CCS / ASRA Racing Forum

CCS / ASRA Racing Discussion => CCS / ASRA Racing Discussion => Topic started by: ColoradoTZ on December 27, 2002, 05:12:58 am

Title: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: ColoradoTZ on December 27, 2002, 05:12:58 am
Hi All,

New to the board.  I currently race with the MRA in Colorado on a '91 TZ250, previously raced an R6 and before that in the late 80s, GSXRs....

I have a question that maybe you can help me out with.

Our club recently changed some rules that affect our TZ/RS two-smoke racers. Our Formula II Class (250 two-stroke GP Class) was dropped due to low turn-out numbers. They created a LightWeight GP Class.  This class puts TZs with SV which can be pumped to 700cc (There are some other bikes allowed as well, but it appears the SVs are probably the biggest contenders)

The club said that other clubs around the country have a similar class and that the SVs and TZs produce some good racing.

So, if anyone here has any info (firsthand would be best) on how the SVs and TZs race go meaning does one have a clear advantage or even a slight advantage given equal riders it would be appreciated.

My issue is that if the SVs are just as competitive as the TZs, I'm considering making a switch.  I can't see the point of the constant maintenance and costs of running a TZ if an SV performs the same without the constant top-end changes, crank rebuilds, etc....

Thanks for any help!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Protein Filled on December 27, 2002, 05:30:28 am
I have raced both and I can tell you that the SV is a heavier bike so it does not turn as well, but it is much easier to ride, so you can push it to the limits easier and in turn sometimes you go faster.

The TZ is a superior track bike though. A good rider on a TZ can beat himself on an SV if he can ride them both to their limits. I would bet money that if Rich Oliver got on an SV, he could not match his TZ times, no matter how built the SV was. At BIR, the fastest rider on his SV does 1:49's-50's. Rich Oliver qualified at a 1:43 this year.


When I switched bikes I improved my lap times greatly. Not immediately, but after a couple of weekends once I got more used to the bike.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Super Dave on December 27, 2002, 06:33:14 am
The TZ is a race bike.  So, in the finest hands, it will go faster than a street bike, an SV.  You can pump up the SV a whole lot, but the TZ is easier to work on.  But the TZ needs a bit more fiddling with.

In Colorado, you could do really well on one of the Sherrit's (SP?) TZ's, but the SV might be more versitile.  Regardless, they are both fun.

I'm sure that you could get one of the Turner boys to ride a TZ close to the lap record at some place like Second Creek, but I think it might be harder on a Super SV.  Again, weight, etc.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on December 27, 2002, 06:42:35 am
What's more fun to ride? I can't imagine that there's a bike out there that is more fun to ride than a 250 GP bike. The cost of maintaining a GP bike is irrelevant when you think of what it costs to get a street bike race ready. For example my 03 TZ cost me $18,000 but it comes race ready with a full season's worth of consumable parts. Now you buy a new GSXR for $9000. Dump 5k into it to get it fully race prepped. Then drop a few more grand for spares and you've spent damn near the cost of a TZ.

As far as being competetive against SVs? Didn't Oliver qualify only a few tenths of a second slower than Tommy Hayden on the ZX6R at Road America last year? We're talking at the track where horsepower rules all. I think with a proper rider on a TZ.. there's no way an SV should be able to run with it. Unfortunately for myself and some others, we're in the infant stages of learning how to ride it properly. Maybe in a few years, I can answer this question with first hand knowledge.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Super Dave on December 27, 2002, 06:59:27 am
Bam, Brian, you're hitting it on the head.

The TZ is a REAL race bike.  Look how much it takes to make a REAL supersport bike for AMA stuff....about $25k.  And when you're done racing it, it's worth about $7k.  

And it sure ain't made for workin' on.

I raced a TZ250 many moons ago.  Simple in design, but it was so fun to ride because it was always so pi$$ed!  (Hummel cylinders, no exhaust valve.  This was before reed valves....)

Guess that's why I'm building an H1.  Simple.  It will be pi$$ed too!  It will just have a lot narrower rims.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on December 27, 2002, 07:01:57 am
Quote


Guess that's why I'm building an H1.  Simple.  It will be pi$$ed too!  It will just have a lot narrower rims.


Wire spoked rims? I like wire rims. By the way.. Rick Merhar says hello.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: ColoradoTZ on December 27, 2002, 08:06:52 am
Thanks so far for all the advice and opinions!

Let me rephrase or narrow down my question abit as well as add additional comments.  Forget about guys like Oliver, Hayden, and the top flight "Pros". What about the average club racer on these bikes in your club?  What have you seen/experieced?

When I raced an R6, like anything else I was able to improve my speed and limits and got my times to a respectible level in our club.  When I switched to the TZ it took and is still taking time to get down to the same lap times.  I'm off by about 1.5 to 2 seconds a lap slower on the TZ depending on the track (Can't just use acceleration anymore).  :)  So, while I find the TZ fun I'm finding it harder to get my times down to what I was turning on the R6.

I definitely agree that setup cost to turn a streetbike into a racebike is alot higher than one would think having done that several times.  But my intent would be to buy a race-ready SV as opposed to building one.  I've seen a few race ready SVs for around 5k.  

One of my other questions is; "Is one easier to ride one than the other to extract performance from", do you have to ride one harder than the other to turn similar lap times"?, meaning, for me on the TZ,  I have to ride closer to my limits on it than the R6 to turn "fast" lap times.  I know that real good racers can ride that way and extract every once of performance out of a bike", but I'm a good racer not great and nowhere nears AMA quality not even privateer...

Regarding your comment Super_duck, your point of view is the same point of view that my friend who races TZs takes.  He figures its about the same costs to run the TZ as a four stroke.  We've had that discussion several times over.  But he always figures in a valve job and some top end work at the end of the season then an engine freshening mid season on a four stroke....

From my personal experience, it still costs way more to run the TZ than a converted streetbike.  Once I had my R6 in race trim I was able to run it for two full seasons with no work other than P.M., my friend who wrenches checked a few times a season and other than valve adjustments the bike needed nothing.  I carried some spares but did not "stock up" on any and as it turned out in two seasons of racing I never needed any. So other than the usual race expenses; gas, oil, tires, etc, there was no additional expenses.

My TZ on the other hand;

4 Top-ends;  These cost me approximately 150 a set so 600 bucks.

Re-nickasil of two of my jugs at 125 a piece 250 bucks.

Crank rebuild - 600 bucks at 1200 miles (And this is making sure I don't go to too many test and tune days or it I'll reach that mark before the end of the season)

Clutch plates et all - 150 bucks.

Misc consumables like gaskets when I take the heads off to examine the pistons, circ clips, rubber rings for the heads, etc, figure another 100 bucks.

So, just the basics to keep the TZ running not including all the other items you consume in a race season is 1700 bucks.  

So, from my personal experience it has cost more to run the TZ.  

And lets be honest, if you check around the pit area you'll find that unless its the top notch racers most club racers do the basic maintenance on their bike and don't tear down the motor to inspect wear and the like.  I think most pretty much do the same as I did with my R6.  Take good care of it, address problems if they arise, but don't typically spend more than they have to, to ensure a safe and reliable "ride".

With that said, I agree the TZ is a blast to ride.  Nothing like it I've ever raced.  

But without the Formula II class where everyone has to "work" to keep their bikes at its peak, I began/begin to wonder if I can get away with something like the SV with less work/maintenace and still finish well....

Of course it comes down to money.  I mean if that wasn't an issue we'd all be racing whatever we wanted, but the reality is some or most of us have a budget we try to work within. Some are smaller or larger than others....

Thanks again and I sincerely appreciate your input! :)
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on December 27, 2002, 08:29:09 am
Well in the LWGP class in just about every region.. the first thing you will notice is the overabundance of SV's and the lack of 250 GP bikes. Regardless of the number of GP bikes on the grid, I think it is very competitive against the SV's. Correct me if I'm wrong guys but  I believe our fastest SV guy and TZ guy run just about the same lap times at our local track(BHF). But we also have to run against 600 inline fours in MWGP and GTU because we are not allowed to run against the SV's in GTL. It's not fair for the 250GP riders but according to Kevin Elliot, he thinks that a good rider on a good TZ should be faster than a good rider on a good 600.  ::) When's the last time you saw a guy on a 250GP bike come to BHF and win a middleweight race? How many 250GP guys can run 13's there? Anyway, I think it's fair to run us against modified SV's, FZR's, and the big ass buells but totally unfair for us to have to run against the inline 4 600's.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Protein Filled on December 27, 2002, 09:30:05 am
Hey Brian,

Have you ridden an SV? They are a blast to ride. You can take mine out if you want while I am riding your new 2003 TZ.

:D ;D ;D
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on December 27, 2002, 09:39:08 am
Quote
Hey Brian,

Have you ridden an SV? They are a blast to ride. You can take mine out if you want while I am riding your new 2003 TZ.

:D ;D ;D


I've sat on one but never actually taken one out. I have this weird thing about riding someone else's bike. I'm scared to ride other people's bike for some reason. Maybe I think I'm going to crash it. Your bike is fast.. that much I know. Actually Lucente's bike is pretty damn fast too.

I'll let you ride my new bike once I get it all worked out. I'll give you 3 laps on the darn thing. How's that sound? But you have to come to a friday practice.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Protein Filled on December 27, 2002, 09:58:54 am
Wooooooh, finally broke down, huh?

;D

Sure, 3 laps is plenty. I just want to see how much they have improved since the 90's model I have. Friday is fine with me...

Rhianna said to me that her bike's motor was almost stock. I didn't know FZR's were that fast out of the box. She claims it was her weight advantage...suuuure ;)
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Super Dave on December 27, 2002, 10:46:44 am
Yes, a TZ250 should kick my butt at Blackhawk.  That's a fact.  I have seen very few guys ride TZ like they should be ridden at the local level.  

The last guy at Blackhawk that did well on a TZ was Michael Hunter.  He was always chasing the lap record.  At AMA events he did respetfully.  Nothing stellar, but he did well.

A TZ is not an easy beast to ride fast.  A 600 is pretty tame and mushie compared to the knife edged performance of a TZ.  There is so much feed back on the TZ, it overwhelms one's senses, and then you go slower that on a 600.

The SV is in the same league as the 600.  Relatively tame.  

You're maintenance pretty much sounds like what I've done for years.

Race Ready bikes?  Be careful.  A race bike is not just an assembly of parts.  Often, it seems like that's what they are listed as.  But then they are assembled incorrectly by a person that has no mechanical ability.  In my school I work with experienced racers too.  So many times, a guy I work with will show up with a new "race bike" he bought that is all wrong.  

There are good ones out there.  I hope the guys that buy mine like them.  But just try to get all the information you can.  I supply any notes with the bike that I made over the period that I had it.  And I offer on going support and usually a school program.  

Improved since '90's?  LOL!  Mine was a TZ250J - 1982.  Brian, bring your TZ to me... ;D ::) ??? 8) :o :o
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZ_Boy on December 28, 2002, 09:49:40 am
Yes Brian, Mr. Elliot is delusional about racing 250's in the CCS.  We can all speculate about Rich Oliver and company and what they can do with TZ's but the reality in club racing is that a TZ and SV are a good matchup and 600's are faster.  I researched the results nationally for Am\EX GTU results and found that out of 120 races there were 0 250 wins and there were only 9 top five finishes, 1 was Jason Disalvo and a few others were low entry's.  This clearly shows that 600's are faster than 250's at the club level.  Mr. Elliot also sites that allowing 250's into GTL's would destroy 125's in this class because they are currently winning 25% of the races.  There are only 1 or 2 250's racing in a class I don't know how this could severly affect the outcome of any race.  As far as 125's winning 1/4 of GTL's races I didn't do the research but I didn't see that happening in the Mid-west.  Yes you will always have the rare case at a small track with a superior rider on a 250 or 125 that can overcome and win but this should not set the standard.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Roach on December 29, 2002, 08:19:30 am

Err... no offense, but a good 250 rider is going to suck the paint of any SV. Or actually, better to say that with equally skilled riders the TZ wins.

The first time Brian K got on my TZ at VIR he was down into the :32's, and I have a '93 chassis with a '96 motor (well tuned, but not exactly new equipment). I think Dave's (yakov) best time on his SV at VIR is in the :34's or :35's?

If you look at the big boys, Oliver set the poll at a high :28 and the top-5 AMA 250 guys were all at :30 or less - this would be competative in the 600ss race!

I am only a half-decent rider, and my best lap there is a high :36 - I couldn't come close to that on an SV.

- Roach
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZ_Boy on December 29, 2002, 09:08:39 am
TZ's do not suck the paint off of SV's especially built ones which there seems to be alot of.  As far as comparing Rich Olivers times to club level racing is irrelevant.  Comparing Brian's times to Dave's or yours is also meaningless.  The results don't lie take a look at LGP results, SV's win races in this class.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on December 29, 2002, 09:32:31 am
Quote


If you look at the big boys, Oliver set the poll at a high :28 and the top-5 AMA 250 guys were all at :30 or less - this would be competative in the 600ss race!


The top 5 AMA 250 guys were all at 30 or less. Where were the rest of the guys? Perhaps off by about 10 seconds? Remember Oliver and the top 5 guys all qualified between 2:16-2:22 at Road America. Where were the rest of the guys? 2:30's?  ::)  That sure would be competitive in the 600 race.  ::)

Paul,
hey if you need a 98 tail section.. I've got 2 for sale... for you cheap cheap cheap


Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZ_Boy on December 29, 2002, 10:11:59 am
Sorry Brian but I am to poor, trying to get some money together for entry fees.  I probably will run on the same crank this year!  Does this mean I have to race with one finger covering the clutch all year. :'(
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: chris_chops on December 29, 2002, 10:16:45 am
I don't think the tz's that we see at blackhawk are as powerful as the ama bikes in the top five.  Except for Rev. Brian's, he told me his makes 91 h.p. on racing fuel derived from drippings off of wuytak's stinky leathers.  Now he has a new bike and wuytak is up to 115 cans of red bull a day.  Hey superdave, I think you are about to see a tz250 doing really well at blackhawk next year.  Go Brian!!!!!
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZ_Boy on December 29, 2002, 10:36:07 am
Amen, apples and oranges. ;D  As far as the Rev. goes don't let him fool you he is aiming for gold next year and his bike will be fast.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on December 29, 2002, 10:52:04 am
Quote
Sorry Brian but I am to poor, trying to get some money together for entry fees.  I probably will run on the same crank this year!  Does this mean I have to race with one finger covering the clutch all year. :'(


Paul,
Don't do it. You have to rebuild your crank. If your crank goes.. it's going to tear up your cases, cylinders, heads and everything in between. Save yourself the headache and additional $$. Save up and get it rebuilt.

Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on December 29, 2002, 10:58:03 am
Quote
I don't think the tz's that we see at blackhawk are as powerful as the ama bikes in the top five.  Except for Rev. Brian's, he told me his makes 91 h.p. on racing fuel derived from drippings off of wuytak's stinky leathers.  Now he has a new bike and wuytak is up to 115 cans of red bull a day.  Hey superdave, I think you are about to see a tz250 doing really well at blackhawk next year.  Go Brian!!!!!


What's a good lap time for a TZ at blackhawk? 17's? 16's?
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Super Dave on December 29, 2002, 11:35:11 am
It should be faster than that.  I would expect 13's to 15's just like a 600.

Apples to apples. Fast TZ at an AMA National vs Supersport at AMA National.  Pretty close.  It should be that way at the Regional lever.

But the GP bike enthusiasm isn't around like it was about ten years ago.  And conversely, Yamaha used to offer contingency money for TZ250's back then too.  So, the regional guys looking for money migrated to the production bikes.

Personally, I know a couple of 250 tuners.  They don't do it much anymore.  But I don't see anyone doing anything like what they did at regional races.  Everyone runs WAAAAAY rich and that's good for them.  For what they are doing, they would be better off on an SV.  Rev, I haven't watched you work on your 250, so I don't know what to say to you.

But the 250's should be going faster at our local regional races, period.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZ_Boy on December 29, 2002, 12:18:49 pm
17's is the fastest that I have seen and this managed a fourth in LGP.  As far as 13's I doubt it but I am sure the Rev. will let you try Dave on his new steed, what are you doing on a 600?  As far as apples my TZ is as close to Oliver's as a CCS GSXR750 is to Miladan's Superbike.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Roach on December 29, 2002, 01:07:36 pm
Quote
TZ's do not suck the paint off of SV's especially built ones which there seems to be alot of.  As far as comparing Rich Olivers times to club level racing is irrelevant.  Comparing Brian's times to Dave's or yours is also meaningless.  The results don't lie take a look at LGP results, SV's win races in this class.



So, because there aren't talented riders on 250s racing againt SVs, that makes the SV a more capable bike? Me thinks that's warped logic :)

Classification at the club level is based on the machine's capability, not the rider's. They try and group bikes together that, even when ridden at their limits, are competative with each other.

If you let 250s into GTL (or WERA LW Solo 20), a good 250 rider is more than capable of running away with it. That's what they're trying to avoid.  

- Roach
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on December 29, 2002, 02:05:09 pm
Roach,
I totally agree with you.. I think TZ's racing against SV whether it's built or not is more than fair. The only reason why I think racing against middleweight bikes is unfair is because we have the unfair advantage when racing against them. Maybe it's just me but if I get stuck behind a pack of 600's that are circulating a second or two slower than I am.. it's almost impossible for me to get by them due to different lines and cornering speeds. I've heard this from quite a few competent 250 riders as well. I also believe that the best riders are not riding 250 GP bikes..atleast at the regional level.

Dave,
The question here isn't whether a TZ should be able to do 13-15's at blackhawk but have you seen anyone do that. Mark Stiles is probably the fastest 250 rider in our region. I believe he does 17's.  Also talked to Aaron Rentschler and he told me his best time at blackhawk was 17s. And both of those guys are no slouches.  It also goes back to whether a TZ should run with the 600's. Can we really go as fast as we can when we run against 600's? I even doubt Oliver or Sorenson would be able to run their normal pace if they were thrown in the AMA supersport race. Anyway, my reason for riding a TZ isn't because I want to go change the world or set any track records. I want to have the most fun as possible and I can't think of any bike that would give me the same enjoyment as riding a 250 GP bike and if at the same time I can do well.. then that's a bonus.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZ_Boy on December 29, 2002, 02:28:31 pm
Brian, Stiles is who I timed doing 17's.  If TZ's were allowed into GTL's the results would be the same as LGP which TZ's do not run away with.  I agree the fastest riders are riding 600's because that is were the money is.  I sold my GSXR1000 to race 250's for fun.  My point is there is no reason to keep TZ's out of GTL's.  I don't believe a TZ can do 13's at BHF, Kevin Gordon did ask to ride my TZ last year that would be a good guage as to how fast it can go althouth he does tend to crash from time to time.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Monty925 on December 29, 2002, 06:40:27 pm
My opinion after racing a '94,'93 and '00 TZ250 over the past 2 1/2 years... If you are a halfway decent rider you should have no problem beating SV's at any track.

I rode both my '00 TZ in WERA National F2 and a pretty nice SV650 in the WERA National LW Endurance respectively.  At most tracks I was 4-7 seconds a lap faster on the TZ.  A SV usually won the drag race to T1 but they never led more than the first lap.

I ran a '93 TZ in '01 at Summit in LWGP and MWGP.  The SV's would usually lead me into T1 but I'd be by them half a lap later or at least on the front straight.  
In MWGP there was one weekend in particular where Randy Renfrow won, Chris Pyles took second and I snared third out of a grid over over 25 600's including Rick Beggs on his Kaw600 and Fred Stucky on his Duc748.  We were all on 250's.

You can brake harder and later on a 250, you can corner faster and should be able to accelerate faster.  A 250 is over 100lbs lighter and in a very mild state of tune should make over 70hp.  
How could you not beat a bike that weighs 100lbs more?  

A 240lb bike with 70hp gives you a 3.4:1 hp to weight ratio.  If a SV weighs 350lbs and makes 80hp that's a 4.375:1 hp to weight ratio.   To get an SV in the 250 power to weight ratio it would have to weigh 340lbs and put out 100hp.  A good 600 against a good 250 is a much better race than a good 250 against a good SV.

I think riding a 250 teaches you far more than riding a SV.  You learn how to use the BRAKES, not rely on engine compression to slow you down.
You learn how to keep a bike in its powerband, not rely on gobs of torque to get your lazy butt moving.
At Jennings GP I counted 17 shifts per lap on the TZ
but just 4, FOUR, on the SV.  (I was 5 seconds faster on the TZ)
You learn throttle control (sorry Roach, not aimed at you buddy!), on a SV you just weight the outer peg and try and twist the grip of the bar.
When you make adjustments to the ride height or suspension on a 250 you FEEL the change.  Most people could let the air out the back tire on a SV and wouldn't know the difference.
A 250 gives you feedback much quicker than a streetbike.  When a 250 starts spinning the rear, you know it right then.  A mushy street bike can start spinning the rear and it seems to happen in slow motion.

These are my opinions.  You can take 'em or leave 'em.  Me?  I'd much rather race my 250 in GTL than GTU if there's money on the line.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Roach on December 29, 2002, 09:55:24 pm
Quote
You learn throttle control (sorry Roach, not aimed at you buddy!)


Oh, I learned a lot about throttle control that day. I also learned about track elevation, and the effects it has on your flight as it falls away from you :(

Quote
These are my opinions.  You can take 'em or leave 'em.  Me?  I'd much rather race my 250 in GTL than GTU if there's money on the line.


Heh... you know you're right... I should be agreeing with this rather than disputing it. Let 250's in GTL!! (You can never have too many trophies, can you?) :D
That, and pistons paid for by the purse would be pretty sweet.

Seriously TZ_Boy, out here (right coast) there are quite a few talented 250 riders that would destroy GTL. Most of them race the WERA National series, but they do show up at the regionals (WERA and CCS) from time to time.

- Roach
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: chris_chops on December 29, 2002, 10:09:08 pm
I tend to agree with roach, as the tz hovers between a lw and mw bike depending on state of tune and rider.  It brings up the whole issue of class structure, hp limits, weight limits, etc..  A real tz makes 90hp, right?  So a real tz wouldn't be a lw in my book, but a 62 hp could be close.  Then some hotshot rider would take a 62hp bike like superducks and rail the whole gtl crowd.  Everyone would get in a huff and the whole debate would go on and on again.  I believe the average tz rider is stuck with no where to go.  No class to compete fairly in.  My two cents.

Matt
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Roach on December 30, 2002, 12:05:32 am
Quote
A real tz makes 90hp, right?  So a real tz wouldn't be a lw in my book, but a 62 hp could be close.


Anyone with a 250 making 62 hp needs to be dragged kicking and screaming to a class on jetting :)

Mildly tuned (as in, I don't worry about it seizing... ever), my TZ makes 78hp and weighs 225lbs.

- Roach
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Super Dave on December 30, 2002, 05:10:36 am
Yeah, 62HP.  I fully expect my 1975 H1 in relatively stock trim with pipes and carbs to be making 65HP.  With some work, we can probably get it to 80HP.

Tuning?  That's the owner's responsibility, not the class structure.  

Mark is now slouch, but he wieighs more than me, and I'm sure he expects that he can go faster.  He's caring for more than one bike too.  Takes a lot out of you.  I have to deal with lots of bikes.  Beats the death out of me.

My times?  Fastest I turned at Blackhawk was a 1:13 something or another.  Last year I couldn't do anything faster than a 14 with my balance and hearing problems.  Denning and I played with each other in the 15's and 16's all day during the Team Challenge.

A TZ250 is a Lightweight Grand Prix bike.  A Lightweight Supersport SV650 that bumps into LWGP should get spanked.

A TZ250 IS a race bike.  An SV650 is a street bike.  There is a huge difference.  Everyone says how the new 600 something from brand what ever is a race bike.  No, they aren't, they are street bikes.  But you'd have to have ridden a TZ250 at a real fast pace to understand the difference.  

As for comparing Oliver's TZ and Mladin's Superbike with your TZ and a regional GSXR750.  That's not a good analogy.

Before the chicane between the carousel and four, Michael Hunter hoovered near the lap record, might have even broke it, right at the 1:11 to 1:12 mark.  It was finally set in 1991 by Andy Fenwick riding a Bimota Dieci that used a Yamaha FZR1000 motor.  I think it was a 1:11.91, which is pretty much the same as what Steve Johnson did on the Tul-laris this year, eleven years later.

To compare AMA 250's with AMA Superbikes, at a long track, sure the Superbike would win, time wise.  Put 'em on a short track, the 250 can be faster.  At Heartland Park in 1991, John Kosinski held the outright lap record over all the Superbikes (Russell, DuHammel, etc.).

Now compare a TZ250 RACE BIKE against a Middleweight or Heavyweight Supersport bike (STREET BIKE).  The 250 should be right there, given a reasonable state of tune and a motivated rider.

As for me jumping on a 250 and doing 13's.  Not that easy.  It takes some time to become accustomed to a 250.  A 250 rider could jump on a 600 and laugh about how mushy is all is and do pretty decently.  
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on December 30, 2002, 05:32:07 am
Quote
 Then some hotshot rider would take a 62hp bike like superducks and rail the whole gtl crowd.


62hp? That's Wuytack's Aprilia man.. not my TZ. My TZ made 52 HP.  :)
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Super Dave on December 30, 2002, 05:36:23 am
52HP?  What's up there?  What fuel are you using?  The track junk?  We need to talk.  I'd bet my 1982 TZ made more than that.  The CB400F I raced for a guy made 55HP.  LOL! ;D
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on December 30, 2002, 05:47:11 am
Quote
52HP?  What's up there?  What fuel are you using?  The track junk?  We need to talk.  I'd bet my 1982 TZ made more than that.  The CB400F I raced for a guy made 55HP.  LOL! ;D


LOL  ;D no way I wouldnt put that track junk in my bike. I used VP MR8 and Nutec GP2 and on a good day... I made 52hp. ;) The 03 should hopefully make 85 stock. I'm going to do some 16's on that darn thing. You watch and see.  :-/
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Super Dave on December 30, 2002, 05:58:24 am
What dyno?  That really just seems wrong.  Whether the new on makes 85HP will still be contingent upon tuning.  Were you working the tuning alot on the "old one".  It wasn't that old.  Seems like Mark eventually got to 70 or so on the Factory Pro dyno at RA, which is real HP, and will be several HP lower than a Dynojet Dyno.  

Doc made like 50 something, and they sent him away to lean the bike out about five sizes.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on December 30, 2002, 06:16:31 am
Quote
What dyno?  That really just seems wrong.  Whether the new on makes 85HP will still be contingent upon tuning.  Were you working the tuning alot on the "old one".  It wasn't that old.  Seems like Mark eventually got to 70 or so on the Factory Pro dyno at RA, which is real HP, and will be several HP lower than a Dynojet Dyno.  

Doc made like 50 something, and they sent him away to lean the bike out about five sizes.


Dave,
I was just kidding. My bike was a rocket. On it's only run on a Factory Dyno.. it made 72. The bike was run by Norifumi Abe's Dad in the all Japan 250GP series in 98 and 99 before it came to the states. My lack of success this last season isn't from my bike being slow.. it's from me being slow  ;D My bike was also very easy to tune. Run it 2 sizes rich and you can run it all weekend without changing the mains unless there's a dramatic change in air density. I'm not a big fan of squeezing every little ounce of power out of the bike atleast at this level. I feel I should be able to do the deed running it slightly on the rich side. The thing about running leaded fuel on a 97+ year TZ is that you have to advance the static timing on it quite a bit and run higher compression heads and/or run positive deckheight do get any kind of grunt out of the motor. The problem with this was that the leaner I went .. more detonation I would get. So it was always safe and cheaper to sacrafice a few horsies and run  two or so sizes rich.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: ecumike on December 30, 2002, 06:31:21 am
Quote
....Then some hotshot rider would take a 62hp bike like superducks and rail the whole gtl crowd...


Soooo you're saying there's a chance.

My priller (supposedly, per Aprilia) puts out ~62 HP, but I can't seem to rail the GTL crowd :(

But maybe that's b/c I'm not as good as Roach.
In a few years, hopefully...


Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Super Dave on December 30, 2002, 07:05:34 am
Quote
The thing about running leaded fuel on a 97+ year TZ is that you have to advance the static timing on it quite a bit and run higher compression heads and/or run positive deckheight do get any kind of grunt out of the motor. The problem with this was that the leaner I went .. more detonation I would get. So it was always safe and cheaper to sacrafice a few horsies and run  two or so sizes rich.


Do you want to run an Unleaded Racing fuel?  I have some.  Well, not today, but I've had it around quite a bit.

You thought about having the heads recut?

Aprilia RS250's are not TZ's.  It's still a street bike with 62HP.  They are fun, and you can learn a lot.  But it's not a "race bike".  I think there is still a chance though.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on December 30, 2002, 07:20:47 am
Quote


Do you want to run an Unleaded Racing fuel?  I have some.  Well, not today, but I've had it around quite a bit.

You thought about having the heads recut?

quote]

I like running leaded fuel. It has natural lubricating qualities due to the lead content. It's easier on the parts and makes more power too. I doubt I'll get the 03 heads recut. Probably try out a few things when I first run it. Advance timing and run really thin base gaskets and see what happens.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Monty925 on December 30, 2002, 07:29:01 am
Have you spoken to anyone about how much deck height to run on your '03 and what timing to try?

We work with Todd Bowman at Swedetech and have had nothing but positive results.  

Since you are in another region and I won't have to race against you anytime soon I'd be happy to share tips. ;D

Just tryin to help a brother out...
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Super Dave on December 30, 2002, 07:32:29 am
I agree in ways.  I think unleadeds  :-X

I haven't really looked inside the new TZ's though.  Advancing the timing will give it grunt off the bottom, but ruin the top.  And it will cause some pain in the bottom end.  Oh, and heat.  

I imagine it has something to do with the shape of the combustion chamber, obviously.  

Are you advancing the timing based on the pistion's distance from TDC or just advancing it on the crank?
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on December 30, 2002, 07:40:25 am
Quote
Have you spoken to anyone about how much deck height to run on your '03 and what timing to try?

We work with Todd Bowman at Swedetech and have had nothing but positive results.  

Since you are in another region and I won't have to race against you anytime soon I'd be happy to share tips. ;D

Just tryin to help a brother out...


I'm basically going at this all blind so any help you might be able to provide will be appreciated. Did you have swedetech work on your motor right away or were you able to run it a few times stock? If so.. what were the results? I assume since both your bike and my bike have the 54x54 bores whatever deckheight and timing you set yours at before the build should put me in the ball park. By the way.. congrats on your WERA national championship.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on December 30, 2002, 07:44:21 am
Quote
I agree in ways.  I think unleadeds  :-X

I haven't really looked inside the new TZ's though.  Advancing the timing will give it grunt off the bottom, but ruin the top.  And it will cause some pain in the bottom end.  Oh, and heat.  

I imagine it has something to do with the shape of the combustion chamber, obviously.  

Are you advancing the timing based on the pistion's distance from TDC or just advancing it on the crank?


Well running leaded fuel with the standard timing with the standard heads will give me alot of over-rev but nothing at the bottom. I think advancing the timing will give me atleast some useable power at the bottom to mid. With the deckheight doing the same. When I advance the timing, it's done based on the piston's distance from TDC. On my 98.. the stock setting was 1.7mm TDC. I would change it anywhere between 1.95mm-2.1mm depending on the situation. Obviously at a track like Road America, I'd go with the 1.95mm timing.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on December 30, 2002, 07:50:53 am
OH yeah... since USGPRU will be running 250 class in 2004...it will probably be a good idea to keep the bike unleaded anyway since they will go by the FIM rules.  ::) So I really doubt I will get the heads recut unless it comes with spare heads.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Monty925 on December 30, 2002, 07:59:22 am
"Did you have swedetech work on your motor right away or were you able to run it a few times stock? If so.. what were the results? I assume since both your bike and my bike have the 54x54 bores whatever deckheight and timing you set yours at before the build should put me in the ball park."

The motor had the full Swedetech treadment prior to my purchasing it.  Bill Oprendek did an outstanding job of setting it up, I just stick to my set up notes and the bike is very reliable.  Moderately quick too.

I do have cut heads, two different volumes and the cylinders have been shaved too.  Email me at Montyw2@aol.com for more detailed info.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Super Dave on December 30, 2002, 08:21:29 am
The guys that I knew that were really doing well with 250's always at least took them down before ever running them.  Just to go through and remove the flashing and make sure everything looked ok.

Monty, are you running an unleaded?  I think it's a stupid rule for racing in the US as so few fuel manufacturers are making decent unleaded racing fuels.  The BTU's are just not there.  And, under CCS rules, the way they are written right now, they are not legal.  Neither is pump gas.  They are not enforcing them either.

Seems like I've heard TZ timing being pretty good at about 1.8 or so.  You've got some serious advance there.  
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Monty925 on December 30, 2002, 08:51:43 am
I run leaded Nutec GP-2.

On the 2000's and newer stock timing is in the 2.4-2.5 range.

We run mostly the 8.5cc heads, some positive deck height, 30:1 mix ratio with Castrol 747 and Jolly Moto Pipes.  They are the easiest bolt on HP you can get for the TZ.  JM's are good for almost 750-1000 more rpm.  I have the Yamaha Kit pipes and stock pipes, they both rev to about 12,5. The JM's go well past 13,2 through 4th gear.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Super Dave on December 30, 2002, 08:56:42 am
Wow, that seems like a lot of timing.

Why so little oil, 30:1?  I do love the smell of A747 in the morning.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Monty925 on December 30, 2002, 09:00:01 am
Quote
Wow, that seems like a lot of timing.

Why so little oil, 30:1?  I do love the smell of A747 in the morning.

30:1 is what Yamaha recommeds.  Depending on the air we'll richen the mixture just a little to be safe.
Same with the timing on the new bikes, we are very close if not at the stock timing.  The bike makes plenty of power, I just try to hang on.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Super Dave on December 30, 2002, 09:06:58 am
A two stroke motor can still run at 6:1.  Optimum power is at around 13:1.  20:1 is still great power without all the mess of the heavier mixtures.  As you diminish from there, heat and friction occur.  And that means that the parts wear more.

Definitely worth trying.  If you do it, increase the jet size to maintain the amount of fuel going in, but it sounds like you might have a handle on that.

You said, "Depending on the air we'll richen the mixture just a little to be safe."  Can you clarify exactly before we all seize?
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Monty925 on December 30, 2002, 09:29:53 am
Quote
A two stroke motor can still run at 6:1.  Optimum power is at around 13:1.  20:1 is still great power without all the mess of the heavier mixtures.  As you diminish from there, heat and friction occur.  And that means that the parts wear more.

Definitely worth trying.  If you do it, increase the jet size to maintain the amount of fuel going in, but it sounds like you might have a handle on that.

You said, "Depending on the air we'll richen the mixture just a little to be safe."  Can you clarify exactly before we all seize?

First let me state that I am a firm believer in sticking to what works for each individual.  I keep pretty detailed notes and use the Tracktimer software, www.tracktimer.com, a Davis Perception II weather station and an Accumix Jug.

My tuner Eric Knight and I spent the better part of a track day in '01 finding what we felt to be the "perfect" jetting for that day's air.  We monitor temp, humidity and barometeric pressure.  We always use the Davis PII even though it tends to read temp a few degrees warm, it allows us a constistant reading.

The Tracktimer software has a jetting guru where you enter the air conditions and jetting you found to be optimal.  That creates your base for all future jetting.  Depending on how the air changes the guru makes the appropriate recommendation and hasn't failed us yet.  Yamaha also provided a chart in the back of most TZ manuals that allow the mathletes in us to do the calculation for jetting vs. Relative Air Density but I find the jetting guru much faster.

The software also automatically tracks mileage for every part I specify with alarms when they reach their service limit.  Allows me to input suspension settings for every track we go to, allows us to input internal and external gear ratios with tire circumference so you can see what the rear wheel speed is in each gear at what rpm, pretty cool!

The Accumix Jug is idiot proof.  Fill the big side of the container to a predetermined level, it's graduated to 10 units or a total of about 1.5 gallons.
If you fill the big side to 8 units, you find the mix ratio you want on the small side and fill it to 8 units and viola! you have the perfect mixture.  We have had success with the 30:1 but if the bike is running higher than 62 degrees or there is not good air, usually when the RAD is 90% or below, I'll add one extra unit of oil to the mix.  8 for fuel, 9 for oil for example.

I haven't dynoed this bike yet.  I dynoed my '94 on the Harley of Frederick Dynojet and it posted 74hp.  I didn't really optimize the jetting that bike had nothing special in the way of work.  My best guess on my 2000 is in the mid 80's.  At most of the WERA Nationals this year I could hang with most every 600 on the straights without the use of the draft.  I weigh 185lb before race gear so I'm not exactly the model TZ rider.

At Summit during the WERA National practice I was playing with Brad Champion and Bernie Hunt of MB Motorsports fame as well as Dave Yaakov and his killer SV and it was just plain silly how much faster the TZ was than their SV's.  Anyone who has seen these guys ride know they have some of the faster SV's around.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on December 30, 2002, 10:04:51 am
Dave,
the first thing that I will do when I take delivery of the bike is send the suspension to LE to get some work done. Then I'm going to split the cases and clean it up, knock out any nikisil, and match the cylinders to the case.

And speaking of mixtures... I ran 32:1 all year. Garry Hayes even recommended 40:1 which I never did for the fear of seizing.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZ_Boy on December 30, 2002, 10:40:22 am
Monty, I agree the TZ is a superior machine to an SV and that it teaches you how to ride that is why I am racing one.  But currently in the CCS we only have one class to be competitive in.  SV's have 5 classes that they are fairly competitive in and do better against the 600's than the TZ's.  I think this is because the SV is better at passing packs of parked bikes in the corners in the first few laps. If you and the talented east coast 250 riders raced in the CCS you did not do well in GTU because there were 0 wins an almost no top 5 finishes nationally for 250's in that class.  I am just looking at the statistics/facts not hypothetical sitiuations our rare situations.  If the TZ is a superior bike compared to a 600 as MR. Elliot believes than why does it finish so poorly against them?  I am new to racing and respect what you and Dave have to say I just don't understand why TZ's can not race in GTL's.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Monty925 on December 30, 2002, 11:14:49 am
Quote
Monty, I agree the TZ is a superior machine to an SV and that it teaches you how to ride that is why I am racing one.  But currently in the CCS we only have one class to be competitive in.  SV's have 5 classes that they are fairly competitive in and do better against the 600's than the TZ's.  I think this is because the SV is better at passing packs of parked bikes in the corners in the first few laps. If you and the talented east coast 250 riders raced in the CCS you did not do well in GTU because there were 0 wins an almost no top 5 finishes nationally for 250's in that class.  I am just looking at the statistics/facts not hypothetical sitiuations our rare situations.  If the TZ is a superior bike compared to a 600 as MR. Elliot believes than why does it finish so poorly against them?  I am new to racing and respect what you and Dave have to say I just don't understand why TZ's can not race in GTL's.

I didn't race any CCS stuff this year because I was doing the WERA Nationals.  
I have run CCS in the past and in a GTU would usually start from the back of about 30 or so bikes and worked my way up inside the top 10 just about every time, that was on my '93.
The reason more of the talent is on the 600's is they can win money in lots of classes.  You can't win dick on a 250 except tire money.  Most of the guys and girls who run the 250's are racing for fun, not money.  With that in mind, a majority of those racing for fun don't push as hard as the 600 rider racing for money and therefore the rider racing for fun more often than not won't fight as hard for a win.
If you can ride around a pack of parked bikes on an SV, you should be able to SMOKE around a pack of parked bikes on a 250.

Every region has it's tendencies based on local track experts.  I've never seen (in expert class mind you) a SV do well against the 600's at Summit or VIR.

When you get better on your TZ, you'll see why they shouldn't be allowed in GTL.  When you start to get good on it you can have an "off" day and still whip the rest of most GTL grids.  It's also much more rewarding to ride your ass off and beat the lions share of 600's in MWGP and GTU on a good 250.

Lastly, most of the good 250 riders from the Mid Atlantic (Brian Kcraget, Donnie Tingle, myself) went WERA racing this year.  Chris Pyles did AMA and the Himmelsbachs didn't ride the 250's much, especially with Bill getting hurt at VIR.

Believe me, I am all for trying to keep the 250 class alive and growing with talent but more and more people are taking the SV/600 route because there are more classes and contingency money available.

I am trying to get WERA to amend their C-Superbike rules to be like CCS MWGP.  They both allow slicks and are pretty loose as far as the allowable mods.  Why not let the 250's in?  The majority of the fast guys are still gonna run the 600's anyway because of the money, let us mix it up with them.  It'll make the 250 riders learn to ride better and if we start beating the 600 guys, it will make them step up their game.

Out of curiousity, have you raced at
Putnam?
Summit?
VIR?
Texas World?
Roebling?
North Florida?
No Problem?
Road Atlanta?
Daytona?

if so, what kind of times did you do?  what about the fast SV's?  any idea about the 600's?

Thanks for the response!
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZ_Boy on December 30, 2002, 11:32:28 am
Monty,  I got the TZ last year and it was my first time racing so I only raced at the local Mid-west tracks.  Formula USA is allowing 250's into the superbike class which is against 600's.  
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Monty925 on December 30, 2002, 12:05:14 pm
Quote
Monty,  I got the TZ last year and it was my first time racing so I only raced at the local Mid-west tracks.  Formula USA is allowing 250's into the superbike class which is against 600's.  

Are you going to do the series?
If so, good luck.  You'll have fun and learn a lot.
Look at it this way.  Racing against 600's there will always be somebody to chase and learn from.  Racing against SV's you'll only learn enough to get in front of them and then you won't have anyone else to chase!
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Roach on December 30, 2002, 12:32:14 pm
Quote
When you get better on your TZ, you'll see why they shouldn't be allowed in GTL.  When you start to get good on it you can have an "off" day and still whip the rest of most GTL grids.  It's also much more rewarding to ride your ass off and beat the lions share of 600's in MWGP and GTU on a good 250.


To add to what Monty is saying here... my experience racing my TZ is the same.

I didn't race the TZ at all in 2001 because we were focussing on the Aprilia Cup series. I run top-5 expert in regional WERA and CCS LW classes on a *Aprilia Cup bike*. I unfortunatly crashed hard in 2002 getting back up to speed on my TZ and prepping for my first AMA race :(  

If I ride the TZ and am having a good day, there's only maybe a handfull of people (who are *much* better riders) that can beat me on an SV  - Yakov, Champion, prob also Romeo and Sabastian but they would be closer. And they never all show up to the same race. If I was a better rider (say... Monty, Brian, or Donnie) .. it wouldn't be a contest.

If I run MWGP, I'm mid-pack... exactly where I'd be if I had a 600 (I've raced a 600 in WERA endurance, and I'm faster on the TZ... but I think that has more to do with being a better two-stroke rider and not having a lot of 600 experience).

When I was a novice, Bill Cole and I used to start at the back of GTL on our *125's* and get to the front. The 250 would just have been silly.

- Roach
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Litespeed on December 30, 2002, 02:56:37 pm
Get a TZ125, then you can run in the LW classes.  Your maintenance costs get cut in half and from what I can tell, a set of tires should last nearly an entire season.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: badmonkey on December 30, 2002, 03:08:03 pm
I watched Ben Walters last year at Roebling Road riding for Rocky Stargel on a TZ250 barely loose to Rich Conicelli on a gsxr750 in UnlimitedGP. Ben was gridded on the 5th row and took the lead by lap 2. He lost the race because the rear had too many races alreay on it. They were turning high 1:14's low 15's. It comes down to rider, everything else is just an excuse....
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZ_Boy on December 31, 2002, 02:02:13 pm
Quote

Err... no offense, but a good 250 rider is going to suck the paint of any SV. Or actually, better to say that with equally skilled riders the TZ wins.
- Roach
::)
Roach as in Brian Roach #699?  I only found 1 race that you raced in the CCS it was LGP at Summit Point.  You finished 8th out of 20 behind 4 SV's, you did manage to beat 1 SV. ;D  
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZ_Boy on December 31, 2002, 02:21:37 pm
I did a little homework.  After looking at all 8 regions, Pacific, Mid-Atlantic, Florida, Great Lakes, Great Plains, Mid-West, Southwest, and Southeast I found the top 5 class points leaders Am and EX for LGP.
There were 48 SV's', 15 250's, 9 FZR's, 5 125's, and 3 Beull's.  This clearly shows that SV's dominate LGP in the CCS.  If TZ's were allowed to race in GTL's SV's would still dominate the class as they do in LGP.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Monty925 on December 31, 2002, 03:37:42 pm
Quote
I did a little homework.  After looking at all 8 regions, Pacific, Mid-Atlantic, Florida, Great Lakes, Great Plains, Mid-West, Southwest, and Southeast I found the top 5 class points leaders Am and EX for LGP.
There were 48 SV's', 15 250's, 9 FZR's, 5 125's, and 3 Beull's.  This clearly shows that SV's dominate LGP in the CCS.  If TZ's were allowed to race in GTL's SV's would still dominate the class as they do in LGP.

Dominate in shear numbers or performance?

Consider this:
Last year only 14 '02 TZ250's came into the states.  How many SV's do you think came in and were sold?
500? 1000? 1500?  Going back to the early 90's Yamaha only brought in 20-30 250's per year.  
There should be a greater number of SV's at any given track than 250's.  Just the '02 SV sales should top ten years of Yamaha importing TZ's.

Why don't you go look up the WERA F2 National Challenge results and see how the mighty SV's fared there.

There is no sense in starting a WERA vs CCS comparison but the reason I chose to do the WERA stuff is there weren't any fast CCS regulars in LGP to push me.  The fastest SV's that regularly run Summit lap in the 1:21's to 23's at Summit and 1:37's to 39's at VIR.  Me and Donnie Tingle easily do 20's and 19's at Summit and drop into the high 17's and 18's when pushed.  At VIR we have off days and do 35's, 33's and occassionally 32's when motivated.

So in OUR region I we don't really have to try to beat all the SV's at CCS events therefore I'm not going to waste my money for a soft win.
If the CCS website would let you look at '01 results you'd see that Donnie and I were usually 1-2 in LGP.  You can go look at WERA Mid Atlantic results from '01 and see for yourself. What it won't show is that we had a 8-10 second lead after 6-8 laps.

It almost sounds like you are trying to justify ditching your TZ and getting an SV.  If you do, try to get a ride with a WERA LW Endurance team and enter the F2 Nationals while you are at it.  I'll be the black and orange TZ with the #1 on it.  I should be at all the rounds except for Talledega.  Look me up.

Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZ_Boy on December 31, 2002, 05:42:24 pm
Quote


It almost sounds like you are trying to justify ditching your TZ and getting an SV.  If you do, try to get a ride with a WERA LW Endurance team and enter the F2 Nationals while you are at it.  I'll be the black and orange TZ with the #1 on it.  I should be at all the rounds except for Talledega.  Look me up.

I am definitely not ditching my TZ this may be the first bike that I keep because Yamaha will stop making them soon.  This would be the only bike that I would race.  As far as sheer numbers are concernerd it only takes a few TZ's to finish in the top of LGP to dominate the class but they don't.  In the Mid-west, Great Lakes, and Great Plains division which are the same riders, a Buell and an SV are the fastest in LGP.  Fast TZ riders are in the AMA and WERA not the CCS.  Monty you are the exception to the rule in CCS and should not set the standard for the rest of us.  Out of 16 division champs in LGP Am and EX only 3 were 250's and 10 were SV's.  All I am saying is that at the CCS level TZ's should be allowed in GTL's.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: badmonkey on December 31, 2002, 09:30:02 pm
using that logic everybody who is too slow in there current class should be able to race down 1 class to make it fair? ??? ??? ??? ???
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Super Dave on January 01, 2003, 03:51:01 am
Quote
using that logic everybody who is too slow in there current class should be able to race down 1 class to make it fair? ??? ??? ??? ???


I agree.  We don't need affirmitive action in racing....

TZ Boy, there are enough of us that have been around racing for quite some time.  A TZ250 is not a GT Lights bike.  A TZ250 can win GTU, MWGP, and should still do well in ULGP.  They did win ULGP races at Blackhawk at one time.  As for what happens at Blackhawk now, that is the responsibiliy of the riders and tuners.  The 250 riders and tuners at Blackhawk know that they are not riding their 250's to the full capability, period.  

As for if Kevin Elliott knows anything about racing...he's a former racer himself having raced small production bikes and full bore 1000cc superbikes.  I support TZ250's in LWGP.  They fit.

An SV is an easy starter bike.  With a few bucks, you can buy it, put it together, turn key and race.  A TZ is not so simple.  Monty uses software to properly and completely operate his at reasonable, maximum effiency.  There should be bunches of them on grids.  By default, because of the length of the series and numbers, they will do well better than most bikes.

TZ Boy, you state that it only takes a few TZ's to dominate.  You've got to put the responsibility in the seat;  it takes a rider in the seat to dominate.  That's why Ed Key is fast in the Midwest region's LW racing.  The bike is only part of the equation.  And even then, it must be tuned reasonably.  If that is not happening, then the results that we have occur.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZ_Boy on January 01, 2003, 08:46:13 am
Quote

TZ Boy, there are enough of us that have been around racing for quite some time.  A TZ250 is not a GT Lights bike.  A TZ250 can win GTU, MWGP, and should still do well in ULGP.  They did win ULGP races at Blackhawk at one time.  

Out of 240 races nationally in the CCS am and Ex for GTU and MWGP there were no TZ wins!  You can shoulda coulda woulda all day long but these are the results.  The average TZ in the CCS makes around 70hp if this makes it a middleweight bike ok.  I am done beating this dead horse.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Roach on January 01, 2003, 09:56:21 am
Quote

Out of 240 races nationally in the CCS am and Ex for GTU and MWGP there were no TZ wins!  You can shoulda coulda woulda all day long but these are the results.  The average TZ in the CCS makes around 70hp if this makes it a middleweight bike ok.  I am done beating this dead horse.


It's a dead horse because you keep ignoring the facts. You keep looking at results of *riders*, which means absolutly nothing - it has no bearing on the capability of 250gp machines in a given class.

The reason the bike is excluded from GTL is because with a skilled rider, it WILL beat any SV on the track. Period. Just because you and many other club-level 250 riders don't have the skill to do so is irrelevent.  The bike is more than capable.

If I sucked at riding a 600, should I be allowed to race it in GTL? No. Because the bike is capable of winning. If you had an SV, would you be winning every race? Sure sounds like it  ::)

You also ignore others' posts. Like the one where I said I haven't raced my TZ in two years in leu of racing my 310lbs 60hp Aprilia Cup bike (the one you quote me finishing 8th on, from the back of the pack of a 20 rider race). Try checking out the FUSA Aprilia Cup results. This year, I took myself out of the season in July. I think the last race I did was in June at Summit Point, where I finished 5th in D-Superbike (same rules as GTL in CCS). Again, on a 310lbs 60hp Aprilia. I'm about 4 seconds a lap faster on my TZ. Of course, in 2000 when I was riding it, I won the Mid-Atlantic regional F2 class on my TZ.

I've also stated that the reason I don't win expert LWGP or F2 races has absolutly nothing to do with my TZ. It has everything to do with the guy on top of it not being the most skilled rider. You see... I accept that fact.

- Roach
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on January 01, 2003, 01:42:01 pm
Let me clarify something here.  TZ_Boy is not slow. The guy won his first race ever at Road America. He could win a race at any given time so what he's preaching isn't based on his inability to go fast. He is fast.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Super Dave on January 01, 2003, 06:20:26 pm
Ok, fine he's fast.  

Let's use the 70 HP analogy.

What's a 250 weigh now?  250 pounds.  That means 3.57 pounds of weight for each HP.

My GSXR600 weighed 380 plus, and made 104HP.  Pretty average now days.  That's 3.65 pounds of bike for each HP.  

Using that analogy, it doesn't belong in Lightweight anything.  It should be put in MWGP and ULGP.

And again using that anology, Ed Key's bike, a Suzuki SV650, FULLY supersported makes around 73HP.  It weighs a very light 330 pounds, maybe less....  Still out gunned by a TZ250.

And the TZ250 was made to be a race bike, not a street bike.  I would think that Yamaha would make a better race bike to race when compared to a street bike.

And fast is very relative.  I raced AMA Pro in the early 90's quite a bit.  I'm old now.  I lolly gag around, I'm dealing with other people's stuff, but I still do pretty well.  I am NOT working hard to go that fast.  I CAN go faster when I have an opportunity to put my head into it.

So, if you're riding a TZ250 and you're getting beat by SV's...  you've got to sit down and figure out a different way of doing what you're doing.

How's that go....

Insanity is defined as doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different outcome...

I really find it hard to agree that TZ250's, RS250's, the real Aprilia GP250 bike (not the steet/race one), belong in GTLights.
Title: "Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Monty925 on January 01, 2003, 07:07:24 pm
"Insanity is defined as doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different outcome... "

That kind of describes some of us trying to make this point.

Here's my last example, maybe it will have an impact.

Even though the CCS website sucks (because it's two+ months after the ROC and the complete results aren't posted yet!)  I remember reading that the 2002 LWGP CCS NATIONAL CHAMPION is Greg Esser on his Honda RS250.  I remember reading that Mr. Key was there as were many other CCS fast guys.

At the WERA/Suzuki Cup Finals SV race at Road Atlanta, Brad Champion managed to post a 1:34.6 as his fastest lap in a very heated battle with Dave Yaakov, John Linder, Greg Harrison and quite a few other VERY COMPETENT SV riders on what should have been some very decent SV's.

That 1:34.6 which won Brad some serious coin wouldn't have put him in the top ten qualifying times at the '02 Road Atlanta AMA 250 event.

TZ-Boy I wish you the best of luck learning to properly ride your 250, Mr. Kwak you too.  When you see the light you will understand.
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on January 01, 2003, 07:14:18 pm
This thread needs to die!  :-X
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Super Dave on January 01, 2003, 07:34:31 pm
This is an Ex-thread...

This is a late thread...

And now for something completely different...

A naked man playing an organ...

Da,da,ta,da,daaaaa!

ITS...

We're out of here...LOL!
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Litespeed on January 02, 2003, 07:33:23 am
Why does everyone quote the power to weight ratio of a bike and not consider the rider?  A 125 bike at 150 lbs and 40 hp has a lb/hp ratio of 3.75 which is equivalent to a 400 lb bike with 107 hp.  Kind of close to a 600 until you put a rider on both.  Figure 180 lbs with gear and suddenly you have 8.25 vs 5.42 which are vastly different.  
Title: Re: "SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on January 02, 2003, 07:45:56 am
Quote

TZ-Boy I wish you the best of luck learning to properly ride your 250, Mr. Kwak you too.  When you see the light you will understand.


Eh?  ???  I DO understand. I've stated over and over that racing against SV's is more than fair. I just don't like racing 600's. Whatever my reason is for not liking racing 600's is not from my bike's performance stand point but from my performance standpoint. I'm not very good at running with 600's. I don't need to see the light.. already done did seen it a long time ago when I used to watch Jeff Voss and Ken Kono go at it at Grattan many moons ago. Lack of speed doesn't mean you haven't seen the light or understand. Lack of speed on a TZ also doesn't mean you should dump it for something more manageable. Some of us are new racers. We're still learning not only how to race but how to ride this particular bike. I'd probably quit racing today if I couldnt' race a TZ or something similar.
Title: Re: "SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Roach on January 02, 2003, 12:12:58 pm
Quote
Eh?  ???  I DO understand. I've stated over and over that racing against SV's is more than fair. I just don't like racing 600's.


But the point is, it *isn't* fair to the SV riders.

I'm going to try approaching this from another direction... you know, that insanity thing... :)

Club racing is just that... club racing. It's a business that's driven by it's membership's needs. The most popular LW bike out there is the SV650. It's almost as popular as the 600cc machines these days. From a business standpoint, this is the bike you want to cater to in terms of class availability. This is why the bulk of the LW classes are SV oriented in terms of machine requirement rules... it's where the money is in regard to entry fees.

With a 250gp machine, you have a class. It's LWGP in CCS, and F2 in WERA. This is THE class for that bike - everthing else in the class is "bumping up". A 250gp machine is capable of destroying any other bike in that class. The SV gets to be king of the roost in LW production classes. LW and MW sportsman (in CCS) are consessions to the other LW bikes that can't compete against the SVs in the "regular" LW classes.  

Because there's so many sprint classes, they can make at least one place for everyone even when, in the case of the 250gp machines, they are a severe minority in terms of number of entries. The SVs get more than one place... as they should becuase of their popularity (again, from a business standpoint).

In the GT races, the 250 machines have to "fit in" somewhere because their numbers preclude them from being a class-defining machine. If you can't accept that you can win, then lets say they are far closer in performance to 600's than they are LW machines - this is the point everyone here has been trying to make. If they could make a new 250GT class, and have it be popular and profitable, I'm sure they would. If they put 250s in GTL, they risk angering the majority of their customers (SV riders) - not a good business move.

And that's the rub - if you want to be a club racer, and have a ton of classes where your bike has the advantage, buy an SV or a 600... it's what's popular.

Or... step up and run AMA (at least through 2003) or the USGPRU (with FUSA and CCS, they've added 250gp this year) where you get a class comprised entirely of 250cc bikes.  The WERA Nat'l Formula 2 series is another good one. All of these classes will show you just how fast a 250gp machine can go, and you'll only have to worry about getting lapped by people like Monty, Donnie, Brian, etc  :)

- Roach
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Roach on January 02, 2003, 12:33:57 pm
Quote
Why does everyone quote the power to weight ratio of a bike and not consider the rider?  A 125 bike at 150 lbs and 40 hp has a lb/hp ratio of 3.75 which is equivalent to a 400 lb bike with 107 hp.  Kind of close to a 600 until you put a rider on both.  Figure 180 lbs with gear and suddenly you have 8.25 vs 5.42 which are vastly different.  


Which is why a 125 is allowed in GTL :)

In the case of the 250GP machine, you are at a slight disadvantage on power:weight with a (older) stock bike, but this is made up for by the fact you are riding a factory purpose-built race machine what has a far better chassis and cornering ability.

Also, most 250s out there aren't stock. Mine ('93 chassis, '96 worked motor) makes 78hp at the rear and weighs about 225, giving it a 2.88:1 ratio.  Add 180lbs and you get 5.19:1, which is still better than your 600 example (and I weigh less than 180 with gear). A 2002 RS250 or TZ250 makes close to 80hp out of the box, I believe.

- Roach
(who's really done now... honest :) )
Title: Re: "SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on January 02, 2003, 12:37:11 pm
Quote


But the point is, it *isn't* fair to the SV riders.

I'm going to try approaching this from another direction... you know, that insanity thing... :)

Club racing is just that... club racing. It's a business that's driven by it's membership's needs. The most popular LW bike out there is the SV650. It's almost as popular as the 600cc machines these days. From a business standpoint, this is the bike you want to cater to in terms of class availability. This is why the bulk of the LW classes are SV oriented in terms of machine requirement rules... it's where the money is in regard to entry fees.

With a 250gp machine, you have a class. It's LWGP in CCS, and F2 in WERA. This is THE class for that bike - everthing else in the class is "bumping up". A 250gp machine is capable of destroying any other bike in that class. The SV gets to be king of the roost in LW production classes. LW and MW sportsman (in CCS) are consessions to the other LW bikes that can't compete against the SVs in the "regular" LW classes.  

Because there's so many sprint classes, they can make at least one place for everyone even when, in the case of the 250gp machines, they are a severe minority in terms of number of entries. The SVs get more than one place... as they should becuase of their popularity (again, from a business standpoint).

In the GT races, the 250 machines have to "fit in" somewhere because their numbers preclude them from being a class-defining machine. If you can't accept that you can win, then lets say they are far closer in performance to 600's than they are LW machines - this is the point everyone here has been trying to make. If they could make a new 250GT class, and have it be popular and profitable, I'm sure they would. If they put 250s in GTL, they risk angering the majority of their customers (SV riders) - not a good business move.

And that's the rub - if you want to be a club racer, and have a ton of classes where your bike has the advantage, buy an SV or a 600... it's what's popular.

Or... step up and run AMA (at least through 2003) or the USGPRU (with FUSA and CCS, they've added 250gp this year) where you get a class comprised entirely of 250cc bikes.  The WERA Nat'l Formula 2 series is another good one. All of these classes will show you just how fast a 250gp machine can go, and you'll only have to worry about getting lapped by people like Monty, Donnie, Brian, etc  :)

- Roach


What exactly are we arguing about here? You're preaching to the choir at this point man. This whole time.. I'm trying to get across a point that LWGP is more than fair for us and that I don't like racing against 600's. I'm sure there are 600 riders that don't like racing in GTU for the exact same reasons that I have. Do I think TZ250's belong in GTLights? Of course not. I know what a TZ is capable of doing so I don't need to check out a Wera national to see how fast Monty, Donnie, and Brian can go on a TZ because I can see even faster guys when the AMA comes to Road America. And with that being said.. lets kill this freakin thread.  :P
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Roach on January 02, 2003, 12:42:32 pm
Sorry... got you lumped in with TZ_boy there based on the not wanting to race against 600s comment, and my wanting to use that statement to make a tie in to the fairness to SV riders :)

I was just trying to provide another reason why 250s shouldn't be in GTL, from a different angle hoping he would see the light.

- Roach
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: TZDeSioux on January 02, 2003, 12:45:10 pm
 :)
Title: Re: SV vs. TZ Question
Post by: Litespeed on January 05, 2003, 09:31:09 am
Is it dead now?  Cause if it is I'm gonna start a thread about CCS not having enough classes that a 125 is competitive in :).   Before you say anything, that was a joke, I am 100% ready to take on all the SV's 600's 250's and anything else they will let me race against.