2011 AMA rulebook?

ol38y · March 25, 2011, 04:08:12 PM

Ya wanna let us know what it was so I don't have to copy 57 pages again...

makr · March 26, 2011, 04:29:51 AM

Quote from: donpearsall on March 17, 2011, 10:38:48 AM
I expect the rules will not be changed substantially. However I do want to know if they will be requiring a 2010 helmet or not.
Don

I was told in scrutineering last year that my m2005 helmet would be no good this year.

donpearsall · March 26, 2011, 07:07:44 AM

Yes I was told that 2005 helmets would have to be replaced for this season too. But the new rulebook says Snell M2005, M2010 or DOT FMVSS 218 are good.
Don

ol38y · March 26, 2011, 07:28:14 AM

Hadn't heard that. That's kinda overkill to my thinking.

Eurogeek Moto · March 26, 2011, 07:43:19 AM

The AMA has made the decision to allow 2005 Helmets for this year, 2011

Also the rule book is up on the BUB site. http://www.speedtrialsbybub.com/2011_event/r&r11.html

ol38y · March 26, 2011, 08:54:09 AM

Quote from: Eurogeek Moto on March 26, 2011, 07:43:19 AM
The AMA has made the decision to allow 2005 Helmets for this year, 2011

Also the rule book is up on the BUB site. http://www.speedtrialsbybub.com/2011_event/r&r11.html

Thanks for the info. Can you tell me what had to be changed from the original posting. I've already printed all 57 pages of the original posting and would rather not have to do it again for a couple simple changes. Thanks, See ya on the salt...

PM me if you'd rather

Eurogeek Moto · March 26, 2011, 04:46:38 PM

5.J. page 30 had wrong wording. Print that page

ol38y · March 26, 2011, 04:58:33 PM

Quote from: Eurogeek Moto on March 26, 2011, 04:46:38 PM
5.J. page 30 had wrong wording. Print that page

Thanks, I need to save ink for printing checks... LOL

Can you shed any light on AMA's opinion on helmet certification and there viable lifespan?

Thanks, Larry

donpearsall · March 27, 2011, 01:44:14 PM

There are lots of changes to the "A" class especially how the rear seat/fender combo affects streamlining. I have questions about this because I was going to be entering this class. Eurogeek (sorry, forgot your name from when you inspected my bike) can you answer question about this?
Don

maj · March 27, 2011, 03:15:51 PM

So the differences between M and A at the rear are the 8" beyond tire for A and 0 " for M
and the lower section on M cannot go below the axle line but with A it can run as an extended belly pan to the vertical axle line

Just wanting to be sure on this as i have seen A bikes cut on the horizontal axle line

donpearsall · March 27, 2011, 03:28:00 PM

This is why a picture is worth 1,000,000 words. I see a lot of questions in that new section. Maybe the inspectors can come up with a drawing that shows the maximum allowable rear area for the A class. That will forestall a lot of repeated clarifications and angry riders in the inspection line.
Don

Koncretekid · March 27, 2011, 03:30:22 PM

The new rules for rear fender/ seat in the "A" class, "Open", read as follows:
"Fenders must meet criteria in rule 7.D. to be excluded from this rule.
Any aerodynamic aid at the rear of the motorcycle (including the riders seat/tail section), shall not extend past the most rearward edge of the rear tire, should not be higher than 5 inches above the lowest section of the top of the seat cushion or seat base if no cushion is used, nor shall it be wider than the rider as viewed from the rear."

Does anybody have a clue as to how the first part of this paragraph is supposed to be interpretted?

I built my frame in good faith according to 2010 rules ( and wrote to BUB as early as February 27 regarding my design), but attempting to get my back and butt as low as possible. It now appears that the plywood seat is going to look more like a milk crate and my a** will be riding as high as the bikes in the "M" class. And I thought the special construction class would allow such a variation, but apparently not any more. Bummer.
Tom

donpearsall · March 27, 2011, 04:06:26 PM

Tom from your photo, it looks like the top of your fender area is too high. UNLESS you use a rear thick cushion to get the distance from the top of the cushion to the top of the fender less than 5".
Like I said, there will be a lot of confusion here, so I urge the AMA inspectors to issue a drawing that shows definitively what that section means.

Don

Koncretekid · March 27, 2011, 04:14:05 PM

Quote from: donpearsall on March 27, 2011, 04:06:26 PM
Tom from your photo, it looks like the top of your fender area is too high. UNLESS you use a rear thick cushion to get the distance from the top of the cushion to the top of the fender less than 5".
Like I said, there will be a lot of confusion here, so I urge the AMA inspectors to issue a drawing that shows definitively what that section means.

Don

....only as of the posting of the new rules! And I wonder how they will treat the new "laydown" style bikes, such as those by Team Sodium Distortion?

nrhs sales · March 28, 2011, 01:15:52 PM

That is the same rule that was decided on last year so it should not come as a shock to anybody. It was in the supplemental rules.

This is what was published last year:

http://www.speedtrialsbybub.com/2010_event/AMA-BUB-Aerodynamic-Clarification-UPDATED080910.pdf

If you built your bike to 2010 rules you are fine as nothing has changed as far as rear fenders go.

News:

2011 AMA rulebook?