OZ ATV :: The Australian ATV Forum

[HoleshotQR#24]

The 2011 SA ATV MX State Title has been announced for August 27th & 28th at QuadridersSA home track at Acusa Park, Harrogate. The committee is working hard making final preparations for the event and gathering business and industry support to help build on the success of last years event.

Supp regs and entry forms are in the final stages of development and should be available soon.

5-rounds over 2-days should make for a great weekend of racing.

Who's in/Who's out (& why) to help give us a better feel for numbers?
_________________
Proud Member of QuadridersSA
www.dualroost.com.au

[Raptor700Matt]

im going if they running a clubman class
also will a 90cc also oem class b run my son and daughter ride raptor 90?
cheers matt
_________________
Raptor700Matt
2010 Raptor 700 SE
2011 450R SE
2011 Raptor 90 x2

Thanks Bikes N Gear WHYALLA

[last minute racing]

Troy,Danelle,Kristen,Kiara will all be riding should be good.
_________________
Yamaha all the way except for the Pro Shark

[JRE]

Reckon I may make a come back if we can get someone decent to prep the track.

[last minute racing]

We will need at least 2 ambo vans if your riding
_________________
Yamaha all the way except for the Pro Shark

[bullet]

What... half a JRE in each van ?
_________________
Can-Am X Team
Bullet #Y12. MrsB #Y18.

[Watson107]

Won't be able to make it this year
_________________
Triple A Racing
Atv's Unlimited
Yamaha
Just Heads

Thanks to:
The Old Man
QuadridersSA
www.dualroost.com.au

[HoleshotQR#24]

Amended supp regs will be available shortly
_________________
Proud Member of QuadridersSA
www.dualroost.com.au

Last edited by HoleshotQR#24 on Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:38 pm; edited 1 time in total

[Go Hard Or Go Home]

It's a shame it clashes with our State Round 5.

[Rotax46]

Note that MSA have confirmed rule 22.4.1.5 can not be implemented and therefore does not apply

Quote:

refering to rule 22.4.1.5 in the Quad rules. www.ma.org.au/moms This rule will not be implemented, as it cannot be policed. This was approved by the MA Board the last time we met. Cheers Ivan G

_________________
Rotax46
Proud member of SA Quad Club.
www.saquadclub.com.au

[bullet]

Rotax46 wrote:

Note that MSA have confirmed rule 22.4.1.5 can not be implemented and therefore does not apply Quote: refering to rule 22.4.1.5 in the Quad rules. www.ma.org.au/moms This rule will not be implemented, as it cannot be policed. This was approved by the MA Board the last time we met. Cheers Ivan G

This is untrue and incorrect.
All current GCR's apply.
Note: Item BR 1557 Wed July 20, 2011 MA Board Meeting.

Contact: Ross Martin MA.
_________________
Can-Am X Team
Bullet #Y12. MrsB #Y18.

[jumbo danny]

[/quote][/quote]
This is untrue and incorrect.
All current GCR's apply.
Note: Item BR 1557 Wed July 20, 2011 MA Board Meeting.

Contact: Ross Martin MA.[/quote]

bit harsh there bullet

untrue and incorrect ????????????? hum???

does that mean that there isn't going to be a 90 class cause there are no y10 bikes as of yet sold with in Australia
your list is untrue and incorrect , just my observation i did ring some of the major importers and got some real facts they haven't got y10 with in Australia check with yamaha,honda,kawasaki,suzuki,polaris,apex proshark,eton, I did . didn't waste time asking can am sure you will say other wise . {you put a date of manufacturer to comply this means bikes b4 that date don't comply} they are still trying to move old stock
that's how i see it .
cheers Danny

[bullet]

Firstly, MA do not require full SVIA Y10+ATV standard compliance, and never have.
I assume that's what you are reffering to when you write "y10".

MA refer to the speed limit of the Y10+ category, which is 48kmh.
It is also the same for Y12+ category.
It is only the 48 speed limit that applies, and equivalence is invited.
The intention (as been explaind many times before) is fair racing for like machines.
Most manufacturers in the world build Junior achines to this standard.
MA Operations Manager Barry French sent out a full list and MA interpretation on 6:5:2011 (chech your e-mails around 4:43pm).

You have a point for older model machines as pre this updated 2011 list some of the 45 manufacturers listed were not signatories to the standards but still produced machines in line with the standard.
there is a history of signatories and when they came on board.
Research the 2009 list and the earliest 2007 list also if you like.

In any case, it is up to MA how their rules are interpreted, and you have that information. MA have the final say on what any rule means. If you still do not understand... don't rip it up and deliberately cause confusion on a public forum... contact MA directly, yourself.
Ross Martin is the Communications Manager and responsible for rule interpretation.

The policing issue is incredibly simple...
If it's built by a manufacturer on the list, and it passes normal scrutineering as OEM... then it complies.

Policing beyond that, is the same as any other class (Junior or Senior) and any other rule in the book.

"untrue and incorrect" a bit harsh???
Rule 22.4.1.5 can not be wiped out by rumour on a public forum.
MA rules apply until an official bulletin is released saying otherwise.

If you want to understand the manufacturing standards better, try...

As a result of the passage of the 2008 Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) ATVs entered into commerce in the US have to conform to the ANSI/SVIA 1-2007 standard for ATVs. This voluntary standard was made mandatory by the adoption of the standard as regulation. Additional information can be found at the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (the US federal regulatory agency) web site at: http://www.cpsc.gov/about/cpsia/sect232.html
Regards,
Tom Yager (tyager@svia.org)

But keep in mind that MA apply only the 48kmh speed limit (all Y10+atv and Y12+ATV)
_________________
Can-Am X Team
Bullet #Y12. MrsB #Y18.

[jumbo danny]

well as a volunteer/ L3 scrutineer i wonder what we should and shouldn't checked i think its all too hard and have serious doubts about helping out !
most don't want the 50" rule policed
others don't want the 50cc checked
others don't want the 90cc checked
Ive stayed right out of it for a while still nothing is being resolved, he said, she said & bullet said toooo much thinking about# not helping out=easier life ;
done no more on this till MA sort it out
cheers danny

[JRE]

Best way I can see to fix this is make Blaster class the first level of competition. 50-90 etc is just fun class ie run what you own. solves all the issues everyone gets a ride and stops the adults bitching. the fast kids know who they are. plus it gives the kids a less stressful environment to learn their skills and get ready for blaster class where parents can mortgage the house if they choose to make their kids bikes awesome. Either way this petty bullshit has to stop as it only drags our reputation down with MA as a serious catagory in motorsport.

On a side note it will be a shame if you choose not to help Danny as your time as a volunteer would be greatly appreciated. However as a scrutineer you are to follow the rules and GCR's. But to pull out because you dont like MA's decision with regard to one of the rules is a cop out and will only disadvantage the kids you are trying to support. We all need to suck it up and let MA do their job writing the rules and do our job and follow them. With a bit of luck and a "profanity removed" load of hard work we can make this State title a memorable one for the right reasons.

Sorry for the rant but it is finally starting to give me the shits.

John

[Daryl R]

Hey shouldnt this be about the kids having fun.

[Watson107]

well said john completely agree
_________________
Triple A Racing
Atv's Unlimited
Yamaha
Just Heads

Thanks to:
The Old Man
QuadridersSA
www.dualroost.com.au

[triple"A"]

JRE for PM

[HoleshotQR#24]

Corrected supp regs are now up on MSA Website.

http://www.motorcyclingsa.org.au/documents/QuadridersAssocofSA27thand28thAugust2011-2011SAAVTMotocrossStateTitlesSuppRegsandEntryFo_001.pdf
_________________
Proud Member of QuadridersSA
www.dualroost.com.au

[Rotax46]

This makes it easier now the Y10 compliancy issue is out.

If you need to have this confirmed please do not hesitate to contact MSA. They will be happy to confirm.

Quote:
refering to rule 22.4.1.5 in the Quad rules. www.ma.org.au/moms

This rule will not be implemented, as it cannot be policed.

This was approved by the MA Board the last time we met.

Cheers
Ivan G
_________________
Rotax46
Proud member of SA Quad Club.
www.saquadclub.com.au

[pyjamas]

The girls cant wait to get out and have some fun
and have stress free parents
_________________
If you're not having fun, it's not worth doing

Thanks to
The Goldfinches
Squire Sisters Racing
Motorcycle Parts an Gear
Off Road Vixens
Burra Tyres
SA Quad Club
and everyone else who helped us

[bullet]

The kids racing is getting better to watch all the time.
I hope we get big classes.
_________________
Can-Am X Team
Bullet #Y12. MrsB #Y18.

Last edited by bullet on Fri Aug 12, 2011 7:04 pm; edited 1 time in total

[Rotax46]

bullet wrote:

The kids racing is getting better to watch all the time. I hope we get big classes.

Without the Y10 restriction it is sure to be.
_________________
Rotax46
Proud member of SA Quad Club.
www.saquadclub.com.au

[triple"A"]

ok so now i'm confused

the ammended supp regs have had the item referring to a need to produce a certificate of compliance removed, but i see no change to the seperation of limited and competition machines. in other words up to 48km/h capability is the limited class, over 48km/h capability is the competition class. what could be simpler really?

but now i see a copy and pasted message from I Golding wiping out the whole reference to the 48km/h factor.

the conversations i've had indicate Mr Golding's comments to be incorrect

as brought up at our most recent club meeting, SA is the only state with issues on this, and in surveying verbally, the people involved in this age group's racing, SA doesnt have issue either, but still we have disturbance over the classes caused by the presentation of application for supp reg approval.

purely and simply, why cant we have the same classes and regs as the vic state title and the WA state rounds?? there is no confusion on those

[PeteW]

triple"A" wrote:

ok so now i'm confused the ammended supp regs have had the item referring to a need to produce a certificate of compliance removed, but i see no change to the seperation of limited and competition machines. in other words up to 48km/h capability is the limited class, over 48km/h capability is the competition class. what could be simpler really? but now i see a copy and pasted message from I Golding wiping out the whole reference to the 48km/h factor. the conversations i've had indicate Mr Golding's comments to be incorrect as brought up at our most recent club meeting, SA is the only state with issues on this, and in surveying verbally, the people involved in this age group's racing, SA doesnt have issue either, but still we have disturbance over the classes caused by the presentation of application for supp reg approval. purely and simply, why cant we have the same classes and regs as the vic state title and the WA state rounds?? there is no confusion on those

I'm with ya there Kev, it's not a hard concept for the states that have had the biggest MX series's to deal with......
_________________


www.thumbpump.com
www.dirtcomp.com.au