The Future for IHRO 2010 Onwards
Posted in IHRO News | 28 Comments »We are in a time of declining entries, there are many reasons for this, almost as many reasons as there are excuses for not riding. IHRO needs to do something to try to ensure our future.
At Mettet it was suggested that in the light of this situation, and to avoid IHRO going the way of other series, we have to adapt and move on. There is nothing new in suggestions of this nature, mostly they come from people who want to have their own particular machine or pet theory adopted, regardless of the overall effect on IHRO.
This one, however, was different, it was by far the most balanced and constructive yet put forward, I thought about it and then suggested it at the social on Saturday evening where it received an overall favourable response. Inevitably it will not suit everyone, but think about it and put forward your view.
I must stress that this is not a ‘done deal’ it is something I am putting forward for discussion, it will obviously need to be refined and there will be areas which will need to be changed, but as a general proposal, I feel it is perhaps the right way to go to forward. We have to do something or IHRO will die out.
In essence what is proposed is that we combine the existing 250, 350 and 500 cc classes into one race for single cylinder machines. We then have a second class for multicylinder machines which we open up to allow any 500cc Grand Prix machine up to 1972.
The single cylinder class would not have any rule changes from what is currently in force, this would make for a full grid which always looks better. Although I do realise that there are some single cylinder machine riders who would loose their second ride, but I would see no reason why people who wished to race twice could not enter their single cylinder machines in the multis class. This would ensure fuller grids at the start of this new venture. Hopefully the single cylinder only class might encourage people who claim to have left the existing class because of multi cylinder domination to return, or was that just hot air?!.
This multis class obviously allows in two stroke twins and multis but we would make it the same as is now, for GP machines or good replicas only, not just a road T500 with a fairing and expansion boxes, it would have to be a good replica of a TR500. The class would allow aircooled, twin shock, drum braked machines only, if you look at what was running in the GPs in 1972, that would certainly cover most of the bikes out there, there would be odd exceptions such as the Konig but IHRO has always had an exception policy for worthwhile machines, I would envisage that this would continue to apply in this class. The essential thing is that they would have to be machines which genuinely raced in GPs as with the current class eligibility rules. The class bikes could be Paton, Honda 450 (any chassis used in a GP or accurate copy of it) , MV 3/4 cylinder replicas, TR2, TR3 real or good replicas, seeley chassis or any that were used at the time, TR2 and TR3 must be 354cc or larger, its easy to check and easy to get the parts to do it, people have to make an effort, not just use a 350 Yamaha. Then you have TR500 Suzukis, any chassis that was used in a GP, Kawasaki 500 3 cylinder, Husqvarnas, Eric Offenstadt even cut a cylinder off a 750 H2R and used that!, it would be a class where people can look at the history books and buy a machine or make a good replica.
OK over to you, I need your feedback and ideas please, try to make them constructive, let us really get a discussion going and move forward for 2010.



I think that the most important thing is that IHRO continues as a successful race series, regardless of the format. As you know I have been an avid supporter of ICGP and have seen the series lose a lot of it’s appeal over the last few years.
I know you must be sick of my first comments but they are valid.
I am new to IHRO and very new to the 500 class. All the riders are of a very good standard and are good safe guys to race with. Unfortunately if you take a vote amongst the die-hard stalwarts of a declining series the format will probably not alter and the inevitable end will leave the purists with nowhere to ride at all.
Here we go again- push starts. I believe there were two rows of riders with pushers in the 500 race, so they were happy enough to ride with us even with the embarrassment of being helped. I was pleased to have got the goldie bumped, but I at 61 find it very stressful. I know of several people who would be out regularly with you if they did not have to push. Just look at the Belgium 500 race grid, most of these guys are eligible, and would be out with us if it were not for the dreaded bump starts. Even if you start the new class, look at the video/films of the period starts. Loads of young fit men, loads of them struggled to get going when the bikes were new. the average age of guys buying our type of bikes is nearer 60 than 30.
I think it always advisable to think of the features that will attract the future of the series as well as try and get back the guys that have been lost over the last few years. I am sure that you would not loose anyone if you go to clutch starts, as anywhere they try to go would be clutch starts anyway.
For me, under the new format I would loose one of my rides, That’s better than loosing both, I have been racing for fifteen years and have never made a good start, clutch or push so It would not help me. but if pushing does become any harder for me, I will reluctantly have to go back to being an admiring spectator for the IHRO races.
Please take these comments as constructive, even if they are offensive-they were not meant to be.
Please keep up your great work, we need IHRO.
Best regards Mick N-de-V.
By and large, I agree with Mike. I’m 66, and have always voted for bump-starts because (now it can be told) I’ve always been good at them. (Purist? Moi? Don’t be silly.) And so long as my luck holds, it means I get a chance to see and hear the Patons as they come past later…
I’ll probably miss the tension of wondering if the bugger will start THIS time, but I can live with it. I pass over in the silence the bizarre concept that having the entire field arrive at the first corner at the same time is deemed “safer” than spread out. God preserve us from elfansafety: racing pales in comparison with the dangers their efforts to keep themselves in a job pose.
Mixed capacities? Not a concern if they are all drum-braked singles. It may be irritating to have to battle to get past a determinedly ridden 350 single, but it isn’t dangerous. His line on a 350 won’t radically differ from yours on a 500.
Of course I’d prefer to “have my own race” with other 500′s, but can’t say that having the Lansdowne guys out with us at Chimay caused me any grief. On the other hand, having no race at all would very definitely cause me grief.
Desperate times require desperate measures. Dammit, I’m having to clean my own moat nowadays, with my own money. I can live with a multiclass IHRO race…
IHRO suggestions:
As discussed clutch starts could entice some riders back and if trialled this year may be measureable and may save introducing other machines.
What I have also learnt is that PVL ignition is very good but apparently not as good on push starts as mags etc.
Other machines:
Classes could be expanded with more modern machines such as some air cooled 2 strokes which would let me in I think!
However, there are a number of Yams TD1C/ TD2 and Suzukis T250 which are converted road bikes using road frames instead of factory frames or after market such as my Machin.
There are also some folks such as Adolf Schnider using powerjet carbs which are out of period.
A cut off before water cooling is good as the difference is immense. Yes a problem with Konig but an exception could be made.
In an effort not to detract from the classic bikes would a split start be beneficial? This would however entail a clutch start or start the modern ones first with the classics on push X seconds later.
Can we please try not to get this discussion bogged down in a push / clutch start debate, that is a separate issue to what I want to hear from you about the class proposals.
If you wants to start a new post about push starts, let me know and I will do so, but please for the moment, lets keep on course with the class suggestions.
Regarding Roger’s comment about Carburettors, that is an issue of detail which can obviously be addressed in the regulations, the question of barely converted roads bikes, I covered in the opening post
In Roger’s post I also see a possible confusion over terminology, ALL these bikes are classics, for the moment, please try to keep the class descriptions as ‘Singles’ and ‘Multis’ we can sort out proper titles at a later date if needed.
Keep the comments coming please
In the period which we are interested in, let’s have the 2 strokes and/or multi’s, which were on the Grand Prix grids at the time. Either real machines as much as is possible, or faithful replicas. No problem. Let’s try it for the benefit of IHRO. Naturally, push start.
Personally, my only concern is that I do not wish to lose either a 350 or 500 ride. I still want to have 2 rides.
Many thanks
Mick Moreton
Rogers comments regarding PVL are in some part correct. These ignition components were imported by many people, some from other types of racing, moto X, Kart etc. many of these have drifted into bike racing, sometimes with totally unsuitable units being tried with the obvious results. The PVL units are extemely reliable and lately systems spacificaly designed for incorparation into mag type units for fourstrokes have been developed and are now available- Mick N-de-V.
Hello everybody.
Can we just for the moment forget push starts, carb sizes and ignition advance curves!
We have a real chance here to make this work.
Keep the discussion on if you are in favour of the proposed changes or not.
We will tie the loose ends later, I am fully behind the proposed changes , if it happens I will be there in both classes.
I apologise if I seemed to ignore the new proposal a bit. I was just trying to put forward what to me and other past IHRO riders see as the reason for declining numbers.
I am happy with the class format as it is now, but if it is felt that opening up the existing or starting a new class will help, I will support it as far as possible.
How you are going to police this rather open class will be interesting. I have seen a couple of attempts to get aircooled/drum braked twostroke classes going and the response has been slow. The other stumbling block that I can see is that the value of any genuine GP bikes will deter guys from riding them and the cost of building a faithful replica may put off people as there will be limited places to race it, especially if the IHRO drop the idea at a later date.
Just having ridden once with IHRO and trying to do 2 races this year I’m not one who could say he’s of any weight… But I’d like the idea behind the single vs. multis concept as proposed by Graham. My feeling is that this could attract some competitors – what would be a good thing in my view
Tilmann
As a newcomer to IHRO and having watched many races over the past years it is a little sad to see such small grids. Running all classes together will ensure much improved grids and being beaten on my 500 by a 350 will only serve to make me more determined to improve my performance. The proposed multi class will stop many of the competitors bemoaning the flurry of Patons which are now a big part of the scene. I believe that a grid with some good air cooled replicas (there are some good examples in group 2 now)of those GP machines already discussed will be a great spectacle for all and will progress IHRO to anther level.
I would welcome a discussion at the appropriate time on push starts.
Peter Cook
As a rider who rode in the early days of IHRO at Assen etc.It is doubtful if we will ever see those days again, so we need changes now.Apart from the people with two single cylinder machines I can not see any problem with the new format for the races, and as Graham says they can ride in the multi cylinder class.I have only one bike myself and it may give me the chance of two rides if the multi class is not full
Thanks again for the Mettet weekend
John Jones
Having only raced with you once I think it is hard for me to have a valid input into these discussions.
Any format to entice more people back and have full grids must be better than watching the grids shrink.
For me I want to race abroad mostly, I have raced in the UK on and off for quite a while, and want a new challenge.
As I also do not own my own bikes, and most are out of my reach whatever I ride will depend on people like Dick Linton.
I also know I need to practice starting the 500, and I should of had a go in one of the races at Mettet.
As far as I can see entries are so thin that there is no option but to combine the 350 & 500 classes. It is no good some people complaining they don’t want to lose a ride, unless things change they will lose 2 rides!! If you suddenly have a flurry of entries, then you will doubtless run separate 350 & 500 races. Look at the Lansdowne – seen as a success, but only 30 regular riders across both classes, with different extra riders coming in at different tracks. If they ran the classes separately at all tracks, the
grids would be thin & the series would not be seen as a success.
As to the ‘new’ class we will have to see. Can’t see that you will get a decent grid full to the spec, with a few enthusiasts choosing to ‘bump up’ from the single cylinder class to boost the numbers.
Big problem is that IHRO does not have a USP any more. The IHRO race at, say, CRMC race is almost pointless. Only difference is the push start……….
I will be at Chimay but wont enter the IHRO. I will ride in the Lansdowne, in which I & my bike are competitive, & in the Belgium races, where due to the size of the grid I am likely to have someone to race against, even if they are on a Honda or Ducati! And its a clutch start; I have already told you I am not doing any more push starts.
Can i offer another option. I have always thought that the machine spec. is understandable narrow ie. GP bikes only.
why not widen the spec. to include “CAREFULLY SELECTED” machines that were never sold as GP bikes but nevertheless could be found on the back row of the grids ridden by enthusiastic owners, Dommy racers, Tritons,Seely framed Triumphs, Percy Tait reps. etc. etc. then again carefully selected multi cyl. bikes to help build up the grid. then perhaps a single cylinder championship within in that group?
then the foremat could be as is now and no one would lose a second ride.
Regards to all Andy Alexander
Nobody will miss a second ride, there will still be 2 races.
You could ride a 350 in the singles class and a 500 single in the multis class. I am sure one well off supporter would sponsor a singles award in the mulis class.
This idea could save the singles from dying, which at the moment they are.
I just hope there is tighter control of the regulations of the new class, not as before where no control didnt help the class at all.
I have had comments made to me regarding the proposed changes by a number of people, some were just phone calls where we chatted about things, others were from people who rang specifically and who did not want to put their views into comments on this site, so I must do it for them, to ensure that their views are presented for discussion.
IHRO and CRMC founder, Alan Cathcart thinks that the ideas have merit as long as they are carefully policed, he feels that perhaps now is the time to move onward and that it would provide a number of genuine GP machines which are currently not really catered for, with a top level series to compete in.
Dick Linton, another of the CRMC founder members and long time IHRO supporter, feels that the changes would result in the total loss of the 350 class (and presumably the 250 class) as he feels that riders do not want to race for classes within races, but only for the first past the flag. He has said that if the changes did take place, he probably would not come to many events as it is not worth travelling a long distance to an event for just 2 races in the weekend.
By contrast, Andy Molnar has repeatedly said that he would not allow his Manxes to race against 8 valve twins, this proposal would allow him, if he chose, to compete without fear of being beaten by obviously more powerful machines.
So in these two people, we have the basis of the problems I face, one long time supporter has said that he would be less likely to compete if we combine the singles into one class, another person does not currently support us as he will not have his singles compete against 8 valve twins but might in the future if the classes were changed.
Damned if I do, damned if I dont.
Andy’s comments about the combined class Lansdowne Cup have obvious analogies for us, do we look weak at the moment because we are split across 2 classes? But would be get sufficient support for the ‘multi’ class? At Schleiz as an example, we have 12 riders who have entered for 2 classes, would they all not bother to travel if they only had 2 and not 4 races over the weekend?. Of course there are many who only have one class ride anyway so that does not affect them. And, as has been said, people could enter their second bike in the ‘multi’ class if the so wished.
I need more comments from YOU, the riders.
Hi Graham,
As you say, dammed if you do and dammed if you don’t. I have been riding with IHRO from the very beginning but normally I only get to one or 2 meetings per year. My work tends to get in the way more than I would like! Regarding the single class / multi cylinder proposition. I can see that the 250 and 350 classes would decline considerably as it would not make a lot of sense to ride my 350 when I have a machine for the 500 class. Having said that I am quite used to coming towards the back of the field so it would not make such a large difference! I am rather disapointed however with comments from certain people. It seems that if their chance of winning is reduced they will not compete. Strange idea of sportsmanship. If people like myself did not ride then coming first in a field of one is also rather meaningless!
Regarding the situation one point does spring to mind. I seem to remember that, in the early days of IHRO, when a certain 500 4 valve Manx Norton started winning everything it was no longer allowed in IHRO. I say no more! I cannot comment myself as I am no expert in that field but are the certain twin cylinder “replicas” accurate replicas? Perhaps, if every “replica” is genuine in every detail the problem would go away! But, of course, then every non original bore and stroke bike would also have to be refused. The field would be very much reduced!
Difficult!
No matter what you decide I will continue to try and support IHRO so long as my employer, bank, wife and arthritic joints allow me to no matter who finishes in front of me!
All the very best to all
Ray King
Discussion about IHRO future-
I had only done the first race with you.
In my opinion, it’s best to have more riders in one group.
I’m one of the slowest at the moment with my 350,so l run behind the field.
When more on the track it’s more attractive for each.Put together what can race together.
I saw a lot of IHRO riders at Grab the flag races.Think many went to GTF because they can have a lot of racing during a weekend at best circuits(Pannonia, Schleiz, Rijeka)for an beneficial price. At GTF we have 5-6 trainings/day and 2 races during the weekend.All classes are fully booked this year.
See numbers of training in Schleiz.IHRO have 4 turns during the weekend- GTF have 6.
IHRO 2010 and beyond
I think the proposed ideas have a lot of merit as long as the combined singles class has a class within a class i.e., someone riding a 250/350 can win the 250/350 class as well as someone riding a 500 can win that class. All you can do is go ahead and see how it goes, as you say, damned if you do, damned if you don’t. It seems a good idea that the multi cylinder and grand prix machines have their own class.
Might I suggest that IHRO consider sourcing meetings at other European circuits as well as road circuits, this would undoubtedly attract more entries from riders who will not ride on road circuits. I appreciate it is not easy but in the days of InCA there were some good circuits and the entry fees were no more than entry fees are now.
I know the economic situation now means that a lot of riders are on a tight budget and those who would normally travel to Schleiz are no longer able to because the price of diesel etc., making it harder for the working man and the retired worker. Therefore, we should be searching for circuits in Europe but closer i.e., France, Belgium and possibly Holland where the cost of getting there is not prohibitive.
I also feel that sump guards under engines should be compulsory for IHRO and also silencing should become compulsory as it is in the UK. This would then allow IHRO to go to more circuits where these rules apply and we wouldn’t be racing on cement dust all the time.
I will continue to support IHRO as much as I can whatever is decided.
Hi Graham,
I think the the idea of having a single class with the 250/350 and the 500 together racing for their own class win is okay,and the multi’s in a seperate class in the format you have suggested.
I hope this will attract the old and hopefully new riders, so they come riding with us again to keep the IHRO flag flying.
I will continue to support IHRO.
Regards to all, Jan
my vote:350 and 500 in one class
3-4 cylinder and younger GP bikes in an other group.
Can see what happen next season.
I would be happy to race in a singles only mixed 250, 350 and 500 race, and have the option to race in a mixed singles and multicylinder class with air cooled two strokes. I think we could also have two different starting techniques for the two races – push start for the singles as currently, but the multis would have to have clutch starts. I also suspect that some of the reduction in grids this year is our collective financial situation – regrettably, I cannot afford to do Schleiz this year, but hope to next season. I think Tony’s comment about other non-road circuits is valid – perhaps we could become guests at some of the more interesting French circuits like Pau? I would not want us to give up on the roads, however, as circuits like Mettet, Schleiz, Chimay and especially Gedinne make racing worthwhile
Looking at some of the ideas and comments if there was to be 2 races, one original + 1 more modern it would keep the 2 parts separate whilst moving IHRO into a later period which is just as pure to those whose era it is. If the CRMC was being formed today a CBR600 would be old hat!
I am sure we need more riders now so lets try this idea .
We can never stop time and evolution is the base of life . Lets keep IHRO well alive and continue to race our beloved beauties .
Jean-Pierre
Its good to see that a lot of people are interested in the future of IHRO and are wiling to comment.
This dialogue is a good thing, regardless of if the changes happen or not, what IHRO needed was more input from the riders and sponsors.
Its the only way you will know which way to go forward.
Keep the comments coming and if are not a member of IHRO and want to comment you can email Graham. info@ihro.org.uk
hello Graham. re multi cylinder GP class
what a great idea to have a second race for multi cylinder GP bikes. I think to get a good grid you should have it split into 350cc and 500cc in one race, mainly on grounds of cost and being able to fill the grid because to convert a TR350 Yamaha for 500cc class would be quite costly
GRAHAM
Its a good idea putting 350 and 500 together
and 2 3 and 4cylinder gp bikes in an other group
regards No Scholl
As an 350 competitor I don’t mind to race together with the 500 singles. And if in the near future I want to race a 500 single Ducati, I don’t mind to race with multi’s. Mostly it is possible to have the second ride anyway with the organisation like CRMC or CRMB own 500 or 350 classes