Rules Discussion

[Mike Gray]

Here's your very own forum thread for discussing the ins and outs of the rules proposals this year. I will be monitoring this thread and probably using copies of it in committee. So please bring any "Discussion" of the rules here as the thread in "Official Announcements" is solely to submit Rules Proposals, and Pros and Cons.

Thank you.

[Rob Tatom]

WHOAA WOHOO HOOO POOKIE POO nuff said someone had to be first

[Sage Wilkinson]

So it was brought up last night during a tear down about the "tuning" of the OEM slipper clutches, the ZX comes with 4 slipper clutch tension springs (which it had) but it was mentioned that removing a spring or two to lighten it up would make it illegal?

Wouldn't that fall under replacement of clutch springs or tuning?

The bike comes with 4 springs, to increase the "slip" of the slipper clutch remove springs as needed, to increase the lock up of the clutch add springs as needed. Seems like more of a rider set up issue vs. cheating. This area is a bit grey IMO and needs some light on it before somebody gets teched for clutch set up, any thoughts?

[Elias Hahn]

Con to this change to allow 900cc 2V twins.....

Ducati 900cc stock HP is 74 and Torque is 56.4 lbft. Stock SV650 is 69 HP and 45 lbft. Starting with 12 extra lbft of torque, which is the same number as my 05 Gix750.....even a Supersported SV motor will only see a max torque of around 48-50 lbft if you're lucky. There is no replacement for displacement. And the Ducati simply has displacement. It should fit into the superbike category.

If you want to compare torque (pretty much a function of displacement) a cbr600rr makes about 48 lb-ft, which is near the SV, but it obviously should not run against the SV. The increase in torque gives an advantage at relatively few spots on the track, most notably starts and drive out of T9.
A 900cc ducati has (claimed) 74 hp which is only 5 more, or a 7% increase compared to a SV, however, for next year, the newest 900 ducati motor will be 6 years old. The ducati is also burdened by an additional 10-15 lbs, or about 3%.

[Mark Bothe]

The few spots that torque plays a role is off of every corner, exiting T9, T3 and T4 where you want the good drive. To start with a 12 lbft advantage is huge. And if we start to talk about a 1000 or 1100cc it's even greater. I have not looked yet at the Ducati specs for the 800 or 750, but maybe those are closer to the SV.

BTW, the SV motor has changed very little since 1999 it's inception. They added dual spark this year, but that was just to help with CAFE and emissions.

[Elias Hahn]

The few spots that torque plays a role is off of every corner, exiting T9, T3 and T4 where you want the good drive. To start with a 12 lbft advantage is huge. And if we start to talk about a 1000 or 1100cc it's even greater. I have not looked yet at the Ducati specs for the 800 or 750, but maybe those are closer to the SV.

BTW, the SV motor has changed very little since 1999 it's inception. They added dual spark this year, but that was just to help with CAFE and emissions.
Ah, torque vs hp. Drive out of corners and the use of tq or hp depends on the powerband/gearing and speed at the exit. I have very little ducati 900 experience, but I hear it's down a bit on the 1k that I ride, and I suspect the competitive advantage would be fairly small - (at least against the guys at the front.)
The 800 and 750 are at a disadvantage to the SV. The 800 is down about 8-10 rear wheel hp, iirc, the 750 a bit more.
I know that other race orgs allow the 800 to race the SV

Rear wheel data here: http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/performancedata/
(note the big difference between the '01 SV and the newer bikes, that's as large as the diff to the ducatis.)


(added) here's some info on the 800cc 2v:
moto-one.com.au (http://www.moto-one.com.au/performance/s2rmonster.html)
That looks pretty even with the SV to me.

[Brian Moe]

Here's another thought on balancing that rule for Ducati's. How would a 900cc Buell fit in if we blanket eliminate that line. Jayson Yates was running a Buell and turning 1:20's. It was pretty even down the straights with the SV's.

Currently it fits in Middleweight. If we eliminate the line it won't. I'm in favor of changing this rule somehow...but not necessarily in favor of just a blanket elimination of certain bikes.

Another way to look at it besides the specs is how competitive are the bikes running.

Not to pick on Elias was 1:16's on a 1000 SS. Eric S. last year was turning 1:20's on his Ducati SS (I think it was a 900). Mike G was turning 1:18's on his 750 SS.

So is anyone really dominating the class such that we need to totally eliminate the line? Just tweak it? Not change it all? I don't know. Just bringing up data points so we can all come up with a good recommendation.

[Mark Bothe]

Ah, torque vs hp. Drive out of corners and the use of tq or hp depends on the powerband/gearing and speed at the exit. I have very little ducati 900 experience, but I hear it's down a bit on the 1k that I ride, and I suspect the competitive advantage would be fairly small - (at least against the guys at the front.)
The 800 and 750 are at a disadvantage to the SV. The 800 is down about 8-10 rear wheel hp, iirc, the 750 a bit more.
I know that other race orgs allow the 800 to race the SV

Rear wheel data here: http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/performancedata/
(note the big difference between the '01 SV and the newer bikes, that's as large as the diff to the ducatis.)



(added) here's some info on the 800cc 2v:
moto-one.com.au (http://www.moto-one.com.au/performance/s2rmonster.html)
That looks pretty even with the SV to me.

There is some good info here Elias. I disagree with you on the torque, however. Torque is torque. The motor will ALWAYS produce the same torque, regardless of what final drive gearing you have. The torque is the same from the motor. You can change where the torque peak and power peak is within the RPM band by changing your final drive gears but those 2 things (RPM and torque) will be constant for a given engine regardless.

From the Link with the numbers on the 800, it looks very comparable to the SV. The only reason I'm comparing it to the SV is that is what the majority run in MP. I would be very in favor of allowing the 800cc 2V Ducati run in MP. The stated torque from Ducati is 52lbft which is very comparable. I think that is where it should be capped in this group to be equitable. It looks like the stock 800 2v is getting 73HP at the rear which is right on with the SV.

Thanks for the good info....

[Elias Hahn]

This may be the wrong place for this,
but the way I read the supersport rules, if I buy a SV650, I have to run a handlebar,
and to run clip-ons, I would have to get a SV650s.
Is this correct? And if so, is this a rule that people would be willing/wanting to change?

[Mike Gray]

Well, we might need a well worded rule to the effect that you can run equipment that is stock on another model of the same bike. This would fall into the Supersport Description section if I remember right. We talked about that last year, but there was no rule submitted.

[Elias Hahn]

Well, we might need a well worded rule to the effect that you can run equipment that is stock on another model of the same bike. This would fall into the Supersport Description section if I remember right. We talked about that last year, but there was no rule submitted.

What is the purpose of the rule?
It states "Handlebars: Non-OEM bars are allowed. If thriple clamp mounted bars are OEM, then clip-ons are NOT allowed. If clip-ons are OEM, triple clamp mounted bars are allowed."

Is it safety or cost related? Would it affect any class other than middleweight supersport? 450 clubman?

[Dawnette Hale]

Two things mentioned at the engine tear down of Sage's bike.

Item 1:
Section B. Supersport Regulations (page 14)

(B-2)

Following OEM gaskets are not required and prior to Exhaust: any exhaust can be used...

insert: Emission systems may be removed.

Reasoning: The emission system does not modify performance.


Item 2:
Section L: Protests (page 38)

(L-6) If the protest is upheld,... [snip]
(second bullet) OMRRA's liability shall only extend to oil, oil seals, piston rings, and gaskets.

Piston rings added to above phrase. Suggestion made because typically piston rings are not damaged other than when removed from a bike in an engine tear down or similar process.

[Darren Carpenter]

Can someone clarify this for me:

C1 – Superbike Regulations
- Displacement limits shall be: 650cc twins are limited to 680cc; 600cc bikes are
limited to 640cc; 750cc bikes are limited to 800cc.

C7 - The Middleweight Superbike class is a trophy class consisting of:
* up to 680ccs twin-cylinder, four-stroke motorcycles

C11 - The 650 GP Twins and Open Superbike Twins classes are two trophy classes consisting
of:
2) Twin cylinder, four-stroke motorcycles of 650ccs displacement (650 GP Twins).


Is the displacement limit for 650 GP Twins, 650ccs or 680ccs? It seems like an oversight that Middleweight Superbike allows 680ccs but 650GP Twins limits it to 650ccs.

[Luke Morgan]

No I believe GP twins is indeed 650, and that is why there is a separate class that covers the Superbike SV's.

[Bill Cismar]

I know it's hard to believe, but the rules were written to cover bikes other than the SV650's. Bikes such as the EX500 and the Honda Hawk were to be given the ability to increase their displacement to compete against the SV's in the other classes. 650GP twins class as a place where they where basically stock SV's. The intent was to run them at the same time as the Superbike class and force the decision, superbike or stock?

The class is misnamed though.

[Geezers rant n class structure]
In the ever growing dim past there were really only 9 classes, divided like the squares in a Tic Tac Toe game.

From bottom to top were the displacement division, Light, middle, and unlimited.
From left to right the divisions were, Stock, Superbike, GP


Unlimited/Stock -|- Unlimited/SB -|- Unlimited/GP
. Middle / Stock -|- Middle / SB -|- Middle / GP
.. Light / Stock -|- Light / SB -|- Light / GP
Migrating was allowed up and/or to the right but never left or down.

Middle was usually the most common displacement of the era, such as 350cc in the 70's and early 80's. (note our current middleweight class). Today middle would be 600cc In line-4's.
Light was anything smaller than the Middle weight, and obviously unlimited was everything bigger.

Stock was just that. The bare minimums needed to be race ready/legal.
Superbike was tweaking a stock bike with OEM parts only in the engine and off the shelf generics on the chassis (ultimately what the factory should have built if they built it to race).
GP was mixing different bits from different makes and making up parts on your own (basically anything goes)

Over the years since the death of two strokes and advent of fours, the displacements went up and became very specific. Also we've created another dimension based on the age of the bikes because the performance is not just modification and displacement based but model years are markedly better.

I imagine there are more than a few of us old timers who would love to return to the simplicity of the old days where there were just the 9 classes.

[End geezer rant]

[Tyson Silva]

too many redundant SV classes.

[Elias Hahn]

too many redundant SV classes.
There are 3, which is equivalent to a 600 or an open twin, and is in line with the original intent, per Bills TicTacToe of classes.

(You can't run both 450sb and 650gp, as they are waves that run at the same time.)

[Mark Bothe]

There are 3, which is equivalent to a 600 or an open twin, and is in line with the original intent, per Bills TicTacToe of classes.

(You can't run both 450sb and 650gp, as they are waves that run at the same time.)


A 600 can run 4 classes, both 600 classes and both 750 classes.

[Tyson Silva]

There are 3, which is equivalent to a 600 or an open twin, and is in line with the original intent, per Bills TicTacToe of classes.

(You can't run both 450sb and 650gp, as they are waves that run at the same time.)

I think one of those is redundant. Just my opinion, but something the rules committee should look at.

[Bill Cismar]

RE Slipper clutches.

The rules allow after market spring changes and these four washers are springs. The number of the washers is the way you adjust the spring pressure. the admonishment against removing metal refers to machining parts not for removal of adjustable/tuning items such as shims or spring stacks.

This is especially true when the stock owners manual tells you specifically to add or remove them to suit your taste, ergo it is intended that even a street rider would do so.

[Mark Bothe]

mark you CAN get 83-85whp in SS legal trim on a SV650 and just over 50ft/lbs tq.

just fyi.


Yeah, I know those numbers are possible, but I was just comparing the factory stock numbers. In essence, where the motors would start from.

"Your motor builder's results may vary"....:D

[Dave Salmi]

sage depends on ref honestly...

against:

1. if the book doesnt say you can..then you CANT
2. you are removing metal from motor
3. book says clutch plates. these are not



I love #1 which applies for almost everything and is so simple to enforce. However, IMO, if your bike comes OEM with an adjustable slipper clutch, it is ludicrous to say that the rule book binds you from adjusting it. The rule book needs a simple update on this one.

[Bill Cismar]

WRONG! These are NOT the springs covered in rule book! PERIOD bill, these are the slipper springs...you CANNOT remove or modify them.
ONLY clutch plates and springs can be changed...

NO rule book (expect the kit one!) tells you to remove or modify the slipper back tq springs..NO ONE.

Kawi WILL tell you how to adjust it by adjusting the clutch pak thickness by mixing the steel plate thickness's around (kawi uses 2.0, 2.3 and 2.5mm steels) but you are NOT told to remove the slippper springs...

but then again, season is over, so we could/should ammend the rule book to say

"adjustment of clutch is allowed in supersport, so long as no aftermarket items are used"

Well I disagree just as vehemently as you assert otherwise. There is nothing in the rules that specify one type of spring over any other type. Reducing or adding the number of washer springs in a spring stack is identical to changing the thickness or the number of coils in a wound spring.

It wouldn't hurt to make the distinction more crystal clear in the rules.

[Sage Wilkinson]

adjusting the slipper by using a thinner metal plate also effects the forward torque and IMO is not a good way to do it, burns up more clutches because they will slip at high RPM's like Matt G's RC51 was, besides your contradicting yourself wording it -

"adjustment of clutch is allowed in supersport, so long as no aftermarket items are used"

you want to adjust using thinner steel plates but what if a guy used aftermarket clutch plates which were not 100% OEM spec, unknowingly "adjusted" his slipper by this action and then had a technical issue on his hands because aftermarket clutches are legal and are rarely 100% oem spec

"NO rule book (expect the kit one!) tells you to remove or modify the slipper back tq springs..NO ONE. "

kit rule books? thats a new one....

In the books or not those springs are there to tension the back torque of the clutch, less springs = less tension = more slip, not a hard concept. I'm sure the rule books needed to be revised when adjustable suspension hit the track and guy's were complaining about the cost of springs and brazing up a compression holes to redrill it a smaller size arguing you could run thicker oil and add air to the fork to make it stiffer.

if its not allowed for the mechanical clutches what do you do with honda? allow a kit ecu like we currently do but disallow electrical control of their back torque system within that ECU?

keep it simple - "allow adjustment of OEM slipper clutches"

[Mark Bothe]

Please see the discussion of Shark Fins in the Rules proposals and then comment here.

[Michael Lenz]

Sharkfins ---

I think Bill is smoking crack, and Rob hasn't bought a new bike before.

To answer Bill's question... I know two people that have lost digits in rear sprocket related incidents while racing. One on his bike, the other on a competitors. And another that lost a tip while cleaning a chain by putting the bike in gear and got it taken off that way... you might remember that one. All of them would have been prevented.

To answer Mark's question... Nicky Moore had his glove sucked into the countershaft and lost a tip.

Racing is dangerous enough what is $30 to keep your finger or little persons arm from being ripped off. Course maybe I am the only one that has had a running bike pin them and try to hump them ( 69 ).

[Rob Tatom]

Well to answer the New Bike Question Mike In the last 10 years alone I bought a 97,01,and 04 GSXR 600 Brand new 0 miles on them and currently have a 998 So yes I have had a few bikes and I know what a freakin chain guard is, when your racing don,t put your fingers near the chain, and I don,t race in sandals!

[Bill Cismar]

A shark fin will not protect you from trying to clean a chain and sprocket while the bike is running and in gear. And in fact, I'll wager that even on a bike with these fins, I can still run a boot or glove through the sprocket, especially on the ones with plastic guards.

You would get far more from requiring a kill cord to stop the motor when the rider is off the bike.

But seriously. Just how safe do we need to make motorcycle racing? They have developed those suits that inflate as soon as a rider comes off the bike.

[Rob Tatom]

Bill where can I get on of those suits I need it for my daily life just to protect myself from myself

[Bill Cismar]

Bill where can I get on of those suits I need it for my daily life just to protect myself from myself

http://www.motoair.com/
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/pedbimot/motorcycle/00-NHT-212-motorcycle/motorcycle43-44.html


There are even airbags for the bikes. Feel like face planting into a big pink ass?
http://world.honda.com/MotorcycleAirbag/image/top/top.jpg
http://world.honda.com/MotorcycleAirbag/

[Michael Lenz]

Just how safe do we need to make motorcycle racing?

How retarded is that, were you wearing a friggin KBC when you crashed in 3? Suppose we don't need airfence either.

[Bill Cismar]

How retarded is that, were you wearing a friggin KBC when you crashed in 3? Suppose we don't need airfence either.

Wow what a rhetorical giant you are.

1st, KBC helmets actually provide better protection against brain injury than "expensive" helmets. There have been several studies explaining the facts.
Second, it is worse than being retarded to be so immature as to need insult to justify your position. And anytime you want to compare IQs or life experience, you just let me know.
Third, Air Fence is a safety device placed in a location which had proved itself to be a real and persistent threat to every rider risking severe injury and even death. Your chain guard is for a minor threat of minor injury in extremely seldom instances.

I've already issued the challenge, I can run a boot or glove into the rear sprocket of a bike with those fins on them. Hint! They bend when struck from the side, as in if the bike landed on your foot or you land on the sprocket.

It is my opinion that the threat is not significant and the suggested solution is ineffective. An engine kill cord would be much more effective. The fact that you don't seem to want to see that makes me wonder if you are more vested in addressing the risk, or applying your solution.

[Michael Lenz]

Wow what a rhetorical giant you are.

Honestly Bill, your comments about motorcycle safety were truly insightful.

A lanyard would be great for the case when a bike separates from the rider then comes back to greet the rider.

For the other cases ... given the most common angles of impact the fin wouldn't snap off, rather it would grind against the chain while the foreign object would continue past the chain/chainwheel connection point. The only thing the fin needs to do is deflect the mass long enough for it to pass the chain/chainwheel connection point. The design ensures that, if installed correctly.

Can you jam a boot toe in there? Sure, but at that angle you have no risk of actually intersecting the chain/chainwheel connection point.

I assume with the KBC being safer comment you were referring to the study that found plastic shells to be better than composite fiberglass and composite carbon fiber in the testing they conducted. If so you are mistaken, the KBC is a composite fiberglass shell, they are the same construction as the other 'expensive helmets' they just don't generally fit as well due to craftsmanship on the interior liner.

[Note: What I find retarded is the blatant dismal, mitten and blow up suit comments you made immediately after the post in the committee thread.]

[Bill Cismar]

My bike has a fin. I run a rolled up rag (thicker than a hand) into the sprocket to seat the wheel against the adjuster when mounting the wheel, and the fin doesn't prevent it. It's a little more awkward but hardly prevented. Pressing it inward will not grind it against the sprocket. If it were that close to the sprocket it would interfere with the ability to swap sprockets and change gearing.

Some of my competitors ride single sided swing arms. They do not have fins and mounting one would be more than just a little problemmatic. Why don't you show me a picture of a fin mounted on a Ducati 1098?

There were two posts about the inflatable suits. First is rhetorical specifically because it points out that there are reasonable limits to attempts to eliminate ALL risks. The second one was a direct response to Rob who asked where such suits can be found. If my response to Rob offends you, then but out of our exchange. The challenge to acknowledge that there are reasonable limits to attempting to eliminate every single risk, bothers you, then explain how you justify racing at all considering the vastly larger threats which remain unsolvable.

My KBC helmet fits me better than any top line design since Shoe changed their fitments. And your wrong about the shell. It is a "POWERCORE Shell – Using a specially selected mix of advanced impact resistant thermo resins, the Force shell is produced using the latest injection molding technology for the highest degree of shell integrity and consistency." Good enough for Matt Maladin.

If you wanted to require that bike equipped stock with chain guard fins are required to keep them or replace them with similar designs, I could support that. But to require bikes that don't have them to try to coble something together to fix such a low level threat is just not reasonable in my eyes.

So who is really being retarded?

[Bill Cismar]

PS
You might also consider the risk of compromising the swing arm by drilling holes into them.

Aprilia had a massive recall replacing swing arms because they were cracking all the way through. The problem was a small 1/8" hole drilled for,,,
are you ready for it?

the chain guard fin aka toe guard.

That failure was due to a factory design implemented during manufacture.
And you want club level wingnuts drilling on their swing arms?

[Michael Lenz]

Good thing you got the lower end KBC and not their VR-2 professional road racing helmet. As that one actually is... "...constructed using an advanced formula of fiberglass, carbon and kevlar..."

You know that your inflatable suit comment was to belittle a perspective. Rationale points would have been just fine.

Valid points on the 1098 and folks that can't safety wire an exhaust drilling their swingarm. Its nice to see bikes like the R6 actually shipping with the mounting place welded to the swingarm. Perhaps until that is more common it is premature.

The flex built into some aftermarket fins allows it to bend toward the chainwheel when pushed from the side, hence the only thing when force is exerted is grinding. The flex doesn't not compromise the functionality.

I can't speak to the mounting position of yours or its construction, as I am not a SME on your model nor its construction. Though I have seen a couple race specific models that ship with them to meet some European sanctioning requirements. One of Peter's bikes shipped with it. While it met the requirement to have one, it wasn't designed or installed properly, making it functionally useless.

The intention behind the proposal was to eliminate unnecessary risk. If the club doesn't agree with the sentiment that is the right of its membership.

[Bill Cismar]

You made several consecutive assumptions which were each false:

1) That the question about inflatable vest was meant to belittle you and nothing to do with illustrating the limits to how far we should push "safety" for safety sake. FALSE If I belittled anything it was your suggestion, not you. Try to discern the difference.

2) Every bike can have a "Toe Guard installed with minimal ease and maximum benefit. FALSE

3) That I was a retard, had suffered brain injury and my KBC helmet was relevant to the discussion and inferior in it's performance. FALSE, FALSE, FALSE & FALSE Your innuendo about not using the more expensive "pro race" version is laughable. Is it worse that I do not use the expensive helmet you tried to discredit, or worse that I use a model that has been shown to be superior in protection for a lower cost?

4) That calling me a retard and suggesting that I had suffered head trauma would some how make YOU look oh so much smarter, and thusly your idea would be oh so much better. ???? Well do you feel so much smarter? Is your idea looking that much better after your insults?

[Bill Cismar]

Oh and I completely left off your initial assertion that I'm a crack smoker.

Sharkfins ---
I think Bill is smoking crack, and Rob hasn't bought a new bike before.


Nice.

[Michael Lenz]

lol, our perspectives and assessment of the situation differs. I simply disagree with you and your assessment, you don't have to accept my assessment, but you have to accept the fact that I don't agree with you.

If you are this much of a pit-bull on what you believe is in the best interest of your positions, one would assume you would steer clear of venal influences. That is one reason why I still believe you deserved my vote to sit on the board.

Have a good weekend Bill.

[Michael Lenz]

Damn Dorn's humor must be wearing off on me. DARN YOU ERIC!!!!

[Michael Lenz]

btw... calling someone they are smokin crack is as heavy as saying 'gee wiz' when you were growing up Bill ... so let me correct that ... 'Gee wiz Bill where are you coming from man?'

Question to Rob was actually about a GP bike to get clarification that the Honda pictures show a RS125 coming with a fin, while Rob said it didn't. Hence.. statement about used v. new purchases.

[Bill Cismar]

lol, our perspectives and assessment of the situation differs. I simply disagree with you and your assessment, you don't have to accept my assessment, but you have to accept the fact that I don't agree with you.

If you are this much of a pit-bull on what you believe is in the best interest of your positions, one would assume you would steer clear of venal influences. That is one reason why I still believe you deserved my vote to sit on the board.

Have a good weekend Bill.

Ahh.

A most excellent response.

I accept that we disagree. The intention of the discussion was to determine the root of the disagreement to search for an agreeable position, even if only to agree that we disagree. No ill will was ever intended, only discovery. Having others who populate this and other forum's, who's best response to any challenge is to draw questions to one's manhood or heritage, has caused me to look wearily at words even when posted by friends.

You are most correct sir. I am not for sale in contravention of my offices.

I hope you have a great holiday weekend.

[Rob Tatom]

I've never seen a RS 125 with a chain guard, But then again I know nothing about them I have a 98 and a 01 I went out and looked at them and see no place where a guard came with the Bike, But since I never bought one new (why would I they are virtually same from 95 to 2007) But I'm sure you will prove me wrong? I think the guys I bought my 125's from took the headlights and turn signals off also Now I'm PISSED i'm gonna call them and give them a piece of my mind and Damn I did'nt get the Keys or titles either I got screwed

[Rob Tatom]

Now I'm really pissed I just looked a both my Manuals and in the section where they show the pictures of every single piece I can order for my bikes they did'nt list or put a picture of a chain guard in there. I'm confused it shows every single Bolt and washer Damn MISPRINTS, Or Peter has the RS 125 RSXR limited edition I could'nt afford that model

[Rob Tatom]

I believe you seen a picture of a Bike raced in Japan they run Guards over there!

[Rob Tatom]

And keep your comments to yourself Cismar you know nothing about 125's--- Oh Sh*t I forgot Stormy had one and handed my Arse to me for 2 seasons, But you did'nt work on it ,well except for the time you put a Crank in it, But that's not really working on it is it?

[Scott Soper]

Hey, I nominated Mike Gray for bathroom supervisor but I didn't see it on the ballot. What ever happened to that?

[Michael Lenz]

I've never seen a RS 125 with a chain guard, But then again I know nothing about them I have a 98 and a 01 I went out and looked at them and see no place where a guard came with the Bike, But since I never bought one new (why would I they are virtually same from 95 to 2007) But I'm sure you will prove me wrong? I think the guys I bought my 125's from took the headlights and turn signals off also Now I'm PISSED i'm gonna call them and give them a piece of my mind and Damn I did'nt get the Keys or titles either I got screwed

lol ... glad to see you haven't lost your sense of humor along with all that weight.

[Michael Lenz]

Peter has the RS 125 RSXR limited edition I could'nt afford that model

naw, just the NSR, after he broke his arm his sponsor took all the bikes back and sold them. So if you are offering him a ride on your RS125RSXR let me the details. Sounds like a mighty powerful steed.

[Michael Lenz]

for those not in the know.. his NSR isn't the same one Rob, Mike and Dorn have. His has two wheels and has a net value of about 1300 bucks. Strike that, Dorn sold his.

[Rob Tatom]

That NSX for your information! not NSR??????????? and I think mines worth about $1300 dollars Now!?!?!?!?!, But that another story?

[Michael Lenz]

X, R.. whats the diff besides a bit of skin?

[Rob Tatom]

Huh???????????