PDA

View Full Version : new rule book



anthony c smith
10-12-2003, 04:58 PM
Hello BOD, Just want to let you guys know you are doing one heck of a job for the organization. I was also wandering if any of you knew when the new rule book is scheduled to be updated on the home page? I was unable to track one down @ MSR and have some home work to do before next season. Thanks, Anthony Smith.

anthony c smith
10-12-2003, 04:58 PM
Hello BOD, Just want to let you guys know you are doing one heck of a job for the organization. I was also wandering if any of you knew when the new rule book is scheduled to be updated on the home page? I was unable to track one down @ MSR and have some home work to do before next season. Thanks, Anthony Smith.

anthony c smith
10-13-2003, 08:32 PM
BUMP

anthony c smith
10-13-2003, 08:32 PM
BUMP

Nancy Selleck
10-13-2003, 08:43 PM
Bryan Norton is working feverishly to get the rulebook finished and the plan is to put it up on the website asap (next week or so).

I feel safe in saying that this is the earliest that any 2004 rulebook will be available to any racing organization in the country.

But, I'm sure you understand that he doesn't want to make it available to everyone until he feels as though it's ready.

Bryan has put a lot of time and effort into this project and he deserves a lot of credit.

Nancy Selleck
10-13-2003, 08:43 PM
Bryan Norton is working feverishly to get the rulebook finished and the plan is to put it up on the website asap (next week or so).

I feel safe in saying that this is the earliest that any 2004 rulebook will be available to any racing organization in the country.

But, I'm sure you understand that he doesn't want to make it available to everyone until he feels as though it's ready.

Bryan has put a lot of time and effort into this project and he deserves a lot of credit.

Blake
11-03-2003, 06:09 PM
Kudos to Brian for assembling the new rule book. That is a task far more involved than virtually all of us can truly appreciate I am sure.

I do have some suggestions from one of the CMRA's soon to be many Buell riders...

A stock Buell 1200cc engine actually displaces 1203cc's. Can you therefore bump up the displacement limits to 1250cc for the applicable air-cooled twins class limits, it would give a margin for slight overbore and such?

Why no fair consideration as before in the 2003 rules for the air-cooled, two-valve, pushrod engines?

Anywhere an SV650 based machine is eligible, the old 1999 and earlier air cooled Buell 1200's and the new XB9 (984cc) Buells and 800cc air cooled Ducs should also be eligible, no? Specifically...

C Superstock, C Superbike:
Increase displacement for 4-stroke air cooled twins to 1350cc (same as the old AMA Pro Thunder class with Duc 748's going up against Buell 1350cc Pro Thunder machines. The Ducs won.)


D Superbike: The SV650 is eligible but 4-stroke air-cooled twins are limited to 883cc. Please increase that to 984cc for two valve pushrod aircooled and to 800cc for two valve desmo aircooled. This will allow our XB9 racing members to join in on the fun in D-Superbike.

Lightweight Twins
The SV650 based machines are permitted up to 700cc and superbike rules where the Buells are limited to Superstock rules. That seems fair for the 1203cc versions of the Buell XB line (XB12R, XB12S), but not for the 984cc versions (XB9R, XB9S) or the older (pre 2000) 1203cc Buell models.

Formula 2
There is no deliniation between air or water-cooled twins. The displacement limit is simply "up to 70cc 4-stroke twins". Seems that is for the water cooled twins and the air cooled, pushrod displacement limit should be 1203cc.

This is America right? Let's give the only American sport bike a fair chance in the CMRA. If we can do that, we might be able to get Buell to kick in some contingency or even prize money.

Thanks for your consideration,

Blake

Blake
11-03-2003, 06:09 PM
Kudos to Brian for assembling the new rule book. That is a task far more involved than virtually all of us can truly appreciate I am sure.

I do have some suggestions from one of the CMRA's soon to be many Buell riders...

A stock Buell 1200cc engine actually displaces 1203cc's. Can you therefore bump up the displacement limits to 1250cc for the applicable air-cooled twins class limits, it would give a margin for slight overbore and such?

Why no fair consideration as before in the 2003 rules for the air-cooled, two-valve, pushrod engines?

Anywhere an SV650 based machine is eligible, the old 1999 and earlier air cooled Buell 1200's and the new XB9 (984cc) Buells and 800cc air cooled Ducs should also be eligible, no? Specifically...

C Superstock, C Superbike:
Increase displacement for 4-stroke air cooled twins to 1350cc (same as the old AMA Pro Thunder class with Duc 748's going up against Buell 1350cc Pro Thunder machines. The Ducs won.)


D Superbike: The SV650 is eligible but 4-stroke air-cooled twins are limited to 883cc. Please increase that to 984cc for two valve pushrod aircooled and to 800cc for two valve desmo aircooled. This will allow our XB9 racing members to join in on the fun in D-Superbike.

Lightweight Twins
The SV650 based machines are permitted up to 700cc and superbike rules where the Buells are limited to Superstock rules. That seems fair for the 1203cc versions of the Buell XB line (XB12R, XB12S), but not for the 984cc versions (XB9R, XB9S) or the older (pre 2000) 1203cc Buell models.

Formula 2
There is no deliniation between air or water-cooled twins. The displacement limit is simply "up to 70cc 4-stroke twins". Seems that is for the water cooled twins and the air cooled, pushrod displacement limit should be 1203cc.

This is America right? Let's give the only American sport bike a fair chance in the CMRA. If we can do that, we might be able to get Buell to kick in some contingency or even prize money.

Thanks for your consideration,

Blake

nicktulloh
11-05-2003, 10:43 AM
Re: 2.2 - rear number plates

I went through this earlier this year and was told that the Ducati 996 vented tail section was legal for number display.

It looks like it (and almost every other bike besides maybe the TL1000) will be illegal next year. I'm referring to the requirement for a flat or vertical 8X10 surface ".. not wrapping around onto the top of the seat."

To remove the subjectivity at tech (and those guys do a great job, don't get me wrong) could we get some specifically acceptable configurations (stock GSXR tail, stock and race 996/996/748 tail etc etc)?

Thanks much.

Nick

nicktulloh
11-05-2003, 10:43 AM
Re: 2.2 - rear number plates

I went through this earlier this year and was told that the Ducati 996 vented tail section was legal for number display.

It looks like it (and almost every other bike besides maybe the TL1000) will be illegal next year. I'm referring to the requirement for a flat or vertical 8X10 surface ".. not wrapping around onto the top of the seat."

To remove the subjectivity at tech (and those guys do a great job, don't get me wrong) could we get some specifically acceptable configurations (stock GSXR tail, stock and race 996/996/748 tail etc etc)?

Thanks much.

Nick

Blake
11-17-2003, 09:34 PM
Can we get some comments back please?

I'd really like to see the displacement and class rules revised to give at least the new 984cc and 1200cc Buells a place to compete competitively.

Right now rules seem skewed against the Buells.

Can we please get them revised to include the same type of comprehensive displacement limits as we had with the CCS rules?

At least as a starting poing and like I posted above, albiet rather clumsily, anywhere an SV650/SV700 is allowed, the Buell XB9 984cc air-cooled, pushrod twin ought to be allowed.

Also... Are the GT classes gone?

Blake
11-17-2003, 09:34 PM
Can we get some comments back please?

I'd really like to see the displacement and class rules revised to give at least the new 984cc and 1200cc Buells a place to compete competitively.

Right now rules seem skewed against the Buells.

Can we please get them revised to include the same type of comprehensive displacement limits as we had with the CCS rules?

At least as a starting poing and like I posted above, albiet rather clumsily, anywhere an SV650/SV700 is allowed, the Buell XB9 984cc air-cooled, pushrod twin ought to be allowed.

Also... Are the GT classes gone?

Chuck Ergle
11-17-2003, 10:37 PM
The 2004 rulebook is a done deal and is being printed. Since I have been on the board, I have come to the realization that somebody, somewhere, will be disadvantaged or disappointed, no matter what we do or what decision we make. Minor tweaks can be accomodated during the race weekend at the discretion of the race director (if you show up with it, a class will be found for it to be competitive in, but we ain't going to create one just so you can win a trophy or get money). Also, the GT races aren't gone, we've just changed back to the Red River Challenge format (I think it's in the online version of the rulebook, posted on the website). My advice to everyone is to closely read the rulebook when it comes out in print and they receive it, and make comments, in the appropriate venue, for changes to be made for the 2005 version.

Chuck Ergle
11-17-2003, 10:37 PM
The 2004 rulebook is a done deal and is being printed. Since I have been on the board, I have come to the realization that somebody, somewhere, will be disadvantaged or disappointed, no matter what we do or what decision we make. Minor tweaks can be accomodated during the race weekend at the discretion of the race director (if you show up with it, a class will be found for it to be competitive in, but we ain't going to create one just so you can win a trophy or get money). Also, the GT races aren't gone, we've just changed back to the Red River Challenge format (I think it's in the online version of the rulebook, posted on the website). My advice to everyone is to closely read the rulebook when it comes out in print and they receive it, and make comments, in the appropriate venue, for changes to be made for the 2005 version.

Bryan Norton
11-18-2003, 08:30 AM
Where it stated :1200cc" for air cooled twins, I bumped it to 1250cc.

There are other sections where a Buell is explicitly allowed.
I didn't want Buells in every class the SV is allowed in.
Buell claims 100 Hp stock. The SV is/was right at 69Hp stock. The Buell actually has a lot of potental. although I haven't seen anyone here locally challenge the faster SVs yet, someone will soon enough.

Bryan Norton
11-18-2003, 08:30 AM
Where it stated :1200cc" for air cooled twins, I bumped it to 1250cc.

There are other sections where a Buell is explicitly allowed.
I didn't want Buells in every class the SV is allowed in.
Buell claims 100 Hp stock. The SV is/was right at 69Hp stock. The Buell actually has a lot of potental. although I haven't seen anyone here locally challenge the faster SVs yet, someone will soon enough.

Blake
11-19-2003, 01:25 PM
Thanks for your considerate reply Chuck and Bryan.

I don't think my concerns fall into the category of a lone dissappointed racer or as one looking to gain an advantage in the rulebook. I'm simply seeking parity and the opportunity for fellow Buell racers to compete on a level playing field and to be included where applicable. Last year the XB9 Buells were appropriately classed as lightweights. That seems to have changed in some of the new classes in the completely revised class structure for 2004.

As to my request to allow Buells to compete in all SV classes, I was speaking strictly of the Buell XB9 machines which are 984cc; they are optimistically advertised at 91 BHP at the crank with a wet weight of 455LB. In stock form they average between 72 and 78 HP at the rear wheel. Is it reasonable to expect them to compete against the 600cc IL4's? The 69 HP figure referenced by Bryan for the SV650 is at the rear wheel. The SV has a significant advantage in lighter weight which makes the two bikes very evenly matched. Surely we can make room for an American Sport Bike to compete against the squadron of dominate SV's? From what I've seen, the SV's have ZERO competition other than the odd two stroke entry. I agree, the Buells do have a LOT of potential. It seems to me that the Ducs made out well in one aspect, no more differentiation between desmo or pushrod or OHC for that matter in the air cooled engine descriptions.


If we want to attract more people, shouldn't we make an effort to fairly class all bikes? The Buells are gaining in popularity, would be a shame to scare them away due to biased displacement limits. Me, I race just for the fun of it, but I hope to see more talented entries on a bigger variety of machines in the future.

Thanks again for all your hard work. I'll take another look at the rules and if I have any comments I'll convene with my fellow CMRA Buell racers for discussion and pass our suggestions on to you.

Blake

PS: Though it's probably already been explained, would someone please tell me what the reason behind the completely new class and rules structure for 2004? I mean I know we ditched CCS, but did we have to ditch the rules so drastically? Just curious. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Blake
11-19-2003, 01:25 PM
Thanks for your considerate reply Chuck and Bryan.

I don't think my concerns fall into the category of a lone dissappointed racer or as one looking to gain an advantage in the rulebook. I'm simply seeking parity and the opportunity for fellow Buell racers to compete on a level playing field and to be included where applicable. Last year the XB9 Buells were appropriately classed as lightweights. That seems to have changed in some of the new classes in the completely revised class structure for 2004.

As to my request to allow Buells to compete in all SV classes, I was speaking strictly of the Buell XB9 machines which are 984cc; they are optimistically advertised at 91 BHP at the crank with a wet weight of 455LB. In stock form they average between 72 and 78 HP at the rear wheel. Is it reasonable to expect them to compete against the 600cc IL4's? The 69 HP figure referenced by Bryan for the SV650 is at the rear wheel. The SV has a significant advantage in lighter weight which makes the two bikes very evenly matched. Surely we can make room for an American Sport Bike to compete against the squadron of dominate SV's? From what I've seen, the SV's have ZERO competition other than the odd two stroke entry. I agree, the Buells do have a LOT of potential. It seems to me that the Ducs made out well in one aspect, no more differentiation between desmo or pushrod or OHC for that matter in the air cooled engine descriptions.


If we want to attract more people, shouldn't we make an effort to fairly class all bikes? The Buells are gaining in popularity, would be a shame to scare them away due to biased displacement limits. Me, I race just for the fun of it, but I hope to see more talented entries on a bigger variety of machines in the future.

Thanks again for all your hard work. I'll take another look at the rules and if I have any comments I'll convene with my fellow CMRA Buell racers for discussion and pass our suggestions on to you.

Blake

PS: Though it's probably already been explained, would someone please tell me what the reason behind the completely new class and rules structure for 2004? I mean I know we ditched CCS, but did we have to ditch the rules so drastically? Just curious. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Blake
11-19-2003, 01:57 PM
Actually, motorcyclist magazine's dyno testing records show the '03 SV650 putting down 72.5 rwhp with a wet weight of 436 LB. They show the XB9R putting down 78.2 rwhp, and as stated above, the XB9 Buells have a wet weight of 455 LB.

Why not let the XB9R race against the SV650? I don't see a reason not to. This is America right? How about we let the little American Sportbike race with its peers?

If we can get Buell to put up some support, would that help?

Blake

Blake
11-19-2003, 01:57 PM
Actually, motorcyclist magazine's dyno testing records show the '03 SV650 putting down 72.5 rwhp with a wet weight of 436 LB. They show the XB9R putting down 78.2 rwhp, and as stated above, the XB9 Buells have a wet weight of 455 LB.

Why not let the XB9R race against the SV650? I don't see a reason not to. This is America right? How about we let the little American Sportbike race with its peers?

If we can get Buell to put up some support, would that help?

Blake

Bryan Norton
11-19-2003, 02:17 PM
Slow down Rudy, that was only 30 minutes between posts!

I don't see much of an issue with the XB9's...we will look into this...

Bryan Norton
11-19-2003, 02:17 PM
Slow down Rudy, that was only 30 minutes between posts!

I don't see much of an issue with the XB9's...we will look into this...

Blake
11-20-2003, 04:15 PM
Thanks again Bryan. On my posting... can't help it, I'm a Buell guy who's accustomed to having to vigorously defend the brand.

Will be awaiting the new rulebook with great anticipation.

Thanks again,

Blake

Blake
11-20-2003, 04:15 PM
Thanks again Bryan. On my posting... can't help it, I'm a Buell guy who's accustomed to having to vigorously defend the brand.

Will be awaiting the new rulebook with great anticipation.

Thanks again,

Blake

CYCLE 1
11-23-2003, 11:06 PM
Several of the Buells at daytona were making well over 100 hp I believe they were allowed to
be as big as 1210 cc. Of course along with Ed
Keys 100 hp sv monster some of them did not survive. I would like to see some buells out there. My only concern is that lightweight bikes
should remain just that. It seems we are almost to the point that that the lightweight bikes are more of lt/middleweight looking at the lap times will show in the last few years the gap is growing smaller.Allowing 1250cc air cooled bikes is extremely generous.

CYCLE 1
11-23-2003, 11:06 PM
Several of the Buells at daytona were making well over 100 hp I believe they were allowed to
be as big as 1210 cc. Of course along with Ed
Keys 100 hp sv monster some of them did not survive. I would like to see some buells out there. My only concern is that lightweight bikes
should remain just that. It seems we are almost to the point that that the lightweight bikes are more of lt/middleweight looking at the lap times will show in the last few years the gap is growing smaller.Allowing 1250cc air cooled bikes is extremely generous.

Blake
11-26-2003, 05:44 PM
If you review the rules I think you'll see that very few if any of the LW classes allow 1200cc (now 1250cc, thanks) air cooled engines. The 984cc XB9R is the Buell lightweight and should be allowed to race with the SV650's head-to-head and according to the same performance rules.

A summary of my concerns...


C-Superstock/C-Superbike
650cc 4-stroke triples and fours
1250cc 4-stroke air cooled twins
800cc 4-stroke liquid cooled twins

This puts the Ducati 749 and IL4 600cc based superbikes at a clear advantage. The Buell needs at least 1350cc to compete with an 800cc liquid cooled Duc. Ditto for the 650cc IL4's. It is doubtful that a Buell could compete in this class with the current displacement limit set at 1250cc. In 2002, AMA Pro Thunder had the Duc 748 limited to 750cc and the Buells at 1350cc. The Duc's and Buells were very closely matched. The Duc campaigned by Jeff Nash and his rider Kirk McCarthy won the championship by a couple points margin.


D-Superstock/D-Superbike
Up to 700cc 4-stroke water-cooled twins
Up to 883cc 4-stroke air-cooled twins

While a hopped up SV700cc machine can race in this class, the Buells don't qualify, not even the 984cc XB9R. I think Brian is going to rectify that. I sure hope so.

Formula 2
Same as D-Superbike


Lightweight Twins
Up to 750cc air-cooled twins, based on Superbike rules
Up to 700cc water-cooled twins with more than 3 valves, based on Superbike rules
Buell Firebolt, Lightning, and Ducati 900SS under Superstock rules

Firstly, we need to differentiate between the 984cc and 1203cc Buell Firebolts and Lightnings. Secondly, only 750cc allowed for air cooled twins, but 700cc allowed for liquid cooled twins? I don't see a fair set of rules here. The CCS rules were exemplary in their fairness to the Buells. I'm not seeing that here, and it is disappointing.

The very carefully constructed CCS rules that considered not just cooling medium but also number of valves and type of valve actuation was very impressive. I'm hoping we can see the CMRA rules evolve to a similar level of parity.

Thanks for listening.

Blake

Blake
11-26-2003, 05:44 PM
If you review the rules I think you'll see that very few if any of the LW classes allow 1200cc (now 1250cc, thanks) air cooled engines. The 984cc XB9R is the Buell lightweight and should be allowed to race with the SV650's head-to-head and according to the same performance rules.

A summary of my concerns...


C-Superstock/C-Superbike
650cc 4-stroke triples and fours
1250cc 4-stroke air cooled twins
800cc 4-stroke liquid cooled twins

This puts the Ducati 749 and IL4 600cc based superbikes at a clear advantage. The Buell needs at least 1350cc to compete with an 800cc liquid cooled Duc. Ditto for the 650cc IL4's. It is doubtful that a Buell could compete in this class with the current displacement limit set at 1250cc. In 2002, AMA Pro Thunder had the Duc 748 limited to 750cc and the Buells at 1350cc. The Duc's and Buells were very closely matched. The Duc campaigned by Jeff Nash and his rider Kirk McCarthy won the championship by a couple points margin.


D-Superstock/D-Superbike
Up to 700cc 4-stroke water-cooled twins
Up to 883cc 4-stroke air-cooled twins

While a hopped up SV700cc machine can race in this class, the Buells don't qualify, not even the 984cc XB9R. I think Brian is going to rectify that. I sure hope so.

Formula 2
Same as D-Superbike


Lightweight Twins
Up to 750cc air-cooled twins, based on Superbike rules
Up to 700cc water-cooled twins with more than 3 valves, based on Superbike rules
Buell Firebolt, Lightning, and Ducati 900SS under Superstock rules

Firstly, we need to differentiate between the 984cc and 1203cc Buell Firebolts and Lightnings. Secondly, only 750cc allowed for air cooled twins, but 700cc allowed for liquid cooled twins? I don't see a fair set of rules here. The CCS rules were exemplary in their fairness to the Buells. I'm not seeing that here, and it is disappointing.

The very carefully constructed CCS rules that considered not just cooling medium but also number of valves and type of valve actuation was very impressive. I'm hoping we can see the CMRA rules evolve to a similar level of parity.

Thanks for listening.

Blake

Bryan Norton
11-27-2003, 10:23 PM
Blake, the under 1000cc Buells really were not considered seperate from the 1200cc ones...That's why the smaller ones don't fit anywhere. My mistake..(I thought all the Buells that were racing with us last year were the big bore bikes...)

I am going to take the concerns to the BoD meeting and see where we can fit them.

I think D classes would be fine for the smaller ones...

Bryan Norton
11-27-2003, 10:23 PM
Blake, the under 1000cc Buells really were not considered seperate from the 1200cc ones...That's why the smaller ones don't fit anywhere. My mistake..(I thought all the Buells that were racing with us last year were the big bore bikes...)

I am going to take the concerns to the BoD meeting and see where we can fit them.

I think D classes would be fine for the smaller ones...

Blake
11-28-2003, 11:34 PM
Bryan,

As usual, your professionalism and consideration are exemplary. The Buells are still a relatively unkown entity in the world of club racing and I certainly understand how the 984cc versus 1203cc bikes could be confused. Thanks again for your ernest efforts to bring parity to the field. We had at least two XB9R's running this year along with at least two 1203cc models, my '97 Cyclone included.

Thanks again,

Blake

Blake
11-28-2003, 11:34 PM
Bryan,

As usual, your professionalism and consideration are exemplary. The Buells are still a relatively unkown entity in the world of club racing and I certainly understand how the 984cc versus 1203cc bikes could be confused. Thanks again for your ernest efforts to bring parity to the field. We had at least two XB9R's running this year along with at least two 1203cc models, my '97 Cyclone included.

Thanks again,

Blake

Blake
02-12-2004, 08:36 PM
Do we have a formal release of the revised rules. I thought that I saw a link on the home page at one time, but cannot see it now.

Blake
02-12-2004, 08:36 PM
Do we have a formal release of the revised rules. I thought that I saw a link on the home page at one time, but cannot see it now.

Bryan Norton
02-12-2004, 08:49 PM
Ok - Walter and I are coming to terms with final (and few) updates.
Unless you can convince me in the next 16 hours this is what we decided for Buell-

Buell 9's can run D superbike, in superstock trim. they will not be allowed in d superstock this year.

I think this is fair, and if we see the Buells as not being competitive enough, then we will change the rule for 2005

Other mods will be Fzr 400 up to 430cc and Hawk up to 700cc in Form CMRA middleweight

The only other real changes are clarifications (SV can run any bodywork, and Endurance superbike can modify fuel tanks with dry break, enlarging, etc)
Notice - These aren't final until the info gets into Nancy's hands.

Bryan Norton
02-12-2004, 08:49 PM
Ok - Walter and I are coming to terms with final (and few) updates.
Unless you can convince me in the next 16 hours this is what we decided for Buell-

Buell 9's can run D superbike, in superstock trim. they will not be allowed in d superstock this year.

I think this is fair, and if we see the Buells as not being competitive enough, then we will change the rule for 2005

Other mods will be Fzr 400 up to 430cc and Hawk up to 700cc in Form CMRA middleweight

The only other real changes are clarifications (SV can run any bodywork, and Endurance superbike can modify fuel tanks with dry break, enlarging, etc)
Notice - These aren't final until the info gets into Nancy's hands.

David Branyon
02-13-2004, 03:40 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by Bryan Norton:
Ok - Walter and I are coming to terms with final (and few) updates.
<snip>
Other mods will be Fzr 400 up to 430cc and Hawk up to 700cc in Form CMRA middleweight
<snip>
</div></div>Hallelujah! Even though my 400 is not moving under its own power at present and I'm focusing on endurancing an SV this season, this is a good change. I believe the FZR400 is now the cheapest way to get into racing somewhat competitively, maybe even cheaper than minis. I saw a good one at the last round last year for $1200. A set of tires goes 4 weekends, and this gives one non-SV class for the FZR to compete against only sub-600cc bikes. Excellent change!

David Branyon
02-13-2004, 03:40 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by Bryan Norton:
Ok - Walter and I are coming to terms with final (and few) updates.
<snip>
Other mods will be Fzr 400 up to 430cc and Hawk up to 700cc in Form CMRA middleweight
<snip>
</div></div>Hallelujah! Even though my 400 is not moving under its own power at present and I'm focusing on endurancing an SV this season, this is a good change. I believe the FZR400 is now the cheapest way to get into racing somewhat competitively, maybe even cheaper than minis. I saw a good one at the last round last year for $1200. A set of tires goes 4 weekends, and this gives one non-SV class for the FZR to compete against only sub-600cc bikes. Excellent change!

Bryan Norton
02-13-2004, 04:19 PM
David - Lightweight Classic is actually the best fit for FZR400 (No Aprillia 250s). They actually have two very good classes to run in.

We try and set up a balanced rulebook that allows for a wide variety of bikes to be competitive, but yet also give plenty of room for the current superbikes.

Bryan Norton
02-13-2004, 04:19 PM
David - Lightweight Classic is actually the best fit for FZR400 (No Aprillia 250s). They actually have two very good classes to run in.

We try and set up a balanced rulebook that allows for a wide variety of bikes to be competitive, but yet also give plenty of room for the current superbikes.

gary sinclair
02-13-2004, 07:12 PM
Bryan,
I have a question regarding the lighweight twins class. I have a Ducati 750, air cooled, two valve. It is bored out to 795 cc per the old rules , so can I race in this class, if i cant is there a chance that you could change the rules since my bike makes 74 hp, and a SV 700 makes mid to high 80's
Thanks ,Gary
If you want to call me at 214 384 6304

gary sinclair
02-13-2004, 07:12 PM
Bryan,
I have a question regarding the lighweight twins class. I have a Ducati 750, air cooled, two valve. It is bored out to 795 cc per the old rules , so can I race in this class, if i cant is there a chance that you could change the rules since my bike makes 74 hp, and a SV 700 makes mid to high 80's
Thanks ,Gary
If you want to call me at 214 384 6304

Blake
02-15-2004, 02:14 AM
If I'm not mistaken an SV700 Superbike is capable of pushing over 90 rwhp, with some achieving near 100 rwhp and weighing in at around 350 LB. Why not let the Buells, which weigh in at a minimum of 40 LBs more with comparable rwhp fall under the same superbike rules? I'm detecting some unfortunate bias here. Why? Why not let the American sport bikes race on a level field?

What was wrong with the displacement limits we had last year? This short sighted WERA based rules are severely lacking compared to the comprehensive CCS classes and displacement limits we had last year, a real step backwards in my opinion. Why not class the Buells like they were last year? As lightweights.

Blake
02-15-2004, 02:14 AM
If I'm not mistaken an SV700 Superbike is capable of pushing over 90 rwhp, with some achieving near 100 rwhp and weighing in at around 350 LB. Why not let the Buells, which weigh in at a minimum of 40 LBs more with comparable rwhp fall under the same superbike rules? I'm detecting some unfortunate bias here. Why? Why not let the American sport bikes race on a level field?

What was wrong with the displacement limits we had last year? This short sighted WERA based rules are severely lacking compared to the comprehensive CCS classes and displacement limits we had last year, a real step backwards in my opinion. Why not class the Buells like they were last year? As lightweights.

Bryan Norton
02-17-2004, 09:48 AM
While the numbers for the SV are a little high(especially at club level) I did something simple - I looked at last year's results...

the 9 series will be legal for D superstock and D superbike for 2004, following standard class rules.

(Please note there is a misprint - superstock bikes must adhere to superstock tire rules)

Bryan Norton
02-17-2004, 09:48 AM
While the numbers for the SV are a little high(especially at club level) I did something simple - I looked at last year's results...

the 9 series will be legal for D superstock and D superbike for 2004, following standard class rules.

(Please note there is a misprint - superstock bikes must adhere to superstock tire rules)

Blake
02-17-2004, 09:08 PM
Outstanding. On behalf of all the CMRA Buell racers... Thank you sincerely for your thoughtful consideration.

Blake
02-17-2004, 09:08 PM
Outstanding. On behalf of all the CMRA Buell racers... Thank you sincerely for your thoughtful consideration.

David Branyon
02-17-2004, 10:42 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by Blake Rudy:
If I'm not mistaken an SV700 Superbike is capable of pushing over 90 rwhp, with some achieving near 100 rwhp and weighing in at around 350 LB. </div></div>I want to buy THAT SV!!! Yee-hah! I believe you are mistaken.

Back in the real (club) world, there are few SV700's, mostly still stock displ 650's. And they put out somewhere in the low to mid-70's for power, as I hear it. And weigh 400 and change.
Or maybe this is what Falt is running and why he always kills everyone... Well that and cause he could ride circles around me on a push-bike. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif

On the other hand, if you can get it up to 76 hp, and then round to the nearest 50, that is "near 100 hp" so maybe so. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

David Branyon
02-17-2004, 10:42 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by Blake Rudy:
If I'm not mistaken an SV700 Superbike is capable of pushing over 90 rwhp, with some achieving near 100 rwhp and weighing in at around 350 LB. </div></div>I want to buy THAT SV!!! Yee-hah! I believe you are mistaken.

Back in the real (club) world, there are few SV700's, mostly still stock displ 650's. And they put out somewhere in the low to mid-70's for power, as I hear it. And weigh 400 and change.
Or maybe this is what Falt is running and why he always kills everyone... Well that and cause he could ride circles around me on a push-bike. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif

On the other hand, if you can get it up to 76 hp, and then round to the nearest 50, that is "near 100 hp" so maybe so. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

Christopher Corder
02-18-2004, 08:00 AM
David,

I bouth Falts sprint bike and my monolithic pace proves his success had nothing to do with the bike. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

I will take one of those 90hp 350lb SV's if you know where to find one. :p

Christopher Corder
02-18-2004, 08:00 AM
David,

I bouth Falts sprint bike and my monolithic pace proves his success had nothing to do with the bike. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

I will take one of those 90hp 350lb SV's if you know where to find one. :p

Rich Desmond
02-18-2004, 09:38 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by Christopher Corder:
...I will take one of those 90hp 350lb SV's if you know where to find one. :p </div></div>The Cycle 1 guys (Scott Levine's shop) will be happy to build you one. Bring money. Lot's of money /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

Rich Desmond
02-18-2004, 09:38 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by Christopher Corder:
...I will take one of those 90hp 350lb SV's if you know where to find one. :p </div></div>The Cycle 1 guys (Scott Levine's shop) will be happy to build you one. Bring money. Lot's of money /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

Nancy Selleck
02-18-2004, 02:34 PM
Rulebook Addendum #1 has been posted on the Forms page right below the rulebook.

Copies of the addendum will also be available at the track.

Make sure to get a copy and attach it to your rulebook.

Nancy Selleck
02-18-2004, 02:34 PM
Rulebook Addendum #1 has been posted on the Forms page right below the rulebook.

Copies of the addendum will also be available at the track.

Make sure to get a copy and attach it to your rulebook.

02-18-2004, 03:58 PM
Nancy, I can't open the Addendum. I'll try again in a few minutes.

02-18-2004, 03:58 PM
Nancy, I can't open the Addendum. I'll try again in a few minutes.

Nancy Selleck
02-18-2004, 05:28 PM
I just fixed it.

Sorry.

Nancy Selleck
02-18-2004, 05:28 PM
I just fixed it.

Sorry.

Blake
02-18-2004, 08:49 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by David Branyon #87:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by Blake Rudy:
If I'm not mistaken an SV700 Superbike is capable of pushing over 90 rwhp, with some achieving near 100 rwhp and weighing in at around 350 LB. </div></div>I want to buy THAT SV!!! Yee-hah! I believe you are mistaken.

Back in the real (club) world, there are few SV700's, mostly still stock displ 650's. And they put out somewhere in the low to mid-70's for power, as I hear it. </div></div>Regardless what exists, the rules allow a full on balls to teh wall 700cc SV superbike no? And likewise you'll not find many Buell XB9R's exceeding 90 rwhp either. Most just make use of the factory race kit which bumps up their performance from mid 70 rwhp to around 80 rwhp.

It would be interesting to tote a dyno to the track and see what all the podium finishers are achieving in the way of engine performance.

Blake
02-18-2004, 08:49 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by David Branyon #87:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by Blake Rudy:
If I'm not mistaken an SV700 Superbike is capable of pushing over 90 rwhp, with some achieving near 100 rwhp and weighing in at around 350 LB. </div></div>I want to buy THAT SV!!! Yee-hah! I believe you are mistaken.

Back in the real (club) world, there are few SV700's, mostly still stock displ 650's. And they put out somewhere in the low to mid-70's for power, as I hear it. </div></div>Regardless what exists, the rules allow a full on balls to teh wall 700cc SV superbike no? And likewise you'll not find many Buell XB9R's exceeding 90 rwhp either. Most just make use of the factory race kit which bumps up their performance from mid 70 rwhp to around 80 rwhp.

It would be interesting to tote a dyno to the track and see what all the podium finishers are achieving in the way of engine performance.

CYCLE 1
02-18-2004, 09:56 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by Blake Rudy:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by David Branyon #87:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by Blake Rudy:
If I'm not mistaken an SV700 Superbike is capable of pushing over 90 rwhp, with some achieving near 100 rwhp and weighing in at around 350 LB. </div></div>I want to buy THAT SV!!! Yee-hah! I believe you are mistaken.

Back in the real (club) world, there are few SV700's, mostly still stock displ 650's. And they put out somewhere in the low to mid-70's for power, as I hear it. </div></div>Regardless what exists, the rules allow a full on balls to teh wall 700cc SV superbike no? And likewise you'll not find many Buell XB9R's exceeding 90 rwhp either. Most just make use of the factory race kit which bumps up their performance from mid 70 rwhp to around 80 rwhp.

It would be interesting to tote a dyno to the track and see what all the podium finishers are achieving in the way of engine performance. </div></div>Average 72 /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/eek.gif

CYCLE 1
02-18-2004, 09:56 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by Blake Rudy:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by David Branyon #87:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by Blake Rudy:
If I'm not mistaken an SV700 Superbike is capable of pushing over 90 rwhp, with some achieving near 100 rwhp and weighing in at around 350 LB. </div></div>I want to buy THAT SV!!! Yee-hah! I believe you are mistaken.

Back in the real (club) world, there are few SV700's, mostly still stock displ 650's. And they put out somewhere in the low to mid-70's for power, as I hear it. </div></div>Regardless what exists, the rules allow a full on balls to teh wall 700cc SV superbike no? And likewise you'll not find many Buell XB9R's exceeding 90 rwhp either. Most just make use of the factory race kit which bumps up their performance from mid 70 rwhp to around 80 rwhp.

It would be interesting to tote a dyno to the track and see what all the podium finishers are achieving in the way of engine performance. </div></div>Average 72 /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/eek.gif

Blake
03-20-2004, 12:44 AM
RRW took a stock SV650, did some conventional run of the mill headwork, added pipe and jetting and race intake and race gas... 90RWHP.

Now about those tires... /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Blake
03-20-2004, 12:44 AM
RRW took a stock SV650, did some conventional run of the mill headwork, added pipe and jetting and race intake and race gas... 90RWHP.

Now about those tires... /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Rich Desmond
03-20-2004, 08:12 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by Blake Rudy:
RRW took a stock SV650, did some conventional run of the mill headwork, added pipe and jetting and race intake and race gas... 90RWHP.

Now about those tires... /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif </div></div>Well, kinda. You left off the 2 main items responsible for that power, cams and flatslides. And with the crank and rods being stock it's a crap shoot as to how long it'll last.

Rich Desmond
03-20-2004, 08:12 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Originally posted by Blake Rudy:
RRW took a stock SV650, did some conventional run of the mill headwork, added pipe and jetting and race intake and race gas... 90RWHP.

Now about those tires... /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif </div></div>Well, kinda. You left off the 2 main items responsible for that power, cams and flatslides. And with the crank and rods being stock it's a crap shoot as to how long it'll last.

CYCLE 1
03-21-2004, 09:44 PM
Blake , that is what makes the SV great
with very limited mods you can have
one fast little bike and be dependable. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Although I agree with Rich you can get a nice
82-85 reliable pushing for more really cuts
down the reliability.And believe me nobody
knows about pushing the envelope more than
me. I could be the world champ at riding
with oiled downed tires. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/eek.gif

CYCLE 1
03-21-2004, 09:44 PM
Blake , that is what makes the SV great
with very limited mods you can have
one fast little bike and be dependable. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Although I agree with Rich you can get a nice
82-85 reliable pushing for more really cuts
down the reliability.And believe me nobody
knows about pushing the envelope more than
me. I could be the world champ at riding
with oiled downed tires. /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/eek.gif

Blake
04-01-2004, 02:34 AM
I enjoy the mechanical tinkering as much as the racing. Sounds like you are of like mind.

Anyway, I think the rules are fair with the Buell XB9R pitted against the SV's. I'd rather see a couple dozen American bikes dominating a class anyway. Now that their price has some down, maybe we'll see some more.

Blake
04-01-2004, 02:34 AM
I enjoy the mechanical tinkering as much as the racing. Sounds like you are of like mind.

Anyway, I think the rules are fair with the Buell XB9R pitted against the SV's. I'd rather see a couple dozen American bikes dominating a class anyway. Now that their price has some down, maybe we'll see some more.

Blake
04-01-2004, 02:41 AM
Rich,
Thanks for the correction. I forgot about the cams and carbs. My bad.

Blake
04-01-2004, 02:41 AM
Rich,
Thanks for the correction. I forgot about the cams and carbs. My bad.