Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 45

Thread: Suggestion for the 2018 Rulebook

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Mohammer Time! Expert
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,253

    Suggestion for the 2018 Rulebook

    Suggestions for the 2018 Rulebook

    Suggestions for the 2018 Rulebook are now open and will be accepted until Sunday October 1, 2018 (rules suggestions will not be accepted after 2400hrs on October 1st). Once the list is compiled, the proposed rule changes will be sent out to all members. Rule changes can be submitted to Shannon Moham, Brett Leveque or any rider representative. The preferred method would be for racers to submit rule changes via the rule change thread on the MRA forums.

    We've changed the venue and scenery for the rule change meeting over the last few years, so I am up for suggestions on where to have it. The rule change meeting will most likely take place in November.

    The rule change meeting is open to all members and will be held to discuss the proposed 2018 rule changes. The members attending this meeting will be encouraged to give input on the changes that will be presented to the MRA board for approval. Finalized rule changes for the 2018 season should firmed up before the end of the year.

    When making your suggestion, be sure to cite the existing rule and what changes you are suggesting. If it is a new rule, please use the exact wording as you would like it to appear at the rule change meeting and possibly the rulebook.

    If you want to discuss your rule change proposal, please start a separate thread on the forum.

    If you have any questions please contact Shannon Moham TRKWILLYS@aol.com

  2. #2
    Junior Member Novice
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    9
    I would like to suggest running stock fuel tanks in the 4hr endurance race. It seems to have become a fuel mileage competition rather than a race.
    Thanks for consideration

  3. #3
    Junior Member Novice
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by Schrems1968 View Post
    I would like to suggest running stock fuel tanks in the 4hr endurance race. It seems to have become a fuel mileage competition rather than a race.
    Thanks for consideration
    Additionally/alternatively, restricting fuel tank sizes to a certain range, based on engine configuration (and keeping stock fuel tank sizes in consideration).

  4. #4
    Junior Member Novice
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    12
    I'd like to propose a change to rule number 2:10 (Production Class Requirements). These bikes are overheating a lot. I lose coolant every time on on track. The KTM 390s are blowing up a lot. The CBRs and the R3s all run very hot. They aren't supposed to be run as hard as we run them. I've discussed this with several people and they all agree (except Ryan) about allowing larger radiators or pony radiators. These are not typically very expensive and are a true safety enhancement. The proposal is to allow radiators of unlimited origin in production class.

  5. #5
    Member Amateur
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    83
    Quote Originally Posted by bjackson View Post
    I'd like to propose a change to rule number 2:10 (Production Class Requirements). These bikes are overheating a lot. I lose coolant every time on on track. The KTM 390s are blowing up a lot. The CBRs and the R3s all run very hot. They aren't supposed to be run as hard as we run them. I've discussed this with several people and they all agree (except Ryan) about allowing larger radiators or pony radiators. These are not typically very expensive and are a true safety enhancement. The proposal is to allow radiators of unlimited origin in production class.

    Concur. Who cares what Ryan thinks....
    #373

  6. #6
    Member Novice
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Boulder
    Posts
    45
    Existing rule Section 10 B: The responsibility for the decision to pass rests with the overtaking rider, as does the obligation to do so safely.

    Suggested New Rule: The responsibility for the decision to pass rests with the overtaking rider, as does the obligation to do so safely. If a pass is initiated after the passed rider has turned in to enter a corner the passing rider may not interfere with the line that the passed rider has chosen.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Amateur Ducdreamin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    133
    While not in the rulebook, warm-up sessions are a concern. There is a huge disparity in the speed of the novices. Experts, who should be experienced in riding/racing with riders of different speeds and abilities, have 3 warm-up sessions. Novices, who range in times and experience of Matt Neuberger, who runs at expert-fast speeds, to first-year racers or those who just don't run at that pace, are in the same warm-up session. If you can only accommodate 4 sessions, then please consider 2 novice and 2 expert sessions or eliminating the plate designation, altogether, and go strictly by lap times. This is for the safety of the riders, not convenience.

  8. #8
    Senior Member Amateur
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by Ducdreamin View Post
    While not in the rulebook, warm-up sessions are a concern. There is a huge disparity in the speed of the novices. Experts, who should be experienced in riding/racing with riders of different speeds and abilities, have 3 warm-up sessions. Novices, who range in times and experience of Matt Neuberger, who runs at expert-fast speeds, to first-year racers or those who just don't run at that pace, are in the same warm-up session. If you can only accommodate 4 sessions, then please consider 2 novice and 2 expert sessions or eliminating the plate designation, altogether, and go strictly by lap times. This is for the safety of the riders, not convenience.


    This was brought up last year and the only thing that was changed was a time limit for expert fast.

  9. #9
    Junior Member Novice
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by Ducdreamin View Post
    While not in the rulebook, warm-up sessions are a concern. There is a huge disparity in the speed of the novices. Experts, who should be experienced in riding/racing with riders of different speeds and abilities, have 3 warm-up sessions. Novices, who range in times and experience of Matt Neuberger, who runs at expert-fast speeds, to first-year racers or those who just don't run at that pace, are in the same warm-up session. If you can only accommodate 4 sessions, then please consider 2 novice and 2 expert sessions or eliminating the plate designation, altogether, and go strictly by lap times. This is for the safety of the riders, not convenience.
    I'd like to second this. Have opt-in (or self-designated) practice groups based on lap times only. Maybe slow/med/fast, independent of license type (expert/novice)?

  10. #10
    Member Amateur
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    83
    Production Cup Rule Changes:

    2.10.C The stock airbox, air box cover, air filter and intake snorkel must remain in place and
    connected as they came from the factory. The air box drains may be sealed for fluid
    retention. No other modifications of the airbox, air filter or intake snorkel is permitted.

    Change to: Unlimited changes of Airbox.

    2.10.M Hand and foot controls, rear sets, handlebars, throttle, and levers may be replaced
    with parts of unlimited origin. Brake master cylinders must remain stock.

    Change to: Hand and foot controls, rear sets, handlebars, throttle, and levers may be replaced
    with parts of unlimited origin.

    Strike the the brake master cylinder as many of us are having issues with the stock master cylinder setup (and we've requested this in the past).
    #373

  11. #11
    Senior Member Amateur Ducdreamin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    133
    I understand the desire for a better braking system on all bikes & we want everyone to be safe. However, I was of the understanding that Production Cup was designed to be an entry-level class, where one could buy a bike, prep it, and race without dumping a ton of money into parts and modifications, just to be competitive. It seems to me that we're losing site of that. I would oppose any modifications to production cup bikes.

  12. #12
    Junior Member Novice
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Ducdreamin View Post
    I understand the desire for a better braking system on all bikes & we want everyone to be safe. However, I was of the understanding that Production Cup was designed to be an entry-level class, where one could buy a bike, prep it, and race without dumping a ton of money into parts and modifications, just to be competitive. It seems to me that we're losing site of that. I would oppose any modifications to production cup bikes.
    Nobody runs up front in prod cup without spending a ton of money in parts and mods. We should just make it supersport 300 to align with FIM.
    #917

  13. #13
    Resident T-Bagger Expert T Baggins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Somewhere between here and Elizabeth
    Posts
    5,164
    Quote Originally Posted by big_sur View Post
    Nobody runs up front in prod cup without spending a ton of money in parts and mods. We should just make it supersport 300 to align with FIM.
    I run a $1300 1992 Suzuki GS500 with almost NO mods, and I am competitive. Won the 500 Prod championship 2 years ago on it. No changes to Production are needed or warranted.
    Tony Baker #21

    Sponsored by:
    Vickery Motorsports, Short Bus Race Team, 406 Racing Michelin, Vortex, PitBull, Driven, Third Bridge Wines, Imodium A-D

  14. #14
    Junior Member Novice
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by T Baggins View Post
    I run a $1300 1992 Suzuki GS500 with almost NO mods, and I am competitive. Won the 500 Prod championship 2 years ago on it. No changes to Production are needed or warranted.
    Maybe you're competitive in a straight line, I hear that's your specialty these days :P
    #917

  15. #15
    Junior Member Novice
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by T Baggins View Post
    I run a $1300 1992 Suzuki GS500 with almost NO mods, and I am competitive. Won the 500 Prod championship 2 years ago on it. No changes to Production are needed or warranted.
    I have less than $3K invested in my 2008 ex500 and won 500 Prod last year and am leading it this year. Don't need a lot of money to run up front. I agree with Tony. Most suggestions for allowable mods are for safety concerns, not performance.

  16. #16
    Member Amateur
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Highlands Ranch
    Posts
    72
    2.4.1 section 3 - Supertwins GTU

    Modify Supertwins GTU to match the Moto America Pro Twins class.
    Up to 850cc twin (excluding the 848)
    Weight restrictions for 800cc and above

    If we choose to modify only one class, STGTU makes more sense than LWGP because whatever bike you race in the Pro Twins ruleset will also be good for Thunderbike and STGTO, both on Sunday.
    - Joe
    #703

  17. #17
    Senior Member Amateur
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Welby, Colorado
    Posts
    177

    Modifications to Supertwins GTU

    Quote Originally Posted by tecknojoe View Post
    2.4.1 section 3 - Supertwins GTU

    Modify Supertwins GTU to match the Moto America Pro Twins class.
    Up to 850cc twin (excluding the 84
    Weight restrictions for 800cc and above

    If we choose to modify only one class, STGTU makes more sense than LWGP because whatever bike you race in the Pro Twins ruleset will also be good for Thunderbike and STGTO, both on Sunday.
    Respectfully, I disagree that Supertwins GTU needs modification. This is precisely what the Thunderbike championship is for. Smaller than Supertwins GTO, bigger than Supertwins GTU.

    Personally I am about 100 days away from having everything done for 2018 (all parts in and all vendors ready to go), and guessing others are in the same boat. Our whole program is built around 700 cc's, to change this soon before 2018 could cause a major drop off in attendance in an already small class. At a minimum any consideration of this should be for 2019.

    Further, there are 10 different classes you can run a 600cc bike in, but really only 2 you can run a 700cc bike in and be competitive to win. Now we are going to get rid of one of those two classes? I think Thunderbike is perfect for those AMA legal twins to earn a championship. Chris Fillmore didn't have any trouble running his twin in RORO. Increasing the size of Supertwins GTU puts that and Thunderbike too close together in classes we already struggle to fill.
    MRA No. 51

    Thanks 2016 Sol Performance / Pirelli * GF&R Tax * Damage Control * Suomy * AGV Sport * RYNOPower * Smith Optics * SIDI * AXO * Shorai * Virus * Motorex * Slick * * GoPro * Honey Stinger

  18. #18
    Member Amateur
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Highlands Ranch
    Posts
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by shRED View Post
    Respectfully, I disagree that Supertwins GTU needs modification. This is precisely what the Thunderbike championship is for. Smaller than Supertwins GTO, bigger than Supertwins GTU.

    Personally I am about 100 days away from having everything done for 2018 (all parts in and all vendors ready to go), and guessing others are in the same boat. Our whole program is built around 700 cc's, to change this soon before 2018 could cause a major drop off in attendance in an already small class. At a minimum any consideration of this should be for 2019.

    Further, there are 10 different classes you can run a 600cc bike in, but really only 2 you can run a 700cc bike in and be competitive to win. Now we are going to get rid of one of those two classes? I think Thunderbike is perfect for those AMA legal twins to earn a championship. Chris Fillmore didn't have any trouble running his twin in RORO. Increasing the size of Supertwins GTU puts that and Thunderbike too close together in classes we already struggle to fill.
    I suggested STGTU because the Ducati 749s won it last year - ~110hp. Pro Twins bikes will still struggle to reach that level of performance, but will be close.

    LWGP could be a different candidate, because the pro twins rules are aimed at people building up their SV, FZ, 650, etc. Like Tony's bike.

    The 675 and 848 in thunderbike are a higher level of performance than any pro twins bike will be.


    edit - suggest weight limit for 750cc and above, not 800cc and above
    Last edited by tecknojoe; September 20th, 2017 at 10:50 AM.
    - Joe
    #703

  19. #19
    Senior Member Amateur Ducdreamin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    133
    While it seems like common sense, I think it should be stipulated that if you intentionally touch another rider or their bike, you will be ejected for the weekend. Zero exceptions.

  20. #20
    Junior Member Novice
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by Ducdreamin View Post
    While it seems like common sense, I think it should be stipulated that if you intentionally touch another rider or their bike, you will be ejected for the weekend. Zero exceptions.
    I like the idea of this rule, but as long we understand that the "zero exceptions" is only for intentional contact. Sometime accidents happen, and there should be an accepted process to contest an ejection if it can be proved or argued that it was an accident with no major repercussions.

  21. #21
    Junior Member Novice
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    12
    I'd like to make a suggestion to remove the KTM 690 from the Colorado class and Ultralight classes. They are clearly way more powerful than anything else in the Formula Colorado class. Since we use Colorado class rules for Ultralight, they would both be affected by removing them from the Formula Colorado class.

  22. #22
    Senior Member Amateur
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Welby, Colorado
    Posts
    177

    Supermono Classes / ULW

    Quote Originally Posted by bjackson View Post
    I'd like to make a suggestion to remove the KTM 690 from the Colorado class and Ultralight classes. They are clearly way more powerful than anything else in the Formula Colorado class. Since we use Colorado class rules for Ultralight, they would both be affected by removing them from the Formula Colorado class.
    Re: KTM 690 ineligible for Colorado Class: Against. This bike is exactly what a Supermono should be and in my view exemplifies what the class should aspire to. This is the premier supermono bike in Europe at present, built with good horsepower and significantly lighter (stock) than similarly powered twins. This engine platform is the future of Supermono: Kraemer is making bespoke race bikes around the KTM 690 engine and they are sweet.

    Also, any major class change like this should come with a one year notice period so affected racers could modify their race program accordingly. Changing class requirements willy nilly isn't a great way to build a long-term base of racers for a club, and is really only a good way to eliminate, rather than bolster, competition.

    Re: KTM 690 ineligible for ULW Endurance: Support. This was raised by the affected parties last year, should be raised again. I agree the KTM 690 should not qualify as ULW.
    MRA No. 51

    Thanks 2016 Sol Performance / Pirelli * GF&R Tax * Damage Control * Suomy * AGV Sport * RYNOPower * Smith Optics * SIDI * AXO * Shorai * Virus * Motorex * Slick * * GoPro * Honey Stinger

  23. #23
    Junior Member Novice
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by shRED View Post
    Re: KTM 690 ineligible for Colorado Class: Against. This bike is exactly what a Supermono should be and in my view exemplifies what the class should aspire to. This is the premier supermono bike in Europe at present, built with good horsepower and significantly lighter (stock) than similarly powered twins. This engine platform is the future of Supermono: Kraemer is making bespoke race bikes around the KTM 690 engine and they are sweet.

    Also, any major class change like this should come with a one year notice period so affected racers could modify their race program accordingly. Changing class requirements willy nilly isn't a great way to build a long-term base of racers for a club, and is really only a good way to eliminate, rather than bolster, competition.

    Re: KTM 690 ineligible for ULW Endurance: Support. This was raised by the affected parties last year, should be raised again. I agree the KTM 690 should not qualify as ULW.
    I'm with shRED on this. I race a 690, and the Colorado Class is it's natural home. The original purpose of the class was to be a venue for single cylinder racers; other bikes have been added over the years as they become uncompetitive elsewhere. The Colorado Class should be the place for no-holds-barred single cylinder bikes. If 690s come to dominate the class so be it: It happens to be the best single cylinder racing engine out there right now. On the other hand, I do agree that it's a little out of place in Ultra Lightweight Endurance. I race it there because the rule book says I can, but if I am required to switch to Lightweight Endurance I will, and I think that's fair enough.

    Stephen Husbands
    MRA 30

  24. #24
    Thumbs Up! Amateur
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Golden
    Posts
    174
    Current rule: 2.7.A Endurance races consist of amateur classes including ultra lightweight, lightweight, middleweight, heavyweight, and open categories. Unlimited frame and engine combinations are allowed. Displacement specifications for ultra lightweight (based on formula colorado section 2.4.1.2), lightweight (based on lightweight grand prix section 2.4.1.1), and for other classes (middleweight, heavyweight, and open classes section 2.3.2).

    New Rule: 2.7.A Endurance races consist of amateur classes including ultra lightweight, lightweight, middleweight, heavyweight, and open categories. Unlimited frame, engine combinations, and modifications are allowed. Displacement specifications for ultra lightweight (based on production cup 500 section 2.10), lightweight (based on lightweight grand prix section 2.4.1.1), and for other classes (middleweight, heavyweight, and open classes section 2.3.2).


    Current Rule: 2.7.B Points will accumulate throughout the year toward class championships.

    New Rule: 2.7.B Points will accumulate throughout the year toward class championships. If the MRA decides to host a 4-Hour Endurance race, all racers who wish to earn points for the regular Endurance Championship must compete in the 4-Hour endurance. If competing as a solo endurance rider (iron butt) you must finish at least 50% of the classes winning lap amount to earn points. If competing as a team endurance rider (True Endurance or Pony Express) you must finish at least 25% of your teams total lap count in order to earn points. All riders that meet the points requirements for the 4-hour endurance will receive 25 points towards their respective endurance championship for their participation.


    Current Rule: 2.10.G Fuel injected motorcycles may utilize an aftermarket tuning device for the purpose of fuel management only.

    New Rule: 2.10.G Fuel injected motorcycles may utilize an aftermarket tuning device for the purpose of fuel, ignition, and rpm management only.


    Current Rule: 2.10.J Rear Shock may be replaced with parts of unlimited origin.

    New Rule: 2.10.J Rear Shock may be replaced with parts of unlimited origin, frame trimming allowed to fit shock. (See Also 2.10.S)


    Current Rule 2.10.S Parts which are not critical to bodywork or integral support may be removed, but they must be removed at the stock mounting or bolting point. Cutting of materials or frame is prohibited with the exception of the kickstand bracket and rear foot peg brackets which may be removed for safety and ground clearance. The countershaft sprocket cover may also be modified or removed.

    New Rule: 2.10.S Parts which are not critical to bodywork or integral support may be removed, but they must be removed at the stock mounting or bolting point. Cutting of materials or frame is prohibited with the exception of the rear shock mount, kickstand bracket and rear foot peg brackets which may be removed for safety and ground clearance. The countershaft sprocket cover may also be modified or removed.


    Current Rule 2.10.U none

    New Rule 2.10.U Cooling systems must remain stock with the exception of aftermarket radiator caps.


    Current Rule 7.1.J When restarting or scoring a red-flagged race, racers will be re-gridded or scored as to their running order at the completion of the lap preceding the lap in which the red flag was displayed. If the race is restarted, racers who crash or retire from a race before or during the red flag lap will be re-gridded at the back of the grid behind all non-crashing/non-retiring racers in the order in which they last crossed start/finish. If the race is determined to be complete and the race was stopped due to a rider(s) crash, the rider(s) involved will finish at the back of their respective lap group. i.e. a rider causing the red flag was in 5th place at the time of the red flag, there were 10 riders on the lead lap, and 15 riders started the race. The involved rider would be scored in 10th place.

    New Rule 7.1.J 7.1.J When restarting or scoring a red-flagged race, racers will be re-gridded or scored as to their running order at the completion of the lap preceding the lap in which the red flag was displayed. If the race is restarted, racers who crash or retire from a race before or during the red flag lap will be re-gridded at the back of the grid behind all non-crashing/non-retiring racers in the order in which they last crossed start/finish. If the race is determined to be complete and the race was stopped due to a rider(s) crash, the rider(s) involved will finish in last place regardless of their position in the race at the time of the crash. (See 7.2.2.B for points allocatoin)


    Current Rule 7.2.2.B Any rider who does not complete the full race distance for any reason will be awarded a finish position based on the distance they completed.

    New Rule 7.2.2.B Any rider who does not complete the full race distance for any reason other than crashing will be awarded a finish position based on the distance they completed. If you crash out of the race you will be awarded 0 points regardless of your finish position.


    Current Rule 10.L none

    New Rule 10.L The race surface is defined as any area of the race track inside of the the walls/fence that separates the racers from the spectators. This includes hot pit lane during the race.



    Current Rule 10.M none

    New Rule 10.M The start of the race is defined by when the the grid marshal allows bikes to be on the track for the warm up lap. While not a scored lap, the warm up lap is considered to be a part of the race and all of the race rules apply to the warm up lap.
    Where the beer flows like wine and the women flock like the salmon of Capistrano, I'm talkin about a little place called... Asssspen!

    MRA #934
    www.carbon-smith.com

  25. #25
    Senior Member Amateur
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Welby, Colorado
    Posts
    177
    Quote Originally Posted by Ducdreamin View Post
    While it seems like common sense, I think it should be stipulated that if you intentionally touch another rider or their bike, you will be ejected for the weekend. Zero exceptions.
    To me this is sufficiently covered by Section 10, item C, which gives MRA officials complete authority to penalize dangerous riding at their discretion without qualification or limitation. This plenary power is more than sufficient to address any circumstance. Writing rules that require mandatory ejection take power away from MRA officials to consider all the facts and circumstances of a case, which I disagree with. Personally, I have heard zero complaints about this actually being an issue in any case, so another rule seems unnecessary since we have such a powerful rule as is.
    MRA No. 51

    Thanks 2016 Sol Performance / Pirelli * GF&R Tax * Damage Control * Suomy * AGV Sport * RYNOPower * Smith Optics * SIDI * AXO * Shorai * Virus * Motorex * Slick * * GoPro * Honey Stinger

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •