Rule Change Proposals

[yak]

Hi

Well it's that time of year again. If you have any rule change proposals reply to this post or send me an email (address available via the "Contacts" tab).

Thanks,

Todd Yakimoski

[JDS]

Ya, no Honda CBR1000rr or 750 GSXR's allowed in the Inter SBK race. Ban them.:D

[scaryfast]

Play nice JDS

[racer51]

Ya, no Honda CBR1000rr or 750 GSXR's allowed in the Inter SBK race. Ban them.:D

I was thinking the same thing...about Ducati 1098's !!!

[Juan42]

Gentlemen, on a more serious note, I'm considering to propose a rule change requiring the use of an auxiliary back protector. What got me thinking about this was a) having benefitted from the use of one, and b) discovering to my surprise, that not everyone who's racing in our club is wearing a back protector. Obviously, having experienced the benefits first hand, and knowing that the outcome would have been much worse had I not been wearing a good back protector(a CE approved protector as below), I really believe that this is a potentially crucial piece of kit for every racer to have on before going out on track. Back protectors built into the typical race suit do not (in my opinion) offer the level of coverage and energy absorption that a separate, good quality protector will. While standards do exist to which some manufacturers adhere, e.g. CE EN1621-2 (european standard), their application is anything but universal, so that raises a problem of how to define the requirement. If a standard is specified, it would limit selection, and for some, would require purchase of a new protector to meet it. On the other hand, if no standard is specified, then how do we decide what's acceptable and what's not. I'm interested in what others thoughts are on this as a proposed rule change. Are you in agreement in principle? What ideas are there around describing, or prescribing requirements? Is it reasonable to set a requirement based on a standard or standards that could require some racers to buy a new protector if theirs doesn't comply?(in my opinion, yes, we're talking in the range of $200 +/-...but I'm interested in yours).
I'm interested in your comments.
Thanks,
Juan

[RG07]

Hey Juan,
Great input on the the idea of making the back protector manditory. The EMRA monitors helmets and the SNELL rating....the back is just as important and putting the rule in place will force everyone to wear it. The chest protector should be included in this. I guess exactly what the rule should state is up to the members to vote on but I am in favour of having them in place......thanks

Rob Guy 20R

[jetfixer15]

I actualy always thought a spine/back protector was mandatory and that the back pad that comes in many leather suits was unacceptable. Chapter 4.2 Rider Apparel in the 2009 EMRA rulebook states: "If the suit is not equipped with a back protector, the rider must wear a suitable back protector under the suit." I think a lot of individuals confuse the back pads with the rigid supporting spine/back protectors. The back pads, made mostly of foam with no rigid support, are simply not the same as a purpose made rigid support back protector. Perhaps a clarification of the rule stipulating that back protectors are of the independantly worn style secured to the upper torso, not the style imbedded in the leather suit. A manufacturing standard or approval rating would also clarify the requirement.

[Dean]

Wow, I had no idea that was not mandatory. here is the clothing section from the WMRC rulebook that we use:

Chapter 6 – Riders’ Clothing
6.1 The following apparel or equipment must be worn: all competitors in any WMRC event must wear a full-face helmet with visor. All helmets must be as new, good condition, Snell 2000 or ECE 22-04, ECE 22-05 or BS 6658 or DOT approved. All helmets and gear must pass mandatory technical inspection at the start of each race day.
6.2 No open face, flip-up full face or motocross style helmet allowed.
6.3 Clothing:
1. All clothing must be made of leather and be in good repair. One-piece special purpose racing suits are recommended. Road racing approved Kevlar suits are also allowed.
2. If the leathers are two pieces, the top and bottom must be safely and securely joined together with a full-length zipper.
3. Road racing boots of at least eight (8) inches in ankle height must be worn.
4. Road racing style leather gloves must be worn.
5. No skin should be visible on the rider’s body when that rider has their equipment on and is in racing position, except at the rider’s neck.
6. A hard shell spine protector or back protector pad must be worn under the leathers.
7. All of the rider’s equipment mentioned above must be worn whenever he/she is on the track, including practice, warm-up laps, cool-down laps and any acceleration runs.
8. None of the rider’s clothing may flap at racing speeds.
6.4 All of the rider’s personal equipment must pass tech inspection before the rider can take part in any of a WMRC event. If any of clothing or machinery shows excessive damage, the Chief Technical Inspector has the right to reject that piece of gear from racing use. EXCESSIVE DAMAGE INCLUDES CRACKED OR SCRATCHED HELMETS, LONG RIPS IN VULNERABLE PARTS OF THE LEATHERS, AND PALMS/KNUCKLES TORN OUT OF GLOVES. IN THESE INSTANCES, THE RIDER MUST PROVIDE ACCEPTABLE REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT.
If a rider’s equipment shows a small amount of damage, the Chief Technical Inspector may take note of that damage and give that rider one event’s grace to repair and/or replace the damaged item.
If at the next event, the same problem(s) still exist with the rider’s equipment, then the Chief Technical Inspector can refuse to allow that rider to compete until the specified repairs have been made.

[YZF1000jon]

More than a back protector complying with a set standard I would like to see a requirement for coverage of the tailbone included. Some good protectors may not have been subjected to the tests for a safety rating, and some "approved" protectors come in shorty versions that stop at the waistline for street use. I like the idea for chest protectors, but a guy my size is already running out of room in his leathers!!:rolleyes: And they aren't as easy to find as back protectors so far.

[YZF1000jon]

I'd like to see an emergency info sheet required in a racers suit pocket similar to WMRC requirements brought to our attention after Juan returned from BC.

[Juan42]

I agree in that a chest protector is a really good thing to wear. I think for this upcoming season, if we can get buy in to mandatory back protectors, that will be a big step. Certainly no reason we can't extend that to include a chest protector if the membership is behind the idea. Thanks Rob !

Hey Juan,
Great input on the the idea of making the back protector manditory. The EMRA monitors helmets and the SNELL rating....the back is just as important and putting the rule in place will force everyone to wear it. The chest protector should be included in this. I guess exactly what the rule should state is up to the members to vote on but I am in favour of having them in place......thanks

Rob Guy 20R

[Juan42]

The way the rule reads, and is generally interpreted, the foam insert protector found in a typical racesuit is acceptable.
If by rigid, you mean hard shell, some of the highest rated protectors in terms of energy absorbtion are the soft type. I think a hard shell would offer greater protection from penetrating injury or impact with sharp edged objects, although this may be more important on the street than the track. There was a good article on this in Bike magazine a few years back...If I can find it I'll link it.

I actualy always thought a spine/back protector was mandatory and that the back pad that comes in many leather suits was unacceptable. Chapter 4.2 Rider Apparel in the 2009 EMRA rulebook states: "If the suit is not equipped with a back protector, the rider must wear a suitable back protector under the suit." I think a lot of individuals confuse the back pads with the rigid supporting spine/back protectors. The back pads, made mostly of foam with no rigid support, are simply not the same as a purpose made rigid support back protector. Perhaps a clarification of the rule stipulating that back protectors are of the independantly worn style secured to the upper torso, not the style imbedded in the leather suit. A manufacturing standard or approval rating would also clarify the requirement.

[Juan42]

It's not yet, but I think it should be. I see that WMRC is calling for "a hard shell spine protector or back protector pad". I'm reading that to mean WMRC will not accept a soft type back protector that doesn't have a hard plastic shell on it. Is that the correct interpretation Dean? Thanks !

Wow, I had no idea that was not mandatory. here is the clothing section from the WMRC rulebook that we use:

Chapter 6 – Riders’ Clothing
6.1 The following apparel or equipment must be worn: all competitors in any WMRC event must wear a full-face helmet with visor. All helmets must be as new, good condition, Snell 2000 or ECE 22-04, ECE 22-05 or BS 6658 or DOT approved. All helmets and gear must pass mandatory technical inspection at the start of each race day.
6.2 No open face, flip-up full face or motocross style helmet allowed.
6.3 Clothing:
1. All clothing must be made of leather and be in good repair. One-piece special purpose racing suits are recommended. Road racing approved Kevlar suits are also allowed.
2. If the leathers are two pieces, the top and bottom must be safely and securely joined together with a full-length zipper.
3. Road racing boots of at least eight (8) inches in ankle height must be worn.
4. Road racing style leather gloves must be worn.
5. No skin should be visible on the rider’s body when that rider has their equipment on and is in racing position, except at the rider’s neck.
6. A hard shell spine protector or back protector pad must be worn under the leathers.
7. All of the rider’s equipment mentioned above must be worn whenever he/she is on the track, including practice, warm-up laps, cool-down laps and any acceleration runs.
8. None of the rider’s clothing may flap at racing speeds.
6.4 All of the rider’s personal equipment must pass tech inspection before the rider can take part in any of a WMRC event. If any of clothing or machinery shows excessive damage, the Chief Technical Inspector has the right to reject that piece of gear from racing use. EXCESSIVE DAMAGE INCLUDES CRACKED OR SCRATCHED HELMETS, LONG RIPS IN VULNERABLE PARTS OF THE LEATHERS, AND PALMS/KNUCKLES TORN OUT OF GLOVES. IN THESE INSTANCES, THE RIDER MUST PROVIDE ACCEPTABLE REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT.
If a rider’s equipment shows a small amount of damage, the Chief Technical Inspector may take note of that damage and give that rider one event’s grace to repair and/or replace the damaged item.
If at the next event, the same problem(s) still exist with the rider’s equipment, then the Chief Technical Inspector can refuse to allow that rider to compete until the specified repairs have been made.

[Juan42]

Agree with the tailbone coverage. It would probably be a bit subjective given the variations in design, and individual torso length etc. Good comment, something we ought to consider in a rule proposal.
Also, I agree with the medical form requirement...another rule change proposal.

More than a back protector complying with a set standard I would like to see a requirement for coverage of the tailbone included. Some good protectors may not have been subjected to the tests for a safety rating, and some "approved" protectors come in shorty versions that stop at the waistline for street use. I like the idea for chest protectors, but a guy my size is already running out of room in his leathers!!:rolleyes: And they aren't as easy to find as back protectors so far.


I'd like to see an emergency info sheet required in a racers suit pocket similar to WMRC requirements brought to our attention after Juan returned from BC.

[Juan42]

Here's a link I recall reading some years ago, when I bought my first back protector. I ended up buying the Joe Rocket Speedmaster which is actually the T-Pro Forcefield, rebadged.
It's one poster's opinions, but I think he has some good thoughts. There are also, lots of good information links included in the post.
http://www.r6messagenet.com/forums/safety-equipment/1785-back-protectors-testing-ce-standards.html

[jetfixer15]

The medical form on the racers person when on the track is a good idea. When I first got into racing with OMRRA in 93 we had the medical froms in our leather suit innner pockets. WMRRA did the same thing at the time so I'm sure WMRC followed suit. It's a good idea, especially if the person is knocked unconscious, like that ever happens.........oh wait, that was me.

[kawasaki]

I agree with the emergency form in your leathers pocket. I do think that back protectors should be required to cover from tailbone to neckline area and have hard shell with foam padding. Beyond that specifiying a standard may force a lot of people with servicable back prtectors to buy new ones.(not me though, mine is only from tailbone to mid back and should NOT pass any tech yet WMRC, CMRA and EMRA all pass me, and I am getting a new one.)
Requiring chest protectors may be a bit much although offically reccomended may be a good addition.
Some other really good tech things that I encountered this year that would be good additions to our tech is actually testing the kill switch by running the bike at tech and using the kill switch.
And I was fit tested for my hekmet fitting properly in Calgary.

[YZF1000jon]

The kill switch thing used to be part of tech in Edmonton and we'll probably be bringing it back next year. Helmet fit is a tough one, we make sure it is in good condition, but leave the fit up to the rider.

[Fireman]

I would really like to see reinforced engine covers mandatory. We have seen small crashes shut down our track for a hour during race day, leaving a unsafe and unpredictable surface for weeks/months afterwards. For a small amount of money you can install covers (or build them )

[Dean]

It's not yet, but I think it should be. I see that WMRC is calling for "a hard shell spine protector or back protector pad". I'm reading that to mean WMRC will not accept a soft type back protector that doesn't have a hard plastic shell on it. Is that the correct interpretation Dean? Thanks !

No, I use a soft (no plastic shell) protector and it certainly passes tech. The intent is that the built-in tiny foam pads that are in most leathers are not acceptable. It must be a separate unit.

[Dean]

Agree with the tailbone coverage. It would probably be a bit subjective given the variations in design, and individual torso length etc. Good comment, something we ought to consider in a rule proposal.
Also, I agree with the medical form requirement...another rule change proposal.

The one part I left out of the rulebook post I made:

6.5 All competitors must carry a copy of the “Medical Information and Treatment Authorization Form” (provided by the WMRC) in their leathers, preferably in a small pocket in the chest of the leathers. It is also recommended that the competitors carry their medical insurance plan cards or papers with them in their leathers.

I'll attach a soft copy of our form for your use if you'd like (it's the 3rd page of our application). We print it out each year in a different colour to make sure information on the forms is current. I place mine in a small plastic baggie as the inside pocket of my leathers tends to get moist.

Here is a link to the form: http://www.wmrc.ca/documents/documents/2009WMRCReg.pdf

I can't attach it as a PDF to this post as the maximum PDF allowed size is under 20K.

[Dean]

I would really like to see reinforced engine covers mandatory. We have seen small crashes shut down our track for a hour during race day, leaving a unsafe and unpredictable surface for weeks/months afterwards. For a small amount of money you can install covers (or build them )

We require them on most bikes. Supermotos don't require them, but everyone else does. We also can fine up to $500 for oiling the track if they did not meet our requirements for case covers. We've not had to fine anyone that I'm aware of at Mission.

[kawasaki]

The helmet fit test would help to prevent guys from bringing someone elses helmet to tech which I have seen guys do when their helmet was snell 2000 for instance. Also a loose helmet is no good. All it takes is put the helmet on and shake the chinbar to see if the helmet moves on the guys head.
I also agree with Justin about the engine covers, I think it is actually in the rule book just not enforced.
I also think that registration and tech could open an hour earlier to get things going and allow more time for delays through the day or finish earlier. anyone from out of town might appreciate finishing earlier.
Calgary and Mission both start an hour ealier.

[Juan42]

Thanks for the clarification Dean. The intent of WMRC's rule on this is exactly what we're looking at proposing, possibly with some further stipulations around meeting specified standards and level of coverage.

No, I use a soft (no plastic shell) protector and it certainly passes tech. The intent is that the built-in tiny foam pads that are in most leathers are not acceptable. It must be a separate unit.

[Juan42]

Thanks for the link Dean. I have a task to make up a form for EMRA, so that is very helpful. Juan

The one part I left out of the rulebook post I made:

6.5 All competitors must carry a copy of the “Medical Information and Treatment Authorization Form” (provided by the WMRC) in their leathers, preferably in a small pocket in the chest of the leathers. It is also recommended that the competitors carry their medical insurance plan cards or papers with them in their leathers.

I'll attach a soft copy of our form for your use if you'd like (it's the 3rd page of our application). We print it out each year in a different colour to make sure information on the forms is current. I place mine in a small plastic baggie as the inside pocket of my leathers tends to get moist.

Here is a link to the form: http://www.wmrc.ca/documents/documents/2009WMRCReg.pdf

I can't attach it as a PDF to this post as the maximum PDF allowed size is under 20K.

[triple]

I like the back protector sugestion and the engin cover too...

Here's my 2 bits, I want the Aprilia cup OPEN. Meaning not "spec" . Don't know if this has anything to do with EMRA...

I just like to spend my money on bikes, that's all :p


--How about a 675 class? lol

[YZF1000jon]

Should we call it the Cheater Bike Open? :D
Not all bikes have engine cases that stick out and touch the ground, which means case covers may not be available or do anything if home made. It's not a bad rule, but how do we make exceptions or allowances?

[jetfixer15]

Not all bikes have engine cases that stick out and touch the ground, which means case covers may not be available or do anything if home made. It's not a bad rule, but how do we make exceptions or allowances?

I know on my SV650 the engine cases have never been scraped and that bike has been on its side a few times now. The v-twin engine is pretty narrow and my frame sliders do a good job. I know there are aftermarket reinforced side case covers out there for it though. I think it would have to be an all or nothing rule otherwise people will try and justify why they don't have one which may be allowed and cause a subsequent oil on the track scenario.

[jetfixer15]

To quote the 2009 Parts Canada Superbike Championship Rulebook:

CHAPTER 10: GENERAL COMPETITION EQUIPMENT RULES

12. ENGINE

H) Aftermarket side covers are mandatory when available; when aftermarket covers are not available, a combination of frame sliders and/or reinforced covers will be required.
I) Competitors must ensure that the engine case side covers on their machines are as sturdy as possible and use case guards where available.

[Planepower]

Im all for the back protector - after only acquiring one for the last 2 rounds - i feel naked without it. But sadly, i would have to decline on a mandatory chest protector, for personal choice (it wont fit in my current leathers). Not that im against more protection, im just trying to save myself extra costs on another set of leathers - perhaps it is something to have implemented for new racers to have immediately, and for exisiting racers to have made the upgrade after a set amount of time.

[Fireman]

To quote the 2009 Parts Canada Superbike Championship Rulebook:

CHAPTER 10: GENERAL COMPETITION EQUIPMENT RULES

12. ENGINE

H) Aftermarket side covers are mandatory when available; when aftermarket covers are not available, a combination of frame sliders and/or reinforced covers will be required.
I) Competitors must ensure that the engine case side covers on their machines are as sturdy as possible and use case guards where available.

That is exactly the rule I was going off of. Now if there are not cases that are commercially available, there are many options to make your own case gaurds. Consideration of our track and it's pristine surface should be on the forefront of peoples minds. It also helps the club stay on schedule and may save another rider a injury at a later date as well.

[eric92]

I guess after all the years of racing in Calgary and having to have tech inspection on the spine protectors, I figured it was law here too. Especially due to the fact that we initially adopted their rule book when the club first started up in 2001.


Yes Juan, a back protector is a good premise.

[Racin Jason]

I agree with both sudgestions of mandatory back protectors and mandatory case covers.
One other thing I have mentioned before is "shark guard" type chain protectors. For those of you that don't know what I am talking about, its a small fin looking devise, mounted to the bottom of a swing arm, that prevents your fingers or toes getting sucked into a spinning rear sprocket.
This is a very cheap and a very easy to fabricate, insurance against someone losing a finger. I'm not sure but I think most new bikes have swing arms that have the chain pass through them and probably wouldn't need this type of protection but the bikes that do should have them.
With regards to the chest protector, I don't really think that is necessary. Don't get me wrong, wear all the protection you can afford, but there are very few scenarios where they are a benefit and I know I will never wear one unless I have too.
I was a little shocked to find out that some people don't wear back protectors as well. Mine has saved me countless injuries and FOR SURE saved me a broken back when I had my recent get off in Calgary.

[mojobie]

Here's my 2 bits, I want the Aprilia cup OPEN. Meaning not "spec" . Don't know if this has anything to do with EMRA...

Also, why not open it up to other low HP/displacement bikes as well, i.e. Ninja 250, Hyosung 250R, and CBR125? I know not a lot of people run these, but I was having some good battles with Josh Dickson on the RS125 vs. my Ninja 250 when we ran together in the lightweight sportbike category.

Eric Swayze
#249R

[eric92]

I thought the lightweight class was for those bikes.

[Fireman]

I thought the lightweight class was for those bikes.

We do. The point of the wildrose cup is to make a class where all the equipment is the same, and the rider is what makes a difference.

Spec class racing is done to make the class affordable.

[mojobie]

I thought the lightweight class was for those bikes.

Agreed, but that class allows the 450 motards and the 125 GP bikes, however it's unlikely that an RS125 or a Ninja 250 could keep up with them (at least not without a serious skill differential or some major modifications - I know I can't), but they're not too far off in comparison to each other.

We do. The point of the wildrose cup is to make a class where all the equipment is the same, and the rider is what makes a difference.

Spec class racing is done to make the class affordable.

If the point is to keep it affordable, there's not too much difference between an RS125 and a Ninja 250...as far as I can tell they're both around $5500 new - I couldn't find a North America price for the RS, all I found was on a UK site where it was ~3500GBP.

Regardless of what happens, I'm still planning on sticking with the Ninja 250 next season (not interested in moving to a bigger bike yet), but it would be nice to have competition, rather than being a 1:16+ pylon :p. If I would have known what I know now when I was buying my 250, I probably would have gotten an RS125 instead, but it's unfortunately too late for that.

Eric Swayze
#249R

[jetfixer15]

Agreed, but that class allows the 450 motards and the 125 GP bikes, however it's unlikely that an RS125 or a Ninja 250 could keep up with them (at least not without a serious skill differential or some major modifications - I know I can't), but they're not too far off in comparison to each other.



If the point is to keep it affordable, there's not too much difference between an RS125 and a Ninja 250...as far as I can tell they're both around $5500 new - I couldn't find a North America price for the RS, all I found was on a UK site where it was ~3500GBP.

Regardless of what happens, I'm still planning on sticking with the Ninja 250 next season (not interested in moving to a bigger bike yet), but it would be nice to have competition, rather than being a 1:16+ pylon :p. If I would have known what I know now when I was buying my 250, I probably would have gotten an RS125 instead, but it's unfortunately too late for that.

Eric Swayze
#249R

Spec class racing? Enter the SV650. You race with other SV's, it's not blindingly fast (mine has a whopping 71hp), and you get paid contingency from Suzuki Canada in SV Cup (any year SV can be raced for contingency). The SV has been raced extensively so there are lots of race parts for it. A used race ready one can be had for well under $5000. Your moving pylon factor will be reduced too.

The underside chain guard is a great piece of equuipment on the bike. I think it's mandatory in the AMA. Too bad most bikes aren't set up for easy instal of one. I think that's how Daryl Beatie lost fingers in the 1990's when he raced GP 500's.

[mojobie]

Spec class racing? Enter the SV650. You race with other SV's, it's not blindingly fast (mine has a whopping 71hp), and you get paid contingency from Suzuki Canada in SV Cup (any year SV can be raced for contingency). The SV has been raced extensively so there are lots of race parts for it. A used race ready one can be had for well under $5000. Your moving pylon factor will be reduced too.

My long term plan is to get an SV for the 2011 season (I do much prefer spec racing). There's a lot of things I can do to the 250 to reduce my times, it was bone stock as far as performance mods go as well as being my first season racing I'm sure I can improve as well, I just thought it'd be nice to get more of the different smaller bikes out on the track, even though they're not all that popular.

Anyway, it was just a suggestion, if no one ever suggests anything nothing will ever progress.

[YZF1000jon]

It's the same catch 22 with all the classes other than the mainstream ones. If we had more of the bikes we could create a special class for them/if we had a special class for the bikes maybe more would show up:rolleyes:. It was a major reason for combining Heavyweight/Lightweight Sportsman into just Sportsman this year, 2 classes of 3 bikes each wasn't practical. The best we can do is react to the bikes that arrive to race. How many bikes would there have been this year in your proposed class, just for curiosities sake?

[mojobie]

How many bikes would there have been this year in your proposed class, just for curiosities sake?

According to the Round 6 Results, there were 8 different riders in the Aprillia Cup this season, typically 4 riders in each round. There were 2 Ninja 250's out that I saw, myself and Wade Dickson. Other than that, there were no other small bikes out that I was aware of (i.e. Hyosung 250, CBR125, maybe some 125/250 motards?). If I had been allowed to run I certainly would have, and that would have been 1 more rider than there was (though, I never did ask if I could).

I've also noticed that the CMRA has some HP-limited classes. Perhaps that's an idea to look into as opposed to 100% spec races, unless it's like the SV Cup where the manufacturer offers contingency and such.

[YZF1000jon]

If you are buying the dyno, we're totally in!!:D

[Fireman]

If you are buying the dyno, we're totally in!!:D

That makes 2 of us!!

[Ducatidaddi]

As Eric92 stated, the CMRA does require a back protector. I went and looked at rule book. 4.2.4 states "If the suit is not equipped with a hard plastic back protector, the rider must wear a suitable back protector under the suit".

http://www.roadracing.org/upload/media_element/2/07/cmra_2009_rulebook.pdf

These do get checked at tech inspection at the CMRA with the rest of the riding gear. They are not expensive and sure seem like a good idea to wear.

[friendlyfoe]

just wondering on the kill switch being mandatory rule. Is it acceptable if i wire ignition on power to the kill switch? The switch would still function but it wouldn't be a secondary means of shutting off the ignition, it would be the primary shutoff.

[fast316]

I think if you cause a red flag you should be out of the race. Right now the rules say if you bring an ambulance out on the track you cannot continue. Seems to me every time (I can only think of 2 times in 4 years) someone crashes, brings out the red flag, and makes it back into the race for the restart it ends badly. This year it happened on the double header. The race was stopped because the bike was in the middle of the track, it leaked fluid on the track causing a delay long, enough for the rider to fix his bike and get back onto the grid for the restart at the back. Once the race started he pushed too hard to make up the positions he lost and crashed again within 2 laps.

It's a small change and doesn't happen often.

[Fireman]

just wondering on the kill switch being mandatory rule. Is it acceptable if i wire ignition on power to the kill switch? The switch would still function but it wouldn't be a secondary means of shutting off the ignition, it would be the primary shutoff.

That is already legal for racing. your kill switch will fire your fuel pump, and act as a ignition kill.

[racing101]

I would really like to see reinforced engine covers mandatory. We have seen small crashes shut down our track for a hour during race day, leaving a unsafe and unpredictable surface for weeks/months afterwards. For a small amount of money you can install covers (or build them )


I agree. +1 for my vote!

[racing101]

Agreed, but that class allows the 450 motards and the 125 GP bikes, however it's unlikely that an RS125 or a Ninja 250 could keep up with them (at least not without a serious skill differential or some major modifications - I know I can't), but they're not too far off in comparison to each other.



If the point is to keep it affordable, there's not too much difference between an RS125 and a Ninja 250...as far as I can tell they're both around $5500 new - I couldn't find a North America price for the RS, all I found was on a UK site where it was ~3500GBP.

Regardless of what happens, I'm still planning on sticking with the Ninja 250 next season (not interested in moving to a bigger bike yet), but it would be nice to have competition, rather than being a 1:16+ pylon :p. If I would have known what I know now when I was buying my 250, I probably would have gotten an RS125 instead, but it's unfortunately too late for that.

Eric Swayze
#249R


I have a well kitted RS125 for sale... nearly for what you would pay for one new... and very low KM!

[racing101]

I think if you cause a red flag you should be out of the race. Right now the rules say if you bring an ambulance out on the track you cannot continue. Seems to me every time (I can only think of 2 times in 4 years) someone crashes, brings out the red flag, and makes it back into the race for the restart it ends badly. This year it happened on the double header. The race was stopped because the bike was in the middle of the track, it leaked fluid on the track causing a delay long, enough for the rider to fix his bike and get back onto the grid for the restart at the back. Once the race started he pushed too hard to make up the positions he lost and crashed again within 2 laps.

It's a small change and doesn't happen often.


+1 also... if you crash and ITS YOUR FAULT (especially if you take somebody else out)... you should not be allowed to race again that day. There are plenty of mediators available to support the decision, and it should not be a problem.

[oldskool]

+1 also... if you crash and ITS YOUR FAULT (especially if you take somebody else out)... you should not be allowed to race again that day. There are plenty of mediators available to support the decision, and it should not be a problem.

I don't think if you crash you should have to sit out the rest of the day. Is this supposed to be a penalty or punishment for crashing? or to ensure that 'half repaired' bikes don't get back on the track?.......because really that would be up to tech to ensure, and what if you bring more than one bike out with you?

also, there are many times when at fault is very grey and far from black and white........I can't see this rule flying.

[sv-racing-parts]

I agree with the emergency form in your leathers pocket. I do think that back protectors should be required to cover from tailbone to neckline area and have hard shell with foam padding. Beyond that specifiying a standard may force a lot of people with servicable back prtectors to buy new ones.(not me though, mine is only from tailbone to mid back and should NOT pass any tech yet WMRC, CMRA and EMRA all pass me, and I am getting a new one.)
Requiring chest protectors may be a bit much although offically reccomended may be a good addition.
Some other really good tech things that I encountered this year that would be good additions to our tech is actually testing the kill switch by running the bike at tech and using the kill switch.
And I was fit tested for my hekmet fitting properly in Calgary.


:) Typically the higher quality race versions, like the Knox contour, have the extended tail bone coverage included at or very near the same price as the shorter version, so cost is not going be the big factor in which style buyers choose,

I can tell you the the contour style of tailbone coverage works, and is not uncomfortable. They also prevent your back from snapping backwards, resulting in some really unpleasant consequences,

I am posting up the information on the Knox group buy for Back Protectors, Chest Protectors, and the Knox Padded Shorts in Group Buys tonight,

It will help make really good equipment less expensive and easier to get for all of us,

If nothing else, the hard back protectors, and the Engine covers need to be mandatory, I can't think of a single race or track organization that I know of North America, or Europe that does not require them. In fact until this thread, I thought that we did too.

Enjoy the ride, and best regards,
Blair

[friendlyfoe]

If nothing else, the hard back protectors, and the Engine covers need to be mandatory,

Enjoy the ride, and best regards,
Blair

i quite like my forcefield back protector, but it is not of the hard variety, so my vote would be against making hard mandatory.

[YZF1000jon]

The reading I've done so far shows that some of the hard protectors aren't as energy absorbing (read safe) as some of the soft ones, this is where difficulties in making rules lies. Maybe just making a rule for length/coverage is the minimum we can do, especially as everyone seems to agree that separate back protectors are required.

[sv-racing-parts]

The reading I've done so far shows that some of the hard protectors aren't as energy absorbing (read safe) as some of the soft ones, this is where difficulties in making rules lies. Maybe just making a rule for length/coverage is the minimum we can do, especially as everyone seems to agree that separate back protectors are required.


:) Can you link us to the reading so that we can see which back protectors were rated the highest?

The higher quality hard back protector products like Knox and similar prodlucts are used at the highest levels of racing for a reason, they work.

Sport Bike Track Gear has some video reviews on the quality of the products available,

Enjoy the ride, and best regards,
Blair

[friendlyfoe]

:) Can you link us to the reading so that we can see which back protectors were rated the highest?

The higher quality hard back protector products like Knox and similar prodlucts are used at the highest levels of racing for a reason, they work.

Sport Bike Track Gear has some video reviews on the quality of the products available,

Enjoy the ride, and best regards,
Blair

ride magazine did an independent test, the forcefield with its soft honeycomb got the best impact resistance of the lot, with the hard alpinestars and dainese (wave - old model) doing some of the worst.

The forcefield is CE level 2 where as many of the hards only meet CE level1. It's not going to stop you from getting folded in half, but it is one of the best at impact absorbtion, i'll find the link.

EDIT: http://www.motorcyclenews.com/upload/Ride%20Magazine/Product%20test%20pdfs/6%20JUN08%20Back%20protector%20test.pdf

and here for all of their product tests
http://www.motorcyclenews.com/Ride/Product-Tests/

[YZF1000jon]

www.Webbikeworld.com does a lot of tests and in the articles are links to the safety organizations too. This is just the search page for back protectors: http://ss306.fusionbot.com/cgi-bin/ss_query?sitenbr=153738354&e=002&k=back+protector

[sv-racing-parts]

:) Hi, you are right, Forcefield does have good products, no doubt, but they tend to sit flat and do not bend to follow the body lines, nor do they offer the protection to the shoulder blades that back protectors like the Knox products do.

The head of Knox, Jeff Terval, is on the CE Board in England and Knox had the first CE Certified products, years ago, so you know Knox is all about the safety,

Both the top level Forcefield Pro, and the Knox Contour, along with the other Knox products we recommend are CE Level 2 certified, Level 2 is the higher certification above Level one,

One of the other differentiating features of the Knox products is that they are much lighter in weight, better fit, and more comfortable to wear as they are designed to work with the body shape,

Bottom line is that there are lots of products out there that range from good better, and best,

What we all need to be doing as club riders is to be using one, to keep ourselves whole in the event of a crash,

Click here to read about the Knox Contour,
http://stores.sportbiketrackgear.com/Detail.bok?no=424
http://stores.sportbiketrackgear.com/images/InitialSet/contourcutout.jpg

Click on the video at the bottom of the pager to see the video review,

Enjoy the ride, and best regards,
Blair

[solo]

I would really like to see reinforced engine covers mandatory. We have seen small crashes shut down our track for a hour during race day, leaving a unsafe and unpredictable surface for weeks/months afterwards. For a small amount of money you can install covers (or build them )

It's pretty hard to find engine protection covers for an old bike, On the old F2 about the only thing that could cause a leak from a damaged engine cover would be the left side mag cover, since I went through the trouble of making my own race fairings, the lower that normally has a hole in it so the mag cover can stick out, was built up to cover the mag cover and reinforced with carbon/kevlar, would that be considered enough protection on that side of the engine?

[Dean]

The WMRC requires them on all bikes except Motards, regardless of age. Older bikes just get them made. These are acceptable for us:

http://www.oppracing.com/image.php?image=pr127_1.jpg

you can easily make something like this. Others have fashioned types of frame sliders as well made of delryn that work too. One bike had over 16 sliders on various locations that we counted to ensure that their engine covers would not hit.

[YZF1000jon]

To quote the 2009 Parts Canada Superbike Championship Rulebook:

CHAPTER 10: GENERAL COMPETITION EQUIPMENT RULES

12. ENGINE

H) Aftermarket side covers are mandatory when available; when aftermarket covers are not available, a combination of frame sliders and/or reinforced covers will be required.
I) Competitors must ensure that the engine case side covers on their machines are as sturdy as possible and use case guards where available.

This rule would cover what we need and leave enough room for the Tech inspectors to use some discretion. If it's good enough for national superbike, it should be something we can work with.

[friendlyfoe]

It's pretty hard to find engine protection covers for an old bike.

NRC makes covers for the f2/f3

[sv-racing-parts]

:)NRC makes covers for the f2/f3



:) Yes, they can ship direct, or we can bring them in and help you save a bit,

Enjoy the ride, and best regards,
Blair

[solo]

:)



:) Yes, they can ship direct, or we can bring them in and help you save a bit,

Enjoy the ride, and best regards,
Blair

Well, that helps! Thanks for all the info...