Racing in 2008 and beyond
Posted in IHRO News | 21 Comments »IHRO is the top international series for Classic Racing and as such should contain ALL eligible machines. I do not intend to open up the eligibility regulations to allow currently non eligible machines in an effort to fill grids. IHRO is, and always has been an elitist organisation where acceptable machines are concerned, so I have no problems with the limited availability of the Patons to ‘the average rider’ on the grounds of cost. Indeed they are not greatly removed from the cost of a modern short stoke Manx or G50.
However, I have a series to consider, there are potentially 4 or 5 Patons which may compete in IHRO races next year, but if the rest of the riders disappear because they are being totally blitzed, then there will not be races for their riders to win. You only have to look at what happened to the Kennings Classic Bike championship and its successors in the UK when there were only 2 or 3 riders who did all the winning, the rest of the riders voted with their feet and the series died. I do not want this to happen to IHRO.
Equally there is the question of the effect on the spectators and race meeting organisers. There is no future in the same rider(s) winning every race by a huge margin, this happened once before in IHRO’s past and resulted in the loss of circuits to us as the organisers felt that the races were not good value for their spectators. At that time the machine in question was banned from IHRO competition, not a move I took lightly, but it was the only available option then.
IHRO is about racing, that is for certain, and everyone on the track has their own goals. be they to win, or just beat the person that they always compete against. Over the past few years we have had some stunning races and we need to ensure that everyone on track bears this in mind when racing, if we do not provide a good spectacle, then there will be no races to win.
I am looking for SERIOUS proposals from you, the people most involved, I do not want to ban the Patons or any other machine just because they have winning potential, it would diminish the grid and the spectacle. I have no realistic eligibility reason for banning them but I cannot let the series die.
Over to you for ideas. Help me out here please, I need your thoughts on these points, and this new website makes it much easier than in the past to air your views, but ultimately I will make the decision.
Pages: 1 2
Interesting reading your comments about the Patons.Personaly I have no problem with them, in fact it good to see the trick Manx and G50 people get the same treatment that they gave to the riders of NORMAL spec bikes!
Regards the 350 class and lack of entries, if you used the same criteria and thinking as you are applying to the Patons the AJR Bultaco would be a grid filler, it doesnt make sense!
Perhaps a fuller explanation of why some bikes are eligible and others are not would help riders and potential IHRO members to understand?
Good news about Brands and Denmark next year for some of us who like to race on safe circuits.
The AJR and the Paton are not analogous, the AJR was a very tuned copy of a machine, the 350TSS Bultaco, which was actually constructed outside the cut off dates for IHRO 2 strokes, but which was allowed in as a special exemption, the same as the Greeves Oulton. It was therefore ruled ineligible. A genuine 350TSS is still welcome in IHRO. The Paton is a copy of a genuine GP machine which falls well within the IHRO cut off dates.
Other machines which are not permitted include the 500 Weslake twin, this was never raced in a Grand Prix in the period, and as such does not qualify for IHRO. There is an argument that a DOHC Weslake practiced for the UGP, this particular machine, but not a replica of it, would be welcome in IHRO, exactly the same way as the 350RSC Honda raced by John Davidson is permitted, that one bike but not a replica. The production Weslake bore no relationship to the DOHC machine so is not permitted.
True about the Weslake, but nonsense about the Bultaco.
But it is all irrelevent, with 90% of the bikes competing in IHRO nothing like the original bikes , does it matter, lets have full grids.
4 valve single cylinder machines were not allowed unless they were the actual one, ie Bob Newby Mularny Manx.
The same rule should apply to the Paton, i.e. multi valve, multi cylinder engines should only be eligible if they are the actual one.
In theory we could develop a desmo drive Manx engine, because we own all the development work done on it by Norton, but that would not be a good idea on costs alone, both to make it and for people to buy.
The 350TSS Bultaco was a post period machine, that is fact, not nonsense, ergo it was wrong to have allowed it to compete in the first place, the mistake was corrected.
The Mularney Manx was ruled ineligible for IHRO over 10 years ago.
The Paton demonstrably did race in Grands Prix in the period.
Keen on the wild card idea. Can only be good for spectator numbers, especially if we can get pre publicity. Would be prepared to loan a bike, subject to certain conditions
The wildcard idea is ok, but it doesn’t address the falling entries issue.
Something needs to be done to make it attractive to the normal guy who spends his own money on a bike and traveling.
At the minute there is no incentive for the majority of riders to carry on competing.
There will never be enough sponsors to bring enough young riders in to fill the grids.
The backbone of classic racing is the self supported rider who is neither young or wealthy.
We need to encourage this rider to continue and when he retires support a younger rider.
Both things are not going to happen in the present situation.
History will repeat itself, the type of bikes in IHRO will fade away, we should have learnt from history and tried to prolong their use.
Come on other IHRO members , surely you have some thoughts on this subject?
Andy, what spectators?
As a “normal” guy who funds his own racing and rides a fairly standard 1956 AJS 7R, I find my self towards at the rear of the 350 field at IHRO meetings no matter how hard I try! I like racing at the IHRO events but as most of the 350cc entry are now made up of smaller lighter faster Italian derived bikes, I’m wondering if I should stop bringing the AJS and find a Ducati or similar. I don’t want to do this but I need to race against similar types of bikes, why not encourage the the older types of bikes with a seperate class (pre 1961) and police it firmly to prevent it being dominated by light weight specials.
I get a bit fed up with the constant digs about who pays for what, owner riders, self supported riders, sponsored riders etc. The tooth fairy will not pay for my race team next year, I will. To do so I will have to work hard!, do without holidays, new cars and nights down the pub! Yes Molnar Precision makes Manx Nortons, but all the money which goes into the racing has to be earned. How does this make me any different from a ‘self supported rider’ ? I can’t race the bike myself and I want to support the sport I love, so why shouldn’t I put who I like on it?
Stay cool Kim.
Seems a bit quiet on the forum, I hope Kim hasn’t scared everybody!!!!!
I like old bike’s (especially Norton’s), and I like all kind of motorcycle racing.
I think that everybody who wants to race has to work for it.
When people started to build the first new G50’s I really liked that and hoped that the same thing would happen with the Manx, and if, I wanted one to race. And if you want something, you have to work for it and make choices. That’s life. It is for everybody his or her own choice how much money they want to spend on racing and you can buy the fastest bike there is, but that’s not making you a winner. If you are a potential winner, you will get a sponsor, and thanks to the sponsors there are a lot of very trick bikes on the tracks and that’s good for the sport.
I think classic racing today is a kind of stock bike racing, very competitive but cheaper because you don’t have to buy new bike’s every 2 years or so, and the bike’s keep their value. I think there have to be good regulations about eligibility but as long I have to run my own bike’s, I will stay by the Manx Norton because that’s the bike I want to have and before I consider a faster engine I have to make faster laps with my 86 bore. (I am my own sponsor, and every sponsor wants to see results before putting more money in it) Racing is all about money, which was in the past and will be in the future. But money doesn’t make you a winner.
Tony, me scary! Graham has suggested I lend a bike to Sophie plus Ela Heck some time in 2008 so we can get silly publicity for an all girl team. May have nothing to add to IHRO but will be fun ! may put a few extra bums on seats.
Well, Its very quiet on the IHRO forum, what does this mean?
1/ Everybody is happy (so no moaning next year!).
2 / Theres not as many IHRO members as I thought! .
3 / Maybe a lot of members dont have a computers ! .
4 Members think they are wasting there time and nothing will change !.
5 / Nobodys bothered about racing in 2008 and beyond!. Any comments boys and girls?
TS: TD’s locked in the garage busy building bikes for 2008, no computer in there. Looking forward to 2008 season.
I have just read all the articles sent in for the first time, on the question over what should be eligible to race and the rising costs of these more powerful potential race winning machines. Why don’t we try and emulate a 70s grid ? let in genuine and replica Kawasaki HIR , Suzuki Twins . I would guess the power output would be much the same as the Patons but cost about a quarter as much to buy build or run.
I will stand well back and wait for the response
An interesting proposition from Martin.
My personal thoughts are that IHRO is not about ‘cheap’ racing, (if indeed any racing can be said to be cheap) the aim is to have top quality machines on the grid with good riders. IHRO was never intended for machines of the type Martin suggests, if you want to race more modern Japanese two strokes, surely the ICGP is the place?
Merry Christmas and happy new year to everybody.
I am having trouble understanding the point of this forum!
Any suggestion that people make is dismissed as unsuitable! What about Mr Boothby making some suggestions to have fuller fairer grids?.
Seasonal felicitations to you as well Tony, and to all IHRO supporters.
This is not a forum, it is a place where people who are interested may make a comment if they wish, hopefully not destructive.
I feel that I have made proposals to improve IHRO for next year.
By fairer do you mean races that Tony Smith can win?? Sorry I cannot turn back the clock, or provide you with sponsorship for next season, you might think I act like god, but my powers are limited as are my finances.
Fuller, I have suggested a championship, which no one has commented on and therefore leads me to think that no one is bothered about a championship as was the case with the ECSC.
I proposed and have implemented a 250cc class in order to fill the grids which is looking good for 2008.
If you mean will I dilute the original IHRO intent in order to just put ‘bums on seats’ on any sort of motorcycle as long as it is old or vaguely approximate to something which may have one time run. Then the answer is a definite NO. There are other organisations which cater for that type of machine. As I have repeatedly said, IHRO is an machine elitist organisation which has survived where others have failed.
You fully understand my position, why keep questioning it, without ever offering anything concrete as a proposal?
Well thats a response!
I dont expect you to turn the clock back or sponsor me, we both know that both are an impossible task for you to acheive.!
Machine elitist organisation, now that takes some quantifying as a statement looking at some of the bikes in IHRO.
Make it easier for me to win races? Sorry you get me on this one, I have no answer.
Happy New Year.
A bit more food for thought,looking back through some of my old race programmes(national& inter) the latest one of my 60s era being a 1970 one before my first of many retirements. The following names appeared not on 500 singles
R Difazio Suzuki
S woods Kawasaki
B Walsh Kawasaki
B Sheene Bultaco
M Carney Sheperd Kawasaki
R McCullough QUB
And we still had Two years to go before the cut off date