Formula 4 class for endurance race

[afmotorsports]

It was voted at tonight's meeting to replace the 450cc endurance class with a new class: Formula 4 (allowing both SV650s and 450cc I4s). This basically means SV650s will no longer have to compete against 600s in the endurance race. Endurance race is a long ways away, but you can always get a head start and begin searching on Ebay for a motor to stuff in your endurance bike... :teeth

[ZXR400SP]

The 600's tired of getting beaten by the 650's?

[afm199]

The 600's tired of getting beaten by the 650's?

:rofl

[Zerox]

Endurance race is a long ways away, but you can always get a head start and begin searching on Ebay for a motor to stuff in your endurance bike... :teeth

That's a good idea, but we may need to compromise with the handlebar position on your SV because I'm not as tall as you. :thumbup

[Mick-e]

oh well, so much for using my old ex500 for this years endurance race.
It makes sense there will probably more entries in this new class.

[TWF]

The 600's tired of getting beaten by the 650's?
that is what it took to get sv class :laughing:laughing

[duh_ave]

It was voted at tonight's meeting to replace the 450cc endurance class with a new class: Formula 4 (allowing both SV650s and 450cc I4s). This basically means SV650s will no longer have to compete against 600s in the endurance race. Endurance race is a long ways away, but you can always get a head start and begin searching on Ebay for a motor to stuff in your endurance bike... :teeth

why?

[afmotorsports]

why?

Why not?? :twofinger

SV650 was the second largest grid last season, just behind the 600s. We want to encourage more SV riders to do the endurance race without having to race against 600s that make 50% more power.

BTW, we're also discussing possibly dropping the 250 class for the endurance race. Now before anybody gets all bent out of shape, please stop and think about it for a second: the Ninja 250s make 27-35hp and have been stuck there for the last 20 years. Open bikes used to make 120hp (like my old 93 GSXR1100), now some of them are over 200hp. The gap between the lil' Ninja and the liter bikes has been getting bigger and bigger. We already had a crash down the front straight a few years ago at Thunderhill when a lil' Ninja got plowed from behind (apparently two riders split the Ninja and the 3rd one rearended it). We obviously welcome everyone's input, but please stop and think about it a little more before you scream bloody murder. Theoretically we could also allow a vintage Honda 160 out in the endurance race - does anybody think that's such a swell idea?? Yeah, yeah, I know, "it's the responsibility of the faster rider to make a safe pass", but it's also the responsibility of the club to try to have a safer endurance race. Putting a 30hp bike on the track at the same time as a 200hp bike sounds a little crazy, even for an endurance race...

[FlatulentDan]

this is GREAT!!!!

I'm glad the board is looking at some new changes.

[gilligan]

This is just going to take the fun out of beating 600's on an SV650.

So, another class for SV's. Is the board getting free bikes from Suzuki or something?

Maybe it's Zoran and some secret agenda to take over the AFM?

Tom
36

[creech]

getting rid of 250's makes the baby Jesus cry...

[TWF]

Maybe it's Zoran and some secret agenda to take over the AFM?

no secret agenda here.
been asking for it last 7-8 years.looks like afm is catching up in reasonable time frame :laughing

[duh_ave]

Why not?? :twofinger

SV650 was the second largest grid last season, just behind the 600s. We want to encourage more SV riders to do the endurance race without having to race against 600s that make 50% more power.

BTW, we're also discussing possibly dropping the 250 class for the endurance race. Now before anybody gets all bent out of shape, please stop and think about it for a second: the Ninja 250s make 27-35hp and have been stuck there for the last 20 years. Open bikes used to make 120hp (like my old 93 GSXR1100), now some of them are over 200hp. The gap between the lil' Ninja and the liter bikes has been getting bigger and bigger. We already had a crash down the front straight a few years ago at Thunderhill when a lil' Ninja got plowed from behind (apparently two riders split the Ninja and the 3rd one rearended it). We obviously welcome everyone's input, but please stop and think about it a little more before you scream bloody murder. Theoretically we could also allow a vintage Honda 160 out in the endurance race - does anybody think that's such a swell idea?? Yeah, yeah, I know, "it's the responsibility of the faster rider to make a safe pass", but it's also the responsibility of the club to try to have a safer endurance race. Putting a 30hp bike on the track at the same time as a 200hp bike sounds a little crazy, even for an endurance race...

I dont doubt the sv could use its own class. I just dont understand the need to eliminate one class to allow another in the endurance race. Why not just add the sv class to the program?
I understand that the 450's will be allowed to run in it, and that is ok, but, its still not the same as having a specific class.

[Holeshot]

There were 3 entries in 450 class last season. 2 finished.

[duh_ave]

There were 3 entries in 450 class last season. 2 finished.

I already asked why and this was not stated as a reason.
I was told the race was 4 with 3 finishers. Not that it matters.

How many 125's raced? How many 250's? Were their classes nixed?

Why wasnt this held at a meeting where it could receive thoughts from the membership?

My point is only that the class did not need to be "eliminated" for the SV's. A "class" could have been intro'd for the SV's specifically. Since the number of team entries is limited, it really has no impact other than the need to purchase another 6 trophies.

[FZ1Craig]

Actually there were 4 entries, 3 finished. Get your facts straight! :laughing

[Holeshot]

Shoot, sorry guys!

The class was pretty small Dave as is Dave. The conversation revolved around having too many classes for the endurance race, and there was a desire to add an SV class. Remember, 450's can still race in 650 prod, AND an SV won the 600 class last season. That was all taken into consideration.

As Alex said, the 250 class is being discussed for safety reasons. Nothing has happened as of yet, but the membership should be aware. This was not my initiative, for the record.

[ZXR400SP]

It would have been nice to finish, sorry my motor spun a bearing, too bad too, we were doing well, next time. :)

[gilligan]

All right...so the board conversation was that there were too many classes in the 4 hour, so the decision was to add another class?

Was this Board decision driven by membership input? As Dave mentioned before, shouldn't these "conversations" be on the general membership meeting agenda for discussion in the chapter meeting? This reeks of the recent 650 Twins Production class addition and changes to the crash rule that were pushed through without the membership being involved.

For that matter, shouldn't these post's about class changes be available on the official AFM forum so the voting membership can reply in a more formal environment? A quick glance over there shows no mention of this...

And...please correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't changes to the rulebook for the 4 hour classes be decided at a rule changes meeting by the Inc. Board of which the last for the 2008 season was in November? Was there a rule change meeting convened without the membership's knowledge?


Tom
36

[Holeshot]

Tom, you make salient points. The conversation initially was not aimed at 450 class. We can bring this up at the next meeting and see if we can alleviate concerns and possibly correct this issue. There's no reason we can't get it right. The season hasn't even started yet.

[duh_ave]

can it be arranged so that this is at the open meeting this then please?

[Zerox]

250P talk is just no fun without PantyBuncher's input. Where'd he go? :p

[afmotorsports]

All right...so the board conversation was that there were too many classes in the 4 hour, so the decision was to add another class?

Nope, the conversation has been going on for at least two years and it was even suggested during the fall rules meeting. The proposal was to add a 650 class to encourage more participation from the second largest class in AFM (yes, 650 Twins and F4 was second in size only to the 600 classes!) It wasn't a matter of too many or too few classes, it was a matter of adding a class for a very large group that currently doesn't have a class.

Was this Board decision driven by membership input? As Dave mentioned before, shouldn't these "conversations" be on the general membership meeting agenda for discussion in the chapter meeting? This reeks of the recent 650 Twins Production class addition

Yes it was and has been for years (see Zoran's post). Also keep in mind that BOTH chapter meetings and board meetings are open to the membership - in fact the two members who came to the chapter meeting also stayed for the board meeting where the discussion took place. And why does the addition of 650P "reek"??? Just like 600s have three classes (600P, 600SB, F1) it made sense to add a third class for 650 twins. I don't get it, how is that a bad thing???

...changes to the crash rule that were pushed through without the membership being involved.

You know where I stand on this topic and it will be addressed at the next board meeting.

For that matter, shouldn't these post's about class changes be available on the official AFM forum so the voting membership can reply in a more formal environment? A quick glance over there shows no mention of this...

And if more people actually visited the AFM forum, we would try to have more discussions there. However, even with the crash rule controversy, we only had 31 members vote in the poll. Did you?

And...please correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't changes to the rulebook for the 4 hour classes be decided at a rule changes meeting by the Inc. Board of which the last for the 2008 season was in November? Was there a rule change meeting convened without the membership's knowledge?

The AFM board is not restricted to making changes only in the fall. In fact, we're pushing to react more quickly to the club's wishes instead of telling members they have to wait until next fall to implement changes that make sense NOW.

[afm199]

Sounds good. I think it is a good thing to get the 250s out of the mix. The speed differential with 400s and 650s is bad enough.

[duh_ave]

Nope, the conversation has been going on for at least two years and it was even suggested during the fall rules meeting. The proposal was to add a 650 class to encourage more participation from the second largest class in AFM (yes, 650 Twins and F4 was second in size only to the 600 classes!) It wasn't a matter of too many or too few classes, it was a matter of adding a class for a very large group that currently doesn't have a class.



Yes it was and has been for years (see Zoran's post). Also keep in mind that BOTH chapter meetings and board meetings are open to the membership - in fact the two members who came to the chapter meeting also stayed for the board meeting where the discussion took place. And why does the addition of 650P "reek"??? Just like 600s have three classes (600P, 600SB, F1) it made sense to add a third class for 650 twins. I don't get it, how is that a bad thing???



You know where I stand on this topic and it will be addressed at the next board meeting.



And if more people actually visited the AFM forum, we would try to have more discussions there. However, even with the crash rule controversy, we only had 31 members vote in the poll. Did you?



The AFM board is not restricted to making changes only in the fall. In fact, we're pushing to react more quickly to the club's wishes instead of telling members they have to wait until next fall to implement changes that make sense NOW.

Alex, I dont have ant issues with the 650 prod class coming in. We've discussed that and I am grateful to have been allowed to speak during the decision making on that.
i do have an issue with the fact that 9.1, if not reinstated, then disallows the 400's to race in that class in 2009 and beyond. The agreement was that the 400's could run in that class, but no time limit was given. So, my issue again is with 9.1 being omitted next year.
I honestly don't have a problem with a 650 class in the endurance race, but I dont see why another "label" cant simply be added.
As I posted earlier, the number of entries for the race is limited already, so if 400 teams sign up before 650 teams, then so be it. I doubt the creation of the specific class will boost entries. Especially since the 650's already had a place to race and were beating the 600's already.

So, paralleling all of this, I would like to honestly know if the AFM has plans to phase out the 450 class altogether. It seems "3 or 4" is the magic number to get nixed. While 450 SB easily is above those numbers, it would be good to know if there is an active thought to do away with the "last" 450 class. Some of us are thinking about spending lots of money and it would be a bummer to spend it and then find out there wont be a class.

and yes, I voted on the crash poll and I do follow the AFM site regularly. :Party

[duh_ave]

Sounds good. I think it is a good thing to get the 250s out of the mix. The speed differential with 400s and 650s is bad enough.


depends on the 400 rider and depends on the 650rider. looking at the last sears point race times between 650 T and either 450 class, there are plenty of 650 riders going slower than some of of the 400 riders.

[TWF]

this is perfect example how afm decides,no thinking.lets just add or delete.
you need little political skills.simple make endurance 3 classes.heavyweight,middleweight and lightweight.you can eliminate 250 without ever saying "250" :)

[Holeshot]

Zoran, There was plenty of discussion on the issue. 4 bikes in class wasn't exactly a "growing" class for 2008. The 400's can still race, but not in their own class.

[TWF]

I am talking about endurance race.
if classes are called same as sprint classes than why not have all of them.or split it 3 ways that is based on cc.set minimum and you done.

[duh_ave]

Zoran, There was plenty of discussion on the issue. 4 bikes in class wasn't exactly a "growing" class for 2008. The 400's can still race, but not in their own class.

I'm also talking about the endurance race.
There were only 4 two strokes too, but they weren't booted or added into formula what ever.

If you were referring to 450 prod, at least 5 people I know of had bought them with the intent of racing the class in 08, but it was too late. So be it. Again, I'm talking about the endurance race.

[Holeshot]

they CAN be raced in the Endurance race, simply in the 650 class.

[TWF]

they CAN be raced in the Endurance race, simply in the 650 class.
did you loose ability to read with bord member title :)
what is the point?if you wanted to eliminate somebody from entering would slowest bikes be first on line.250's as mentioned due to speed difference.
450's can enter but most like they will not.we will not race our 500 any more.

[Holeshot]

Why not Zoran? You did well against 600's on a 650...

[TWF]

because it makes no sense racing 500 against 650's.

[duh_ave]

they CAN be raced in the Endurance race, simply in the 650 class.
right, I get that. My question was why even drop the class when the 650 class simply could have been added to the program?
There was no need that I can currently see or understand, other than the board "wanted to".

[Holeshot]

As Alex explained in the other thread, we went with F4 classification.

[elaineo]

they CAN be raced in the Endurance race, simply in the 650 class.

can 2-strokes race in the 650 class if the 250 class is eliminated? just wondering - they're at least as fast as 400s :) if so, nothing will have changed in terms of who is on the track, cuz no one entered a 27HP 250 last year anyway.

[Holeshot]

Not sure Elaineo...we'll axe the question at the next meeting.

[675 Trip]

According to the rulebook 6.1.1 page 38, Formula IV includes 201-250cc street based, 2-stroke, twin cylinder.

Not sure if that fits your bike, but the only other 250 mentioned is 4 stroke multi-cylinder.

I guess it could be designated Formula IV Plus and include any bikes that meet a certain lap time requirement on a regular basis.

If you want to run a certain bike under 600cc in the endurance race this year, it is probably best to put up a description of the bike and lap times to get the arguments in favor of keeping it in the rules out before the next meeting. If you can't find a board member to carry your perspective to the meeting, I will, but we need to make arrangements to make sure it gets brought forward in the manner you want.

[elaineo]

thanks Holeshot

Eric, i don't really want to create a fuss to get a couple of bikes into the endurance race if everyone else doesn't want them. (i was asking about 125 and 250 gp bikes.)
i trust the board to make a prudent decision :) thank you though!

[675 Trip]

cool,

The board always wants to make prudent decisions, but they are often operating in a vacuum because people think the board knows what the membership is interested in. Part of what I do is try to get the membership to talk about what they want the board to know so that if it is apparent that the board hasn't considered the position, I can bring it up.

I have to confess that I am not particularly versed in the lines and speeds of the 125 two strokes, but if they are similar to the SV650 or EX500 or a 450 for that matter, then it seems like it would be logical to include them instead of excluding them.

Let me know if you change your mind and want it brought up from the peanut gallery at the meeting.

[420]

Please bring that up at the meeting!! I think 125 and 250 2-Strokes can be fast enough to play. At least as fast as those nutty SVs... well, except the ones Zoran builds...:D

[675 Trip]

thanks Holeshot

Eric, i don't really want to create a fuss to get a couple of bikes into the endurance race if everyone else doesn't want them. (i was asking about 125 and 250 gp bikes.)
i trust the board to make a prudent decision :) thank you though!

I don't think it is creating a fuss. You know how pissed "Everyone" is about the crash rule, but only 29 people or so even clicked on the poll. For every one who talks publicly about an issue, a lot of others are wall flowers and think that their perspective must have somehow come forward. Even in big classes, only a small percentage of the racers will chime in, most will just bitch in the dark.

At least two riders on here are expressing an interest in having the two strokes in the endurance, My experience with two strokes is that they are often faster than me on my 675, so I don't think they raise the same concerns as the 250 ninjas.

Of course, if I were running the endurance, I would qualify as my own closing speed issue and Berto would probably not run for that reason :)