules. For that matter if you ported and/or used tricker bottom end how are they going to find out unless you get torn down?
Check displacement and TB/airbox is the obvious way to spot something, but much beyond that is way way hard...
I guess the current rules are there for a reason, most pratical. I still think older bikes should have more flexibility, such as twins and triples do because the obvious disadvantage (like it or not) :-/
horsepower to weight ratio. and allow slight mods so all current bikes can be competitive. but we can not try to keep all bikes SS competitive. if you want to run an old bike than go race another class. you can not make the rules so a 1992 ex500 is competitive with a 2006 sv650. doesnt make sense
Can you guys read? The main point of this is not HP and cheating. It is a fully kitted bike that qualifies for ss. For example: Carbon fiber gas tank and body work, brembo m/c, Ti axles and a quickshifter would still make a bike legal in SS in the current rule book. There will always be cheating, but to be honest if someone has a 3mm motor in ss are they for sure going to beat me? I'll just have to ride a little harder. I don't think big tear downs in tech are the way to go nor do I want to see that. But the things I am pointing out are pretty obvious for the most part. Some of you may not believe this but a bike that weighs 20lbs less than your +20hp cheater bike with the same rider on it will be faster around most tracks.
How many of you really understood what this topic was about? I say about five of you. Now we know why nothing ever gets changed, because everyone would rather b*tch and criticize each other than help the cause. Dave R. was right to say it is too late to change it for next year. Let's all stop twisting everyone's words around, forget this whole thing and find something better to do with our lives. I hope everyone has a great holiday and best of luck to you all next year!!!
Jason/Kevin--
Off the subject, but give me a call or shoot me an email on the new gig so I can help get the word out.
Yep, your point is understood by the people here. Things always just go off on other tangents on any board.
So how hard would it be for everyone involved to just send (individually) a message to Kevin that you think he needs to sit down and take a good look at the SS rules. If anyone feels they have some good input into how to change them feel free to add that.
Yes, the rule books are probably at the printer or already printed but it's not too late for an amendment to the book. It could happen with enough input.
How about someone schedules or sets up a meeting, and everyone talks person to person (ROUND TABLE STYLE) about the issue or issues. I'm talking actual racers, that care. Come to some what of an agreement, put it all on paper and/or an email and then send it to Kevin?
We can call it a POW WOW!
Someone seriously schedule it! Make it at a cafe, a bar, town hall, SOMEWHERE!!!
We spend alot of our hard earned money on our passion called motorcycle racing. I'm sure a night talking and actually writing some good ideas down together would solve alot.
Mr. Damico?
Mr. Rosno?
Weggie_man?
Kvanengen?
Anyone else with alot of knowledge about club racing or motorcycle racing in general, get together, organize something.
I'm still quite new to the group, as lots of people are, but I'd be willing to show up and give my input as well. As alot of others will.
I can tell you one thing, we will get more accomplished talking face to face rather than typing on the internet.
Sincerely,
Nick
Interesting idea.....there just may be an opportunity for such a meeting on January 7th........ ;D ;D
Kevin's a reasonable man.
It's still probably easier to focus with individual written proposals. Get riders to support it and go from there.
Even if most riders don't support it, does it matter. There have been changes in CCS that were clearly based on complaints from the minority and a lack of complaining from the majority.
Supersport has always been based around the concept of being production based (for street bikes) with some modifications.
Jason, write it up, even if it's not completely done, and get me a copy. Run with it.
I think it would be impossible to have any sort of elaborate tech inspection after the races. People would still be at the track monday morning waiting the outcome. Put in a claiming rule for all supersport classes.Complete bike can be claimed for the OEM list price plus $5000. If someone wants to run a F2 in 600 supersport and it's not competitive tough, get a new bike. Why should i add weight to my bike because someone doesn't want to buy a new model.
I'm game! Great Idea. I forgot about the old AMA claiming rule. It keeps everyone legit in case they might lose their bike.
What happens if someone doesn't give up their bike?
Disqualification of all points and 1 year licence suspension?
-Farrell
QuoteI think it would be impossible to have any sort of elaborate tech inspection after the races. People would still be at the track monday morning waiting the outcome. Put in a claiming rule for all supersport classes.Complete bike can be claimed for the OEM list price plus $5000. If someone wants to run a F2 in 600 supersport and it's not competitive tough, get a new bike. Why should i add weight to my bike because someone doesn't want to buy a new model.
Wisdom.
Bingo!
Jason...thoughts?
There still needs to be supersport rules on what is allowed and what isn't.
Jason was getting at trick parts needed to be not allowed.
The claiming rule works but there still needs to be rules on the table for what is allowed or not.
I mean NOS still shouldn't be allowed for power right?
Honestly I like the AMA supersport rule format with the claiming rule imposed.
-Farrell
I was reading the AMA rule book yesterday, and came across this claiming rule. It said that the ammount was the price of the bike new plus $1500. Does this mean I can go to an AMA race and get myself a factory supersport r6 for $11,000?
There are a few stipulations to that rule I believe. You also have to supply all the stock original parts with that.
Don't plan on keeping any friends in the AMA!
The is a name pick situation that happens. I believe only the AMA can choose to put your bike up to claim if THEY want to. Then anyone who wants to claim the bike puts their name forth and the names go in a pool. Whoever gets picked out of a hat or something like that gets the bike.
You can't choose to just buy a riders bike. You must also be a AMA Rider in that class to claim it.
-Farrell
Not that I planned on doing that. It just seemed strange to me that you could claim a bike for probably less than a third of what it is worth.
Worth?
Try selling that bike for $33k.
As for the AMA...
How many of the upper level teams are "friendly", per se...they have jobs they need to ensure. No reason why they want everyone to have access to that stuff that they get and the stuff that they develop.
That's another story.
Jason????
Read IT!!!
Write it up Jason...
Lets read it! Let's hear it!
The AMA claiming rule, as it stands, does NOT allow for other riders to claim bikes from other teams.
The claiming rule only allows AMA Pro Racing to claim the bike for that price--which will never happen, so they might as well take that provision out.
QuoteNot that I planned on doing that. It just seemed strange to me that you could claim a bike for probably less than a third of what it is worth.
fwiw, most AMA teams sell their previous year bikes for much less than what you would think it costs. The true 'value' of a bike is in its development work, testing, etc but you can't put a number on that and expect someone else to pay for the R&D.
QuoteThe AMA claiming rule, as it stands, does NOT allow for other riders to claim bikes from other teams.
The claiming rule only allows AMA Pro Racing to claim the bike for that price--which will never happen, so they might as well take that provision out.
I'm sorry man, but WTF does that have to do with 9 to 5, 40 to 50 hour working Club racing folks? ???
QuoteI was reading the AMA rule book yesterday, and came across this claiming rule. It said that the ammount was the price of the bike new plus $1500. Does this mean I can go to an AMA race and get myself a factory supersport r6 for $11,000?
Grasshopper--i was jut replying to this statement.
QuoteGrasshopper--i was jut replying to this statement.
OH! Grasshopper not read good enough....
Long thread, Lots to read!
I'll read more carefully next time :-X
Where's Damico at, someone call him and tell him to sign on to the internet...
QuoteThe AMA claiming rule, as it stands, does NOT allow for other riders to claim bikes from other teams.
The claiming rule only allows AMA Pro Racing to claim the bike for that price--which will never happen, so they might as well take that provision out.
2005 AMA rule book - page 20 section 17
Supersport and Superstock claiming rules...
The AMA used to claim the Daytona Supersport bike and sell it...usually it was always sold before hand...You could go to someone in the AMA and get it done...
Instead of claiming the bike just make it the engine. Isn't that the real part of the bike in question? All else is pretty easy to see by the visual eye? We have a local 1/2 mile track where I live and anyone can claim the engine of the guy that wins for $500.00. It is supposed to be hobby stock racing and the engines aren't supposed to be worth much. Make it a realistic number for what you can get a good salvaged motoer for. And have it decrease by age. IE: first generation $2500.00 second generation $1750.00 third generation $1250.00 Are you really going to want to sink $2500.00 into a cheater motor if someone can walk away with your motor? Make it so places 1,2,3 can lose ther engines. I don't know if the payout prices are right here but you get the idea. If you want to do engine work and all kinds of mods, come play with the big boys in superbike class. There will be enough guys kicking your A$$ on superstock bikes and you have nothing to B1TCH about, you were out rode. It goes back to the 80/20 rule the fast guys will be fast. It doesn't matter what you make them set on, they have natural talent and can ride!
You can't claim a engine , how would you find one quick enough? it would have to be the whole bike
QuoteYou can't claim a engine , how would you find one quick enough? it would have to be the whole bike
Yeah your right, I could find a bike much quicker than just an engine, what was I thinking???
LMAO
Quotehttp://www.katechengines.com/corporate_services/whistler.php
For a start....
You said displacement. This is for compression ratio. :(
Call 'em. Should do both.
How many people would REALLY want a bike claiming rule in club level motorcycle racing. Guess what - someone might claim YOUR bike, either because they think you're cheating, or they just trashed their bike and need one quick, or they are just an ass.
People put a lot of time and work into SS legal bikes, so it's not just a question about the money that went into it. It's about the setup and developement time.
How about the guy with the really nice paintjob (as SD says its about promoting an image...)? No impact on performance, but someone might have put a lot of hours or dollars into it. Or the guy that has his street bodywork at home and puts it back on between races, he could lose his street ride.
I personally have a lot of time invested into my bikes, its often hard to come to selling them. I would not want the possibility of someone swiping it out from under me for some fixed price.
Sure, the risk of losing your bike is part of racing (crashes, mechanicals, theft, etc.), but would you really want claiming added to that list.
An engine claiming rule might work for club level NASCAR guys, because the should all have pretty much the same engines anyway, you could claim one an bolt it into your car. It isn't that simple with bikes. Maybe in a spec class, but not in a true supersport class.
-z
It seems to me that supersport is just silly. Any bike is eligible for supersport, superbike, gp, gt, and maybe a sportsman class. Now if you run a truly legal bike in supersport, you'll be outgunned in all the other classes. Once you step up from supersport, you can run slicks, an alternative fork setup, better brakes, whatever wheels you want, and build up your motor. Even though I never had the money for a full-house superbike, I've usually modified my bikes as much as I could afford, and just skipped supersport.
Running F40, I was forced to have a supersport legal setup. My competitors WERE NOT running supersport legal bikes. I sat at an engine builder where I worked part-time and assisted as 2 of my competitor's bikes went together with illegal parts. (You'd be SHOCKED if you knew who these thoroughly respectable ambassadors of racing were!) Then my engine builder had me stand between my bike and one just like it with hot cams. He started each, and showed me how to hear the difference. I did the same test on the false grid later. Without a doubt, I was racing against bikes like mine that were equipped with hot cams. Why didn't I protest? First off, how would the CCS staff have even proved if I was right or wrong? Second, who really wants to be branded as the whiner who protests people?
Knowing all this, I'd have cheated with a clear concience if I could have afforded it. But those who know me also realize that I've been known to race on junkyard motors and other people's takeoff tires, so where would I have come up with the money for cams and an overbore?
The point is, why would anyone build a bike just for supersport, then get beaten in all the other classes? Why not just do away with supersport and run simple displacement rules that are easily enforced? At least then everyone could be creative without cheating!
Cuz SS is where the money is
Is this more in the Amatuer or expert classes? I could build a supersport legal f2 and put a guy like denning on it and he could easily do probably high 12s or low 13 at blackhawk on it. It would make around 97 to 100hp on it. How many amatuers do those times now. We can go a little newer and put him on a say 2000 ZX6r , it would have about 110hp and he could probably do high 11s to low 12s. How many experts can do those times.
Get over who is cheating and who is not , it's the rider pure and simple. If your an amatuer who cares , your learning to ride and move up to expert. As an expert your goal is to get into the 10's on a 600. Worry more about your riding , setup you will then reach those goals. Jim
Aye.
I'm with Jim on this one.
I can attest to that. I did an 11.7 on a 2000 ZX6R at Blackhawk in 2003.
Back in 1998 I ran a 13 something on an F3. All were supersport legal bikes.
My F3 had 102 HP and the ZX6R had 108 HP.
It's all the rider. I always say work on your riding skills first cause if you can't even take the proper line around the track what good does it do to have an Ohlins shock or full kit suspension.
What good does it do to have a ton of power if you don't have the proper suspension to put it on the ground?
Oh that ZX6R I did that time on had a stock shock on it that was original! :o
I have been running stock forks on my race bikes for the last few years too. I tried the Ohlins Kit Internal and did the same exact lap times on both bikes stock or kit.
I will admit it felt a slight bit better over the bumps but it wasn't enough for me to make a big difference.
So it doesn't really matter if someone cheats or not to me. It won't do anything for you but hurt your ego when you get beat and your wallet!
Don't get me wrong, it is good to have your bike setup properly and have the motor tuned to run good since it will last longer and give that extra little bit of advantage if you need it and the competition is tough. But if you need to work on your skills yet do that first cause that is free.
Racing is about the whole package. Bike (which consist of hundreds of variables) rider (which have just as many), team players, mechanic (if you have one). Try to balance all those to make the best package.
When you get it right things will really come together.
Quote (You'd be SHOCKED if you knew who these thoroughly respectable ambassadors of racing were!) !
It goes way deeper than that. I think alot of people would be surprised. In the end why would you want to get in a wizzing contex=st with anohther racer who basicaly has your life at his hands.
I remember one time when a protest was filed against a legit cheater only to have the legit cheater file a retalitory protest out of spite. CCS did nothing in the mannor to help the rule abiding racer out. In short CCS at times leaves little to be desired when it comes to administrative items such as protest.
Garth, I don't know if we're talking about the same person, but for it to be done, the retalitory protest was filed by another rider. And the tech inspector and the referee both refused the protest based on their ability to do so in the rule book per retalitory protests. However, it was the race director that upheld the protest.
Whiners are protesters... I guess I don't agree. File the protest if you have the money. Predates a lot of you, but Polen was protested early in the GSXR Cup Series. The fast racers that were getting beat by him found out that his motors were very, very tired. You've got to legitamize your thoughts or realize your fears. Either way, protesting isn'w whining. Not protesting is.
I bet jim and jason both tell there customers that pay them to build there engines. "oh I don't think you need more horsepower, you just need more practice".
Jim would prefer to sell them a suspension package first because he recognizes that helping a rider be successful with a better handling motorcycle is better for business than one with HP and no handling. Jason's been in the same boat before too.
Just a little historical perspective on the subject of SS may be insightfull. As a "charter member" of CCS I was involved in the initial discussions with Rodger Edmondson when he started CCS twenty some years ago.
At the time WERA was the main competitor to CCS. WERA had strict production based racing. Stock exhaust, stock cam timing etc. When Rodger came out with the SS rules it was a major departue from WERA.
I was appalled at how liberal the SS rules were and argued strongly against them. Rodger looked me straight in the eyes and said "I'm trying to compete in a limited market, why should a customer buy what I'm selling if it's exactly what my competitor is selling?"
I'll have to admit that pretty much stopped me cold. He had a good point. His vision was to change production racing from showroom racing to tuner based racing. He told me that to grow the sport he wanted to bring in more companies and products. This he argued would increase the sponsorship and contingency oppertunities.
Was he right or not? You be the judge.
At the time WERA and CCS shared at lot of tracks in the midwest. As such most of the guys riding production bikes set them up to WERA specs and ran both series. Nobody optimized to CCS SS rules. Over the years the two organiztions pretty much stopped sharing tracks and riders and some people started optimizing to CCS SS rules.
What Jason said in his initial post about my views is basically correct. I have in the past argued for stricter rules. I lost the initial argument with Rodger and I have continued to lose recent aguments with Kevin. The most recent being aftermarket ram air being allowed on bikes that didn't originally have it.
Also, I wouldn't necessarly characterize the CCS rule book as having grey areas. I think it only has one, but it's a big one. I think it's very easy to understand once you realize the underlying principal behind the CCS SS rules. WERA tells you exactly what you can do in superstock, and that's it. If they don't specifically mention that you can do it's restricted. Basically CCS on the other hand tells you exactly what you cannot do. If they don't specifically mention something it's not restricted. CCS in my opnion has never done a good job of communicating this one vital principal. People are continually astounded by the fact that my SS bike is legal.
What Jason did get wrong are the numbers on my SV SS bike. The best motor I ever had was 74 dynojet SAE hp. The current weight is 288 lbs wet w/an empty gas tank. I have no idea what the ram air adds but I'm guessing it's a lot less than 11 hp.
Those numbers didn't come easy and they didn't come cheap. They did however come legally. My SV is the result of a lifetime of accumulated ideas, knowledge, resources and persistance. I offer no apologies for the existance of that motorcycle. I did this project for two main reasons. I wanted to build a SS bike to the absolute limit of the rules to see what was possible. I also wanted a bike to that was competitive at the ROC.
In 1999 I went to the Daytona ROC with a totally stock SV. While I was able to win the infield I got blown away on the high banks and finished 4th. That result is what convinced me to pursue the SV SS project.
National racing is very different from regional racing. Particularly at Daytona. I've won the Daytona ROC LWSS 3 times now with my SV. As hard as it may be to believe that bike has never been the fastest SS bike there. At it's best it's been just as fast. My largest victory margin ever was less than 1 bike length. I'm talking about top end speed here, not acceleration. At Daytona top end is paramount, acceration, not so much. We've got the acceleration thing pretty much figured out, now we're working on the top end speed.
My point here is CCS SS is not AMA SS or WERA Superstock and never has been. I've tried myslef to get the rules changed to be more restrictive. I was not successful.
Ed Key
QuoteI bet jim and jason both tell there customers that pay them to build there engines. "oh I don't think you need more horsepower, you just need more practice".
Yes that is actually what i tell them to do , read some of my other posts!
QuoteAt the time WERA was the main competitor to CCS. WERA had strict production based racing. Stock exhaust, stock cam timing etc. When Rodger came out with the SS rules it was a major departue from WERA.
I'll add my part. WERA and CCS existed side by side when I started. We started by racing WERA because of the location of the races.
Production, as Ed says was that. My street bike was a GSXR750 that was fitted with a Vance & Hines exhaust system. It had that because I had a street bike crash, and I wanted the "performance upgrade" and it was less expensive.
With that modification, my GSXR750 was now a WERA "superbike".
That limited me to one racing class a weekend as a novice. Great fun. In the history of everything, "supersport", and basically production based motorcycle racing class with "limited" modifications has been successful. I'm with eeky.
QuoteI bet jim and jason both tell there customers that pay them to build there engines. "oh I don't think you need more horsepower, you just need more practice".
Wow what a cheap shot! Do you know me? Have you ever been to Speed Tech or 4n6 for that matter? Before you assume check with the sources first.
Maybe you should actually read the post and UNDERSTAND what we are saying before you shoot.
Here is a line I said. I'll post it here so you don't have to scroll back:
"Racing is about the whole package. Bike (which consist of hundreds of variables) rider (which have just as many), team players, mechanic (if you have one). Try to balance all those to make the best package.
When you get it right things will really come together. "
The best package if the fastest guy on the day. If your motor is tired and it is down on power from what it used to be you could still race it and probably go pretty fast yet. But if your racing for money and you lose out 1 or 2 positions because your motor is tired you might lose up to a possible $1500 in just one race. So is that motor freshing job really worth it? Only if it matters to you Not me! I could give a crap if you want it built or not.
I tell it the way it is. Riding skills does and always comes first. To stretch proportions lets say you give a Ducati Supebike to a first time rider on the street and me a Katana 600 or better yet an EX250, who do you think will go faster? Not hard to figure out right. So riding is first.
I personally have been racing for 25 yrs and I'm 29 years old. I have gone through the hard knock of tough learning and have started my shop on the basis of my riding skills. I'm the first guy to tell any customer what my opinions are about what you really need. The question is asked is " What it worth to you?"
Heres an example: Buy a department store helmet or and Arai, Shoei, or Suomy? Hmmm.. They all protect but the top brands do a better job don't they?
Maybe you'll figure it out one day after going through what we have been through as racers & shop owners.
If your motor is weak and it needs to be freshed up yes I would recommend it. Cam timing helps. Fuel Injection tuning helps, Ignition timing helps, New rings help, fresh bearings help, But the amount it helps is very small compared to understanding the proper way to shift or brake or lean, ect....
I run Race Fuel that cost me $275 per 15 gallons at AMA Nationals. Do I need it. Hell yah. Because it makes 7-8 horsepower and the engne burns cleaner. In a race I will use 2.5 approx. of fuel. So the cost? So thats 18.33*2.5=$46. Lets see the difference between 9th & 10th is about $800 after contingencies. So yeah its worth it. And the extra motorwork to squeeze every little bit out at the line each lap is worth it too. It pays for itself in my case since I'm racing for money.
If your forks are bouncing or chattering or the bike won't turn I would diagnose the situtation as to whether its the rider causing it, If not then make changes to the suspension next.
If your and amauter or expert racing for no money and only a piece of wood maybe not worth it!
So like I say, "What's it worth to you?." Everyone has different goals.
So I say it like it is and I know Jim pretty well. He says it like it is too.
All of it is worth it to use because we are in the business of building RACE BIKES! We build them to the best of our knowledge to help the rider acheive a faster lap time.
If that is not your goal then I don't know why your racing. I race to win not finish in the back.
Funny thing is even though I tell some guys they DON'T need something they get it anyways because it makes them feel faster knowing they have it. Like a ridiculous paint job on a race bike or a set of Ohlins internals. So mentally I can't help guys there. What ever makes you feel faster I guess. You tell me what you want & I'll build it. That's my job.
My job is to solve riders problems. Customers only come to me because they have a problem. Bike isn't fast enough, not cool looking, handles bad. It's my job as a competent racer and motorcycle performance shop to analzye his problem & fix it whether its on the bike or in the riders head. Oh I forgot to mention, I do charge for classes I have at my shop for riding skills.
Have a nice day. Hope that cleared the air on that issue.
-Farrell
QuoteIn 1999 I went to the Daytona ROC with a totally stock SV. While I was able to win the infield I got blown away on the high banks and finished 4th. That result is what convinced me to pursue the SV SS project.
National racing is very different from regional racing. Particularly at Daytona. I've won the Daytona ROC LWSS 3 times now with my SV. As hard as it may be to believe that bike has never been the fastest SS bike there. At it's best it's been just as fast. My largest victory margin ever was less than 1 bike length. I'm talking about top end speed here, not acceleration. At Daytona top end is paramount, acceration, not so much. We've got the acceleration thing pretty much figured out, now we're working on the top end speed.
My point here is CCS SS is not AMA SS or WERA Superstock and never has been. I've tried myslef to get the rules changed to be more restrictive. I was not successful.
Ed Key
Ed...I was out there this last time and saw what it ment to have a fast bike. I was told by other racers that the "real" fast guys dont run the GTO race at daytona due to it trashing their engines. After running the GTO race and winning I soon understood. I had a problem arise in the SS race that cause the motor to glitch in and out on the deceleration and I crashed in turn one. After the race I took the bike over to the dyno to see if I could duplicate the problem...unfortunetly it didnt. But what I did see was that my bike was down from 155hp to 128hp on a 04 1k gixxer.
The point that I am trying to get at is that at the level that I was racing (AM) I was able to pull some tricks out of my bag and make it up on the infield and go on to win two more. On the flip-side...I will never return to Daytona again having the slowest bike...especially going expert next year. Experts have their game on and hp is a major tool at the hands of these capable riders.
I saw first hand the difference in HP when I went up on the banking with Barnes. I hung with him all thru the infield and once on the banking he left me like I was sitting still. I remember by the time I was coming off the banking...barnes was crossing the finishline! The banking to me requires the least amount of talent..it just takes the balls to hold it WFO the first time and the rest is finding the right line around it (just to the right of the white line).
This thread interest me the most because I am currently building a new bike for next year. I have a guy by the name of Evan Steel doing the motor...supersport legal. I am abiding by the rule book. But I'm also not doing certain things so that I can race WERA and AFM. Things like not putting a Brembo on the bike etc. I just dont think that its worth getting caught with your hand in the "cookie Jar" over a few ponies. At this point I can have pretty much anything on my bike that I want...but I choose to have nothing to hide. Hell...If I do get protested next year, I would be pissed as hell that my bike was going to be torn down. Then again...once the truth is told I would be laughing my ass off at the poor F'er and all the crap he would be getting around the paddock!
YOU hung with barnes through the infield?? And no ride this year?? Maybe it` cuz....
a. He was scuffing in tires
b. He was scuffing in brake pads
c. He was masturbating while riding and you were trying REAL hard
;D ;D ;D
QuoteExperts have their game on and hp is a major tool at the hands of these capable riders.
Then FUSA results would be based on HP only.
Fact is, set up is still paramount.
Total package. And just 'cause you're an expert, it doesn't give one all the resources to "have a 155HP GSXR"...
that wasn't a cheap shot.I was just being honest.most of the "racers" agree that there should be more stringent SS rules.and we were talking about ways of making the class with stiffer rules=less mods=closer racing=less expense. fun for all.there already is classes for racers with more money and time than they know what to do with. superbike,GP and GT races. then you and Jim gave input that everything should just be left alone. "its all in the rider" well thats not always the case. when a bike is 50lbs lighter than yours or has 15more hp because you dont have the 3grand it takes to build a SS motor. it becomes a little silly. I just found it humorous that 2 guys that make money off of building SS motors and dont show up and race in the class that is being discussed would feel it should be left alone.thats all. whats wrong with the idea that there should be a class that allows very little mods so everyone is on equal equipment? thats what would happen if it was HP to weight ratio. it would be FANTASTIC!!!!!!! even better, ratio including rider weight so the bulkier guys are on the same level.that would be the best racing ever.
Jason does race in Supersport.
Jim has done work on my supersport motor, but we don't go to the extent that is avaiable for CCS racing's supersport class. Jim doesn't race, unless you count the racers around the country that rely upon him for chassis and some motor work.
Which part is true about them not participating in CCS supersport?
If every motor were stock, there wouldn't be equality. I'm not sure if you understand that, but in production, nothing is perfect. I raced in a truely stock class, and I had a slow motor. Great, now what. When you're all beating your head against the ground to make money, now what? No equality there.
One year, a rider I worked with bought a bike so he could focus on AMA Supersport. Recognizing that riding and his chassis were important, he did leave his motor alone. His bike happened to have a "ringer" motor. Maybe it was made on a Wednesday when someone wasn't stressed, we don't know. But even the factory riders were complaining how fast it was and they were talking about a protest. He thought it was great 'cause he could get some extra racing money for a tear down.
For me, I fully expect that if the rules dramatically change, the first thing that Jim and I talk about will be the suspension, because it is the most important. Everything else, well, you do what the rules allow and what you feel you should do based on that.
Quotethat wasn't a cheap shot.I was just being honest.most of the "racers" agree that there should be more stringent SS rules.and we were talking about ways of making the class with stiffer rules=less mods=closer racing=less expense. fun for all.there already is classes for racers with more money and time than they know what to do with. superbike,GP and GT races. then you and Jim gave input that everything should just be left alone. "its all in the rider" well thats not always the case. when a bike is 50lbs lighter than yours or has 15more hp because you dont have the 3grand it takes to build a SS motor. it becomes a little silly. I just found it humorous that 2 guys that make money off of building SS motors and dont show up and race in the class that is being discussed would feel it should be left alone.thats all. whats wrong with the idea that there should be a class that allows very little mods so everyone is on equal equipment? thats what would happen if it was HP to weight ratio. it would be FANTASTIC!!!!!!! even better, ratio including rider weight so the bulkier guys are on the same level.that would be the best racing ever.
I understand what your saying but you just havent been around long enough. Without having the skill needed to win a race it makes no diff what hp or weight your bike is.I have seen slow bikes with good riders win more races than slow riders on fast bikes. As far as combined bike and rider weight ,that is a silly proposal.Thats like me telling the NBA to change the rules so a short 49yo guy can be competitive, so they should make all the tall guys play on their knees.Motorcycle racing is a competitive sport , if you can't be competitive find a dif sport. I find it interesting that everyone always thinks it should be fair. Also a SS motor isn't $3000 unless your paying way too much! Look at all the trackday guys buying 1000cc bikes . Guess what they still will be slow as they park it in the corners. So hp means nothing till you learn how to ride and then how to actually race.Oh and as you replied , no i don't race but probably know more about it than you from being involved in it for a few years. Then again i do know about building motors and bikes and you don't have a clue! Jim
The fact is, to be competitive throughout a whole CCS weekend you have to have 2 bikes. One SS legal and the other SB prepped. The SS bike will not be competitive in the SB, GP, or GT classes. If you want to race supersport, you have a supersport bike, you may be fast in the modified classes but the good riders on built bikes will beat you. I am living proof. The people that were their with me know what I'm talking about....
Racing is not cheap, and if you want to be competitive it all boils down to RIDER TALENT, TIME, MONEY, and RESOURCES.
BOTTOM LINE.
QuoteThe fact is, to be competitive throughout a whole CCS weekend you have to have 2 bikes.
Really, so when I carried a number one, and used one bike, I wasn't competitive?
Tommy, when you had a number one, how many bikes did you have?
I won some Unlimited Supersport and Unlimited Grand Prix Championships with a 600 too...and that was before the points system was in it's goofy previous state...
No, you don't need two bikes.
At Daytona last year, Yates qualified faster on his Superstock bike than he did on his Superbike....
So?
QuoteI have seen slow bikes with good riders win more races than slow riders on fast bikes.
Jim
Wisdom...
QuoteReally, so when I carried a number one, and used one bike, I wasn't competitive?
Tommy, when you had a number one, how many bikes did you have?
I won some Unlimited Supersport and Unlimited Grand Prix Championships with a 600 too...and that was before the points system was in it's goofy previous state...
No, you don't need two bikes.
At Daytona last year, Yates qualified faster on his Superstock bike than he did on his Superbike....
So?
Having a 10 hp to 15 hp down SUPERSPORT LEGAL machine doesn't help racing in SUPERBIKE, GRANDPRIX, GT, OR THUNDERBIKE.
Does it Dave?
Not everybody is SUPERDAVE or YATES!
If you are racing a 10 to 15 hp down bike and beating everyone, every race, in CCS CLUB racing you don't belong their, you should be racing PRO, because you are so suppierior and better and have so much more talent than everyone else.
The fact of the matter is, and I really hope you see my point, is that if you have a SS legal bike, TECHNICALLY you won't be as competitive against guys with close to the same amount of talent on a 10 to 15 hp stronger NON SUPERSPORT legal bike.
Am I making sense or just talking out of my A$$?
Out of your a$$...
;D
This is a competition. HP is not the whole package. If it was, we could all stop buying tires, and we could just go to the dyno and run 'em.
We wouldn't need brakes either.
And we wouldn't need riders, right?
So, have you only been beaten by riders that had more HP? Is there more to this road racing thing?
In 1994 I was invited to ride an old bike. It made 51HP. I beat guys in a second wave that were on current run production Ducati 851's and 888's with slicks, etc. Yeah, they weren't racing me, but they weren't catching the guys that I was that they were racing against.
Rider? Package? HP?
Can HP help? Yeah. Can a good rider help? Hel1, yeah! Can a handling package help? Certainly.
Which do you want to buy?
In drag racing you need traction and you need to cut a good light. Red light the start, and all the HP doesn't make any difference.
Whatsup. Never thought I would see the day that Jim, Jason and Rosno get called out all in the same thread. This is just classic. ;D
Rider talent and ability will always trump everything else. Sooner or later talent gets recognized and everything else will follow.
QuoteThe fact of the matter is, and I really hope you see my point, is that if you have a SS legal bike, TECHNICALLY you won't be as competitive against guys with close to the same amount of talent on a 10 to 15 hp stronger NON SUPERSPORT legal bike.
Am I making sense or just talking out of my A$$?
So that it's just not SD or Jim replying, I'll throw in my nickel... Yes, you're talking out of your arse.
If all things were "equal", yes, you would have a valid point. Equal as in, a grid full of riders with unquestionable talent and bike setups which could not be improved upon.
THEN... and only THEN would HP be the major (but still not _only_) determining factor.
At a CCS weekend, that is not "seldom" the case, it's *NEVER* the case... If it was the case, it wouldn't be called CCS, it would be WSB/WSS/MotoGP.
Instead, you're running against Backyard Barney who pieced together a 92 600 CC bolt bin with duct tape and safety wire, as well as someone on the latest R6/636/600RR/GSXR, as well as someone on one of those bikes but a few years old.
Talent (largely fueled by wisdom - which can be further defined as applied knowledge), is the deciding factor.
You would be NO MORE COMPETITIVE on a separate SS/SB bike as you would on either bike individually.
Would a Hayden or Bostrom be more competitive on a different SS/SB bike on a given CCS track? Probably, but even then, not by much.
I'm not sure how many more people have to say it before you get it... Collectively, there's like 500 years of racing experience all saying the same thing.
Wow, 8 pages on supersport rules.
At this rate we should all just race 250 GP bikes, impose an easily attainable 230 lb min weight, and be done with it. ;D ;D ;D ;D
-z.
QuoteOut of your a$$...
;D
This is a competition. HP is not the whole package. If it was, we could all stop buying tires, and we could just go to the dyno and run 'em.
We wouldn't need brakes either.
And we wouldn't need riders, right?
So, have you only been beaten by riders that had more HP? Is there more to this road racing thing?
In 1994 I was invited to ride an old bike. It made 51HP. I beat guys in a second wave that were on current run production Ducati 851's and 888's with slicks, etc. Yeah, they weren't racing me, but they weren't catching the guys that I was that they were racing against.
Rider? Package? HP?
Can HP help? Yeah. Can a good rider help? Hel1, yeah! Can a handling package help? Certainly.
Which do you want to buy?
In drag racing you need traction and you need to cut a good light. Red light the start, and all the HP doesn't make any difference.
If I'm talking out of my A$$, then why does Ed Key have 2 bikes? Why does Ed have his SS spec bike and his SB spec bike?
QuoteSo that it's just not SD or Jim replying, I'll throw in my nickel... Yes, you're talking out of your arse.
If all things were "equal", yes, you would have a valid point. Equal as in, a grid full of riders with unquestionable talent and bike setups which could not be improved upon.
THEN... and only THEN would HP be the major (but still not _only_) determining factor.
At a CCS weekend, that is not "seldom" the case, it's *NEVER* the case... If it was the case, it wouldn't be called CCS, it would be WSB/WSS/MotoGP.
Instead, you're running against Backyard Barney who pieced together a 92 600 CC bolt bin with duct tape and safety wire, as well as someone on the latest R6/636/600RR/GSXR, as well as someone on one of those bikes but a few years old.
Talent (largely fueled by wisdom - which can be further defined as applied knowledge), is the deciding factor.
You would be NO MORE COMPETITIVE on a separate SS/SB bike as you would on either bike individually.
Would a Hayden or Bostrom be more competitive on a different SS/SB bike on a given CCS track? Probably, but even then, not by much.
I'm not sure how many more people have to say it before you get it... Collectively, there's like 500 years of racing experience all saying the same thing.
Sorry buddy, but when you are on a SS legal bike racing in SB, GP, GT, or thunderbike, fighting for 1st or 2nd place and the 2 guys ahead of you have that much more horespower it does matter. Go race a SS legal bike in any of the other modified classes and tell me how you do.
I want to hear about one person, name them and I'll shut up, who goes out and wins races on a SV in the modified classes (GP, SB, GT, THUNDERBIKE) CONSISTANTLY, and the SV is SUPERSPORT LEGAL.
QuoteSorry buddy, but when you are on a SS legal bike racing in SB, GP, GT, or thunderbike, fighting for 1st or 2nd place and the 2 guys ahead of you have that much more horespower it does matter.
You're talking about isolated incidents. I say that because in MOST classes, the people who are in SB/GP/GT and are in 1st, 2nd, 3rd - are ALSO running Supersport on that SAME BIKE.
QuoteGo race a SS legal bike in any of the other modified classes and tell me how you do.
I have for the last 5 years. I finish very respectably. I don't win everything, but I'm generally 5th-8th with my share of podiums.
And it's not HP that's holding me back...
QuoteI want to hear about one person, name them and I'll shut up, who goes out and wins races on a SV in the modified classes (GP, SB, GT, THUNDERBIKE) CONSISTANTLY, and the SV is SUPERSPORT LEGAL.
SV? Couldn't tell you.
Wanna talk MW/HW/UNL? I can start a very long list...
Or then again, we could all be wrong...
What is it that you're looking for out of this thread? Someone to say HP makes the difference? Great! HP makes the difference... Hey, when you go and have your motor built, consider MD Racing and tell Matt I sent you over.
I think if you talk about the SV class yes it is whored up. The SV type classes should be for the newbie racer or the older guys that are just rtying to have fun. In that respect grasshopper is correct. Most SV guys do cheat from what i hear , cams and such.If Ed Key used the rules to his advantage good for him,anyone else can do the same thing so quit whining about it. It's all part of the competition. I remember going to my first race , it was a WERA event in 1981 or so. We had a Seca 750 then and when i showed up there were maybe 10 of them. My bike was in fact way faster than the others as it was more superbike than supersport . Guess what Ed Key was there winning races and i think in one race he beat us. Yes our rider had never roadraced until that weekend. Faster bike slower rider we lost.So if everyone in the SV class pushes the rules like ED he still will win.
QuoteI think if you talk about the SV class yes it is whored up. The SV type classes should be for the newbie racer or the older guys that are just rtying to have fun. In that respect grasshopper is correct. Most SV guys do cheat from what i hear , cams and such.If Ed Key used the rules to his advantage good for him,anyone else can do the same thing so quit whining about it. It's all part of the competition. I remember going to my first race , it was a WERA event in 1981 or so. We had a Seca 750 then and when i showed up there were maybe 10 of them. My bike was in fact way faster than the others as it was more superbike than supersport . Guess what Ed Key was there winning races and i think in one race he beat us. Yes our rider had never roadraced until that weekend. Faster bike slower rider we lost.So if everyone in the SV class pushes the rules like ED he still will win.
1981? :o Holy Sheet. I was in Jr. High. Man, you are old. ;D
QuoteI want to hear about one person, name them and I'll shut up, who goes out and wins races on a SV in the modified classes (GP, SB, GT, THUNDERBIKE) CONSISTANTLY, and the SV is SUPERSPORT LEGAL.
Well, yeah, Ed Key. He doesn't race the Superbike all the time because it is stressed. Save that for opportunities when there is a cash payout.
QuoteI want to hear about one person, name them and I'll shut up, who goes out and wins races on a SV in the modified classes (GP, SB, GT, THUNDERBIKE) CONSISTANTLY, and the SV is SUPERSPORT LEGAL.
Off the top of my head: David Yaakov, John Linder, Darren Danilowicz and Ross Ryals. These guys, among others, have SS legal SVs that compete and win in the modified classes.
Ed Key has also used his SS legal SV to win races in the modified classes on occasion.
My SS legal XB is reasonably competitive in the modified classes as well. In 2004, I won two races in LW SS. Two in GT Lights. And one in Thunderbike, SuperTwins and LW SB. I also finished on the LW SS podium at the ROC behind Ed Key and Nate Kern.
That said, I may quit running LWSS next season. I don't think I made a dime in contingencies for the class due to small fields.
Well, with all that said, I think I'll just shut my mouth and go about my business, see you guys at the track some time! ;). NOT RACING SS. ;D
Sure HP can hold you back to a degree, but at the end of the day, the faster rider usually finishes ahead.
I raced against a sea of SVs on an ancient '91 GS500 for 3 seasons. They'd all blow past me on the straights. So I'd have to work harder on the infield to catch them. As a novice I was consistently in the top 4-8 with a couple podiums in LWSS, LWSB, GTLights. Being so slow compared to the SVs made me learn to ride the front tire harder, to make my time up in the corners, and to start my drive as soon as frickin' possible. I can tell you that while it was frustrating to get beat by a slower-in-the-infield but passed-me-like-I-was-standing-still on the straights bike, it was awesome to beat them! It made me learn to RACE (finding places to pass, using a line to keep them from getting the best drive out, etc.), so it was a good experience. My last name will never be Hayden, but if I can finish ahead of guys w/ more motor, you probably can too.
But, guess what? I was down 20hp on those bikes by choice - if I wanted to be competitive, I'd have bought an SV. I couldn't afford it, so I raced what I had and tried to learn and improve.
HP is a factor IF "all other things are equal". As many have said, that virtually never happens. If 5-10 ponies are the difference between you placing 4th and placing 1st, buck up and pay for 'legal' motor work - your choice. But for those of us mid-pack and farther down, learning and improving our skills and our setup should be priority.
Do you think Mladin's Yosh GSXR has 15 more ponies than Yates' or Spies'? Hmm, probably not. So how come he consistently finishes ahead of them?
QuoteDo you think Mladin's Yosh GSXR has 15 more ponies than Yates' or Spies'? Hmm, probably not. So how come he consistently finishes ahead of them?
He's in their head. ;D
Hey grasshoper,
You asked to name someone that has raced a SV that was ss and competitve in sb. Jesse Janisch raced his SS legal SV in all the SV legal classes and has won them all. And he was even racing Ed at the time. I know for a fact that it was legal because I rode it and Jim can back me because they built it. Jesse even entered gtu at gingerman and at gateway and WON that on a SS legal SV. When I raced a Hawk and a 916 I blew my 916 up and ran my hawk in GTO and finished 3rd at Blackhawk. It was a SS legal hawk.
Jim,
I have been involved in racing for awhile, and ever since I began have heard and respected you and what you have put into this sport. But, two things caught me by suprise about you during this thread. 1) You seem to have the blinders on and have forgotten what we are talking about here on this forum. This is CCS, this is supposed to be grassroots racing, a place to get started. There are maybe six people during any (non oem paying)blackhawk weekend that have gotten any type of significant money sponser and have any realistic chance of "making" money that particular weekend. You operate the weekend as a business at a bit of larger scale at larger events. What most of us are trying to acheive is to be able to afford to go to a race weekend and be able to afford it on your average 40hr a week job and still be semi competitive. The guys with huge talent like Blake Young or Jesse or J. Farrell can still show up and smoke everyone and then decide to step up to the next level(fusa,ama) and make a go at it. Those guys will always be fast, I would just like some type of rule structure in place were I can show up with a (more strict rule)SS bike and have at least some peace of mind that the guy next to me has the same bike. I don't have a right answer for it yet but we are working on it.
2) I was suprised to see you getting into a battle of belittlement with a am rider. Telling a new rider they don't have a clue or your smarter than they are, or they should find a new sport, was very disappointing to hear coming from you. Being a business owner I would think you would want to try and earn these new racers repect and maybe try to teach them something. Maybe offer to show them a few bike set-up tips, or things to concentrate on while you are riding. Offer to do some suspension tuning to prove to them that you have an understanding of what is needed to go fast or at least improve their riding. This may gain you a customer who brags about what you have done for them and what you could possibly do for others. Instead you chose to puff up your chest and told a new racer they don't have a clue and possibly created yet another NON-customer!
Maybe I took your post the wrong way, I hope that is the case. I am hoping you will clarify what you ment by your post and if not step up and reevaluate the advice you gave to this potential customer.
Hugs and Kisses
Jason D'Amico
I might have been a bit frustrated as most of the posts are am riders looking for an easy way out. (and a few experts too!)This is racing even at the grassroots level and crying foul all the time is counterproductive. Do what it takes to be a better rider not more hp is the only answer. It also won't be the first or last time i piss off a potential customer! i have that effect on people sometimes! The thing you will get is brutal honesty and not coddling. I never blow smoke up anyones butt or tell them how their manhood will grow if i do anything on their bike.
We have been successful at all levels of this and flattrack racing why ? Because we work hard at it. When we first raced AMA i didn't walk around begging for fairness i saw what the factories did and tried to emulate. Same when i first did grassroots.
Racers need to change the the way the think , instead of i can't , they have to say i can ! This sport is not an entitlement or affirmitave action program you have to earn your rewards. Jim
I think riders do need to recognize that there is little in the way of affirmitive action in competitive racing.
There should be a reasonable set of rules that are attainable and measurable.
Even with a restriction of engines, as it appears the real argument is here, it will not make all bikes equal in power at all. Might, but it is no guaruntee.
Given that magic idea that the HP of each bike were the same, a rider must recognize that they still might not win and the same riders might still continue to win.
This is a hard thing for some racers to come to grips with.
Jim has some simple ideas that, while I don't necessarily agree with all of the ideas, I do find most of them intriguing. There is more than one way to skin a cat. When it doesn't have skin, it still was a cat too.
I think there is a reasonable amount of frustration that some times needs to come out. I don't know if it matters who's fault it is... The HP issues will never change; someone will always have more. Even spec engines have different amounts of power, and some riders either just rider better or know about set up more...or really just bought new tires and know how to utilize the extra traction.
Jim's done this for "a couple of years", so I think he might have some knowledge about why riders might win.
If blame lies anywhere, it is with the racing organization that has continually escalated the changing of rules away from the historical intention of "supersport". Similarly, the blame lies with lax attitude of riders that complain, but do nothing.
For a couple/three years, pump gasoline was not allowed under the CCS/FUSA rules. Is that ridiculous? There can be reasons for it, but the rules were not written by CCS to eliminate pump gas.
Jason, I'm still hoping that you'll come up with some ideas for what you'd like changed. Maybe some will support it, and some won't. Might be too late, but who knows.
Good post Jim!
Very Knowledgeable reading, lots of good opinions, and points of view.
Thanks!
Nick
Road America, Formula 40. SS rules. Third row, but I got the start of my career. As I banged second gear, I had a wheel in the lead!
By the time I shifted into fourth gear, I was in 8th place. As I exited turn 5 thirty seconds later, I was watching 7th place disappear under the bridge at the top of the hill. For those of you who haven't raced at Road America, that's about a two city block gap. I finished in 8th place.
I got the holeshot, but my race was over before turn 1. I'm not sure how much riding skill had to do with that, but I'm pretty sure horspower played a part. I had an "identical to mine" GSXR750 pulling me by 3-4 bike lengths per gear. How much lead does that equal to between 14 and 1 at Road America? What exactly should I have done to ride around that problem?
Some guys use 600 bikes in F40. Later that season, I had "SS legal" first gen R6s pulling away from my K1 GSXR750 down the straight. I'd carry more corner speed, gain for the first 50 feet after the apex, and then it was like the other guy hit the NOS button! My 750 made 128 hp on the dyno, but the 600s were able to out-accelerate me. My teammate had an R6 that wouldn't out accelerate me, but his wasn't quite as "equal" as some others I competed against.
No, I'm not the best rider in CCS, but that was pretty damn disheartening.
Go to Superbikeplanet.com and read the 2nd part of the Jim Allen Interview. Some interesting coments.
QuoteRoad America, Formula 40. SS rules. Third row, but I got the start of my career. As I banged second gear, I had a wheel in the lead!
By the time I shifted into fourth gear, I was in 8th place. As I exited turn 5 thirty seconds later, I was watching 7th place disappear under the bridge at the top of the hill. For those of you who haven't raced at Road America, that's about a two city block gap. I finished in 8th place.
I got the holeshot, but my race was over before turn 1. I'm not sure how much riding skill had to do with that, but I'm pretty sure horspower played a part. I had an "identical to mine" GSXR750 pulling me by 3-4 bike lengths per gear. How much lead does that equal to between 14 and 1 at Road America? What exactly should I have done to ride around that problem?
Some guys use 600 bikes in F40. Later that season, I had "SS legal" first gen R6s pulling away from my K1 GSXR750 down the straight. I'd carry more corner speed, gain for the first 50 feet after the apex, and then it was like the other guy hit the NOS button! My 750 made 128 hp on the dyno, but the 600s were able to out-accelerate me. My teammate had an R6 that wouldn't out accelerate me, but his wasn't quite as "equal" as some others I competed against.
No, I'm not the best rider in CCS, but that was pretty damn disheartening.
Good point ! The things i wouldhave been looking at is my bike tuned as well as possible , out of tune can be 5hp or more different. Was the other guys using race fuel ? Am i geared correctly? So manythings that are not expensive can make a difference. The R6 is probably lighter , maybe the rider is also 10 or more lbs lighter. We raced 750 supersport one year at AMA and had to put 20lbs on our 600 to be legal. That weight cost us almost 2 sec per lap!
RA... aerodynamics can play a roll there as well... figure if I am giving up 30lbs to a guy I am more than likely requiring more air to be moved as I blast down the straight (or straights for RA) gotta be a disadvantage there as well that has nothing to do with HP equivalency...
"earn your rewards". that is the idea jim.not buy your rewards. current SS rules give the advantage to racers with more money that should not be the case in SS. the idea behind a closer and less expensive class is to let the riders with more talent than money have some fun tooo!!! we are not talking about new riders learning how to ride or ama racing,all way off topic. and before you tell me that I should learn to ride first. my ability has nothing to do with this. when Ed Key and damico are behind stiffer rules that,should be enough ability and experience for my vote.
Chris was your GSXR up to par?
Another thing to consider is Power to weight ratio.
Every 7lbs = 1 Horsepower in acceleration.
I've tested this theory with many riders and many bikes. On the street I have seen 600's pull 750 just because the heavy guy was on the 750 and flyweight was on the 600. I mean smoked the 750.
Just another thing to consider.
-Farrell
Quote"earn your rewards". that is the idea jim.not buy your rewards. current SS rules give the advantage to racers with more money that should not be the case in SS. the idea behind a closer and less expensive class is to let the riders with more talent than money have some fun tooo!!! we are not talking about new riders learning how to ride or ama racing,all way off topic. and before you tell me that I should learn to ride first. my ability has nothing to do with this. when Ed Key and damico are behind stiffer rules that,should be enough ability and experience for my vote.
How many classes should they have? Should they base it on bike value? Yes it is riding ability, lets put you on Ed's bike and him on a bone stock one . Tell me who would win?
sometimes more stringent rules actually mean more money will be spent exploring ways around them. There is no way to take the financial aspect out of racing. It is a part of the game...period.
I recall having less go fast components on my race bikes than my competitors all my career but I still won races all the time! Even Supersport.
What needs to be changed here so we don't get out of context about what this thread is all about is the supersport rules on what is allowed and not allowed should be more defined to make it easier for the guy with less money to compete.
No carbon fiber bodywork, no titanium parts, no major engine work. No updating of parts from newer models. No master cylinder changes.
This way the guy who is broke will feel like it is fair for him. Although it won't really matter much it will still give that broke rider some piece of mind that he really could only finish 3rd. If he wins now and beats guys like Ed Key or myself because the class if fair we will still never really know if it was because the rider got faster or the bike was more capable of reeling the other guy in.
I know it won't happen in my classes since my bikes are so very close to stock anyways.
Or it they still lose it will just cause them to look for other excuses besides their riding skills.
The reason pro riders are fast is I say again because they are very good riders with the whole package that works.
So to solve this dang thing and keep it from starting a war I think is to make supersport like the AMA rules and keep peace of mind in the pits that everyones bikes are fair. But then again you never know who is cheating!!!!!!!!!!!
And if you know they are will you tear them down??????
According to this site noone will tear you down so cheat all you want but the fast guys with the package in regional racing will ALWAYS win anyways!!!
I'm just laughing as I read these responses from everyone because I don't and have never cheated and have never felt a need to but I still kick a!! when I ride. And on top of it all I'm never worried if someone is cheating or not.
I could cry that Jeff Wood's GSXR 600 only made 95 horsepower at Road America in April of 05 Formula USA Sportbike race but I won't. My bike made 103.9 & Conrads made 104.5 in a 105hp class on a Factory Pro Dyno.
Clearly Jeff Wood pulled from me on the straights and I couldn't even draft him.
I just said right out to him and his mechanic ya! What F!@#ing ever and laughed. He won Conrad 2nd and I was 3rd.
Did I cry? NO!
I'll just kick his !ss next time.
He has to live with the guilt that he cheated not me.
Who cares? Now imagine when I beat him next time how he will feel!
-Farrell
Yeah Chris. You and your 400 pound fat a$s would get pulled by an SV!!! specially since you are such a sissy that can't open the throttle fully!
There will never be a real way to make a class to fully showcase rider skill. No matter what, people will find a way to cheat. I have been beaten by guys with much faster bikes as well as by guys with much slower bikes. It's all about rider skill. Why is it that the AMA pro's can get on a bone stock bike straight off the showroom and go within a few seconds of their best times on their fully developed race bikes?
QuoteChris was your GSXR up to par?
Another thing to consider is Power to weight ratio.
Every 7lbs = 1 Horsepower in acceleration.
I've tested this theory with many riders and many bikes. On the street I have seen 600's pull 750 just because the heavy guy was on the 750 and flyweight was on the 600. I mean smoked the 750.
Just another thing to consider.
-Farrell
Just out of curiosity, and please excuse my ignorance if this is out of left field...
Do the 125 guys have these 'cheater' discusions like this? It seems that they have much less restrictive rules than SS (except the min weight in USGPRU) but maintain what seems to be pretty close racing. Although, it does seem like the same people seem to gravitate toward the front...
When the Aprilia cup was running, was the general concensus that it was an equitable series? Or was there a lot of the 'he's got the money so he wins' stuff?
Personally, I wouldn't care what someone else was running if there was a fair minimum weight rule (rider and bike combined please...) or maybe a weight/hp ratio... Or would something like that be to hard to police?
Us 125 guys don't have a problem with anyone
cheating. About everything that is on the faster
bikes is easily available to everyone. With the two
strokes it's mostly having the ability to tune and jet the motor. Ive been running 125 for 8 years and have never seen anyone caught for cheating. I do know of 2 different times when a rider was DQ'ed for having the rider/bike combined weight be less than the 300# min.(not the same person both times) I'm
about 60# over the min so I spend the time and effort to set up the bike as a whole as well as I can.
And then ride the shit out of it to keep up with kids that have 50 #s (eqaul to about 7 hp) on me. When a bike only makes 40ish hp you learn how to ride real quick. That's why I also spent the money on a
bunch of ti bolts,carbon wheels, tank, fenders and
bodywork.
I agree , ban carbon fiber and ti. Seems easy enough i would think. The problem with a hp thing or dyno thing is you could take a 600 and stroke it so to speak and then you have a bike that will be under the hp limit but have gobs of grunt. You can also electronically without the use of any special switch reprogram the ecu at the end of the race to kill the power a bit. Just rock the on of switch in a certain sequence before you pull off the track . There is a company in belgium that does it for $350 or so US dollars. Jim
QuoteI'll just kick his !ss next time.
He has to live with the guilt that he cheated not me.
Who cares? Now imagine when I beat him next time how he will feel!
-Farrell
eheheh
I enjoyed reading that post.
Hey guys - haven't been around much lately, but was interested to read this thread, and good reading it has been...
You know, I never really much cared about bike mods my first year racing my SV as an AM. With venerable Ed's guidance, and some patience and crashes I learned a ton my first year - and won a bunch of races on my nearly-stock, heavy a$$ '02 SV (it had a jet kit on it - that was it). I raced five classes per weekend, and when I didn't crash I came away with five chunks of wood. (Oh, and I was one of those "old guys" you all were talking about earlier - I was 43, I think, when I started).
Anyhooo...what I learned that year was this:
Bikes aren't fast - riders are. All you newbs out there, repeat that a few times to yourself as you whine about mods, etc.
Number two: Ed doesn't race LWSS - at least not as an AM! And you know what? Most of the guys racing AM don't build their bikes much at all. Total loss ignition on an AM SV? I only saw one in 80 some races (Guy, you know who you are ;) ).
And experts? It took me a few weekends to figure this simple truth out in my second year: most expert SV pilots don't have SS-legal SVs (I may be dumb, but I'm slow... ;)) So guess what? If you want to race five races each weekend *and* be competitive in LW you're gonna need two bikes. The class could sure as heck use it. I used to come in third almost every weekend in LWSS as an expert (ok, that was last place, but still...)
BUT - if you don't mind racing only four weekends and being competitive, then build the crap out of your SV and go for it: LWSB, LWGP, TB, GTL - heck even Supertwins is fun, and if yer an oldie, F40). That's *six* classes, and you don't need a SS-legal bike for any of em.
(And then re-read my brainfart above: Bikes aren't fast, riders are.)
QuoteAnd experts? It took me a few weekends to figure this simple truth out in my second year: most expert SV pilots don't have SS-legal SVs (I may be dumb, but I'm slow... ;))
I'm curious about this.
Most EX SV riders don't ride in Supersport with their bikes because they are not supersport legal? Or their bikes do not meet the rules of supersport in CCS? They were torn down? Or they freely admited it?
QuoteI'm curious about this.
Most EX SV riders don't ride in Supersport with their bikes because they are not supersport legal? Or their bikes do not meet the rules of supersport in CCS? They were torn down? Or they freely admited it?
They know they don't meet the rules of SS. And if they tried to race SS, chances are their buddies would know what was not SS-legal about their bikes and protest to CCS. Remember, for the most part EX racers have been at it for a few seasons - you have a pretty good idea who's who, what they are riding, and what they've done to their bike.
QuoteI'm curious about this.
Most EX SV riders don't ride in Supersport with their bikes because they are not supersport legal? Or their bikes do not meet the rules of supersport in CCS? They were torn down? Or they freely admited it?
Many have obvious modifications that disallow them from SS, like GSX-R forks.
Most and many...
Ed still has stock forks on his supersport SV. Can still win Superbike.
Whatever...
With the stakes *so* high in the LW classes, you can bet there are guys out there with monster-built motors that are illegal, etc, so they can go out to BFR, spank the field and brag to their buddies when they get home. ::) NOT.
Fact is there are things that can be done to the SV to make it go better, that would be difficult to detect without a full teardown. But given the guys who are racing in these classes, I never got the feeling that any of them would go that far in deliberately building out a supersport bike so they could go out and win that class. But maybe that's just in the Midwest. In the other classes, I'm having a difficult time coming up with anything you would want to do to an SV that would be illegal (OK, a bored out 750 turbo might not fly). And if there is I'm sure Mr Key will be able to tell us exactly what that is (cuz he's probably already thought of it).
I just wanted to add a few hundred thoughts to this link. I can understand allot of the viewpoints that people have on this subject. The one thing everyone is forgetting is that if super sport becomes showroom stock racing there would be no room for aftermarket parts. Once that happens you can kiss any contingency money away. What interest would companies have in putting up product money into a class that no one is allowed to use their products? If you really want to balance the field it would have to be power to weight ratio. The simple fact is CCS cannot do this for free, so entry fees would go up. And can you imagine how much extra work this would be for every one (riders included). I have pitted for Ed on FUSA races and it adds allot of extra work for the crew if you want to be competitive. We normally add one more crewmember for these events.
Here are some thoughts on the subject of whom you think is cheating. I can say from my experience that as I learn to ride some of my competitors seemed to be exceptionally faster than me. It is very easy to automatically suspect people of cheating. As I became a better rider I found myself passing some of these same individuals. I then thought about how ignorant I was assuming people were cheating. Then I thought.... Hmmm.... I bet some of them think I am a cheater. Well here are some things that I think are essential to all of us having a good time... That is what we are here for anyway. Honestly, Look At Yourself First, most fast guys are better riders than you want to believe. Secondly, when someone blows your doors off you should be thankful for the lesson on how to go faster, watch them you might learn something. Lastly YOU DO NOT HAVE TO WIN TO HAVE TONS OF FUN ON A RACETRACK. If you are only riding because you have to win, you are missing a giant part of this sport. The best time I have ever had on a motorcycle was in a race with Gerald Lehman (I am sure that I screwed the spelling up) over 5th place. We figure that about 15 passes took place in one sprint race, too much fun. At that moment in time I would not have cared if he were riding an R1, our rider/bike packages were even enough for us to have fun together. We all should have a passion for competition against the track and one another, not just for a race win.
I really do not understand people cheating, I am sure some people do it. I could never feel like I accomplished something if I was cheating. For those of you that are cheating, I have a question for you. How can you ever feel good about the position that you earned with an illegal motorcycle? You will never be able to answer the question of: Did I win, or the cheater bike? Here is another thought. If you suspect someone of cheating put your money where your mouth is and protest him or her. If you can justify spending money to make you bike faster, you should be able to afford a protest. Then in theory the cheaters would be caught and you could probably scare some of the others away from cheating.
Last thought I promise (the height of soap box I am on is frankly, Dizzying). Some people actually like working on their bikes. If the rules were changed such that you could no longer modify your bike, a portion of my enjoyment of this sport would go away. As far as the thought of making eveything superbike;I do not want to have an expensive strung out super bike motor that requires allot of attention. Besides almost all people get motor work (at least the machining part) done professionally. We do not have the equipment to do so at home. You can modify your motorcycles chassis and suspension at home. Ok I am done now. Lets all have a big group hug. And in the profound words of Rick Bruer "SHUT UP AND RIDE IT YA GIRL" (sorry ladies, it was not intended to offend)
Guy
Well done, Guy.
Last time I check I didn't see any engine builders paying out contigincy money ::) So how would that prevent Super Sport racing for getting sponsers to pay for contingincy? The Sv racers are not asking for a show room floor class we are asking for a level playing field that is reasonably cheap. Jet kit, pipe, suspension, brakelines, brakes, clipons rearsets bodywork ect. Not ram air Ti bolts and parts, carbon fiber bodywork total loss ign. ect.
QuoteI just wanted to add a few hundred thoughts to this link. I can understand allot of the viewpoints that people have on this subject. The one thing everyone is forgetting is that if super sport becomes showroom stock racing there would be no room for aftermarket parts. Once that happens you can kiss any contingency money away. What interest would companies have in putting up product money into a class that no one is allowed to use their products? If you really want to balance the field it would have to be power to weight ratio. The simple fact is CCS cannot do this for free, so entry fees would go up. And can you imagine how much extra work this would be for every one (riders included). I have pitted for Ed on FUSA races and it adds allot of extra work for the crew if you want to be competitive. We normally add one more crewmember for these events.
Here are some thoughts on the subject of whom you think is cheating. I can say from my experience that as I learn to ride some of my competitors seemed to be exceptionally faster than me. It is very easy to automatically suspect people of cheating. As I became a better rider I found myself passing some of these same individuals. I then thought about how ignorant I was assuming people were cheating. Then I thought.... Hmmm.... I bet some of them think I am a cheater. Well here are some things that I think are essential to all of us having a good time... That is what we are here for anyway. Honestly, Look At Yourself First, most fast guys are better riders than you want to believe. Secondly, when someone blows your doors off you should be thankful for the lesson on how to go faster, watch them you might learn something. Lastly YOU DO NOT HAVE TO WIN TO HAVE TONS OF FUN ON A RACETRACK. If you are only riding because you have to win, you are missing a giant part of this sport. The best time I have ever had on a motorcycle was in a race with Gerald Lehman (I am sure that I screwed the spelling up) over 5th place. We figure that about 15 passes took place in one sprint race, too much fun. At that moment in time I would not have cared if he were riding an R1, our rider/bike packages were even enough for us to have fun together. We all should have a passion for competition against the track and one another, not just for a race win.
I really do not understand people cheating, I am sure some people do it. I could never feel like I accomplished something if I was cheating. For those of you that are cheating, I have a question for you. How can you ever feel good about the position that you earned with an illegal motorcycle? You will never be able to answer the question of: Did I win, or the cheater bike? Here is another thought. If you suspect someone of cheating put your money where your mouth is and protest him or her. If you can justify spending money to make you bike faster, you should be able to afford a protest. Then in theory the cheaters would be caught and you could probably scare some of the others away from cheating.
Last thought I promise (the height of soap box I am on is frankly, Dizzying). Some people actually like working on their bikes. If the rules were changed such that you could no longer modify your bike, a portion of my enjoyment of this sport would go away. As far as the thought of making eveything superbike;I do not want to have an expensive strung out super bike motor that requires allot of attention. Besides almost all people get motor work (at least the machining part) done professionally. We do not have the equipment to do so at home. You can modify your motorcycles chassis and suspension at home. Ok I am done now. Lets all have a big group hug. And in the profound words of Rick Bruer "SHUT UP AND RIDE IT YA GIRL" (sorry ladies, it was not intended to offend)
Guy
The comment I made regarding engines was in response to the person who suggested that super sport be eliminated and all motorcycles would just conform to super bike rules. As far as I am concerned eliminating Ti, carbon fiber, ram air, and total loss ignition is a great idea!!! How would you then police it to ensure equality?
QuoteThe comment I made regarding engines was in response to the person who suggested that super sport be eliminated and all motorcycles would just conform to super bike rules. As far as I am concerned eliminating Ti, carbon fiber, ram air, and total loss ignition is a great idea!!! How would you then police it to ensure equality?
Easy - just state in the rules what mods are allowed (as someone mentioned in this thread earlier, I believe - like 5 or 7 pages ago), and limit mods to those only. Here's a start, from the Canadian SV Cup rules:
1. Lightweight SuperSport motorcycles must meet the General Equipment requirements except as noted:
a) The exhaust system may be replaced with commercially available aftermarket exhaust systems meeting mandatory track noise limits.
b) The rear shock may be replaced with an after-market shock.
c) Front forks must remain stock. Internal springs, valving, and oil may be changed with any aftermarket components.
d) [deleted - Pirelli spec tire rule - that's a whole 'nother can o' worms...]
e) Steel braided brake lines may be used to replace stock lines. Calipers and rotors must remain stock. (After market brake pads are acceptable.)
f) Horsepower limit: 75hp measured at the rear wheel (Sanctioning body to enforce if required). My add to this: mandatory dynoing when a dyno is available for top three finishers.
g) OMIT: Suzuki & series sponsor decals must be displayed on prominent parts of the motorcycle.
h) Genuine Suzuki SV650S or aftermarket replica bodywork can be used.
i) Starters, alternators, air boxes, carburetors and EFI must remain stock and functional, however carburetor jetting or EFI may be adjusted.
I like that as far as it goes, but I'd add the following:
The following items may be also be replaced with commerically available items:
* a smaller battery is allowed, but it must be permanently mounted in the stock location
Except as noted above, the following items must remain stock (in case you didn't understand the above paragraphs):
* engine compression and displacement
* engine heads, cams, valves
* all other internal engine components
* all ignition system components (spark plugs and wires are open)
* subframe
* fuel tank
* any other items not specifically referenced in the above sections must remain stock. Consult tech inspection if you have questions.
Now this may not be dead nutz complete, but directionally it seems to me it would go a long way toward leveling the playing field, don't you think?
THat would do it. And since my 2003 SV made 74 HP with just a pipe and an ignition advancer key, this would be easy for anyone to acomplish. Then the big question would be how do the various bikes stack up if they all follow the same rules?
Ov course, all of Ed's lightening tricks would still be legal, because they aren't prohibited by supersport rules. There would need to be a bit more clarification, such as "Aftermarket windscreen, clip-ons and rear sets allowed. All other pieces of the original motorcycle must be present and unmodified."
QuoteThere would need to be a bit more clarification, such as "Aftermarket windscreen, clip-ons and rear sets allowed. All other pieces of the original motorcycle must be present and unmodified."
Yeah, that was the point - unless the rules say you *can* do something, you can't. So lightening anything would be prohibited. I think the stuff about clipons and rearsets is in the general section for bike prep, but if it's not then you're right - it would be called out explicitly in the LW rules. And Ed's bike would need to be changed a bit ;).
Ok, then...
How do you police it?
How does one determine if something is fiberglass(legal) or carbon fiber(illegal under some ideas)?
How do you determine if a stock aluminum bolt was replaced with a steel or titanium bolt? What if the OEM bolt is out of stock?
Simple. Police by protest. If specific bolts are protested, The protester supplies one of his bolts for comparison. Then randomly choose another bike of the same model from the paddock to compare if the first two don't match.
Bolts aren't the enemy. Bolts are just one aspect of weight savings. And weight savings aren't really the enemy unless you race Ed Key! Not many other guys have supersports like the one Ed has built. The enemy is the guy who runs an SS legal bike in all the other modified classes, decides to modify BEYOND ss legal, but keeps running ss anyway. That's cheating, and it's bull$hit. Find a way to police that without forcing riders to protest each other. Keep in mind that Ed has painstakingly, laborously, and expensivly mined the rulebook for LEGAL ways to make his bike faster, and that he's just about alone in that quest. I respect what Ed has done, because it's devious, diabolical, and PERFECTLY LEGAL!
For the most part, race officials willingly work their butts off to make it a good show. So why not give the tech guys a compression gauge and one of those tools that measures displacement through the plug hole. Then you go off the factory specs, and randomly test after a race, just like airbox checks.
QuoteThe enemy is the guy who runs an SS legal bike in all the other modified classes, decides to modify BEYOND ss legal, but keeps running ss anyway. That's cheating, and it's bull$hit. Find a way to police that without forcing riders to protest each other.
So why not give the tech guys a compression gauge and one of those tools that measures displacement through the plug hole. Then you go off the factory specs, and randomly test after a race, just like airbox checks.
I don't know if CCS, as a
club racing organization could find it in their budget to do it.
Cheating is cheating, and that's easy to police if someone would protest. But then the penalties would need to be painful too...not so tolerant.
And HOE BIZ...
That's cool... ;D
"the lower the stakes, the greater the politics..." :-/
I think you guys may be making this unnecessarily complicated. Do you really think that guys cheat in LWSS? I mean, I suppose they certainly *could*, but we're not talking about 600s here, where winning means the potential to move on to bigger things in racing. The new guys who do want to move up are going to move up to MW or HW anyways (look at Janisch or some of the other young guns) - you think they are going to start out cheating?
We're talking about old guys (like me) who want to keep racing, have fun and still feel competitive; and newbs to racing of all ages who want to just try it out and see if they can do it; or try it out and just do it.
Sure, at the top of the classes you're going to find fierce competition. But even then, I question the assumptions that Dave is making about people's willingness to intentionally cheat in *this* class. Last time I checked Pamela Anderson (or her lookalike) was not waiting at the finish line of the LWSS race at Blackhawk, RA, or even ROC with a double magnum of champagne, a kiss and a check for a few grand.
Couple that with the fact that there's hardly any EX racers running LWSS anymore - because they've built their bikes and they *know* they are not SS legal - and you would have a hard time believeing that any of the three or four or five guys out there in a regional LWSS race was cheating.
I say keep it simple. If some crazy yahoo wants to go spend a thousand bucks on Ti bolts/axles to *intentionally* (not you, Ed) break the rules then a) who the heck is gonna care that much?; and b) a magnet would sure sort it out quickly if anyone really suspected (Dave, I don't think there's much in the way of aluminum *bolts* on an SV - I'm having a hard time thinking of even one).
I've been beaten plenty of times by guys on bikes that I'm sure were not much different than mine - because they were just plain faster. That's it. And 99% of the time in LW I'd be willing to bet that it's the same in other regions.
As for HP/engine displacement/other internal mods - put a max 75HP and some kind of min weight limit in the rules for this class, and check it at the FUSA weekends when there's a dyno and scales available - top 3 guys. That would force the cheaters to have two SS bikes - one legal and one not, or place out of the top three on 8 weekends a season.
After that, just about everything else you'd want to check can be done visually.
CF bodywork? Geez... I don't know that that would matter that much. Sharkskinz are pretty darn light. Again - we're not talking fame and glory here - you want it that bad, go for it. I'll take a big dump right before the 5-board, run faster, and still beat yer butt anyway 8) :P
QuoteAnd HOE BIZ...
That's cool... ;D
;)
Make sure that you state what dyno is being used. A factory dyno like the one used during FUSA events yields a HP reading about 15% lower than a Dynojet dyno. Ed SS bike makes 73.5 to 74 Hp on a dyno jet and 66hp on a factory dyno. That Hp number is to high. It takes VP fuel to get that number. You guys are looking to reduce cost so the HP should be more like 72. for the 99 -02. Here comes the first problem I have heard that an 03 can make up to 76hp on a dynojet. What about the XB12 that bike will make 95hp on a dynojet. Even Mark Brenards old Buel made over 90Hp. That is why the rule needs to be a power to weight ratio. Checking the power to weight ratio once in a while would not help that much, but it is a start.
If we make it a power to weight class, let's measure weight with the rider aboard. I would get to run a Gixxer thou in lightweight! ;D :-[
WTF! I'm reading this and I can't believe it. I've been out of racing for a while but from what I remember, SS bikes had a pipe and a jet kit(powercommander), a shock and the forks reworked. put on some steel braided lines and good brake pads, race bodywork and away you go with DOT tires. It needs to be that way again, and that's the bottom line..... You wanna play with that other stuff, build a superbike. If your 3 year old bike can't compete, then sell it and upgrade.
MACOP1104 I don't know who you are but THANK YOU!! SOMEBODY FINALLY F**king gets it!
QuoteWTF! I'm reading this and I can't believe it. I've been out of racing for a while but from what I remember, SS bikes had a pipe and a jet kit(powercommander), a shock and the forks reworked. put on some steel braided lines and good brake pads, race bodywork and away you go with DOT tires. It needs to be that way again, and that's the bottom line..... You wanna play with that other stuff, build a superbike. If your 3 year old bike can't compete, then sell it and upgrade.
+1
QuoteWTF! I'm reading this and I can't believe it. I've been out of racing for a while but from what I remember, SS bikes had a pipe and a jet kit(powercommander), a shock and the forks reworked. put on some steel braided lines and good brake pads, race bodywork and away you go with DOT tires. It needs to be that way again, and that's the bottom line..... You wanna play with that other stuff, build a superbike. If your 3 year old bike can't compete, then sell it and upgrade.
Interesting..........everything you said is on my bike and nothing more......thats what I thought SS was about?
That IS what SS is about. The problem comes when Guys use that same bike in GP, GT, SB, Super Twins, or whatever. So they change things that don't show, like cams, compression, or bore size. This is outright cheating, and I've seen it personally.
Mark Donahue wrote a book called "The Unfair Advantage." It documented all the crazy things he had done to make his cars better than the competition. The man was an engineer who could see his way cleanly around any rule. Given enough time, genius, and money, there will always be a Donahue or a Key who will find a better way within the rules. These guys are the ones we talk about when we say "Racing improves the breed," and IMO, they should not be discouraged. The endless evolution of thought process and redesign that men of this breed display is responsible for the magnificent bikes we can now buy right off the showroom floor.
I abandoned this thread earlier. I'd related an experience that I'd had at Road America to make a point. Then a few guys were asking me about my setup, and about how much difference my heavier body weight makes. WELL, LET ME CLARIFY! ONE MINUTE YOU CAN RACE SOMEBODY WHEEL TO WHEEL. THEN HIS SS BIKE SHOWS UP AT YOUR SPONSOR'S SHOP FOR CAMS, A BORE, AND HIGH COMPRESSION PISTONS! SUDDENLY, YOU CAN'T GET CLOSE ENOUGH TO RACE HIM ANY MORE. Other riders who you used to be able to compete with find similar gains with no outwardly visible changes to their bikes other than idle quality. Suddenly the race you used to be IN is now 30 seconds up the road when the checkered flag waves.
Rosno, don't you DARE start talking your shit about how some guys could run sixes on a pogo stick. That isn't what I'm talking about. This is hobby racing. We come to have a good race, and we all bring a certain amount of talent. When you can run bar to bar with someone and beat them, then suddenly they build a cheater motor and just WALK you with the same bike they had a month ago, that sucks. It gets worse when the next guy and the next guy do it. Now they are all still bar to bar, but you're behind and hating it! And the worst part is if you don't actually end up in the right place at the right time and SEE the cheater motor going together. Now you wonder if it's just you. And guys like Rosno enable the cheaters by suggesting that they all just learned to ride better while you didn't. Great logic. "Gee, two weeks ago, I used to stay within a bikelength down the front straight, but now I'm 10 bikelenghs back in that distance. My competition must have figured out how to outride me in a straight line! I need to be a better rider!" Gimmie a break!
Screw it. If I EVER again KNOW FOR SURE that someone is cheating, I'm going to protest. Even if I came in dead last.
I think a lot of the allowable mods have spilled over from AMA pro-racing. It was common practice to shave the head or the cylinders to bump compression , so the next year they allowed milling the head. One year, Everyone was accusing Kawasaki of having a quick shifter on their ss bikes which they fabricated out of the kickstand switch. The next year, quickshifters were allowed. Then kit ECU boxes were allowed. I think the rule book definitely needs to tighten things up to bring down the cost and even things up between those with $ who can afford the mods and those who can not afford the mods.
Maybe part of the problem involves details in the rulebook, and it certainly seems doable to tighten up SS rules there to address some of this.
Perhaps, tho, it is possible that the overall structure of the classes is more of an issue. The incentive to cheat in SS is not necessarily so you can win SS, altho that's certainly a nice benefit of cheating and not getting caught. Could it be that the real incentive is to win in the other three classes - SB, GP and GT??
The way the regional championship is structured these plus SS are where you have to perform well to win your class in the region. And in those other classes pretty much anything goes by way of mods to the bike (as long as you keep it within the displacement limits).
Couple that with the fact that the majority of riders cannot or chose not to field multiple machines (it's already a bloody spendy pasttime with just one), and you can start to see how there could be an incentive to shave the heads, bore the cylinders, etc. If you don't you won't have a prayer in three of the four classes that you must be competitive in, if you want to have a run for the regional title.
Now I don't know that it *would* solve anything, but what if they looked at taking SS out of the points mix for regional titles? Would that take away the incentive for some to cheat?
I completely agree with this topic. Damico is easily frustrated by people who stray from the subject but there are many valid points here. The one thing I have seen in supersport time and again ( I`m sure this is what Super Dave is referring to when he talks of rider skill) is corner exit drive MASSIVELY effects straightaway speed. At the front of my local SS races, on my home track, I`ve witnessed riders exit a corner immediately in front of me yet gap me by getting on the gas sooner or put the power down better(less wheel spin due to better set up)
I guess what I`m saying is although cheating is rampant in SS, you cannot judge someone solely on whether their bike appears to be faster than yours!
You SV guys are killing me with this thread ::)
QuoteGimmie a break!
Screw it. If I EVER again KNOW FOR SURE that someone is cheating, I'm going to protest. Even if I came in dead last.
Actually, I've said that many times.
I have knowingly raced someone that I knew had a massive overbore on their engine in Supersport. Beat them anyway. I know they ride well, and I don't have the money to protest...meaning I don't have it period to put up. Doesn't matter that I'd get it back.
Ed does what the rules allow. The current CCS supersport rules are too open. I think the same of the AMA, but that'a another topic.
Supersport bikes should have starters and charging systems. Start there. But I think, given that it's January, nothing will be changed.
QuoteActually, I've said that many times.
:-* :-* :-* :-* ;)
I'm backing K3 on this one and I'm wondering if this thread is coming close to being World Champion thread!? What's the most views a thread has ever had. We've obviously hit a good topic here. Here's to 2007 having strict SS rules!
As I said before.....doesn`t matter what rules they write....cheaters will cheat and nothing will change!
QuoteNow I don't know that it *would* solve anything, but what if they looked at taking SS out of the points mix for regional titles? Would that take away the incentive for some to cheat?
No, it wouldn't. Your post neatly paraphrases what I've been saying, (Thanks!) but misses the point on motivation. Guys race because they like it. It gets better if they win. Entering SS doesn't have to be about the points. I was running into the SS cheating phenominon in F40, a class that doesn't count for anything but fun. F40 heavyweight bikes have to be SS legal. I know of two that WERE NOT legal. But their owners also ran them in the more modified classes, had built them, and thought nothing of entering them in F40 for fun. Problem is, I wasn't having any fun watching them disappear.
At one point, I actually petitioned for F40 to be run under GP rules. Then I could have at least built my bike without cheating. See, I don't mind building a hotrod. I just hate being told I can't, then having to race against people who did it anyway!
My original thought on starting this thread had absolutely NOTHING to do with cheating. I have never gotten beat by someone that cheated that I didn't deserve to be beaten by (because I didn't ride well enough). Stop FU**ing whining about cheaters, learn to ride better or protest, otherwise shut up if your just going to whine about it.
This thread had to do with the wording in the rule book to allow some of the stupid sh8t they allow in SS.
I am so glad I get to make so many new friends on this forum.
QuoteAs I said before.....doesn`t matter what rules they write....cheaters will cheat and nothing will change!
If no one will ever protest, then you might as well call them 'guidelines' instead of rules... Personally I've never seen the point of winning the SS class with a superbike... Kind of like cheating on your golf score... If you're going to do that, you might as well put down anything, because it's meaningless...
QuoteI have never gotten beat by someone that cheated that I didn't deserve to be beaten by (because I didn't ride well enough). Stop FU**ing whining about cheaters, learn to ride better or protest, otherwise shut up if your just going to whine about it.
I am so glad I get to make so many new friends on this forum.
;D Did you write this post, or was one of your old friends borrowing your computer?
Hey K3, lets go to the races and set up a table like a bail bondsman only we'll be fronting PROTEST FEES 'R' US. We can franchise and go to all the races even the W*** ones. We get a cut and everybody that wants to can protest all day long. The details are sketchy, but the outline is here.
Wait, you run the table and I'll enter the Triumph 675 in the LW classes, that'll drum up some business.
(j/k..... j/k, it's a long off season and I'm going nuts ;D)
And I could sell Highside at the same table!!!!
Now we're talkin' capitalism...
A supersport bike should have a working starter.
A supersport bike should have a working charging system.
Carburated bikes could have jets changed and ignition advancers installed, so you'd have to allow all the FI stuff and ignition stuff there. Everything continues to be leaned down for emissions, so that stuff is good for longevity and durability.
Replacement rear shocks? I think you must allow it. Some manufactures make their bikes so that they street bike is so far off from what a reasonable race bike is it's necessary to have the replacement shock just for the extra length.
I'm blown away by all the people that are dropping big cake on all the drop in cartridge kits. Seems like a whole lot of expense, and it, to me, is kind of far away from reality. I don't mind having new springs, and modified internals, but complete replacement of cartridges...well, that's someone elses money.
Motor...maintenance needs to be allowed. So, I always liked the idea that one could redeck the head to get things to seal when things warp. Then you need to allow cam timing to go with that.
Blueprinting bottom end bearings? Yeah, I think that's fine. They are stock parts. If you can't do that, run lighter oil. I had some different oil made to my spec's once.
Transmissions...ok, I think you should allow someone to shim it if they no how to do it, but back cutting it seems excessive in that it can get modified pretty quick to really improve it way beyond stock.
More thoughts?
QuoteNow we're talkin' capitalism...
A supersport bike should have a working starter.
A supersport bike should have a working charging system.
Carburated bikes could have jets changed and ignition advancers installed, so you'd have to allow all the FI stuff and ignition stuff there. Everything continues to be leaned down for emissions, so that stuff is good for longevity and durability.
Replacement rear shocks? I think you must allow it. Some manufactures make their bikes so that they street bike is so far off from what a reasonable race bike is it's necessary to have the replacement shock just for the extra length.
I'm blown away by all the people that are dropping big cake on all the drop in cartridge kits. Seems like a whole lot of expense, and it, to me, is kind of far away from reality. I don't mind having new springs, and modified internals, but complete replacement of cartridges...well, that's someone elses money.
Motor...maintenance needs to be allowed. So, I always liked the idea that one could redeck the head to get things to seal when things warp. Then you need to allow cam timing to go with that.
Blueprinting bottom end bearings? Yeah, I think that's fine. They are stock parts. If you can't do that, run lighter oil. I had some different oil made to my spec's once.
Transmissions...ok, I think you should allow someone to shim it if they no how to do it, but back cutting it seems excessive in that it can get modified pretty quick to really improve it way beyond stock.
More thoughts?
Theres no way that a set of springs and Racetech valving are going to compare to the 25mm Ohlins carts that I have in my new SS legal 1k Suzuki. Give me a cookie....
QuoteMy original thought on starting this thread had absolutely NOTHING to do with cheating. I have never gotten beat by someone that cheated that I didn't deserve to be beaten by (because I didn't ride well enough). Stop FU**ing whining about cheaters, learn to ride better or protest, otherwise shut up if your just going to whine about it.
This thread had to do with the wording in the rule book to allow some of the stupid sh8t they allow in SS.
I am so glad I get to make so many new friends on this forum.
Excellent point, but I doubt that we will get back to it.
PS - I have met you and like you. Of course, I also like Super Dave... :-/
so, ah, is this thing dead?? ;D ;D ;D ;D
QuoteTheres no way that a set of springs and Racetech valving are going to compare to the 25mm Ohlins carts that I have in my new SS legal 1k Suzuki. Give me a cookie....
Well, there are racers that actually make money with manufacturer contingency that don't like or use the drop in aftermarket cartidges. If it works for you, great. How much affect does it have on your lap times?
And Thingy...the feeling is mutual.... ::) :-*
OK Dave the suspense is killing me. Why are you changing your name constantly? Are you on the run?
Are you having identity problems?
Not the kind of identity problems you might think... :-*
LOL!
(The board is boring lately...)
Tom, this thread might never die. Every year, Supersport is questioned.
The rewards for this class are probably the highest because it is the most attainable. Fast riders have won races on simple set ups. Yeah, there are those that live on the edge, there are those that cheat, and there are those that rightfully build to the rules. The rules have been "corrupted" over some time. Probably about ten years ago where it started to substantially change from what it was "in the beginning".
Winning a supersport race is a badge of honor to me, and I recognize when a rider wins a supersport race that it is a lot of work. For me, personally, Supersport is the only one that is reasonable. There is, at least, a reasonable cap on what can be done. But the jar is too big. That's all that Jason, myself, and even Ed believe.
Most manufacturers focus a good deal of contingency in the Supersport classes over GP and Superbike. So, it does have the most reward.