Gristy,
I am worried my TLR might be one of those "plastic things" you are talking about. I would consider a pre 65 if I could find a suitable example.
Steven Harvie
Tiger Cub Square barrel eligibility
Moderator: Moderators
Re: Tiger Cub Square barrel eligibility
David,
I realise this is moving further away from the main subject of Tiger Cub parts eligbility, but I am afraid I may have made a cock up as well. I was looking aslo a putting a Bantam together for early trials work, but am now concerned it may be out of rules for the "Pre 65" determinations as well.
Intention was to run it pretty well stock, but have noted it is a 1966 twinshock frame with the 1959 175cc motor in it.
The D7 frame really did not change or evolve too much until the later models came out (besides the twinshock rear end in lieu of the earlier plunger rear), so may need to back date the rear frame design. Also the original rims are well worn and was pondering what rim material would now be acceptable, ie- the original skinny tinnies with a Dulux overhaul or alloy replacements.
The thought did cross my mind to make up a fixed rigid rear frame section out of a spare rear frame loop if the twin shocks in this year model frame would not be allowed as contestable.
Would there be a link to more details to ensure total elegibility requirements could be achieved for these bikes?
Regards Bogdit
I realise this is moving further away from the main subject of Tiger Cub parts eligbility, but I am afraid I may have made a cock up as well. I was looking aslo a putting a Bantam together for early trials work, but am now concerned it may be out of rules for the "Pre 65" determinations as well.
Intention was to run it pretty well stock, but have noted it is a 1966 twinshock frame with the 1959 175cc motor in it.
The D7 frame really did not change or evolve too much until the later models came out (besides the twinshock rear end in lieu of the earlier plunger rear), so may need to back date the rear frame design. Also the original rims are well worn and was pondering what rim material would now be acceptable, ie- the original skinny tinnies with a Dulux overhaul or alloy replacements.
The thought did cross my mind to make up a fixed rigid rear frame section out of a spare rear frame loop if the twin shocks in this year model frame would not be allowed as contestable.
Would there be a link to more details to ensure total elegibility requirements could be achieved for these bikes?
Regards Bogdit
Re: Tiger Cub Square barrel eligibility
minutes of MA commissioners meeting in May 2010:
http://www.ma.org.au/fileadmin/user_upl ... y%2010.pdf
proposed changes approved by the commissioners, to go before the state controlling bodies (SCBs), then if approved to the MA board for ratification and inclusion in 2011 MoMS.
This weekend at the Aussie titles may be an (the last??) opportunity to discuss these changes with our trials commissioners prior to their implementation.
jamie
http://www.ma.org.au/fileadmin/user_upl ... y%2010.pdf
proposed changes approved by the commissioners, to go before the state controlling bodies (SCBs), then if approved to the MA board for ratification and inclusion in 2011 MoMS.
This weekend at the Aussie titles may be an (the last??) opportunity to discuss these changes with our trials commissioners prior to their implementation.
jamie
-
- Expert participant
- Posts: 273
- Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 11:38 am
- Bike: Triumph
- Club: Wester districs trials club
Re: Tiger Cub Square barrel eligibility
jamie wrote:minutes of MA commissioners meeting in May 2010:
http://www.ma.org.au/fileadmin/user_upl ... y%2010.pdf
proposed changes approved by the commissioners, to go before the state controlling bodies (SCBs), then if approved to the MA board for ratification and inclusion in 2011 MoMS.
This weekend at the Aussie titles may be an (the last??) opportunity to discuss these changes with our trials commissioners prior to their implementation.
jamie
Good luck with talking to the Commissioners. I spoke to one and I think it would have been easier to get Tony Abbott to join the ALP than get him to change his views on Pre65.
If it still has to go through the State bodies you should get onto your clubs deligate and let them know how you feel about the proposed changes.
Re: Tiger Cub Square barrel eligibility
If we get this topic back into perspective the issue was, are square barrels eligible for Tiger Cubs and it was subsequently proved that they are.
If we are now talking about other Pre 65 issues going before the trials commission then the only one I can think of that was contentious to some was the eligibility of Spanish bikes in pre 65 events, namely Alan's M10, and that was undeniably proved to be ineligible plus the banning of Jap carbs.
On the subject of carburettors I have discarded the excellent Keihin that was on my bike and fitted a Mk1 Concentric which is working equally as good as the Keihin so I'm not sure what the problem is about banning Jap carbs.
The Qld trials sub committee have quite rightly introduced some eligibility standards for the National titles but the same could happen in the 2011 titles with different eligibility requirements in the Supp Regs yet again but if they go before the commission and are either approved or not we will all know at least, where we stand.
The only other point to bring up before the commission is the fact that the 2009 Classic title should be awarded to the rider who came second and the records ammended, this would be the fairest outcome of this discussion.
See most of you guys at the weekend.
Cheers
Rog G
If we are now talking about other Pre 65 issues going before the trials commission then the only one I can think of that was contentious to some was the eligibility of Spanish bikes in pre 65 events, namely Alan's M10, and that was undeniably proved to be ineligible plus the banning of Jap carbs.
On the subject of carburettors I have discarded the excellent Keihin that was on my bike and fitted a Mk1 Concentric which is working equally as good as the Keihin so I'm not sure what the problem is about banning Jap carbs.
The Qld trials sub committee have quite rightly introduced some eligibility standards for the National titles but the same could happen in the 2011 titles with different eligibility requirements in the Supp Regs yet again but if they go before the commission and are either approved or not we will all know at least, where we stand.
The only other point to bring up before the commission is the fact that the 2009 Classic title should be awarded to the rider who came second and the records ammended, this would be the fairest outcome of this discussion.
See most of you guys at the weekend.
Cheers
Rog G
Roger Galpin
- A.Phillipson
- C grade participant
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 7:33 pm
- Bike: Bultaco
- Club: DMCC
Re: Tiger Cub Square barrel eligibility
Twinshock wrote:
The only other point to bring up before the commission is the fact that the 2009 Classic title should be awarded to the rider who came second and the records ammended, this would be the fairest outcome of this discussion.
See most of you guys at the weekend.
Cheers
Rog G
My bike was accepted at the time of application.i rode the event and won. i earned it fair and square.
so you want the title awarded to second. Isnt it kinda late to say this now,only like 10months after the fact. Thats like buying incorrect size clothes,wearing them all year and taking them back because they dont fit.
I gave the people who rode their oppitunity to share their frame numbers and modifications,but no one did. I even stated that if you wanted to come and check my bike out,pull it apart etc that we could have. that offer wasnt accepted either. So every one passed up there oppitunities to find out the correct truth.
if you were to ammend the results what would you write.due to twinshock being a bad sport and acting like a child we should change all documents that he see fit,do you want me to send you the trophy so you can look at it and see how awsome you are. Would you get Thomas Jefferson's name removed from the Declaration of Independence and get your name put there?
when geoff lewis came to denman he was saying he didnt like the new rules,its funny he fought to get them changes then has a cry when they are changed to the currrent,you cant fight something then get upset when it doesnt go your way.
in a way im glad my awsome bike has been banned,because it shows me how many fantastic people out there can be, and how many douche bags that are around aswell stir shit because they couldnt back up anything with there ability.
im outa here.just think i only have to wait a few years and can get the rules changed again to suit what i want(with enough bitching anyways) then my mighty bully will triumph ones again.
Maybe you should just the past now because theres going to be a new title holder this weekend.
-
- Expert participant
- Posts: 273
- Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 11:38 am
- Bike: Triumph
- Club: Wester districs trials club
Re: Tiger Cub Square barrel eligibility
I just thought I'd let people know that after finding out about the French army bikes being the only ones with these Heads and barrells. I do not want to fit them to my bike as this would clearly be in my view not be in the spirit of Pre65 in Australia.
I also find it most hyporcritical that the people with them are the most vocal about the M10 Bultaco competting last year.
The M10 is really a 65 model machine but clearly production did start in 1964 and even TwinShocks post to the forum in England came up with evidence to support this, but he didn't pass that on. Our rules state that it is the production date that is important and not designated model year. The MOM's also state that components manufactured after that date that are visualy indistinguishable from the period components are eligible.
All information other than Roger's words state that a Trials Cubs did not come with the Square head and barrell until 1965 or Mk1 amals until 1966. So with the Square bits it is not visualy indistinguishable from the 1964 trials cub yet they let them ride the title. It's only because of some obscure info that Mike Riley found that states that a realitively small number went to France in 64 that allowed them in. How do we know that the info wasn't a miss print? As the most highly regarded book on cub's disagrees.
I also find it most hyporcritical that the people with them are the most vocal about the M10 Bultaco competting last year.
The M10 is really a 65 model machine but clearly production did start in 1964 and even TwinShocks post to the forum in England came up with evidence to support this, but he didn't pass that on. Our rules state that it is the production date that is important and not designated model year. The MOM's also state that components manufactured after that date that are visualy indistinguishable from the period components are eligible.
All information other than Roger's words state that a Trials Cubs did not come with the Square head and barrell until 1965 or Mk1 amals until 1966. So with the Square bits it is not visualy indistinguishable from the 1964 trials cub yet they let them ride the title. It's only because of some obscure info that Mike Riley found that states that a realitively small number went to France in 64 that allowed them in. How do we know that the info wasn't a miss print? As the most highly regarded book on cub's disagrees.
Re: Tiger Cub Square barrel eligibility
George stated
"It's only because of some obscure info that Mike Riley found that states that a realitively small number went to France in 64 that allowed them in. How do we know that the info wasn't a miss print? As the most highly regarded book on cub's disagrees."
Well George, the "obscure info" you mention actually came from, as you describe it, "the most highly regarded book on cub's", The Tiger Cub Bible by Mike Estall, page 163 and the "relatively small" number that went to France, 82, wasn't small in those days and would have been part of a production batch that also started appearing on the works Cubs in late 64, I was born 20 miles from where they were built and competed against them.
I trust these facts clear up any confusion.
Cheers
Twinshock
"It's only because of some obscure info that Mike Riley found that states that a realitively small number went to France in 64 that allowed them in. How do we know that the info wasn't a miss print? As the most highly regarded book on cub's disagrees."
Well George, the "obscure info" you mention actually came from, as you describe it, "the most highly regarded book on cub's", The Tiger Cub Bible by Mike Estall, page 163 and the "relatively small" number that went to France, 82, wasn't small in those days and would have been part of a production batch that also started appearing on the works Cubs in late 64, I was born 20 miles from where they were built and competed against them.
I trust these facts clear up any confusion.
Cheers
Twinshock
-
- Expert participant
- Posts: 273
- Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 11:38 am
- Bike: Triumph
- Club: Wester districs trials club
Re: Tiger Cub Square barrel eligibility
You must be reading a different page 163 because the one that I have says that the square head and barrell didn't start until Feb 1965.
Here is a link to the book online for those that want to read it. You will have to scroll down to page 163.
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=kgw ... &q&f=false
Here is a link to the book online for those that want to read it. You will have to scroll down to page 163.
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=kgw ... &q&f=false
Re: Tiger Cub Square barrel eligibility
George, we are boring people with this topic but if you don't accept the info I have provided I suggest you read page 163 very carefully again and it clearly states 82 Cubs were delivered to the French army during 1964 and the spec of the Froggie cubs was square head and barrel.
If you also look carefully at the pictures of the Froggie Cubs on page 162 they are fitted with the eight fin square barrel in both pictures and before anyone queries this I suggest they inspect a bike with a square barrel fitted so that they know where to start counting from. The details of the eight fin barrel are also in the Tiger Cub Bible.
I'm tired of this topic and I won't be commenting again but I look forward to having a yarn with you on this subject in the future.
Cheers
If you also look carefully at the pictures of the Froggie Cubs on page 162 they are fitted with the eight fin square barrel in both pictures and before anyone queries this I suggest they inspect a bike with a square barrel fitted so that they know where to start counting from. The details of the eight fin barrel are also in the Tiger Cub Bible.
I'm tired of this topic and I won't be commenting again but I look forward to having a yarn with you on this subject in the future.
Cheers
Return to “Twinshock & Classic Trials”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 47 guests