TT Website Forum
So they should it was a disgrace - Printable Version

+- TT Website Forum (http://www.ttwebsite.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Isle of Man TT Website (http://www.ttwebsite.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Manx Grand Prix & Classic TT (http://www.ttwebsite.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=12)
+--- Thread: So they should it was a disgrace (/showthread.php?tid=8415)

Pages: 1 2 3 4


So they should it was a disgrace - an old man returns - 13-10-2009

Such was the pace of Senior Classic Race winner Ryan Farquhar (108.018mph) that only Wattie Brown (2nd place, 102.295mph) finished within 110% of his time - hence only two of the coveted Manx Grand Prix replicas were awarded for the Senior Classic in 2009. The Committee of the Manx Motor Cycle Club have since decided to recognise the fantastic effort of Andy Reynolds' who claimed the last rostrum position by awarding a third replica to him- congratulations Andy!



Well done Andy

(It should be done without question, on the podium a replica awarded)


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - cregnybaa - 13-10-2009

(13-10-2009, 02:31 PM)an old man returns Wrote: Such was the pace of Senior Classic Race winner Ryan Farquhar (108.018mph) that only Wattie Brown (2nd place, 102.295mph) finished within 110% of his time - hence only two of the coveted Manx Grand Prix replicas were awarded for the Senior Classic in 2009. The Committee of the Manx Motor Cycle Club have since decided to recognise the fantastic effort of Andy Reynolds' who claimed the last rostrum position by awarding a third replica to him- congratulations Andy!



Well done Andy

(It should be done without question, on the podium a replica awarded)

Ken this may be the right or the wrong thing to do i don't honestly know but i have said before that actively encouraging tt riders to the manx will i believe be the beginning of the end once you take away the chance of the ordinary competitor to win a replica the entries will fall i think there was only 60 in the senior classic this year and i bet there will be Evan less next year.


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - an old man returns - 13-10-2009

The point I am making is that the first three (on the podium) should be recognised for their efforts, it was uncomfortable at the prize giving for third place to receive a finishers medal.

Having said that I completely agree with your statement, there is little chance of reward in the current climate of entry and this has a direct effect on entries for the classic. I understand that the awarding of rep's may come under a broader regime next year. Will that save the Classic MGP? the historical effect may be too great to rescue.


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - norstar - 23-10-2009

I agree as well, with the awarding of the rep to Andy Reynolds but would the extra allowance given to Andy allowed any other riders in the Junior or Lightweight classes to have got a rep? It was the same race and all should be treated the same!!
As to the TT or professional riders at the Manx, this will go on for ever but if any rider averaging over 100mph is discounted as far as reps are concerned, would this solve the problem!


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - superted - 23-10-2009

(23-10-2009, 10:54 AM)norstar Wrote: I agree as well, with the awarding of the rep to Andy Reynolds but would the extra allowance given to Andy allowed any other riders in the Junior or Lightweight classes to have got a rep? It was the same race and all should be treated the same!!
As to the TT or professional riders at the Manx, this will go on for ever but if any rider averaging over 100mph is discounted as far as reps are concerned, would this solve the problem!

Although Ryan is obviously quick the main difference was what he was riding, and it is that which has put off a large number of riders. Although completely modern it's closer to post classic, and now that 4 valve heads are allowed that is where it should be


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - Carole - 23-10-2009

(23-10-2009, 04:52 PM)superted Wrote:
(23-10-2009, 10:54 AM)norstar Wrote: I agree as well, with the awarding of the rep to Andy Reynolds but would the extra allowance given to Andy allowed any other riders in the Junior or Lightweight classes to have got a rep? It was the same race and all should be treated the same!!
As to the TT or professional riders at the Manx, this will go on for ever but if any rider averaging over 100mph is discounted as far as reps are concerned, would this solve the problem!

Although Ryan is obviously quick the main difference was what he was riding, and it is that which has put off a large number of riders. Although completely modern it's closer to post classic, and now that 4 valve heads are allowed that is where it should be

There's no doubt the Paton is quick, but it is within current rules, just as the replica Manx Nortons and G50's are. Let,s not forget that Andy was also riding a Paton.
Having said that, I for one am delighted that he got his replica- great bloke and well deserved. Well done Andy!


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - superted - 24-10-2009

(23-10-2009, 11:37 PM)Carole Wrote: There's no doubt the Paton is quick, but it is within current rules, just as the replica Manx Nortons and G50's are. Let,s not forget that Andy was also riding a Paton.
Having said that, I for one am delighted that he got his replica- great bloke and well deserved. Well done Andy!

If it was within the rules I wouldn't quibble, but it isn't even a replica of anything that was made in the classic era, whereas the "supermonos" are. It was conceived and built in the 80s

However, regardless of what I think there is absolutely no doubt that allowing it in for the past couple of years has pretty well killed the class, which is why it has had to be opened up to 750s. Note the number of 500 riders who opted to ride their 350s in the mixed class this year. Why do you suppose that was?

I am pleased for Andy too, having raced against him for many years, but he would be the first to admit that on his previous mount he wouldn't have had a sniff of the podium, and that was one of the "supermonos"


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - Gstarron - 25-10-2009

Actually, the field was almost even between the Jr and Sr Classics. And it seems there were more Jr Classice entries this year. Now, I did talk to a couple of racers and it was a difficult decision... some made it based on loyalty to a sponsor, some based on how good one bike was running Vs the other, etc. And a few guys made the decision at the last possible minute.. in the end again both classes were pretty even on bike count. And as I have stated more than once, "It's the economy"... that kept a bunch of racers and spectators away.. Oh yes, and I know of a couple of guys that were denied their entry so the were not there...

Ron - from Sunny California... Long live the MGP..!!

(24-10-2009, 11:39 PM)superted Wrote: However, regardless of what I think there is absolutely no doubt that allowing it in for the past couple of years has pretty well killed the class, which is why it has had to be opened up to 750s. Note the number of 500 riders who opted to ride their 350s in the mixed class this year. Why do you suppose that was?



RE: So they should it was a disgrace - andyr - 27-10-2009

Thanks for the kind words posted here. I was offered the Paton by a very generous sponsor and at my age could'nt turn the offer down. I'd be the first to admit that our Paton was 'too fast for rider' but it was wonderful to circulate the TT course on.
My personal view is that it is as legal as some of the fastest singles but that doesn't matter now, as it is up for sale and I've retired from the TT course. Third place was brilliant and it was fantastic to have been allowed to receive a replica with that 3rd place inscribed on it. I can't beat that.
I wish safe and fast riding to those younger and future Classic MGP riders, I had a great time, my future riding will be Lansdowne races on the Manx Norton with a few gravel traps to rest my old bones on!


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - David Linsdell - 27-10-2009

(24-10-2009, 11:39 PM)superted Wrote:
(23-10-2009, 11:37 PM)Carole Wrote: There's no doubt the Paton is quick, but it is within current rules, just as the replica Manx Nortons and G50's are. Let,s not forget that Andy was also riding a Paton.
Having said that, I for one am delighted that he got his replica- great bloke and well deserved. Well done Andy!

If it was within the rules I wouldn't quibble, but it isn't even a replica of anything that was made in the classic era, whereas the "supermonos" are. It was conceived and built in the 80s

However, regardless of what I think there is absolutely no doubt that allowing it in for the past couple of years has pretty well killed the class, which is why it has had to be opened up to 750s. Note the number of 500 riders who opted to ride their 350s in the mixed class this year. Why do you suppose that was?

I am pleased for Andy too, having raced against him for many years, but he would be the first to admit that on his previous mount he wouldn't have had a sniff of the podium, and that was one of the "supermonos"

I would just like to point out that the Paton is in fact a replica of a bike that was first built and raced in 1968. The bikes are built in the original factory, from the original drawings and are more a true replica than many of the singles, as is the MV. Like it or not, what is happening is a repeat of what happened in the period, which is what classic racing is about. There is no doubt whatsoever that the bike is within the rules, ask the club or the scrutineers, or even one of the riders that raced one in the 1960's!

I'd like to mention again that Alan Oversby lapped faster on his single than he managed on the MV, and that Chris Palmer regularly split the Patons on a G50. It is the package of rider and machine which makes a fast lap. It's been gone over and over, so one more time won't hurt; this has always been the case in the classic Manx. The main reason the replica situation was so bad this year was the weather and the combined junior/senior cut out many of the regular front runners.

Dad, on his Royal Enfield Bullet, built in our shed at home and financed from my parents pockets, would have been set for a podium position if he had finished. He will be back next year and is confident of winning a replica if the bike makes it to the finish, under the current rules.

On a personal note, I'd like to congratulate Andy on his podium and replica - you couldn't meet a nicer man. I'll see you around the paddock next year!

David


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - Will Loder - 10-11-2009

Well said David. I have a book written in the early 80s with a test and photo of the 60s/early 70s 4 valve 'works' paton and the earlier 2 valve version and if you ask me they look pretty similar to the current one. At least as similar if not more similar than a 95 bore manx looks to a 86 bore version. So to say that the 4 valve paton was concieved in the 80s is wrong.

Whether or not you should be able to build a replica of a 'works' Paton when I know that Ken Platt was refused permission to build a replica of the outside flywheel 'works' Norton is more questionable. As is the clubs refusal to allow replicas of 'period' homemade 4 valve heads despite the fact that they were a lot more available than a works MV. Mularney would have sold you his 4-valve manx.......there is no way MV would sell you a works bike!

Lets not forget that Oversby has lapped at over 108mph on a Manx Norton and so did Bill Swallow in the 1999 singles TT (i think it was 1999).


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - an old man returns - 10-11-2009

Wasnt Alans lap (flipping brilliant), in his own words, "slipstreaming the Paton", or is my old memory failing here. I also seem to have a beffudled memory that Bills bike wasnt a 500 at the TT.

Ready to be shot down.

Andy is a gent.....


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - Will Loder - 10-11-2009

Alan's lap was following the Paton yes. He said that in lots of places Ryan was holding him up through the corners, but it did give him a tow down some of the straights. How much difference following the Paton made is tough to know, typically they're so much faster down the straights that it's impossible to slipstream them, so Alan must have been coming onto the straights a hell of a lot faster than the Paton to be anywhere near it.

Bill's TT bike was a 500, I believe Andy Reynolds can verify that as he used to ride it. Bob Heath played about with 650 G50 engines, alloy swingarms and more modern forks, but never really got it all working.


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - andyr - 10-11-2009

[/align][/b][b][align=left]
(10-11-2009, 10:59 AM)Will Loder Wrote: Alan's lap was following the Paton yes. He said that in lots of places Ryan was holding him up through the corners, but it did give him a tow down some of the straights. How much difference following the Paton made is tough to know, typically they're so much faster down the straights that it's impossible to slipstream them, so Alan must have been coming onto the straights a hell of a lot faster than the Paton to be anywhere near it.

Bill's TT bike was a 500, I believe Andy Reynolds can verify that as he used to ride it. Bob Heath played about with 650 G50 engines, alloy swingarms and more modern forks, but never really got it all working.

When we got the Petty that Bill rode it was 570cc and Brian Richards, the owner, told us that it was in that form that Bill rode it at the Singles TT, when he did the quick lap. When they cancelled the Singles TT the owner sold the 570 crank to the Summerfields and the bike is now in 500c form.
I tested it at Mallory Park in 570cc form and it didn't half pull!
I entered the 2000 Singles TT but we had the foot and mouth crisis and then the race was removed from the TT programme!
Brilliant bike though, even as a 500, 58bhp and perfect around the Island.


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - an old man returns - 10-11-2009

(10-11-2009, 11:23 AM)andyr Wrote: [/align][/b][b][align=left]
(10-11-2009, 10:59 AM)Will Loder Wrote: Alan's lap was following the Paton yes. He said that in lots of places Ryan was holding him up through the corners, but it did give him a tow down some of the straights. How much difference following the Paton made is tough to know, typically they're so much faster down the straights that it's impossible to slipstream them, so Alan must have been coming onto the straights a hell of a lot faster than the Paton to be anywhere near it.

Bill's TT bike was a 500, I believe Andy Reynolds can verify that as he used to ride it. Bob Heath played about with 650 G50 engines, alloy swingarms and more modern forks, but never really got it all working.

When we got the Petty that Bill rode it was 570cc and Brian Richards, the owner, told us that it was in that form that Bill rode it at the Singles TT, when he did the quick lap. When they cancelled the Singles TT the owner sold the 570 crank to the Summerfields and the bike is now in 500c form.
I tested it at Mallory Park in 570cc form and it didn't half pull!
I entered the 2000 Singles TT but we had the foot and mouth crisis and then the race was removed from the TT programme!
Brilliant bike though, even as a 500, 58bhp and perfect around the Island.

Befuddled or not the memory worked that time.

Will we see you return Andy? has Bill decided to call it a day too noticed his bike up for sale....thats a shame George will miss his chats with Bill


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - David Linsdell - 10-11-2009

(10-11-2009, 12:45 AM)Will Loder Wrote: Well said David. I have a book written in the early 80s with a test and photo of the 60s/early 70s 4 valve 'works' paton and the earlier 2 valve version and if you ask me they look pretty similar to the current one. At least as similar if not more similar than a 95 bore manx looks to a 86 bore version. So to say that the 4 valve paton was concieved in the 80s is wrong.

Whether or not you should be able to build a replica of a 'works' Paton when I know that Ken Platt was refused permission to build a replica of the outside flywheel 'works' Norton is more questionable. As is the clubs refusal to allow replicas of 'period' homemade 4 valve heads despite the fact that they were a lot more available than a works MV. Mularney would have sold you his 4-valve manx.......there is no way MV would sell you a works bike!

Lets not forget that Oversby has lapped at over 108mph on a Manx Norton and so did Bill Swallow in the 1999 singles TT (i think it was 1999).

Agreed Will - the current rules stipulate that a replica can be made if the bikes were available for sale to the public I believe, and the Paton was available as a customer bike. However, maybe Ken Platt should re-apply as they have now let in the MV, which was certainly not available to the public (see also the Gilera). I believe that the current rules also state that any other bike is allowed in at the discretion of the committee.

However, to the original point, rest assured that the builders of the Patons have provided more than adequate proof that the Paton in the spec currently produced was raced within the era in question to both the CRMC and the Manx Motorcycle Club.

David


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - smokey125 - 10-11-2009

The rules now don’t really state anything other than it must be of a type used in the period. They used to state that “factory or works” replicas weren’t allowed along with replicas of things such as the Mularney, unless it was the original, Bob Newby ran the original Mularney a few times at the Manx.

As for the Paton’s being available to the public that is tenuous to say the least! With only 2 of the 8 valve 500’s being built and only about 10 bikes in a 10 year period ranging from 250 to 500 it would be very hard to describe them as anything other than a factory bike. Equally the MV became Privit (don’t think that’s spelt right) after MV pulled out of racing, you could argue that they were then available to the public. Incidentally I have raced against one of the Privit MV’s so they remained available to the public.

As for the spec being the same as originally built you could have that argument all day long and never prove it one way or another with out striping one of the originals and a replica and measuring everything as you went. My only comments on this are I remember the fist time I saw one was when Steve rode one at the CRMC Snetterton meeting as few years back. At the time I was riding a Weslake which was probably faster than the Paton now it wouldn’t get close to it. I also had a very entertaining conversation with a former racer who raced against the Paton’s in the era he commented that they were fast but not usually for long! I guess something’s aren’t exactly as they were!

Last comment Alan’s lap. A friend had broken down at 32nd that evening he commented that Alan slowed mid corner as he caught Ryan and as they exited Windy Alan was right behind him but lost the tow very quickly.


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - andyr - 10-11-2009

(10-11-2009, 02:44 PM)smokey125 Wrote: The rules now don’t really state anything other than it must be of a type used in the period. They used to state that “factory or works” replicas weren’t allowed along with replicas of things such as the Mularney, unless it was the original, Bob Newby ran the original Mularney a few times at the Manx.

As for the Paton’s being available to the public that is tenuous to say the least! With only 2 of the 8 valve 500’s being built and only about 10 bikes in a 10 year period ranging from 250 to 500 it would be very hard to describe them as anything other than a factory bike. Equally the MV became Privit (don’t think that’s spelt right) after MV pulled out of racing, you could argue that they were then available to the public. Incidentally I have raced against one of the Privit MV’s so they remained available to the public.

As for the spec being the same as originally built you could have that argument all day long and never prove it one way or another with out striping one of the originals and a replica and measuring everything as you went. My only comments on this are I remember the fist time I saw one was when Steve rode one at the CRMC Snetterton meeting as few years back. At the time I was riding a Weslake which was probably faster than the Paton now it wouldn’t get close to it. I also had a very entertaining conversation with a former racer who raced against the Paton’s in the era he commented that they were fast but not usually for long! I guess something’s aren’t exactly as they were!

Last comment Alan’s lap. A friend had broken down at 32nd that evening he commented that Alan slowed mid corner as he caught Ryan and as they exited Windy Alan was right behind him but lost the tow very quickly.

Just to reiterate, I have retired from Isle of Man racing. I won't be back!(sadly)
My sponsor is selling the 'lovely'Petty Norton that Bill Swallow and Bob Jackson and then I raced there.
I don't know anything about Bill not riding over there in the future.
Sorry to interrupt your Paton discussions!!!!


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - Will Loder - 11-11-2009

Apologies for getting that wrong about Bill's Manx beign a 570, I was only 12 back then!

I don't really believe that any bike is internally identical to the period, however they dont have to be as long as the fundamental architecture of the engine is eligible which I believe that the Patons are.

It's obvious that the Patons have been developed since Steve first took them to the manx. I remember me and my dad laughing at how they'd got a top quality rider and come over from Italy with all their smart team clothing and their £30,000+ bike isn't even close to being as good as Dave's Weslake which you could easily build for £11,000. I think dad was passed Steve before Glen Helen and the Paton broke down. However they've obviously got it right now and they're very very good, I'm seriously impressed with them.

At the same time we did 105mph with the weslake in 2003, the track is now faster (2mph +), and it doesn't need a pitstop, therefore a replica on a weslake is more than possible and you can build a brand new top spec one for a third of the price of the Paton.


RE: So they should it was a disgrace - David Linsdell - 12-11-2009

(11-11-2009, 12:51 AM)Will Loder Wrote: At the same time we did 105mph with the weslake in 2003, the track is now faster (2mph +), and it doesn't need a pitstop, therefore a replica on a weslake is more than possible and you can build a brand new top spec one for a third of the price of the Paton.

I think too little is made of the fact that the Paton needs to make a pit stop - that is at least one minute lost there and then, and that's without the slowing down into the pit, and the time spent getting up to speed again.

Also, I have first hand experience that (unfortunately) having a ride on a Paton doesn't make you a winner. I was lucky enough to ride one at Donnington and Brands CRMC this season, and, despite it being a fantastic machine, I looked at the results sheets and still found myself midfield!

Whilst there is undoubtably a speed advantage, the Paton has a disadvantage through the twisties, and at at least 20kg more than a single I found myself struggling to make the bike stop! I also found myself scared of highsiding, or crashing a bike of considerable value and ended up pussyfooting around quite a few corners.

A quick look at Andy's results shows you that in previous years, on the norton or his g50 he averaged between 95 and 96 mph each year from 1995 onwards (give or take a few years). This year he averaged 97mph, and I'm sure the improvements to the track had an effect on that difference. Is this an unfair advantage?

In the 1992 Senior Classic dad averaged 103mph on a norton with 42bhp. This speed would achieve a replica in any year. In fact, a race speed of under 98mph would have achieved a replica this year (andy was around 30 seconds off I believe). If there was a bike out this year with less than 42bhp I would be suprised, so to say that a replica is unachievable because of the Paton is ludicrous. I maintain that a replica should be something that you strive for, and should not be easy. However, if altering this will encourage bikes back out then I am all for it. I fear that of the 105 bikes entered in 2004, many have been retired along with the riders, from racing altogether, be it age or money enforced. I know that I plan to enter the classic races one day, and hope they are still there when I come to make that decision - the owners of the bikes need to be encouraged to put younger riders on them, rather than hanging on to them as ornaments ifthe races are to surive.

David