"never" huh.....i doubt it, as the front streamlining
rule USE to be nothing foward of a vertical line
through the front axle, then the production bikes
started moving the fairing noses beyond that, so NOW
the rule was changed to allow streamlining to the front edge
of the front wheel.......that made all attempts now to a different
standard than once was for over 50yrs
and rightfully so, as the inspectors didnt want new production bikes
to have an aero advantage over bikes in classes designed for
ingenuity and modifications/improvements
now we again have production bikes displaying features like rear tail height
above the OLD rule, so likely in the near future the rule/s will change
they allowed the front of the bike to change, now we can argue the same
points on
the rear, it goes against logic to allow aero advantages on production
bikes that
modified and altered partially streamlined bikes cant enjoy
Jonathan Amo wrote:
>Well I can tell you the reason for the rule. This creates more of a surface
>area, thus wind gusts can push you over. It is a safety factor in enclosing
>rear wheel and adding more surface area. That is what I was told by the
>"motorcycle techs." The ventelation of the rear rim proves a safety reason
>also, as with the front wheel.
>Charlie Toy have a partially enclosed front wheel on a killer fairing and
>had handeling problems. He cut out slots in the front fairing and It went
>away. But then again Team Elves bike had an enclosed front wheel as per the
>rules and they did just fine.
>The rule will never change, EVER. The reason is the past runners have not
>been able to use that rule to set their records. So a way to preserve the
>feat of bonneville they really wont do it. Never hurts to bring it up at the
>Motorcycle meeting during bonneville.
>
>Now Russ we can include John W in this with his Kawi because his was a
>different rule. The 36" rule he was having trouble with.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Russel Mack" <rtmack@concentric.net>
>To: "gary baker" <lsr350@hotmail.com>; <land-speed@autox.team.net>
>Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 10:25 PM
>Subject: RE: rule changes
>
>
>>Good question, Gary. I'd like to know the answer, too.
>>
>>The SCTA rules for partial streamlined/ modified bike have become so
>>
>friggin
>
>>conservative that some sportbikes with STOCK bodywork can't pass (like Jon
>>W.'s big Kawi at World Finals last year).
>>
>>How does that make sense????
>>Russ, #1226B
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|