i'm happy too as my bikes have fallen into the CS class because of the rules! i'm not having a shot at you (i'm jealous you have the resources to do what you do!).
yes it is stoopid we can pay big $$$ just to get a chassis with the 'right' compliance plate. i was lucky had bikes built at the right time of the year for these rules. it's silly any of us can go have the ability to simply have a chassis that was built and stamped >5yrs ago but completely gutt it and fill it full of current spec everything because the basic geometry is the same.
my perception of the idea of CS is to allow an easier introduction into racing and people to utilise "old" race bikes competitively at club level without being hosed by current spec machinery.
this was relevant when manufacturers were updating bikes every 2 yrs but it been many more years since most of the players have released a "new" model.
i was of the understanding the club had no interest in changing the CS rules of rolling build date of >5yrs old. remember we have a club that will allow '636' bikes to race in the 600cc class despite the 'rules' clearly stating otherwise.
do we want to go down the path of PCRA style 'if it was in that era/year and has remained unchanged since". use the zx6r for example. my 11/08 model is identical to the 2014 plate zx6r that i can walk into a dealer and buy tomorrow. they are the same bike! we all know there are other examples out there.
so where too from here.... overhaul the CS idea/class? bikes with carbs only? a list of eligible bikes? a longer rolling period >8yrs? do nothing?
personally i'd like to see the minimum age extended to match the 'lack of development' from the manufacturers. essentially to exclude atleast the current spec model and if not the previous generation also.
this is just a late night rant post work so hopefully it makes some sense!





Reply With Quote
Bookmarks