Motorcycle Racing Forum

Lots of drama lately concerning the performance of the de-stroked 4 cylinder bikes in lightweight.   Do you feel the 565 has such an enormous performance advantage that the rules should be changed or the bike in its current state should be outlawed?  Please, lets focus on the bike in it's legal displacement and not the recent rules infraction that occurred at Road America.  In my opinion, the bike was built within the limits of the rulebook and it should be allowed to race in the classes it is currently legal for.  Flame on....  :cheers:

I think saying performance advantage is bad wording. There are a ton of bikes now in the lightweight class that have similar performance a better question would be "at what point is a bike no longer a "lightweight" bike?" 

110hp+ is not lightweight.  That is middleweight performance.
160mph+ is not lightweight. That is middleweight.

I'm not saying those things because I want the SV to remain the top of the lightweight food chain.  I have no issue if another bike, say the FZ-07 is actually good, take over the crown.  I would love for there to be 4-5 different makes of 650/700 twins out there. 

Yes, the rules have been in place for awhile.  But you have to look at what the lightweight class is about and it's not HP race.  565/Big Ducs are hardly LW bikes anymore.  They have created this point and shoot racing in the LWT field which just shouldn't be.   I'm not saying all the Ducati's are guilty.  I don't want them outlawed, I like the bikes.  But the 1100's should be Thunderbike and thats it.

I think one rule change should be that the GT Lights (for team challenge and sprint) should be Superbike rules, not GP.   This won't happen but it would help.

I believe the 565cc was a ruling that allowed the FZR 400 to add displacement. I say leave it as it is. Yes some have been able to and willing to take a more modern bike and make it smaller to compete in a GP style class. I like it as it is.

Some of the same arguments can be said of the SV into the Ultralight Superbike class. There have been many an SV in the ultralight class that has been illegal. In that I mean they were one mil over legal for lightweight SS but out of the displacement allowed for Ultralight.

Race as it is. There are so many arguments that could be used. Could be where a 250GP bike has an unfair advantage and someone spending $100k on one of those. It's not about cost, it's not about HP. If you can afford it then good on you. If you are like me that work hard for the money and only have so much of a budget then that's all you can do.

That's 2 for leave the bike and the rules in place.
For Sam, I will change my question:
Do you feel the 565 has an unfair advantage against other bikes in it's class (lwgp) and that the rules should be changed or the bike in its current state should be outlawed?

From what I know, the only "565" out there racing was the one at RA that got disqualified. It was the same one I ran against at VIR and a protest was in effect but later retracted. Until there is a real 565 built within regulation I don't think anyone will be able to determine if its unfair. I can tell you that I've seen times on a SV that smoked the illegal 565 so its obvious that the rider also plays a role.

Hey Mark lets say somebody was able to buy the last year 2008 Aprilia 250GP MotoGP spec and race it in CCS,That bike can do faster lap times on some tracks then wsbk in the same year and faster then the 500GP on some tracks. That bike is very fast and can be raced in the CCS lightweight class.

Quote from: Dragon on July 13, 2014, 05:01:58 PM
From what I know, the only "565" out there racing was the one at RA that got disqualified. It was the same one I ran against at VIR and a protest was in effect but later retracted. Until there is a real 565 built within regulation I don't think anyone will be able to determine if its unfair. I can tell you that I've seen times on a SV that smoked the illegal 565 so its obvious that the rider also plays a role.

There were at least 2 565s at VIR.   There were 3 565s at WERA Cycle Jam at Road Atlanta.  Your statement is suggesting the same motor at RA was in the bike at VIR, which the owner has stated was not the case.   

I don't race WERA. You are correct about the "two" that were at VIR. I should have been more specific but the one that got disqualified at RA was at VIR but lost to TWO SV's which led me to comment that its the rider that makes the most difference.

I don't know if this was Sam's point - but for me, there's a certain point where regardless of skill difference, you create a speed and bike characteristic difference that is dangerous.

Sure you put a guy on a well sorted SV and he can keep up with the 565s, but when you have a 'middle of the pack' skill guy on an SV and a 'back of the pack' skill guy on a 565, that's dangerous.  Will you guys be saying the same things when you have a first race amateur t-boning 1/2 the expert grid in T1?

Maybe I'm painting a nightmare scenario, but it would be the reason I would vote against it.

Quote from: Dragon on July 14, 2014, 09:59:06 AM
I don't race WERA. You are correct about the "two" that were at VIR. I should have been more specific but the one that got disqualified at RA was at VIR but lost to TWO SV's which led me to comment that its the rider that makes the most difference.

Both of those riders excel at V.I.R., well they are amazing everywhere but VIR especially.
Put those riders on that 565......



Yes riders make the difference....when everyone is on similar bikes.  But you take someone not as skilled, give them a 30hp+ advantage, of course they can keep up with the crazy fast guys.   No offense to Ben or Ray, they can flat out fly. But if they were on SV's or a similar HP bike, they wouldn't have been anywhere close to Mazz, Xman, and Kcraget.   Bringing 120hp to a lightweight race is absurd, that bike can compete in middleweight.  Might as well allow a 600 to race in LWT.   In fact I have seen one of those 1100 ducati's pass a middleweight on the straight.  So where is the difference in lightweight and middleweight then?  Seth Starns was doing 1:35's during the TC at CMP on the "lightweight" ducati 1100... 1:35's...... That is middleweight.


The Race of champions is held at a track that claims a lightweight champion for not even being the best rider.  It's honoring who can bring the biggest gun which is stupid for lightweights.   WERA has it right by having theirs at Barber, a skill track.

I could easily see a LWGP bike being faster than a modern MWSS. As it has already been stated, a proper 250GP bike would easily beat a MWSS bike on most tracks. One class is relatively stock bikes, the other can have a built motor, custom or GP chassis, the latest Ohlins forks, etc.. Now, when a LWSS bike starts passing a modern well ridden MWSS bike on the straight, then you might have a problem.

I could see a well set up and built MWGP bike (Moto2 chassis with a built motor and a MM electronics package in it) beating an ULSS bike at many tracks as well.

I'm by no means saying I like racing against them. They have middleweight power but read the rulebook. There are 6 lightweight classes, not to include the ASRA class offered (TC lightweights) and of those 7 classes offered, the 565, when legally built, is only allowed in 3 of them. Those three classes (LWGP, GTL and TC/LW) only have engine restrictions. I know of plenty builders in my area alone will take your money and put it into a bike classified as "LW" and will produce well over 100hp. It just depends on how much you want to spend. I don't want I give up my SV cus it offers me more race options but if I had the cash to dump into a 565, which may be sooner than later, then ill do it. As far as rider and the possibility of collisions that may happen because of their ability or lack there of, it's a crap shoot. The rider has the responsibility to know the limitations of thier bike. I've been leading an entire race and wrecked out on the last lap and I've been in dead last and done the same. There is more than one factor than plays into a crash. Not just the speed of a bike. The best thing you can get from a crash is why it happened. Practice and track days allow us to test those limits. You can't worry about what happens behind you. You can only focus on what's in front and remember that this is club racing. What will happen when suspension becomes so advanced that it allows the rider to blow away the competition in the turns? Is everyone gonna start bitching then too? It's one thing to turn faster laps and catch up to the guy in front of you but passing them is another thing.

Quote from: Dragon on July 14, 2014, 02:36:01 PM
I'm by no means saying I like racing against them. They have middleweight power but read the rulebook.

That's why we are talking about changing the rulebook....  To keep middleweight power out of the Lightweight classes.

Quote from: 2blueYam on July 14, 2014, 02:13:23 PM
I could easily see a LWGP bike being faster than a modern MWSS. As it has already been stated, a proper 250GP bike would easily beat a MWSS bike on most tracks. One class is relatively stock bikes, the other can have a built motor, custom or GP chassis, the latest Ohlins forks, etc.. Now, when a LWSS bike starts passing a modern well ridden MWSS bike on the straight, then you might have a problem.

I could see a well set up and built MWGP bike (Moto2 chassis with a built motor and a MM electronics package in it) beating an ULSS bike at many tracks as well.

Rules are in place. It is a GP (builders) class.
I just dont think the endurance should be GP rules.

I would hope a MWGP bike would crush any UL bike at any track...

Quote from: MACOP1104 on July 13, 2014, 09:41:58 AMDo you feel the 565 has such an enormous performance advantage that the rules should be changed or the bike in its current state should be outlawed?

It would seem that these rules have been in place for a while. A lot of time, money and effort was spent to build a 565 size engine/bike to conform to those rules. The fact that it is really fast and makes a lot of power is just proof of the effort that went in to it. I agree with you. Of course it shouldn't be "outlawed". What would that say to people?

Spend a lot of time making a really fast bike and we will just change the rules to screw you? Please understand that I don't ride those classes and I can certainly see the frustration but does that sound right?

Quote from: jfboothe on July 14, 2014, 04:03:05 PM
It would seem that these rules have been in place for a while. A lot of time, money and effort was spent to build a 565 size engine/bike to conform to those rules. The fact that it is really fast and makes a lot of power is just proof of the effort that went in to it. I agree with you. Of course it shouldn't be "outlawed". What would that say to people?

Spend a lot of time making a really fast bike and we will just change the rules to screw you? Please understand that I don't ride those classes and I can certainly see the frustration but does that sound right?

There is a lot to this thread, and I'll address what I can. But the idea behind the thread isn't that far off base. We built this bike as an answer to the Ducati and one off Ducati motor based bikes that were being built. Those guys took advantage of the same set of rules that we took advantage of. It just happens that our answer is more affordable, more reliable, and a bit easier to attain and maintain. I don't think the question is should the 565 be banned, the question is, is CCS LW headed in the right direction. CCS rules have always been inclusive, and while I don't agree with them always, it seems to be working. We have had good competition with multiple formats, brands and types of bikes winning races and challenging for wins.


My normal answer for the theory behind this question and debate is pretty simple. Go spend 50,000 dollars on a 2008 rs250 from aprillia, put Brian Kraget on it at VIR and run the race where he myself and maz were together at the front. I guarantee you we would never see him. Like not even a little bit. The rules aren't there for the average racer. They are there for the guys who take them to the limit. And the rules are not at their limit with the 565. The super bike 565 that I rode at RAtl and VIR is getting there. But so is the Pierbonne that a WSBK racer showed up with and crushed us at the ROC. None of these bikes are particularly dominant, but all of them could be questioned as to their lifespan in the LW class.


I made a really big mistake and ran an illegal motorcycle at RA. I risked a lot of my reputation and hindered the success we have had and will have. I'm really sorry for that and apologize to everyone. It's tough to answer these questions and not feel like I'm blowing off my infraction, or speak in a way that I sound like I expect people to believe me, I know I've lost some of that. But I'm just here to address the issues and be as transparent as possible, and I carry a heavy weight with the trust I broke and can't apologize enough.


The 565 super bike at VIR made 4.5 less hp than the 580 at Road America. What was on display was the enormous advantage our package has to the Ducati at a track like Road America, along with our riders ability and experience at that track. On the WERA board, and here Ray was referenced as just not being capable of being faster than these guys. It's downright wrong. Ray won anything and everything last year on multiple bikes. He ran entire races on the rear wheel of Kraget at RA running times just short of what X and I did there this year. He won 600 sprint races at RA last year against perennial dominant MW racers. I'm not here to say Ray or I are the fastest guys alive, but Ray especially deserves the respect as he has put any multitude of bikes up front with the majority of what the country has to offer for fast club racers.  The bike has it's strengths, it has it's weaknesses. And at the majority of tracks, 4 or 5 of the faster LW guys in the country on different bikes, the winner still comes down to ability. A few tracks really favor our bike, a few really favor the Ducati. And the fastest of all of us are on SVs.


The speed differential argument at for the class and the 565 in particular is silly. We lose 20-30 bike lengths to the fast ducs on even the shortest of starts, speed and acceleration wise they are on par. So any discussion of that danger must include all fast LW bikes.

Thank you Ben for understanding the toic. Altho 2 of your paragraphs are a bit off topic.

Mike isn't talking just about the 565 and neither am I.  We're talking about the HP of the new lightweight bikes on the grid.  Which I know you understand.  It's about what the lightweight class is about, what it's becoming and where it's going to end up.

You've built a great cheap bike to compete with the high dollar bikes.  Which is great because not everyone can spend $50,000.  I commend you on that, it's cool and a great idea.  But this is not about the cost of the bikes, it's about the speed. 

Easy fix= WERA.

My opinion is this:    If the big money Ducs are legal for LW, then the 565 is legal too....

It would be really nice if someone could post up the rules from '97 or so because I'm pretty sure there were no allowances for air-cooled liter+ twins at the time.  I'm quite certain a change was made to allow the Buells and that's what has led to the 'lightweight' class becoming what it is now.

The biggest air-cooled lightweight twins that I can recall at the time were the Duc 750s like Donnie Unger was racing. 

Just noticed the results archive has a lot of old stuff added since the last time I checked.  A Duc 900 was running in heavyweight sportsman, but not lightweight sportsman.  Also being run in MW classes. Some Triumph 900 was in LW Clubman, no idea what it was. 

If I'm right about that past rule change, I think it should be changed back to what it was.

I say leave it as it is. The rules have been in place forever and there's always someone willing to take them to the limit. If you don't want to take them to the limit, no problem, race supersport.

I don't understand how Mr. Probst can say these are "One off Ducati motors" when half the field is ducati powered. Also pure fiction is the $50,000 minimum entry that mr Swiest quotes. I built my bike with the best of everything and it's for sale right now for $20K. That is with the latest "One off Ducati motor" making 127HP on the MotoCorse dyno. It's a brand new machine. And guess what? I maybe run 1.5 seconds faster than I did on my SS legal 1000DS. So it's no magic bullet.

Here's some more arguments I disagree with and my reasoning:

1. HP difference should dictate where a bike fits.....when the SV came out in 2000 it was 73HP. A 2004 GSXR 600 was 97.5. So the SV is about 70% of the GSXR stock. The 2013 Ducati Hypermotard is 95HP and 2013 Yamaha R6 is 122......77%. So the performance of LW bikes has not increased relative to MW bikes. Of course there are some people who have built to the GP limit of the rules and have more HP. I have 127. Some R6's easily make 150 so again, it's all relative and not much has changed in terms of actual performance advantage. My point is you can't pull an arbitrary number out of thin air and say "this is not a LW". If you want to cap LW HP at 75% of MW HP then fine, break out the dyno and let's do it. ASRA and MOTO ST tried it and it was a disaster. Not to mention you would have to have a formula that takes weight into account. 

One final note about HP and Dyno numbers. They are not the end all, be all. My Duc makes 127 but put it up against a 122 HP Yamaha R6 and I won't see much of him after 3rd gear. Daytona you can forget it. I did 145 on my GPS last year. The "real" middleweights are all over 160 MPH. Also, I have a buddy on a Duc who makes 109HP but his bike out accelerates mine like crazy, and we have ridden together for 15 years so trust me when I say we're getting wide open at the same place.  There is also weight and chassis to consider. The SV is light and has proven very capable. A Ducati with SV horsepower would get creamed by and SV due to the higher weight and different chassis. Again my point is Dyno numbers aren't everything.

2. You have to spend $50,000. This has been proven to be not true time and time again. As I said, (and I am in no way bragging here) I built my bike with the best of everything for about $25K. Yes that is a shit ton of cash....and look at what a Graves R6 costs....if you want a new bike built to the limit of the rule book I think this is about relative. I think the only bikes with that kind of price tag are the Pierobon and the Bimota. The Bimota is a great machine (ridden it extensively including TC at Daytona) but it's not the advantage it's touted to be. Look at how they finish and you be the judge. The Pierobon is much of the same, but it just so happens that the ones being ridden right now are in the hands of some VERY capable riders which compounds the problem.


New bikes are expensive. Building superbike engines is expensive. You don't have to like it or even participate.. That's what the SS classes are for. This coming from a guy who rode a stock 1000DS in LW SuperSport for 7 seasons. Yes it sucked getting motored in the rest of the classes but that's racing! If you're looking for spec racing we have it! The 500 class!


Not sure where to throw this one in there, but comparing Seth Starnes riding a pimped out LW bike and doing some amazing times is NOT a relative comparison. I rode a track day with the guy yesterday in which he rode a 70HP 900SS with stock suspension (the brake fluid was black for god's sake!) and there were RACERS on GSXR 1000's that COULD NOT CATCH HIM. So please let's not use him as a comparison. Along the same lines is Ray Hoffman. I raced against the man at Daytona and Roebling and if you think he's not one of the fastest riders out there, you are smoking something good and maybe should contemplate a move to Colorado.


One final note. Mr. Sweist, who is in favor of a change in the rulebook said the following:


"it's about what the LW class is about and what it's becoming"


The LW class is about RACING. For those of us that choose not to race in other classes. It's no different than any other class. It's NOT a spec class,  NOT an old man class, NOT a 100HP or less class. (There ARE classes for each of those categories, btw.)


So in closing, I say leave the rulebook alone. The grids speak for themselves! Look at WERA grids.....I believe in the CCS LW race at Roebling in March we had 48 bikes on the GTL grid....that to me is a great success! We should be doing everything we can to EXPAND the class, not restrict it. Bring on that GSXR 565 and lets GO RACING!

Quote from: SVbadguy on July 14, 2014, 05:58:40 PM
It would be really nice if someone could post up the rules from '97 or so because I'm pretty sure there were no allowances for air-cooled liter+ twins at the time.  I'm quite certain a change was made to allow the Buells and that's what has led to the 'lightweight' class becoming what it is now.

The biggest air-cooled lightweight twins that I can recall at the time were the Duc 750s like Donnie Unger was racing. 

Just noticed the results archive has a lot of old stuff added since the last time I checked.  A Duc 900 was running in heavyweight sportsman, but not lightweight sportsman.  Also being run in MW classes. Some Triumph 900 was in LW Clubman, no idea what it was. 

If I'm right about that past rule change, I think it should be changed back to what it was.

MW Sportsman was rebranded Thunderbike. LW sportsman was limited to 600CC twins I believe. Hawks were not legal but EX500's were.

Just to be sure I understand- you're suggesting we revert to what the rules were 17 years ago?

Gino,
What classes is your bike legal for in CCS?

2000 SV was about 62-64hp, no where close to 73. :)  Most 600's now are between 120-130hp. Which is exactly where your Ducati fits in :) 

Building a bike per class is expensive.  Look at Mavros. So for me to build my bike for 1 class like you recommend (SS) and get blown away in every other class isn't fun as you said.  Luckily up here in the north a SS SV/Kawi is very competitive because, like i've said 1000 times, it's still mostly 650s up here.  So it's still fun.

I said Ray can flat out fly. Not taking a damn thing away from him.  He's one of the top guys.

Thunderbike is that middle ground, or should be that middle ground between lightweight and middleweight.   I see you and others post, "well you SV guys have ultra light".... how about we say "well you big ducati's have thunderbike"..  Fair right?  You can't just claim well you get 1 class and everything is peachy. 

CCS isn't going to change anything because the current rules are making them a butt ton of money.  Until all the lightweight guys who can't afford the fast bikes quit it's going to keep making them money.

Quote from: Gino230 on July 14, 2014, 06:24:06 PM
MW Sportsman was rebranded Thunderbike. LW sportsman was limited to 600CC twins I believe. Hawks were not legal but EX500's were.

Just to be sure I understand- you're suggesting we revert to what the rules were 17 years ago?

Rules should've never been opened up just to appease the Buell riders.

$$$ talks.

Quote from: MACOP1104 on July 14, 2014, 06:32:03 PM
Gino,
What classes is your bike legal for in CCS?

LWGP, GT Lights.

I'd rather it just be legal for LWGP and Thunderbike.  :)

Quote from: Swiest on July 14, 2014, 06:36:21 PM
2000 SV was about 62-64hp, no where close to 73. :)  Most 600's now are between 120-130hp. Which is exactly where your Ducati fits in :) 

Again, you're comparing apples and oranges. Compare the Stock SV of 2000 to the Stock GSXR of 2000. And if you want to compare my bike to a 2012 Middleweight, Compare it to a MW Superbike at 150HP....I stand by my original numbers, I got them from manufacturer websites, which they quote at the crank as I'm sure you know.

Building a bike per class is expensive.  Look at Mavros. So for me to build my bike for 1 class like you recommend (SS) and get blown away in every other class isn't fun as you said.  Luckily up here in the north a SS SV/Kawi is very competitive because, like i've said 1000 times, it's still mostly 650s up here.  So it's still fun.

Don't forget, you also have LWSS, which should be very competitive?

Look guys, I'm not saying I don't think that the HP race has gotten crazy, But I don't get why all the focus is on LW? The rules have not changed and the big bore Ducatis have been around for a while now and have not dominated so what's the deal?

I do get that it's frustrating to race on a budget against high dollar bikes. Sometimes I look at my program and wonder how the hell I got here. My philosophy was always to keep it stock so I could run pump gas and have my engine last all season. Also concentrate on my riding instead of my bike. I guess I got sucked in like alot of people do these days. And it IS fun riding a fast bike. :)

I suppose in the MW classes more people are running bikes that are closer to stock, so the class structure matters less. Then again, if you want to race MW, you have a choice of three whole bikes! Yamaha, Suzuki, or Triumph....(and an 848 but they don't make 'em anymore).

The LW GP and Thunderbike classes are the last of the "builder's classes" where you can run a wide variety of machines. I guess what frustrates me the most is that the SV crowd is always trying to get the rules tightened so that the SV will once again be dominant, and that's just not feasible unless you make it the SV cup, (which Ultra LW essentially is). and I just don't get that. There are plenty of options for classes where mods are not as much of an issue yet we still hear all the moaning and groaning about LW?

I love the lightweight class.  I love that it's cheap to race.  The danger factor is much lower.  The racing is good.  The general personality of the riders is excellent.  For less than $4,000, you can race LWT and be competitive (up here in the north) or with another club. 

You start pushing 120hp.... none of those things exist anymore.  I don't blame anyone for running the crazy fast LWT bikes.  If you got the cash, why not?  They are legal ( well mostly everyone i think is legal ).  They are amazingly cool bikes.  Would I own one if I could, yes.  It's still hard to consider it a lightweight bike when they put out that much power.

I'm not trying to keep SV king, altho my garage would stay happy as it's covered in SV crap.  If the Kawi was better, I'd have no issue moving to it.  If FZ07 is good, no problem moving to it.  Those are still much lower HP machines.


This isn't again about ti being a SV, or a Ducati, or a GSXR. It's just about the pure power output. I understand what you're saying with the HP going up in all classes.  90HP is a lot for LWT no matter how you look at it, just like 140hp is a lot in MWT.

You can push 100-110HP out of SV in case you're wondering.

Gino, I said ducatis and one off Ducati based bikes. Like the pierbonne and bimota and whatever in the hell else shows up. I don't hate on the Ducati and the direction it has taken the class. It's racing. If you wanna win figure it out. They meet the rules.


I do see a point to the fact that 120hp inline 4s and 1200cc twins can be a tough pill to swallow for what the lightweight class has traditionally stood for. On one hand this isn't 1999. On the other hand, it's a tough sell to say there is no way in hell, no matter how talented you are that you will win a race at handful of the tracks that CCS runs unless you're on one of the two bikes. On the other hand, tough shit build a faster bike. :biggrin:

Ben, that's were you come in. Sponsor those guys who can't afford the fast ones. :)

Quote from: Swiest on July 14, 2014, 10:27:36 PM
Ben, that's were you come in. Sponsor those guys who can't afford the fast ones. :)

I wanted to this weekend but some asshole snapped up the fast ones already to ride the slow bike!!  :lmao:

Quote from: benprobst on July 14, 2014, 10:22:50 PM
Gino, I said ducatis and one off Ducati based bikes. Like the pierbonne and bimota and whatever in the hell else shows up. I don't hate on the Ducati and the direction it has taken the class. It's racing. If you wanna win figure it out. They meet the rules.


I do see a point to the fact that 120hp inline 4s and 1200cc twins can be a tough pill to swallow for what the lightweight class has traditionally stood for. On one hand this isn't 1999. On the other hand, it's a tough sell to say there is no way in hell, no matter how talented you are that you will win a race at handful of the tracks that CCS runs unless you're on one of the two bikes. On the other hand, tough shit build a faster bike. :biggrin:

Or race somewhere else!

Quote from: Swiest on July 14, 2014, 03:30:50 PM

I would hope a MWGP bike would crush any UL bike at any track...

By UL I meant Unlimited, as in 1000cc 4 cyl. bikes. It sounds like you thought I meant ULW or Ultra- Light Weight.

I did, my mistake.   But yes 600's are so amazing now they can do lap times or damn close to that of a 1000.

Gino. how does a 127hp bike only go 138mph at Daytona?  You must be horrible out of the chicane....  :)

Quote from: Swiest on July 14, 2014, 09:39:45 PM
I love the lightweight class.  I love that it's cheap to race.  The danger factor is much lower.  The racing is good.  The general personality of the riders is excellent.  For less than $4,000, you can race LWT and be competitive (up here in the north) or with another club. 

FWIW, I wish I could be competitive on a $4000 bike (in ALL the LW classes) too. But that's just not reality and I don't think any changing of the rules will make it so.

I do remember when Mike Mills had an SV that was putting out over 100HP. He could run MW times on that bike but it was tough to get it through the weekend. Massive radiator, oil cooler, ram air box, etc....it was a neat bike.

Quote from: MACOP1104 on July 15, 2014, 10:03:45 AM
Gino. how does a 127hp bike only go 138mph at Daytona?  You must be horrible out of the chicane....  :)

HA!

Well, I'm not the fastest, but I am not the slowest, either. I got 5th this year in LWGP doing a time of 203.5 on the big bore Duc. I know what you're saying about exit drives, but top speed is top speed, the bike is tapped out before Nascar 4. I believe I was beaten by Philippe Touya, Mavros, Turpin, and Orlando. I don't think those bikes were any faster than mine (well maybe Mavros' Paul Smart was) but they were riding the wheels off....got down into the 58's I believe.

My point was more about dyno HP numbers not being everything. I rode an 848 with SS mods in the team challenge, that bike was about 138HP and it was doing well over 160 on the banking....despite my crummy run out of the chicane ;)

If your bike really only does 138mph, SV and ER would have no issue. 

I cannot fathom a class where 120+ hp Bimotas and Pierobons with WSBK electronics package are legal but a 565 is not.  A 250GP bike is legal also.  But I guess that's my humble lower middle class roots showing.

So let's go old school for a second and talk about SV racing.  I should know, I was 1 before inventing the GSXR565 concept and asking Ben to build the world's first.  Fact is, rider weight and size has a lot to do with lap times on lower HP machines for any given rider skill level.  Also, mechanics who can deal with a fragile engine at the track can build serious HP into the SV that those of us without mechanical ability cannot.  So exactly how are either of those factors "fair"?  Until you come up with an affordable spec class, HP and minimum combined weight, there is always going to be an obstacle to overcome unless you happen to be small in size and above average in mechanical ability.

BTW, with GPS data in hand from even the high speed tracks, I can tell you the speed differentials being reported by some are WAY out of whack.  For instance, I was accused of passing someone at Road Atlanta by 25mph on the back straight...when in reality GPS data showed only 5 mph difference between my 565 and the SV.

Quote from: sdiver68 on July 15, 2014, 05:42:01 PM
I cannot fathom a class where 120+ hp Bimotas and Pierobons with WSBK electronics package are legal but a 565 is not.  A 250GP bike is legal also.  But I guess that's my humble lower middle class roots showing.

So let's go old school for a second and talk about SV racing.  I should know, I was 1 before inventing the GSXR565 concept and asking Ben to build the world's first.  Fact is, rider weight and size has a lot to do with lap times on lower HP machines for any given rider skill level.  Also, mechanics who can deal with a fragile engine at the track can build serious HP into the SV that those of us without mechanical ability cannot.  So exactly how are either of those factors "fair"?  Until you come up with an affordable spec class, HP and minimum combined weight, there is always going to be an obstacle to overcome unless you happen to be small in size and above average in mechanical ability.

BTW, with GPS data in hand from even the high speed tracks, I can tell you the speed differentials being reported by some are WAY out of whack.  For instance, I was accused of passing someone at Road Atlanta by 25mph on the back straight...when in reality GPS data showed only 5 mph difference between my 565 and the SV.

what was your top speed at Rd Atl?

140.1, with most laps in the 138-139 range.

Quote from: sdiver68 on July 15, 2014, 06:10:09 PM
140.1, with most laps in the 138-139 range.

Xavier hit 137 on my SV.  That was from the LWSBK race with no draft.   The bike has stock bore and stroke and is not even close to 100hp.   

Quote from: sdiver68 on July 15, 2014, 05:42:01 PM
I cannot fathom a class where 120+ hp Bimotas and Pierobons with WSBK electronics package are legal but a 565 is not.

I guess you didn't read anything.  This isn't about just the 565......

Quote from: MACOP1104 on July 13, 2014, 09:41:58 AM
Do you feel the 565 has such an enormous performance advantage that the rules should be changed or the bike in its current state should be outlawed?

I did answer the question, Sam.  I see you are still whining.  :blahblah:

2nd post, I expanded on what Mike originally posted to include all the high HP machines.

It's funny how I can agree and get along with Ben, but not you.  I thought you were his offspring. :)

Quote from: sdiver68 on July 15, 2014, 05:42:01 PMbefore inventing the GSXR565 concept and asking Ben to build the world's first. 

So, not only did you invent the concept, but it's also the world's first?  How can you possibly claim this?  :)

Take it easy you two! Lol. Steve addressed the first question as it singled out the 565. Sam you're right that the real question here includes the hybrid and big hp ducs.


Our 565 isn't the first 565 ever but it is the first GSXR version anyone has been able to come up with. While not the greatest accomplishment since we landed on the moon, Steve and I are proud of it!

You should be proud, as I stated before, you came up with a "cheap" way to keep the ducs at bay. :)

AFM still has the rules perfect. 650cc LCT, 800cc ACT, 450cc LI4.  If only I didn't live 3,000 miles away.

Steve and Sam should team together at VIR for Team Challenge.....   

Not on that POS 565. :)

Quote from: MACOP1104 on July 16, 2014, 09:46:02 AM
Steve and Sam should team together at VIR for Team Challenge.....   

Probably not, but Ill buy him a beer afterwards.

Quote from: Swiest on July 16, 2014, 08:43:38 AM
So, not only did you invent the concept, but it's also the world's first?  How can you possibly claim this?  :)

Long in-depth and worldwide research.  I'm happy to withdraw the claim with evidence to the contrary.  There were 2 r5.5 builders I was able to find.  JD Hord  who shared his "secrets" afterwards and as it turns out we independently made the exact same design decisions even down to vendors.  And an AFM guy who I emailed and he never replied, I understand his bike never made it to the track.

Loser buys. :)

Quote from: Swiest on July 16, 2014, 09:41:56 AM
You should be proud, as I stated before, you came up with a "cheap" way to keep the ducs at bay. :)

AFM still has the rules perfect. 650cc LCT, 800cc ACT, 450cc LI4.  If only I didn't live 3,000 miles away.

I keep hearing that this is the "cheap" alternative....but I would like to know the real cost. Let's say you start out with a 2012 or newer GSXR, Ohlins kit in the front, Some type of shock in the rear (whatever you guys use on those Jap-O-nese bikes ;)  chain, sprockets, slip ons, bodywork, Power commander or bazzaz or whatever, Brembo Master, slipper clutch, brake pads, plus the 565 engine. Basically a SS package + 565 engine build......I'm guessing you're spending upwards of $15-20K?

Quote from: Gino230 on July 16, 2014, 11:04:52 AM
I keep hearing that this is the "cheap" alternative....but I would like to know the real cost. Let's say you start out with a 2012 or newer GSXR, Ohlins kit in the front, Some type of shock in the rear (whatever you guys use on those Jap-O-nese bikes ;)  chain, sprockets, slip ons, bodywork, Power commander or bazzaz or whatever, Brembo Master, slipper clutch, brake pads, plus the 565 engine. Basically a SS package + 565 engine build......I'm guessing you're spending upwards of $15-20K?

Depends what you start with and what level of engine build you want. Mine started as an 08 AMA SS bike (ran at AMA SS Daytona Spring 2013) and including development/build costs and race package  spares ran around $13k. Today with in-house knowledge a replica could be built for $12k.  Other than the destroke parts it was AMA SS legal...well until I added the Brembo MC.  If you are willing to supply some of the labor, go with lower spec parts, and/or throw some sponsor parts at it I could see 1 being put together for less...maybe even <$8k.  Alternately if you wanted a current gen Superbike build I think the low end of your $15k estimate might be right.  Go crazy with weight reductions, etc and the sky is the limit.

I think part of the "cheap" also goes towards plentiful spare parts, set-up knowledge, pit replacements, reduced maintenance of a Jap I-4, reliability, etc..

Quote from: Gino230 on July 16, 2014, 11:04:52 AM
I keep hearing that this is the "cheap" alternative....but I would like to know the real cost. Let's say you start out with a 2012 or newer GSXR, Ohlins kit in the front, Some type of shock in the rear (whatever you guys use on those Jap-O-nese bikes ;)  chain, sprockets, slip ons, bodywork, Power commander or bazzaz or whatever, Brembo Master, slipper clutch, brake pads, plus the 565 engine. Basically a SS package + 565 engine build......I'm guessing you're spending upwards of $15-20K?

If you knew what I spent building my SV superbike you would laugh.  Spare parts are plentiful and cheap on the used market.  Building my own motors saves a bunch also..

Which is the same SV SBK that was doing 33's at VIR.

Quote from: MACOP1104 on July 16, 2014, 11:53:26 AM
If you knew what I spent building my SV superbike you would laugh.  Spare parts are plentiful and cheap on the used market.  Building my own motors saves a bunch also..

Please keep in mind all my prices quoted include labor and tuning.  If you ask Ben what he could put 1 together for himself, different story.

Anyone ridden new FZ-07 yet?



Can we ban it yet? :)

If you allow the 565, then the Ducati 749, 748, 851, 888, and the BMW HP2 should also be in the GT classes.  All have similar performance to the 565. 

If we want to get technical, the HP2 isn't allowed because BMW classifies it as a middleweight.  The same can be said for the 565.  Suzuki classifies the GSX-R 600 as a middleweight bike.  If I destroke an HP2, then would it be lightweight legal?  Or is still excluded?  Remember, the 565 came about because of the engine was being based on a lightweight bikes engine, Yamaha FZR 400 with some 600 parts.  Here are you are doing the exact opposite.  Nothing on the 565 is from a lightweight bike.

Is it nice that it is "reasonably" priced alternative to the high HP Ducs, yes.  I feel the rules should have been written a bit better to define air cooled, push rod, type engines up to 1210cc if you really wanted to include the Harley based engines.

Heck, early 90s CBRs and ZX6s  should be allowed in the lightweight classes.  Talk about a cheap and easy way to get into racing.  1992 CBR 600s go for cheap now.  They are already allowed in Thunderbike. 

The topic of the thread isn't about allowing in more fast bikes, it's about possibly changing rules to remove them from the equation. :)

Quote from: Capitalview on July 17, 2014, 12:46:42 PM
If you allow the 565, then the Ducati 749, 748, 851, 888, and the BMW HP2 should also be in the GT classes.  All have similar performance to the 565. 

If we want to get technical, the HP2 isn't allowed because BMW classifies it as a middleweight.  The same can be said for the 565.  Suzuki classifies the GSX-R 600 as a middleweight bike.  If I destroke an HP2, then would it be lightweight legal?  Or is still excluded?  Remember, the 565 came about because of the engine was being based on a lightweight bikes engine, Yamaha FZR 400 with some 600 parts.  Here are you are doing the exact opposite.  Nothing on the 565 is from a lightweight bike.

Is it nice that it is "reasonably" priced alternative to the high HP Ducs, yes.  I feel the rules should have been written a bit better to define air cooled, push rod, type engines up to 1210cc if you really wanted to include the Harley based engines.

Heck, early 90s CBRs and ZX6s  should be allowed in the lightweight classes.  Talk about a cheap and easy way to get into racing.  1992 CBR 600s go for cheap now.  They are already allowed in Thunderbike. 

LW class doesn't need to become a dumping ground for obsolete middleweight bikes.   That's what vintage racing is for

My main point was that the GSX-R 565 is a middle weight bike, not a lightweight bike.  Hence, if you are going to allow it you might as well let the older middle weight bikes in as well.

Also, if you allow the GSX-R 565 then you must also allow a destroked HP2.

The intention of the rule was to allow an older lightweight bike to keep up with the newer lightweight bikes.

Why wouldn't you want the older bikes in LW?  I hear people say they want more people to get involved in racing, but when someone suggests a way to get into racing for cheap, with on older bike, it immediately gets shot down.  How many races does AHRMA have in the midwest?  By my count, 2.  RA and Grattan. 

Plus, talk about a CHEAP way to build power against the big ducs.  It also opens up the field to other bikes besides the SV or Ducs.

The rules and meaning behind the rules has been established.  Again, not the point of thread.
We don't want build power to keep up with the ducs. We want to take power away..... Keep it lightweight. 

Even if HP2 was legal, I don't think you would see a bunch of them out there.

As mike said, no one wants lightweight to be the dumping ground for old middleweights.

The question was should the 565, and bikes like it, be outlawed.  I answered that question by pointing out, specifically, that since the HP2 is not allowed the 565, built from a 600cc middleweight, should not be either.  Both because they are sold and marketed as middleweight.

I guess you can start calling me "no one" since I would love to see LW diversify into other bikes besides the SV and air cooled Ducs.  What do you have against the older bikes?  Is it the fear the SV wouldn't be king anymore?  I would like to hear a well reasoned articulate answer besides "no one wants to see lightweight to become a dumping ground for old middleweights"

Hmmm, I just realized how strange my last post sounds.  I guess I should clarify that MW produced in the last 20 years should not be allowed. 

Do they ever do anything with the other classes????        for example
Do you really think that your 1996 Kawasaki ZX7 or 1998 Yamaha R1 or even a 2003 will win middleweight races? They will never lower the class for those bikes.
Did you know for THUNDERBIKE  it says-------   4 cylinder Air Cooled up to 1200CC----------
So what if I had a 1991 GSXR 1100 built up to 1200CC and was making over 150HP.It would be real fast on the banking at Daytona.I do know somone that has one with 170HP but doesn't race it or even ride it much as alot of parts on that bike aren't available anymore,don't want it to get messed up.

Quote from: Capitalview on July 17, 2014, 03:32:27 PM
Why wouldn't you want the older bikes in LW?  I hear people say they want more people to get involved in racing, but when someone suggests a way to get into racing for cheap, with on older bike, it immediately gets shot down.  How many races does AHRMA have in the midwest?  By my count, 2.  RA and Grattan. 

Plus, talk about a CHEAP way to build power against the big ducs.  It also opens up the field to other bikes besides the SV or Ducs.

There is already multiple cheap ways into racing. You can buy a race ready SV for 2200 dollars right now. How much cheaper do you want? Or do you mean a cheap way to be competitive? If that's the case, this isn't tiddlywinks, trophies aren't just given out for showing up. That's why we race. Build the fastest thing legal for the class and that you can afford and ride it the best you can. If that's an SV then great, if that's a 50k duc or 100k pirrebonne then so be it, for now. :D

Quote from: benprobst on July 18, 2014, 12:36:22 PM

There is already multiple cheap ways into racing. You can buy a race ready SV for 2200 dollars right now. How much cheaper do you want? Or do you mean a cheap way to be competitive? If that's the case, this isn't tiddlywinks, trophies aren't just given out for showing up. That's why we race. Build the fastest thing legal for the class and that you can afford and ride it the best you can. If that's an SV then great, if that's a 50k duc or 100k pirrebonne then so be it, for now. :D

Ben I realize you are a little 'tongue in cheek' with your remarks about the Ducatis, and I also realize have a little bit of an interest in painting the Duc as an insanely expensive bike, but I have been very forthcoming in what I and others have spent to develop a competitive bike and it's not half of what you claim.

In fact I know Moto Corse has a package deal for $15K for a fully developed superbike making 110HP. And I can promise you it will be competitive with the 565. I don't want to reveal what anyone else has spent, but there are a few of them racing and doing well.

One thing I agree with you on is the SV crowd will never be happy with anything but the sv's only or maybe the FZ-07. How much cheaper do you want....exactly.

As for Steve's comment about extra reliability and lower maintenance...... well, that remains to be seen, doesn't it? As for the Reliability of the Duc, I have over 3000 race miles logged on mine, and I've done 4 or 5 oil changes, and there's less than 3% leakdown on both cylinders. No valve adjustments to date and only one set of cam belts. I would say that's pretty damn good reliability and maintenance costs for a 127HP LW machine.

Italian vs. Japanese rivalries aside, I am glad to see the 565 racing with us. The FZ07 is the first new LW eligible machine to start production in some years and I am excited at the prospect of bigger grids. The air cooled Ducs are going to die a slow death, Ducati has stopped building the air cooled platform all together so it's only a matter of time before parts become scarce. I guess by then it will be time to either start racing Middleweight, or try to convince CCS to let the new Ducati 820 CC water cooled engine in. I think the potential of that engine is too high, though. Too close to the 848.

Quote from: Gino230 on July 19, 2014, 12:42:51 AM
Ben I realize you are a little 'tongue in cheek' with your remarks about the Ducatis, and I also realize have a little bit of an interest in painting the Duc as an insanely expensive bike, but I have been very forthcoming in what I and others have spent to develop a competitive bike and it's not half of what you claim.

In fact I know Moto Corse has a package deal for $15K for a fully developed superbike making 110HP. And I can promise you it will be competitive with the 565. I don't want to reveal what anyone else has spent, but there are a few of them racing and doing well.

One thing I agree with you on is the SV crowd will never be happy with anything but the sv's only or maybe the FZ-07. How much cheaper do you want....exactly.

As for Steve's comment about extra reliability and lower maintenance...... well, that remains to be seen, doesn't it? As for the Reliability of the Duc, I have over 3000 race miles logged on mine, and I've done 4 or 5 oil changes, and there's less than 3% leakdown on both cylinders. No valve adjustments to date and only one set of cam belts. I would say that's pretty damn good reliability and maintenance costs for a 127HP LW machine.

Italian vs. Japanese rivalries aside, I am glad to see the 565 racing with us. The FZ07 is the first new LW eligible machine to start production in some years and I am excited at the prospect of bigger grids. The air cooled Ducs are going to die a slow death, Ducati has stopped building the air cooled platform all together so it's only a matter of time before parts become scarce. I guess by then it will be time to either start racing Middleweight, or try to convince CCS to let the new Ducati 820 CC water cooled engine in. I think the potential of that engine is too high, though. Too close to the 848.

Gino,   
Just to set the record straight, my original post was concerning the performance of the 565.   I stated the bike should stay as long as the big Ducs can stay.  I believe you also said let the bike stay and "lets race".  I have no problems with the hybrids in LWGP.  After all, the bike is not legal for lwsbk.  Sam on the other hand, wants to see the Ducatis wiped from the face of the earth :)
Yes there is lots of talk about the FZ07.   It looks like a good platform for WERA LW classes and ULWSB.  I'm sure someone will push it and see how far the motor can be taken.   I'm hoping the success of the bike will motivate Suzuki to redesign the POS Gladius or possibly come out with a new model.  Same for the Kawasaki EX650.   
As far as the 821cc Ducati, my good friend has a Hypermotard 821SP.  The bike is bad ass.  It isn't too far off from a 848.  A bit too much for LW IMO.   

The progression of bikes have been this way for some time. This us the same conversation just a different year.

Specifically the 565 was meant for the aging FZR 400 and it's needed for that bike. There have been many FZR incarnations and I have the parts to build one.

In speculation, if we are going to scale down the lightweight class where do stop. In my mind using some of your arguments we should stop only after the SV is out. The current EX500 and GS500 could use a place to race as well. My FZR400 would still have a place to race.

Ultralight Superbike: some will say this is the right place for the FZR 400. Well the SV is there too.

Hp comparisons: cannot be compared, the 127hp Gino states are inflated compared to the SV numbers being stated. 62hp for an SV? My FZR 400 with total loss produces 59.8 the SV can't possibly ONLY make 62 hp. Performance; just as Mark Evry if he is faster on his stock SV or his FZR400. Guarantee the SV wins every time with the same rider on it.

Big Cash: it's up to the owner, racer, or team manager on what is spent. If anyone had that type of expendable cash I would venture to say they would spend it too.

Quote from: roadracer162 on July 19, 2014, 11:10:33 AM
The progression of bikes have been this way for some time. This us the same conversation just a different year.

Specifically the 565 was meant for the aging FZR 400 and it's needed for that bike. There have been many FZR incarnations and I have the parts to build one.

In speculation, if we are going to scale down the lightweight class where do stop. In my mind using some of your arguments we should stop only after the SV is out. The current EX500 and GS500 could use a place to race as well. My FZR400 would still have a place to race.

Ultralight Superbike: some will say this is the right place for the FZR 400. Well the SV is there too.

Hp comparisons: cannot be compared, the 127hp Gino states are inflated compared to the SV numbers being stated. 62hp for an SV? My FZR 400 with total loss produces 59.8 the SV can't possibly ONLY make 62 hp. Performance; just as Mark Evry if he is faster on his stock SV or his FZR400. Guarantee the SV wins every time with the same rider on it.

Big Cash: it's up to the owner, racer, or team manager on what is spent. If anyone had that type of expendable cash I would venture to say they would spend it too.

Since I'm the OP I will respond to this.   I'm assuming some of your statements above were to posts from others:

I never said anything about scaling back LW.  My original post was in response to some Ducati riders complaints about the speed of the GSXR565.  My feeling is the rules should stay in place and the 565 should stay LWGP legal.  I do think the Peirobon and the DB5R shouldn't be allowed in LW supersport.  I think they're just too much bike for that class.  Your FZR400, EX500, and GS500 can now race in the new 500 supersport class where they won't have to race against the SV.  Just like the SV has a safe haven in ULWSB.

Quote from: MACOP1104 on July 19, 2014, 08:18:28 AM
Gino,   
Just to set the record straight, my original post was concerning the performance of the 565.   I stated the bike should stay as long as the big Ducs can stay.  I believe you also said let the bike stay and "lets race".  I have no problems with the hybrids in LWGP.  After all, the bike is not legal for lwsbk.  Sam on the other hand, wants to see the Ducatis wiped from the face of the earth :)
Yes there is lots of talk about the FZ07.   It looks like a good platform for WERA LW classes and ULWSB.  I'm sure someone will push it and see how far the motor can be taken.   I'm hoping the success of the bike will motivate Suzuki to redesign the POS Gladius or possibly come out with a new model.  Same for the Kawasaki EX650.   
As far as the 821cc Ducati, my good friend has a Hypermotard 821SP.  The bike is bad ass.  It isn't too far off from a 848.  A bit too much for LW IMO.   

So what you're saying is that we agree? Break out the cooler!

Sorry if we hijacked your thread a little, but we need the action on the forum....it's just too long between race weekends around here. :)

Agree with you both. I was responding in general not necessarily to any one person but to offer information in correction to some comparisons. I can only base my opinions on my own experience in the shop, dyno and on the track.

Certainly the FZR may have that new class to run yes. And so does the SV have the ultralight, but my response was to the scaling back of the lightweight legal bikes.

Leave the rules as it is and let's race. What may be interesting for me is submitting the acceptance of the Ducati 900 into ultralight SB class

Quote from: Gino230 on July 19, 2014, 12:42:51 AM
Ben I realize you are a little 'tongue in cheek' with your remarks about the Ducatis, and I also realize have a little bit of an interest in painting the Duc as an insanely expensive bike, but I have been very forthcoming in what I and others have spent to develop a competitive bike and it's not half of what you claim.

In fact I know Moto Corse has a package deal for $15K for a fully developed superbike making 110HP. And I can promise you it will be competitive with the 565. I don't want to reveal what anyone else has spent, but there are a few of them racing and doing well.

I'll take your word for it that Moto Corse NOW (with competition from 565?) offers a $15K Superbike, but I did talk to Chris Boy/Moto Corse and exchanged many texts with him prior to coming up with the 565 concept.  I still have the pictures he sent me on my phone, although the texts have long since disappeared.  This would be during the Spring of 2013, and I was following your awesome build thread on Ducati.ms found here:

http://www.ducati.ms/forums/57-supersport/214129-1198-1100-air-cooled-conversion.html (http://www.ducati.ms/forums/57-supersport/214129-1198-1100-air-cooled-conversion.html)

At that time, I wanted to commission something just like your bike Gino.  Chris offered to build me a 2006 Paul Smart chassis with an EVO 1100 engine producing ~105-110 HP for $20k.  125 HP "Max" build was quoted at approaching $30K.  He also had the 04 DB5R for sale at the time for $60K on his website.  Info found here after it was posted on ebay:

http://raresportbikesforsale.com/track-day-heaven-2004-bimota-db5-race-bike/ (http://raresportbikesforsale.com/track-day-heaven-2004-bimota-db5-race-bike/)

Chris actually talked me out of another project like yours Gino in favor of the Paul Smart based approach.  His caution was finding the 2006 Paul Smart chassis and even the EVO1100 engine was getting hard and he would contact me when he had something.  Eventually, for whatever reason he stopped responding to my texts, probably got busy during the heart of the racing season...and I went in search of another air cooled Ducati alternative.  There are a few others that I knew about but I did not contact, I believe Frank Shockey has a hybrid and there's a guy who races F40 out of Champaign, IL that I talked to at a BHF event.   

The only other air cooled "games in town" at that time that I could find was Pierobon primarily being built out of Boulder Motorsports starting around $25K (base 100HP F042) but quickly rising to $40K (X60R) and above in race trim, and then some NCR based alternatives costing at least that much.

When I couldn't find anything for sale at the time for what I considered a reasonable cost I started researching what eventually became the GSXR565.  Being a mechanical moron but a good researcher, I corresponded with many people on the concept of downsizing 4 cylinders through the 3 options available (sleeve, cylinder deactivation, and destroke).  Working with Ben since he's local to St. Louis and the top guy in the Midwest for something like this (and the builder of my SV at the time) we ended up with destroke as the best option.  We found a shop to do the cranks based on information from Bonneville Salt Flat racers (in particular a guy who runs a turbo CBR600 based 500cc) and a recommendation from KWS.

BTW separate topic, but I don't believe the FZR400/600 comparisons are fair nor even the reason for the 565 4 cyl rule.  Of course no one downsized an FZR600...the aluminum 400 chassis is far superior to the steel framed 600.  Somewhere along the path to the 565 I did consider the FZR562 option.

Quote from: Gino230 on July 19, 2014, 11:37:11 AM
So what you're saying is that we agree? Break out the cooler!

Sorry if we hijacked your thread a little, but we need the action on the forum....it's just too long between race weekends around here. :)

Gino, what classes do you race your bike in?

Quote from: benprobst on July 22, 2014, 09:07:08 PM

Gino, what classes do you race your bike in?

unlimited superbike, UNL GP,  Formula USA, Moto GP      ;)

Quote from: sdiver68 on July 19, 2014, 09:49:07 PM
BTW separate topic, but I don't believe the FZR400/600 comparisons are fair nor even the reason for the 565 4 cyl rule.  Of course no one downsized an FZR600...the aluminum 400 chassis is far superior to the steel framed 600.  Somewhere along the path to the 565 I did consider the FZR562 option.

Just curious, where do you believe the 565 rule came from then?

capitalview, - I agree with you completely that the FZR 400 was the reason why this rule came about. There were no downsized FZR600 racers that I know of. I am an owner of multiple FZR400 and FZR600 and although you may claim that there is an advantage to the FZR 400 chassis in my experience of both it is very limited. The largest difference is the weight savings of the aluminum chassis. The rear subframe is a full steel version and heavy so no weight savings there.

The suspension of the two models are near identical and the FZR400 offers no advantage.

There are many versions of the 565cc FZR motor utilizing OEM parts from the FZR600 and FZR400 or the YZF600 and the FZR400. Two different approaches with similar outcome.

The intent of the 565 ruling was to allow the FZR400 to be built up and never intended for the FZR600 to be downsized. I don't know if anyone tried.

The machine that Gino has(air cooled motor in a modern chassis) is legal and raced in GT lights, LW GP and LW F40. the reason LW F40 is because anything LW GP legal is also legal for LW F40

Quote from: Capitalview on July 24, 2014, 03:21:42 PM
Just curious, where do you believe the 565 rule came from then?

.

Somewhere around 2002-3 and during the great 2-stroke to 4-stroke  transition, the TZ250 even in the hands of Rich Oliver became uncompetitive with fully developed 600cc sport bikes with equal riders.  Some organizations such as AMA proposed allowing 330cc from 2 strokes...the problem was there were no stroker or big bore kits for the TZR.  Rich Oliver wanted the 600cc restricted to Supersport rules.

http://www.tz250.com/rich_oliver_4-29-2003.php (http://www.tz250.com/rich_oliver_4-29-2003.php)

At the time, most road racing organizations had the 250s in middleweight.  I think they simply demoted 250GP bikes to the class just below middleweight...lightweight GP in order to give them a class to run.  And since the 250s lagged just a bit from the 600 they simply picked a slightly smaller displacement for 4 cyl.  Here's where the FZR562 comes in...since some guys had already built them and the rules organizations wanted to allow something just below a 600 to compete in the class, 565 was chosen.

The fact is that the 565 is legal per the CCS rulebook.   This isn't a matter of right or wrong, fair or unfair but rather this displays that there is a fundamental problem with the CCS rulebook.  Someone this past weekeend at BHF pointed out to me that the CCS rulebook focuses on what you can't do to your motorcycle rather than what you can do.  I've have heard WERA takes a different approach, by telling you what you can do to your motorcycle and what motorcycles can run what class.  Personally I wish CCS would take this approach.  I wish that the lightweight class were full of stock SV's.  However I don't know how many lightweight racers would agree with me.  Maybe guys choose CCS over WERA because they can run bigger and meaner machines in the lwt classes.  I don't think you can ban the 565 because it has an unfair advantage because you are now getting into an arguable argument.  I run an 80 hp sv; a 100hp sv, buell, ducati, I4 are all going to have an unfair advantage of me, no? You can't pick and choose which is fair and which isn't, the rules are the rules but I sure wish CCS would change the way they go about them.

I agree with you on most points. However when discussing rule book changes- be careful what you wish for. WERA grids are tiny, not saying that's the only reason, but the CCS formula is clearly working!

Quote from: Gino230 on August 01, 2014, 01:38:34 PM
I agree with you on most points. However when discussing rule book changes- be careful what you wish for. WERA grids are tiny, not saying that's the only reason, but the CCS formula is clearly working!

Thats a very good point!

As an engineer I get a kick out of someone figuring out how to build a bad ass machine within the confines of the existing rules. That's one of the main reasons I like formula one.. They just have millions to figure out those tweaks:)

Without millions though it still happens., quickshifters, dyno tunes, thinner gaskets.. At one point they were the new thing someone figured out and everyone followed suit to keep up. Can't stop innovation.

Quote from: Gino230 on August 01, 2014, 01:38:34 PM
I agree with you on most points. However when discussing rule book changes- be careful what you wish for. WERA grids are tiny, not saying that's the only reason, but the CCS formula is clearly working!

17 in Formula 2 today at VIR.  Not one ducati. :)

Quote from: Swiest on August 04, 2014, 12:19:01 AM
17 in Formula 2 today at VIR.  Not one ducati. :)

Don't misunderstand, I'm not one of those guys that gets a kick out of seeing someone else's (or some other organization's) failure. I've said many times, the more, the merrier! Our sport needs more participation, not less, and if that means people spending more money innovating and coming up with more bikes to race, so be it! I'm glad there was a big grid.

Personally if I were a WERA racer, I would probably not build a bike for one class. So I'm not surprised. Although I would still take a SuperStock Paul Smart 1100 over an SV but that's just me :)

Or maybe some of our gang should start showing up at WERA events.....

Quote from: Gino230 on August 01, 2014, 01:38:34 PM
I agree with you on most points. However when discussing rule book changes- be careful what you wish for. WERA grids are tiny, not saying that's the only reason, but the CCS formula is clearly working!

Quote from: Jwhite316 on August 01, 2014, 02:07:21 PM
Thats a very good point!

Well they  are not working for lightweight supersport here in the midwest!

Quote from: HerbigCBR on August 05, 2014, 01:29:56 PM
Well they  are not working for lightweight supersport here in the midwest!

Is the equivalent class WERA D Superstock? Or are WERA LW Twins classes consider more equivalent? Looks like the LW Twins (AKA: SV650 spec class) classes have a pretty good turn out. The D Superstock classes not so much...just looking at Grattan.
Nevermind I see the SV doesn't fit in the D classes. 

Quote from: HerbigCBR on August 05, 2014, 01:29:56 PM
Well they  are not working for lightweight supersport here in the midwest!

Can we assume by "not working" you mean small grids? How are the rest of the LW classes doing?

Just curious. Here in FL, LW SS is one of the smallest grids. Most people mod their machines beyond the SS rules. I ran the LWSS class for 7 years and loved it....but the grids were usually less than 5 machines. Even at Daytona when I won the race, we barely had enough for Dunlop contingency.

Quote from: Gino230 on August 05, 2014, 05:49:42 PM
Can we assume by "not working" you mean small grids? How are the rest of the LW classes doing?

Just curious. Here in FL, LW SS is one of the smallest grids. Most people mod their machines beyond the SS rules. I ran the LWSS class for 7 years and loved it....but the grids were usually less than 5 machines. Even at Daytona when I won the race, we barely had enough for Dunlop contingency.

Yes, i mean small grids. I was the only expert LWSS last month at blackhawk. In 2013, we had 5 "regulars" and in 2012 it was 2 "regulars" (experts). LWSS has been the smallest of all expert grids in the midwest ever since I can recall.

I don't necessarily blame CCS for the problem in LWSS because I understand why people do a few upgrades that are not legal in SS but make them more competitive in the rest of the lightweight classes. Build a bike that is competitive in one class, or spend a little more to have a bike that is competitive in 5 other lightweight classes and skip supersport. I get it.

I have stuck with LWSS the past few years because of my budget and I thought it should be one of the "cheapest" CCS classes to race when I started and I had people to race with. How much cheaper do you get than an supersport SV650? Even ninja 250s arent that much cheaper, if at all...

All I know is that I'm having way more fun actually racing people for 5th place in the other classes (on my SS bike.) Guess Ill throw some flatslides on for next year...

Sorry for the threadjack. Guess if the 565 ran in LWSS, there wouldnt be anybody to protest! JK!

Atlantic CCS grids are nice size and not ruled by the Ducati's. 

That is all. :)

Yep big grids in Supersport in Mid Atlantic area.Gino all of your motocorse ducatis would have to run against 600's in Wera,even mine.They would have to run a factory stock engine then it would be ok,but the SV can be superbike.

Quote from: apriliaman on August 06, 2014, 08:30:53 AM
Yep big grids in Supersport in Mid Atlantic area.Gino all of your motocorse ducatis would have to run against 600's in Wera,even mine.They would have to run a factory stock engine then it would be ok,but the SV can be superbike.

I asked Sean to let superbike spec air cooled 2 valve Ducatis into WERA F2.  My reasoning was the class is based on 250GP which is not really a LW machine.  I think he'll let them in at least on a trial basis.   

WERA is good and specifies that the 1200 air cooled is for Buell. CCS failed there.

If CCS' "failure" means we can have grids with 30+ LW bikes, I'll take that anytime over WERA's "good" 5 bike grid. Just sayin'......

Quote from: SVbadguy on July 14, 2014, 06:52:30 PM
Rules should've never been opened up just to appease the Buell riders.

Applause for this comment and complete agreement.

Grid size has nothing to do with rules package.  CCS has a very strong Florida region and CCS has NJMP.

Quote from: Gino230 on August 06, 2014, 10:46:25 AM
If CCS' "failure" means we can have grids with 30+ LW bikes, I'll take that anytime over WERA's "good" 5 bike grid. Just sayin'......

Like I said, There were just 17 lightweight experts on the Formula 2 grid at VIR with WERA.  Almost all SVs.

And what was the biggest lightweight grid at Homestead?  10?    Lots of 5-6 grids there.....

Quote from: Swiest on August 06, 2014, 03:28:00 PM
Like I said, There were just 17 lightweight experts on the Formula 2 grid at VIR with WERA.  Almost all SVs.

And what was the biggest lightweight grid at Homestead?  10?    Lots of 5-6 grids there.....

The last two rounds (June / July) are traditionally the slowest of the year. Homestead was practically empty this last round. It's pushing 100 degrees and 100% humidity with 80% chance of showers this time of year. Lots of people are out of town or on summer vacations.

I'm no expert on other regions, but I would guess Florida is one of the stronger regions as far as turnout.

What exactly are we debating again here? Who has the biggest grids?

you mean who has "biggest grids" right? :)

It was coming down to, are these faster bikes pushing grids smaller or larger.  WERA is 90% SVs and they just had a good turn out.

I assume CCS sept VIR round is going to blow this past WERA round out of the water tho.  Gino you should show up. :)

It seems the CCS mid-atlantic region is the strongest club racing following in the country.  Not sure about exact numbers or what they have out in California.  Personally I have always believed that club racing in the US should be held under one governing body.  Same classes everywhere, that way its easy for guys to travel to different events and so on.  I don't the market is large enough to have several small racing bodies, even if they aren't directly competing with another in a particular region. I know its a pipe dream, but I think if club racing were more organized in the US, we could see a healthier sport and hence a healthier pro series(I'd say the ama is weaker than most club organizations at the moment...)

Mid-Atlantic CCS is definitely the strongest for lightweight grids. 

Grids out in cali are about 8-15 entries. Not near as healthy as they once were (30+)

Quote from: Jwhite316 on August 07, 2014, 01:30:47 PM
It seems the CCS mid-atlantic region is the strongest club racing following in the country.  Not sure about exact numbers or what they have out in California.  Personally I have always believed that club racing in the US should be held under one governing body.  Same classes everywhere, that way its easy for guys to travel to different events and so on.  I don't the market is large enough to have several small racing bodies, even if they aren't directly competing with another in a particular region. I know its a pipe dream, but I think if club racing were more organized in the US, we could see a healthier sport and hence a healthier pro series(I'd say the ama is weaker than most club organizations at the moment...)

I'd like to see class uniformity nation wide as well, but like you mentioned............ Pipe dreams

The biggest grids are in the Mid Atlantic region Just look at the results and you will see!
GT LIGHTS
Roebling 28 march
Jennings 12  april
Carolina 20   april
Homestead 10 may
NJMP 22  may
Summit point 19 may
VIR 24 june
homestead 11  june
summit point 10  june
NJMP  15   july        39 in  AM GTU!!!!! at njmp  july
homestead 9 july

Quote from: Swiest on August 07, 2014, 11:55:05 AM
you mean who has "biggest grids" right? :)

It was coming down to, are these faster bikes pushing grids smaller or larger.  WERA is 90% SVs and they just had a good turn out.

I assume CCS sept VIR round is going to blow this past WERA round out of the water tho.  Gino you should show up. :)

I would love to but right now I'm leading two championships and I don't have the resources to go to any more rounds.

I think next year I might travel to different CCS rounds / regions so I can learn new tracks. Maybe follow the TC schedule? Championships are nice but let's face it, this is a hobby, what's more important the "piece of wood" or having fun, improving, and having some new adventures?

Plus I'm parking the LW bike and moving on to MW for next year. So I'll be taking a shellacking anyway :)

Quote from: Gino230 on August 11, 2014, 11:09:48 AM
Championships are nice but let's face it, this is a hobby, what's more important the "piece of wood" or having fun, improving, and having some new adventures?

My wife tells me she is very proud of the wood I've gotten this year!!   :biggrin:  She knows how hard I have had to work at it!!

I thought you just need a pill for that type of wood?

It's always nice when you can get wood easily and without working too hard at it. Some people get bored when it's too easy to get wood, but now that I'm over 40, I will take it any way I can get it!

I put this together for a discussion on the WERA BBS, figured it's useful here as well:


https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/14705KhSB8X1YDeQzOyd78sFkLATMJSBpDWdviGZGYE8/edit?usp=sharing

Sv's have raced in D and clubman with WERA, they are just modified to be 500 or 600cc with use of sv400 crank.

So I heard one of the 565s did a 15.9 at Summit during the Team Challenge.  That's a pretty hot lap time for a lightweight bike....!

You mean "lightweight" bike.... :)

And then it was crashed in turn 3.

Quote from: SVbadguy on August 25, 2014, 03:20:12 PM
And then it was crashed in turn 3.

What's your point?

Quote from: MACOP1104 on August 25, 2014, 10:05:57 AM
So I heard one of the 565s did a 15.9 at Summit during the Team Challenge.  That's a pretty hot lap time for a lightweight bike....!

I dont see a 565 in the results from summit. Whos bike was it?

Pretty sure it was TOBC with Kratchet on board. :cheers:

TOBC with Brian Kcraget and Curtis Murray.   They DNF'd Bruce.  It was stupid fast and both TOBC riders say its insanely fast, not lightweight material.

I did say at Summit the 565 is not a lightweight bike as we have always determined bikes to be "lightweights" but that includes the monster air cooled 1000/1100 Ducatis in their different frame configurations.

CCS left TOBC with no choice. Build/Buy one of the Ducatis or build the GSXR565. TOBC has GSXRs with spares that interchange, so they decided the best plan would be to build the 565. And they did one hell of a job building it. Rick Matheny and the TOBC crew put together one of the best bikes I have ever had the chance to ride. As witnessed during practice and the race...it is fast. It does not have the grunt off the corners the Ducatis have but up top, it screams. I have a bit of learning curve on how to best ride it though. I was going ok on it but Curtis was a little faster than me.

And then I destroyed it.......and am sick to my stomach over it. I made a huge miscalculation on overtaking a much slower bike during the Team Challenge Race. On SVs, I don't catch many people so fast. I have raced over 3 years in the Endurance (WERA and CCS) with many, many laps at a winning pace and this is my first race crash in that time period. Still I can't believe I screwed up. We were out of the hunt in the race and I still messed up. I am so glad I didnt knock the lapper down and I am thankful I am not in the hospital. I thought I would never stop tumbling.

I think I am the definition of a Lightweight club racer. I have raced FZR400s, Aprilia Cup bikes, RS125s, TZ250s, RS250s, and of course years on the SVs. I want the Lightweight classes to be for "Lightweight" bikes. But I understand why CCS allows the Ducatis and now the 565......entries means $ for them. And if you look at the grids, it is working for them.

So, even though the 565 is not a "Lightweight" bike as we used to define it......if you outlaw it, they must also outlaw the big air cooled Ducatis. They are not "Lightweight" bikes either.

Brian Kcraget
TOBC Racing

Even though I get beat by them in every race, I'm all for it. They are only allowed in GP grids so you still have a few other classes that are just for the traditional lightweight bikes. I can tell ya that if I get good enough money for my 750 then the 565 will be my next bike and if someone asked me to race one then I'd say hell yeah!

Quote from: Swiest on August 26, 2014, 08:28:46 PM
TOBC with Brian Kcraget and Curtis Murray.   They DNF'd Bruce.  It was stupid fast and both TOBC riders say its insanely fast, not lightweight material.

Oh...CCS doesnt show a bike for them, just the results. According to the rule book that is a light weight bike. Perhaps all the other bikes are NOT light weight material any more  and and should be reclassified as something else, hmmm, Ultra light weight? Evolution....

I have no issue with the 565 in LW GP.  It's a GP class after all.  But for the team challenge I would like to see it be SBK rules.  565 and $$$ ducs are right there with the middleweights.  So that tells me they aren't lightweight material, they are middle weight material.

Swiest...remember earlier in the year when I said you might be surprised about the connections between my 565 and TOBC, but I did not respond with details?

Now that it's out in the open there are 2 connections.  The first is that my 565 was Curtis Murray's AMA SS bike until I bought it from him last year and told him what our plans were for it.  Thus the worlds first GSXR565 was born.

The second is I knew they were building a 565 I just didn't want to spill the beans. We modestly assisted in their build with parts and they assisted in ours with a very special part as well.  I'm hoping their experience with it might trickle back to me.

That's all, just connecting some dots.  And I might add that BK is now echoing all the reasons we built it.  Outlaw the AC Ducs and I'm happy to see the 565 merit only a footnote in the history of lightweight racing.

Yes I remember, but it was never a concern of mine because the bikes are bollocks. :)


Why the bikes were built doesn't need to be discussed, it's clear.



Performance index is what needs to be discussed.

Brian, any luck finding the lap timer and transponder in the bike somewhere?

Transponder was still hooked to the bike but beneath the triple. I didn't see it until I checked again later.

No on the laptimer. You can see it flying through the air in a pic posted to the TOBC facebook page. It is out there somewhere. I looked again at the end of the day walking from Turn 2 to Turn 3 including looking in the tires. It is the high dollar AIM GPS one......sucks big time. I did a lot of damage to that bike with it be the worse crash ever for me in terms of bike carnage.

And I am ok on the 565 not be legal in the Team Challenge. I prefer the SVs. However, the TOBC crew does not  agree with me. They do not like working on the SVs and have tired of them over the last few years. They now prefer the 565 since they are used to working on GSXR600s and 1000s. If they do not let the 565 run in the Team Challenge, they must not let the air cooled Ducatis. I do not think CCS will change the rules though..if you take out the Ducs and the 565s(with more being built as I type this)...this LW TC grid will be tiny. Summit had 31 Team Challenge teams...the least amount was in the LW class though as the rules stand today. 

I think issue with removing both 565 and Ducs is that you're removing people from the grid. This is why I propose the rules to be changed to SBK.  That still allows the production models.  So Hanig and Mavros can still run their Paul Smarts.  It removes the Hybrids and 565.  The guys who want to spend big $$$ can still do that with SBK rules. SV guys don't need to pee their pants over hybrids and 565.  IS there still a problem with crazy fast lightweights? Yes, but this at least minimizes it.

Since the big air cooled ducs are allowed in LW classes with claimed 95 hp, why not allow the new 696 monsters in too.  Claimed 80hp from Ducati.

Quote from: Capitalview on September 07, 2014, 01:40:07 PM
Since the big air cooled ducs are allowed in LW classes with claimed 95 hp, why not allow the new 696 monsters in too.  Claimed 80hp from Ducati.

What do you mean allow it.  The rules don't restrict it from LW.

Yes it does.  It says "Twin cylinder, liquid cooled, non-desmodromic valves, up to 800cc"

The new 696 is liquid cooled.

Unless you know something I don't, it's air-cooled.   The Ducati website even says air-cooled. 

I think he's confusing it with the new 821 monster which is liquid cooled. the 696 is air cooled and I highly doubt it actually makes 80hp.

Wow, I don't know what I was thinking.  I am losing it today...

Quote from: Swiest on September 07, 2014, 08:31:49 PM
I think he's confusing it with the new 821 monster which is liquid cooled. the 696 is air cooled and I highly doubt it actually makes 80hp.

80hp at the brochure at most...

That bike/engine doesn't belong in LW. It's a de-stroked 848 and it has way too much potential.

It's not legal anyway.   

just curious but what standards and regulations are in place on CCS's side between staff and officials to ensure that these bikes are indeed 565cc's vs people just entering a 600 that is set on "C" mode and printing out a "build sheet/fake receipt" and banking on the fact they wont get protested....most of these built 565's are producing more HP that a OEM 600 motor does....also is there a way to check the cc's of these engines track side if one were to be protested? i would think a 450cc  build (deactivation of one complete cylinder) would be more reasonable in making it a bike that would easily be verified and a more competitive bike against the lesser machines...

Normally, the racer's claim of eligibility is taken as good until there is a reason to suspect otherwise.  It's the honor system until you're called out by a protest and proven (or admit) otherwise.  The protest system has provisions for how far a bike has to be torn down to demonstrate it is class eligible, in this case you'd be taking the head off, measuring bore and stroke directly.  If you're racing against these bikes and think one is cheating, put up the protest fee and get them torn down.  If you're right, you loose nothing, if you're wrong, they get the fee to compensate for new gaskets, labor, etc caused by the teardown.

I think the penalty should be increased for a failed protest to something like removal of all season points, a public apology at the riders meeting, and possibly a flogging.

Not saying people do cheat, but if you honestly are... you are a very bad person.

There are other penalties associated with failing a protest, I just don't have my rule book in front of me.

so it doesnt seem like there is any kind of protocol for CCS to verify these machines....i guess the beauty of it is no one in thier right mind gonna tear down thier $8k motor build  to the rods (to verify lenght for stroke measurement) for $500 so once they forfit the 1st protest any/every weekend after that you can re protest them over and over with the same $500....i think its a great concept and i remember reading about the gsxr450's that were gonna be built for this cause to make a superior bike LW legal..which would be easliy verified by not only the sound of the engine but also visually from the lack of 4 spark plugs (or being all hooked up for that manner) and make for really good racing....just saying if there is going to be the allowance of these machines that look like a 600, sound like a 600, perform like a 600...there should be a procedure in place with CCS officials to verify these bikes are indeed 565cc's....also how accurate is the equipment used to verify measurement during a teardown (which is opening a totally different can of worms if there is a "margin of error %" involved with inspection)? as 565.000000001 cc's is not 565cc's correct?

You don't need to go to the rods to verify stroke.  Rods don't alter stroke.  Take the head off and roll the motor over, find TDC, note how far from the top the edge of the piston is.  Find BDC, note how far from the top the edge of the piston is.  Subtract the TDC measurement from the BDC measurement and you have the stroke of the motor.  Next measure the bore.  Simple math tells you the displacement from there, the length of the rods will have zero impact on those numbers.

I thought they did have a bore and stroke tool that just slipped down through the spark plug hole. Not 100% accurate I'm sure, but accurate enough to see if displacements are reasonable.

I will donate to who ever wants to protest one. :)


Jason, you're not gonna get CCS to verify these 565's before they race. Just won't happen.

Why can inline 4's be 565cc but three cylinders only 500cc? Doesn't make sense if in middleweight 675 is limit..

Three cylinder, liquid cooled, up to 500cc
Four cylinder, liquid cooled, up to 565cc

This is the same discussion that's had every season. (Not that I mind something new to read on the forum) :) This is club racing and tech inspection can't be tearing down every bike on a whim. That's why the protest system is in place. If you feel someone is cheating, put up the $$ and have the heads removed. Not sure about other races, but the Daytona 200 it's specifically stated that failure to allow your machine to be measured is a $1000 fine and some type of suspension.

Also don't expect immediate gratification- the rules state you're allowed to put off the teardown until the end of the day's racing. Last one I saw the head being taken off of was Barrett Long's 800SS in Homestead. And it was legal. In 15 years I've never seen one upheld, actually. Most protests are lost, or the person withdraws.

I was all set to protest the Buells at Daytona back in '08 for the LWSS race. They didn't show up to tech and in the interest of sportsmanship, I asked someone to go get them. When they did show up, the airbox was not stock so we never got as far as the millennium cylinders....didn't have to go there.

I thought I remembered reading somewhere that CCS had a tool that could slip in the spark plug hole and measure bore and stroke- but that was at a MW race, not sure if they have it in FL. Also only works when the spark plug hole is at the exact center of the head- not offset or angled in any way.

Same reason twins are allowed up to 850? And singles unlimited?

you don't get it gino.

In middleweight . 600cc 4cyl, 675cc 3cyl.
in lightweight gp.  565cc 4cyl, 500cc 3cyl.  <- that doesn't make sense. Why would 4 cyl get higher displacement?

500cc triple is good for lightweight.  4 cylinder should be 450cc which is good for lightweight.  That's AFM's ruling.

Ahhh I see what you're saying.

I think it was written that way with specific bikes in mind- i.e. punching out an FZR 400 to 565.

What bike tho?

Yep Gino rule was mostly for the FZR 400.When you make it to 565 you will have anywhere from 85-100hp.I do know an FZR 600 with lots of mods and has 97hp they race in WERA and win races.At summit point they only do 23's which would be mid pack in expert CCS LW.

I say get rid of the GP classes all together.  That way this whole discussion is moot.

I love the word moot!

Moot!  Moot!  Moot!  Moot!

Just curious if this was new for MCRA this year?

6.2.2. Light weight GT displacement limits are absolute and are set as follows:
LIGHTWEIGHT GT (Amateur & Expert Divisions)
1. Single cylinder, unlimited displacement
2. Two stroke, liquid cooled, up to 450cc
3. Two stroke, air cooled, unlimited displacement
4. Twin cylinder, air cooled, up to 1210cc
5. Twin cylinder, liquid cooled, non-desmodromic valves, up to 800cc
6. Four cylinder, liquid cooled, up to 565cc
7. Four cylinder, air cooled, 2 valve, up to 750cc
NOTE: BMW HP2 machines and destroked 600cc inline 4 cylinder bikes are excluded from the Lightweight class.

Wow - good on them.

Smart move. Hopefully CCS follows.

i am all for the cripple triples (450's).....i think a deactivated cylinder inline 4 would be great for LW classes....easy to verify (visually and by sound) and would be in the 80 hp range (but still offer nicer features like better brakes and wider rear rim for tire selection and make for great racing).....but the 565's just offer it being too easy to just enter a 600 and no one is the wiser and the odds of protest are low...i would think that winning on a bimota or a 565 against LW bikes would feel about as rewarding as hitting a home run off a T-ball stand....

Nonsense. This is racing. Winning on a legal bike is winning. Period.

Besides, how many bikes are we worrying about here? 2? 3? The guys riding them are going to win no matter what they're on....

The lightweight classes used to be the place for people to race on a budget. Seems like they are more expensive now then racing a 600 or 1000

What I don't really understand is the problem with destroking, boring out, changing engines or anything you like in a GT or Grand Prix class. Isn't that supposed to be the point of those classes? Aren't they supposed to be builder's classes so you can spend money and try different things? "Grand Prix machines are unrestricted in all areas" as long as they meet the displacement limits. For Supersport and Superbike it's obviously a whole different story and they should be much more limited.

For MCRA they are a small race organization with a limited number of classes so I can see why it would make sense to limit some of the modifications even though their classes are "GT" classes. "6.2. LIGHTWEIGHT GT – Lightweight GT machines are unrestricted in all areas as long as they meet the standards of Section 5." However now you can't destroke a 600...so it's not really unrestricted in all areas.

Am I understanding the thinking behind the class structure?

Quote from: ahastings on February 16, 2015, 07:51:20 PM
The lightweight classes used to be the place for people to race on a budget. Seems like they are more expensive now then racing a 600 or 1000

This.


I pitched rule change to go SB rules for Team Challenge, at least for GTL as a way to try and promote it to fill the grids; that 565's didn't fit the spirit.  I know numerous others did too.


It was denied, I inquired why, and got a generic response of 'TC is GP rules'. I was honestly hoping for at least a response with some meat on it, but so be it.


Apparently the idea of not doing twin sprints and a TC on the same weekend (Carolina MP) as well as shuffling the schedule for TC on Saturday to avoid down time and bolster the grids (a great Mazz idea) apparently is also thrown to the side.


I personally feel that club racing needs at least a perceived budget friendly safe haven in order to grow.  Racers are not interested in participation awards and it's hard to recruit new racers if they think the only way to go is spend a lot of dough.   It's also hard to to justify traveling long distances for for 1 12-15 mile long SS sprint race.


I guess the answer is that it is what it is, don't like it race another class or org.


I'm sure it's a fun project to build, but why not do a MW GP and see how you stand up to the 1000's

Quote from: Gino230 on February 14, 2015, 05:42:02 PM
I thought I remembered reading somewhere that CCS had a tool that could slip in the spark plug hole and measure bore and stroke- but that was at a MW race, not sure if they have it in FL. Also only works when the spark plug hole is at the exact center of the head- not offset or angled in any way.

It's my understanding that this is the tool that was presented at Road America in 2014, when a 565 was questioned as to LW legality.

I do not know if CCS has/owns a tool like this or has one available to tech in general.

There are plenty of budget classes. LWSS, ULSB, even MWSS. We are talking about GT / GP Classes here.

Making the team challenge Superbike rules is a totally different discussion. I don't get why everyone is asking for changes but the formula clearly works....grids are strong and getting stronger.

Your grids in Florida are growing with expensive Ducati's.  Grid growing with expensive bikes isn't good for the majority of the racers. 

I don't race GT or GP classes, but am still going fight that the 565 doesn't fit.  The 120hp duc hybrids fit better than 565s.

I don't have a problem with TC being GP rules.  The problem are the the bikes that fit in the class because of the GP ruling.

Quote from: Gino230 on February 18, 2015, 12:34:10 PM
There are plenty of budget classes. LWSS, ULSB, even MWSS. We are talking about GT / GP Classes here.

Making the team challenge Superbike rules is a totally different discussion. I don't get why everyone is asking for changes but the formula clearly works....grids are strong and getting stronger.

I dont think allowing high dollar exotics in endurance helps the gtl grids. for each one you add probably lose as many or more that know they cant be competitive with true lightweight bike. I understand allowing them in gp classes but not endurance.

Quote from: Gino230 on February 16, 2015, 05:05:07 PM
Nonsense. This is racing. Winning on a legal bike is winning. Period.

Besides, how many bikes are we worrying about here? 2? 3? The guys riding them are going to win no matter what they're on....

Who?  Names please.

Quote from: ahastings on February 18, 2015, 02:46:55 PM
I dont think allowing high dollar exotics in endurance helps the gtl grids. for each one you add probably lose as many or more that know they cant be competitive with true lightweight bike. I understand allowing them in gp classes but not endurance.

That hasn't proven to be true thus far.

Quote from: LWT Racer on February 18, 2015, 12:42:37 PM
Your grids in Florida are growing with expensive Ducati's.  Grid growing with expensive bikes isn't good for the majority of the racers. 

I don't race GT or GP classes, but am still going fight that the 565 doesn't fit.  The 120hp duc hybrids fit better than 565s.

The majority of the bikes on the LW grid are Ducs, but not hybrids. Yes, they're $20K for a new high end build. So is a new R6 Superbike from Graves.

Show up in Middleweight Superbike with a $5000 special and you won't be competitive either. The only people this is not good for is the people hoping to run Superbike or GP classes on a budget machine. Otherwise it's no different than any other class.

All of this complaining is moot, the rules are not going to change. The dreaded machines you're worried about have failed to dominate despite all of the complaining so.... Anyway I'm out of this discussion, I'm racing MW these days.

You keep saying you're out, but yet you keep coming back.

Quote from: Gino230 on February 20, 2015, 11:32:51 PM
. The dreaded machines you're worried about have failed to dominate despite all of the complaining so....

Check homestead results.....

Listen Sam, don't try to confuse Floridians with facts.... Love that LW Superbike Expert race... lots of SVs there.....

Quote from: Gino230 on February 20, 2015, 11:32:51 PM
All of this complaining is moot, the rules are not going to change. The dreaded machines you're worried about have failed to dominate despite all of the complaining so.... Anyway I'm out of this discussion, I'm racing MW these days.

The dreaded machines have failed to dominate because they are few and far between, and the best riders aren't riding them. 

SV's are Dominate in alot of races in the Mid Atlantic and And Atlantic region.Very fast riders and high cornering speed.

Exacrly.  Put that rider on a DB5 and what'a he going to do?   Mazz, Kcraget, Xavier?   

Quote from: apriliaman on February 23, 2015, 08:12:50 PM
SV's are Dominate in alot of races in the Mid Atlantic and And Atlantic region.Very fast riders and high cornering speed.

I been running LWT on and off depending the season since 79. I moved back to Middleweight a few seasons ago. Best thing I ever did. SV is a joke anymore for Expert down here unless you are 100 lbs.

After reading as much as I can about this topic, I was curious if there was a definitive approval from CCS that the so called cripple triples are allowed in the Lightweight classes.

Yes, cripple triples (gsxr750 with cylinder disabled = 565cc ) is legal for LWGP and GTL.   But it will get crushed by a destroked 600 or good air-cooled Duc.

Quote from: LWT Racer on January 09, 2016, 07:21:19 PM
Yes, cripple triples (gsxr750 with cylinder disabled = 565cc ) is legal for LWGP and GTL.   But it will get crushed by a destroked 600 or good air-cooled Duc.

I would like to see that play out. Do you think if one could get a 100hp out of a cripple it could do battle with the Duc?

Quote from: Wolfie109 on January 09, 2016, 08:50:41 AM
After reading as much as I can about this topic, I was curious if there was a definitive approval from CCS that the so called cripple triples are allowed in the Lightweight classes.

Triple regardless of build method, factory, destroked/bored Triumph/MV, deactivated cylinder 4 etc limited to 500cc liquid cooled 4 stroke.

Quote from: Eric Kelcher on January 12, 2016, 06:36:36 PM
Triple regardless of build method, factory, destroked/bored Triumph/MV, deactivated cylinder 4 etc limited to 500cc liquid cooled 4 stroke.

What displacement can a  de-strocked 4 cylinder be for LW classes?

If you want to run a 600 then run it in the Middleweight class where it belongs.....

I can't believe this conversation is still going on. I remember caring about this a few years back for about a day. Personally, though I run an SV and in theory would be put at a disadvantage if the 565 becomes legal, I just don't really care, it's CLUB RACING! And on that same note, it's CLUB RACING, so why go through the effort of taking a perfectly good 600 and detuning it so you can race Lightweight. Seriously, that is one of the most foolish things I've heard in a while. If you want to run a 600 than just man up and race it in middleweight. If you want to race lightweight than simply buy any damn SV650 and run it. It's not like there is a shortage of SV650 bikes around.

Everyone is overthinking this and I'm not sure why. Just buy the bike that is designed for the class you intend on running and SHUT UP AND RIDE!

That is all. Good Day!

Quote from: kvanengen on January 20, 2016, 10:58:21 AM
I can't believe this conversation is still going on. I remember caring about this a few years back for about a day. Personally, though I run an SV and in theory would be put at a disadvantage if the 565 becomes legal, I just don't really care, it's CLUB RACING! And on that same note, it's CLUB RACING, so why go through the effort of taking a perfectly good 600 and detuning it so you can race Lightweight. Seriously, that is one of the most foolish things I've heard in a while. If you want to run a 600 than just man up and race it in middleweight. If you want to race lightweight than simply buy any damn SV650 and run it. It's not like there is a shortage of SV650 bikes around.

Everyone is overthinking this and I'm not sure why. Just buy the bike that is designed for the class you intend on running and SHUT UP AND RIDE!

That is all. Good Day!

This from the guy with THE most over engineered SV on the planet. Ya, it's club racing.

Quote from: bruce71198 on January 11, 2016, 02:37:27 PM
I would like to see that play out. Do you think if one could get a 100hp out of a cripple it could do battle with the Duc?

No, a good Duc will crush a cripple tripple.  Those Ducs are so insanely fast when built.....

Haha well played, Bruce. If you know my equipment, you know damn well that the bike I ride in most races is nothing special. It's not the lightest or fastest out there. On the other hand, yes, my SB is a wicked SOB. But again, I hardly ride it. In fact, I rode it in two races last year. Let me take this even further. The motor I ran until the last race weekend was bone stock. I bought for $250 with 30k miles on it.

I like butter. I like it on bread, popcorn, and especially blueberry waffles.

Sometimes, I even just eat plain old butter, by itself. Just a little bit, though, not even a full pat or anything like a spoonful, oh no.

 :pop:

Quote from: Eric Kelcher on January 12, 2016, 06:36:36 PM
Triple regardless of build method, factory, destroked/bored Triumph/MV, deactivated cylinder 4 etc limited to 500cc liquid cooled 4 stroke.

This got me thinking, why is the displacement cap for a liquid cooled 4 cylinder MORE than that of a liquid cooled 3 cylinder in LWGP


I have no horse in this race (a good thing since it would have been beaten to death by now) just curious.

Quote from: LWT Racer on July 13, 2014, 10:13:16 AM
I think saying performance advantage is bad wording. There are a ton of bikes now in the lightweight class that have similar performance a better question would be "at what point is a bike no longer a "lightweight" bike?" 

110hp+ is not lightweight.  That is middleweight performance.
160mph+ is not lightweight. That is middleweight.

I'm not saying those things because I want the SV to remain the top of the lightweight food chain.  I have no issue if another bike, say the FZ-07 is actually good, take over the crown.  I would love for there to be 4-5 different makes of 650/700 twins out there. 

Yes, the rules have been in place for awhile.  But you have to look at what the lightweight class is about and it's not HP race.  565/Big Ducs are hardly LW bikes anymore.  They have created this point and shoot racing in the LWT field which just shouldn't be.   I'm not saying all the Ducati's are guilty.  I don't want them outlawed, I like the bikes.  But the 1100's should be Thunderbike and thats it.

I think one rule change should be that the GT Lights (for team challenge and sprint) should be Superbike rules, not GP.   This won't happen but it would help.

I want a 565!! :biggrin:

Quote from: britx303 on June 26, 2018, 06:33:41 PM
I want a 565!! :biggrin:

The elimination of "vintage" classes and replacement with "Classic" adds in interesting addition to this thread. Build your 565 from a 2006 or earlier R6 or Gixxer600 and run it in Lightweight Classic. Then you will have four races in LW that you can run your 565 in. I guess Vintage did not attract enough riders to make it financially feasible for CCS. I bought a nice FZR400 and built it to race LW vintage.
I raced it once and two weeks later had a crash on my other bike that I was trying to sell riding less than 100 ft to tech not wearing a helmet. Left in a helicopter. ALWAYS wear your helmet when riding. I would say most riders do not wear their helmet to tech. Including me. Stupid stupid stupid.
Away from the track from that injury for a year but was planning on a comeback of sorts at Daytona on the FZR. New rules made the decision to try car racing easy.
Pondering it though as my 2005 Bimota/Ducati air cooled 1100 twin would be legal in Classic MW by the new silly rules. Oh....I would have to take off the BST Carbon wheels and put the stock OZ mags back on.
Not gonna do that either. I supported the Vintage attempt by CCS when they introduced it. But 2006 isn't vintage anything.
But from an income to CCS standpoint there are plenty of 2006 and earlier bikes running modern classes already at the track so for another class to race the numbers may work out better for the club.
See you guys at the track but will most likely be spectating.
Back on topic: The 565 rule, I believe was made so FZR400s could be competitive with the onslaught of SVs dominating LW. I remember one that was over 100hp but not always reliable.
But the rule has been on the books for a long time. Why it is there is irrelevant. The folks who figured out they could fit in the class legally with a destroked 600 are racing within the rules. Very creative.
I have heard some bad mouthing about them and it is uncalled for. Rulebook interpretation and maximization of the rules is part of racing. Cheating is not. OK it is but it should not be. 565s are not cheaters. Get over it.
If enough people approached CCS and wanted the rule changed I am certain it would be considered.
"CCS may refactor any bike...." But in the meantime have some respect for the creative builds.
Cheers!

Quote from: Grady on December 11, 2018, 07:19:42 PM
The elimination of "vintage" classes and replacement with "Classic" adds in interesting addition to this thread. Build your 565 from a 2006 or earlier R6 or Gixxer600 and run it in Lightweight Classic. Then you will have four races in LW that you can run your 565 in. I guess Vintage did not attract enough riders to make it financially feasible for CCS. I bought a nice FZR400 and built it to race LW vintage.
I raced it once and two weeks later had a crash on my other bike that I was trying to sell riding less than 100 ft to tech not wearing a helmet. Left in a helicopter. ALWAYS wear your helmet when riding. I would say most riders do not wear their helmet to tech. Including me. Stupid stupid stupid.
Away from the track from that injury for a year but was planning on a comeback of sorts at Daytona on the FZR. New rules made the decision to try car racing easy.
Pondering it though as my 2005 Bimota/Ducati air cooled 1100 twin would be legal in Classic MW by the new silly rules. Oh....I would have to take off the BST Carbon wheels and put the stock OZ mags back on.
Not gonna do that either. I supported the Vintage attempt by CCS when they introduced it. But 2006 isn't vintage anything.
But from an income to CCS standpoint there are plenty of 2006 and earlier bikes running modern classes already at the track so for another class to race the numbers may work out better for the club.
See you guys at the track but will most likely be spectating.
Back on topic: The 565 rule, I believe was made so FZR400s could be competitive with the onslaught of SVs dominating LW. I remember one that was over 100hp but not always reliable.
But the rule has been on the books for a long time. Why it is there is irrelevant. The folks who figured out they could fit in the class legally with a destroked 600 are racing within the rules. Very creative.
I have heard some bad mouthing about them and it is uncalled for. Rulebook interpretation and maximization of the rules is part of racing. Cheating is not. OK it is but it should not be. 565s are not cheaters. Get over it.
If enough people approached CCS and wanted the rule changed I am certain it would be considered.
"CCS may refactor any bike...." But in the meantime have some respect for the creative builds.
Cheers!

FYI De-stroked 565 are not legal in Lightweight Classic
There are only 2 lightweight classes that a destroked 565 is currently legal for Lightweight GP and GTLights, guess there is third if you are over 40 as F40Light follows LGP rules

Thanks Eric.
I must have overlooked where in the Lightweight Classic specs it was pointed out that destroking a model year eligible bike was not legal.I'll look again but am glad to hear it. But a built up FZR400 to a 565 would be correct? Otherwise why was that displacement added to the class when going from LW Vintage to LW Classic? Regardless, I am not spending the money on my very cherry FZR400 to make it a 565 so it will be more competitive in the LW Classic class. Not sure what I will do with it.
And this highlighted in the rulebook: Includes all carbureted machines through 2006 model year and all fuel               injected machines through 2002 model year. So my comment above about my Bimota being legal in MW Classic is in error. It is fuel injected.

As a part-time vintage racer I will admit that I ain't gonna complain about vintage going away. It would have been nicer if all the vintage WERA racers in the mid-atlantic region would have actually gridded up, since most don't want to drive to georgia once or twice a month just to do a regional. Thank you to CCS for trying to do something with vintage anyways. The classic still deserves a longer lifeline though......... :jammin: