2021 Rule Change discussion

[Nevets]

Unless someone is able to come up with a way to measure that can cut out the variables such as wind etc. you won’t get much more consistent than how it was done this year from what I witnessed. Same location, altitude etc in relation to the track. Anyone in a group was pretty much ignored. It was only when a bike could be singled out for certain(for multiple laps) that I witnessed any bikes being called in. If you think you might be close. It’s your job as a rider to ensure that your bike meets the requirements. Ask for your reading. If it was close enough that other factors may have forced it over , then perhaps take the steps to ensure it won’t happen. Such as an insert etc. I’d be in top of that, especially if you are in the hunt for a championship.

Thanks Shane. I started a long winded response about how riders are responsible for ensuring their bike passes tech at all times, but you captured everything I wanted to say, and probably nicer than I was going to be.

 

[M87]

Unless someone is able to come up with a way to measure that can cut out the variables such as wind etc. you won’t get much more consistent than how it was done this year from what I witnessed. Same location, altitude etc in relation to the track. Anyone in a group was pretty much ignored. It was only when a bike could be singled out for certain(for multiple laps) that I witnessed any bikes being called in. If you think you might be close. It’s your job as a rider to ensure that your bike meets the requirements. Ask for your reading. If it was close enough that other factors may have forced it over , then perhaps take the steps to ensure it won’t happen. Such as an insert etc. I’d be in top of that, especially if you are in the hunt for a championship.

It's not rocket science, well, actually part of it is.

A stationary test does not exactly replicate what happens on the track but it can be modified to meet the EMRA's needs and is repeatable and verifiable. And someone else did a lot of the science for you!
Of course you wouldn't use the same sound levels as street bikes but the methodology is the same.
I would suggest that you test the sound level of a bike using the current method at the track on a day with little or no wind that meets the definition of "standard day" (15 C and pressure 29.92 60 percent humidity).
Once you have a sample bike that meets the maximum sound level, test it under the conditions in the video but modify the parameters slightly. Off the top of my head I would think the idle reading is worthless to the EMRA but a reading at one half of redline would be repeatable and consistent.
If the sample motorcycle reads 110 db on track and 105 db in the static test then set the standard accordingly.
Before anyone wastes their valuable time pointing out all the possible variables using this test I would like to point out that they also exist in the current situation, this method has been proven to reduce them as much as can be reasonably expected.

 

[2quickrides]

It's not rocket science, well, actually part of it is.

A stationary test does not exactly replicate what happens on the track but it can be modified to meet the EMRA's needs and is repeatable and verifiable. And someone else did a lot of the science for you!
Of course you wouldn't use the same sound levels as street bikes but the methodology is the same.
I would suggest that you test the sound level of a bike using the current method at the track on a day with little or no wind that meets the definition of "standard day" (15 C and pressure 29.92 60 percent humidity).
Once you have a sample bike that meets the maximum sound level, test it under the conditions in the video but modify the parameters slightly. Off the top of my head I would think the idle reading is worthless to the EMRA but a reading at one half of redline would be repeatable and consistent.
If the sample motorcycle reads 110 db on track and 105 db in the static test then set the standard accordingly.
Before anyone wastes their valuable time pointing out all the possible variables using this test I would like to point out that they also exist in the current situation, this method has been proven to reduce them as much as can be reasonably expected.

Except the point of the sound limit is to limit overall noise travel to the neighbors, which is dependent on all the variables that apply to the current testing method. So many bikes, displacements, engine layouts, exhaust lengths/sizes/designs and muffler designs will not all give a linear sound level by RPM. It adds just as many, if not more, variables than it takes away.
Also, that would require testing every single bike at the start of the day and wouldn't stop anyone from removing the insert they installed in the morning to pass sound.
That's just my opinion anyway.

 

[M87]

That's just my opinion anyway.
I respect your opinion and I respect every one who volunteers their time to keeps racing going I just want to try and shine a little light on how there might be some improvements.
The point of the sound limit is to limit overall noise travel to the neighbors, which is dependent on all the variables that apply to the current testing method.
That is an unachievable goal. You would need a different set of standards for each wind condition and temperature. During my previous life I have witnessed sound readings at the property line of a home 1/4 mile from a motocross track. The owner complained about the noise and had the county come for sound readings. On the day of the race the wind was blowing towards the track at about 5 KTS. The sound readings were so low that when a Corolla drove by on the paved road it read louder than the start and he had to wait for the next race to get an accurate reading. Later I was shown readings that showed when the wind was in the other direction the readings were almost 10 decibels higher. By the way, you are right about sound not being linear, a 10 db increase is generally considered as being twice as loud.
So many bikes, displacements, engine layouts, exhaust lengths/sizes/designs and muffler designs will not all give a linear sound level by RPM. It adds just as many, if not more, variables than it takes away.
You are right here to a degree. In my haste to find an example I just grabbed the first video I saw which is more for street bikes than race bikes. What if there was an example that all the major manufacturers agreed to for race bikes?
Fortunately there is and its contained here;
https://www.acu.org.uk/Uploaded/1/Documents/2020 handbook/06ACU-HANDBOOK2020-Road-Racing-Standing-Regulations.pdf
Just go to
AUTO CYCLE UNION HANDBOOK 2020 ROAD RACING 265
14.8 CONTROL OF EXHAUST SOUND LEVEL
Here is a screen grab of one of the major differences between this standard and SAE J2585.


As you can see there are different RPM for different configurations and displacements, even one for two strokes.
This standard was agreed to by all the major manufacturers in Europe, including aftermarket exhaust makers, and it is the basis for almost sound testing in racing there. Notice the RPM are higher and there is also different RPM for different configurations.
Also, that would require testing every single bike at the start of the day and wouldn't stop anyone from removing the insert they installed in the morning to pass sound.
I would suggest that each bike is required to be tested once a year before it goes on track. A special inspection sticker would be issued After that the EMRA would monitor track side noise levels to see if anyone stands out as being excessively loud. If a bike is suspected to be loud a second static test would be run to see if there has been a change and justice would be dealt out accordingly.
Of course this is all based on whether there is correlation between static levels and track side levels. The manufacturers do based on their acceptance of the rules and in Britain there are many tracks that are close to towns or villages and they must meet more restrictive sound standards.
These tracks have simple but effective strategies. I will give you two examples, Snetterton and Oulton Park.
Here is a copy of Snettertons noise restrictions.
http://www.snetterton.co.uk/media/975291/snnoisedocument_for_website_2010_rm.pdf
And here is a copy of Oulton Park noise categories.
https://www.oultonpark.co.uk/residents/news/noise-categories.aspx
For the basis of this lets compare Oulton Parks green limit with Snetterton.
As you can see there are two readings static and drive by. Static in Snetterton is 105 db and in Oulton Park is 102 db the drive by limits are 92 db and 89 db respectively.
In each case they have determined that in order to achieve specific sound levels in surrounding areas they must achieve specific track side sound levels. They do that by setting static levels and monitoring compliance with track side testing.
I would like to point out that they use a 20 metre standard for track side. The exact specifications vary but the measuring device is at least three feet off the ground and 20 meters from the track. It is at a 90 degree angle from the track normally facing a straight such as the start finish straight and is situated so that it only points at on point one the track. In other words I think it would have to be in the infield.
What the necessary track side noise level would be and what static level would be needed to achieve that would have to be figured out.
Thats it.
In short other people have faced this problem and found reliable ways to solve it to most peoples satisfaction. If I was racing and this was adopted I think I would take my iPhone to the static test and get a reading for my own benefit. That way I could double check if I made any big changes to the bike.

 

[Matt Stokes]

Hello everyone at the EMRA,

I've been pushing to have a class that overlaps between the AMRA and EMRA; Lightweight Superbike. I think the rules in this class should be left unmodified on the EMRA side, it is perfect just as it is, especially in regards to engine displacement rules. Running sportbike chassis/engine lightweight class bikes on the small kart tracks just doesn't make much sense, whereas custom built supermoto and GP lightweights that do not fit within sportbike rules but are still lightweight bikes are common at all mini racing clubs and are perfect for adapting to such a perfect "transition" class. Every GP bike that is raced in AMRA formula GP has already had a custom engine swap so this is already commonplace, I hope we can see growth in the EMRA LWSBK class in 2021 by getting a bunch of these bikes to Stratotech with engines well matched to be competitive in both clubs.

Thanks for your note Dave. I reached out to the AMRA Supermoto guys recently, and there wasn't a lot of interest in them coming racing at the EMRA. Perhaps the GP style bikes would be more interested to come. Rupert Collins would be the best guy to bridge the conversation between the two clubs.

I would like to grow the Lightweight classes at the EMRA. The issue I have with LW Superbike rule is that it allows 700cc, 80 horsepower bikes that are not generally considered Lightweight bikes. They are Middleweight bikes, and we already have a Middleweight Superbike class for them (it's called Middleweight Twins). Give them two races per day.

What lightweight GP style bike from AMRA would race well against a Yamaha FZ-07? John Georgiou raced a really nice Yamaha TZ 125 last year, and it didn't have as much power as my Ninja 300. Power is not everything, we understand that. But it is weird to race 35 horsepower bikes against 80 horsepower bikes. It's more than double the power difference.

At the end of the day, I'm going to be there racing my Yamaha R3 next year whatever happens. I'm just pushing for our classes to reflect modern bikes and classes at the club and national level.

 

[2quickrides]

That's just my opinion anyway.
I respect your opinion and I respect every one who volunteers their time to keeps racing going I just want to try and shine a little light on how there might be some improvements.
The point of the sound limit is to limit overall noise travel to the neighbors, which is dependent on all the variables that apply to the current testing method.
That is an unachievable goal. You would need a different set of standards for each wind condition and temperature. During my previous life I have witnessed sound readings at the property line of a home 1/4 mile from a motocross track. The owner complained about the noise and had the county come for sound readings. On the day of the race the wind was blowing towards the track at about 5 KTS. The sound readings were so low that when a Corolla drove by on the paved road it read louder than the start and he had to wait for the next race to get an accurate reading. Later I was shown readings that showed when the wind was in the other direction the readings were almost 10 decibels higher. By the way, you are right about sound not being linear, a 10 db increase is generally considered as being twice as loud.
So many bikes, displacements, engine layouts, exhaust lengths/sizes/designs and muffler designs will not all give a linear sound level by RPM. It adds just as many, if not more, variables than it takes away.
You are right here to a degree. In my haste to find an example I just grabbed the first video I saw which is more for street bikes than race bikes. What if there was an example that all the major manufacturers agreed to for race bikes?
Fortunately there is and its contained here;
https://www.acu.org.uk/Uploaded/1/Documents/2020 handbook/06ACU-HANDBOOK2020-Road-Racing-Standing-Regulations.pdf
Just go to
AUTO CYCLE UNION HANDBOOK 2020 ROAD RACING 265
14.8 CONTROL OF EXHAUST SOUND LEVEL
Here is a screen grab of one of the major differences between this standard and SAE J2585.
View attachment 2488
As you can see there are different RPM for different configurations and displacements, even one for two strokes.
This standard was agreed to by all the major manufacturers in Europe, including aftermarket exhaust makers, and it is the basis for almost sound testing in racing there. Notice the RPM are higher and there is also different RPM for different configurations.
Also, that would require testing every single bike at the start of the day and wouldn't stop anyone from removing the insert they installed in the morning to pass sound. I would suggest that each bike is required to be tested once a year before it goes on track. A special inspection sticker would be issued After that the EMRA would monitor track side noise levels to see if anyone stands out as being excessively loud. If a bike is suspected to be loud a second static test would be run to see if there has been a change and justice would be dealt out accordingly.
Of course this is all based on whether there is correlation between static levels and track side levels. The manufacturers do based on their acceptance of the rules and in Britain there are many tracks that are close to towns or villages and they must meet more restrictive sound standards. These tracks have simple but effective strategies. I will give you two examples, Snetterton and Oulton Park.
Here is a copy of Snettertons noise restrictions.
http://www.snetterton.co.uk/media/975291/snnoisedocument_for_website_2010_rm.pdf
And here is a copy of Oulton Park noise categories.
https://www.oultonpark.co.uk/residents/news/noise-categories.aspx
For the basis of this lets compare Oulton Parks green limit with Snetterton.
As you can see there are two readings static and drive by. Static in Snetterton is 105 db and in Oulton Park is 102 db the drive by limits are 92 db and 89 db respectively. In each case they have determined that in order to achieve specific sound levels in surrounding areas they must achieve specific track side sound levels. They do that by setting static levels and monitoring compliance with track side testing.
I would like to point out that they use a 20 metre standard for track side. The exact specifications vary but the measuring device is at least three feet off the ground and 20 meters from the track. It is at a 90 degree angle from the track normally facing a straight such as the start finish straight and is situated so that it only points at on point one the track. In other words I think it would have to be in the infield. What the necessary track side noise level would be and what static level would be needed to achieve that would have to be figured out. Thats it. In short other people have faced this problem and found reliable ways to solve it to most peoples satisfaction. If I was racing and this was adopted I think I would take my iPhone to the static test and get a reading for my own benefit. That way I could double check if I made any big changes to the bike.

So. Much. Reading. Lol.
I'll keep the rebuttal short so people actually read it. Lol.
1. Just a note. In testing I've found the phone db readers read relatively accurate at higher frequencies (Like an inline 4) but don't register the lower frequencies accurately at all (Like a V-twin or single).
2. So we adopt a complicated system and still need to monitor track side noise?........... Right now it's a simple test. And yes it reads slightly different on different days, but if you are close to the limit, you usually get a heads up (Though it's not hard to tell if your bike is louder than everyone else). No matter what procedure or system you use, it has it's ups and downs. None of them are perfect.
3. The sound test isn't just for racing, it's for any vehicle being used on the track on any day. So you'd still need to monitor it for every track day as well. It's not realistic to test every bike showing up for every day individually.
4. Every standard and location you used as example has vastly greater resources (Both money and people) than our club. It would take a lot of time to nail down an acceptable system, agree to every displacement/exhaust/engine configs limits, and then add it to the tech (Which already takes a TON of time every weekend) for every round and now track days.

 

[Matt Stokes]

I think one of the biggest problems this club faces is declining rider numbers we have had over the past couple years. Probably the biggest factor in that is the local economy. I'd rather not sit around and blame the government. Instead I'd rather focus on finding ways to put more, better, racing on for more people. We are a RACING club after all. I'm not talking about dividing already existing grids or subdividing classes, then handing out 10 more trophies at the end of the year. Our schedule and classes are a fine tuned machine that only needs small tweaks to stay ahead of the curve. Some of the changes proposed in posts above accomplish this and look very promising.

One thing I'd love to see is a cross over class with the AMRA created. Easy to say, much harder to do, I know. But if we task the 2021 Exec with it I'm sure they can figure out a way and work with the AMRA. Which classes, which bikes? I dunno. But I'd like to start the dialogue and give the Exec direction.

Second thing I would like to see is the creation (or maybe its recreation?) of an EMRA Endurance race. We are a RACING club so lets focus on putting on some more racing. With Stratotech back on the map, race fees and rental fees low as they have been in a long time, maybe its time to look into the economics of such a race once again. In the past the Endurance race was a ton of fun. Recently clubs like the UtahSBA have made format changes to their endurance race that resulted in much better turn outs and better competition. With no fixed schedule yet I know it is hard to start planning. But if we have a set of rules, format, and schedule created, we will be able to put on an endurance race that much faster.

All good suggestions Jon. A cross over class between EMRA and AMRA is Lightweight Superbike. 125 - 150cc GP style bikes more or less make similar horsepower to production style 300cc four strokes (Yamaha R3, KTM RC 390 etc). The GP bikes will go around the track faster, but more or less, they are on a similar playing field. The Ninja 400 and CBR 500 would also fit in here well. 700cc twins do not fit here very well.

I would support an endurance race.

 

[DEFBOY35]

I’d also like to add that the calls in for sound I witnessed, it wasn’t like the bikes were one or two db over. They were way over.
As for how the test is currently performed. The only thing that could be done really to make it any more consistent would be to mount the meter to a tripod instead of it being handheld.
It’s honestly a pretty lenient test as other places I have been to are tested much closer to the surface.

pop in an insert. Doesn’t make much difference in power but makes a huge difference in the sound reading. And maybe it gets added to the winter maintenance to repack your can to make sure it’s doing it’s job as best as it is able to.

 

[M87]

Yeah, sorry about the long post but it's a complex subject and I don't like saying something without having the evidence to back it up.
So here we go.
1. After IOS 6 all iPhones have remarkably flat frequency response. Normally these tests are only done to 96 db so maybe at the higher levels there is some inaccuracy below 300hz (where much of the sound energy in a twin is at low RPM). However the absolute accuracy is not as important as consistency and repeatability. Let's say during a test the official mic said 103 db and your phone said 98 db. You purchase a new Akraarrowtwobrothers3:47 exhaust. In an open area without any obstruction in 8-10 ft your phone says 98 or even 99 db. You are probably going to be alright. If it reads significantly higher you can probably expect trouble.
2. Actually it's not a complicated system, cops can do it so how hard can it be? (Hi Dave et al) This discussion started because some felt that the current system unfairly penalized them and Shane said:
Unless someone is able to come up with a way to measure that can cut out the variables such as wind etc. you won’t get much more consistent than how it was done this year from what I witnessed.
Well, I'm telling you there is a way and I even created a huge post to back it up. So maybe someone should edit the post to read "yeah there's a better way but we don't want to do it ."
I'm also saying that if you only want to do on track monitoring the correct method is by placing the microphone 20 meters from the track, preferably on a stand, in the infield, at a 90 degree angle to the track facing a straight away. This is the practice at most tracks and
is similar to the method used for "Traffic Noise Modeling" used by the US government.
BTW saying none of them are perfect is weak. The information they provide is good enough most racing organizations including WSBK and BSB and the aforementioned US government.
3. Yup, you are right.
4. Yup, right again. But just because we can't do what other organizations do doesn't mean we shouldn't look at what they do and see if we can learn something.
As far as how much offending motorcycles were over the limit, and how... I'm trying to think of a big word that makes me sound smart here...egregious the offence was, I think people might accept the penalty more easily if they new it was based on a proven, widely accepted standard. It might also help if you are able to provide the data to back it up.

 

[Nevets]

3. The sound test isn't just for racing, it's for any vehicle being used on the track on any day. So you'd still need to monitor it for every track day as well. It's not realistic to test every bike showing up for every day individually.
4. Every standard and location you used as example has vastly greater resources (Both money and people) than our club. It would take a lot of time to nail down an acceptable system, agree to every displacement/exhaust/engine configs limits, and then add it to the tech (Which already takes a TON of time every weekend) for every round and now track days.

3. Yup, you are right.
4. Yup, right again. But just because we can't do what other organizations do doesn't mean we shouldn't look at what they do and see if we can learn something.
As far as how much offending motorcycles were over the limit, and how... I'm trying to think of a big word that makes me sound smart here...egregious the offence was, I think people might accept the penalty more easily if they new it was based on a proven, widely accepted standard. It might also help if you are able to provide the data to back it up.

Thank you Mike for the technical information on this subject. There is no one on the exec currently with this level of knowledge on the subject.

And an extra thank you for volunteering to attend all the EMRA events at Stratotech next year to administer and enforce the system you are proposing. I am sure the membership will be very grateful for all the work you will put into this. When we flag someone in a race for going over your carefully measured sound limits, the offending racer will appreciate the hard work you've done and thank you for making sure they have complied with the tech requirements to ensure a fair race for everyone; after you have presented them with the data and all the information to back it up of course.

Can we do something about consistency and knowledge on the black flag at stratotech, one day ur under and the wind blows east the next day ur over and the wind is blowing west. One lap your in a group u don't get flagged next your with one other person and u get flagged.
a few championships were lost do to the * my belief * WRONG call last year. We see so much of the noise limits at area 27 and it depends on humidity and who ur with on the track whether you pass or fail. The people doing the noise testing last year * not mentioning any names as they are volunteers and I love the volunteers *** but they were not consistent and didn't give any lee-way during a race ( same bike same exhaust as the day before or even the race before) and then all of a sudden get black flagged for noise ? CHAMPIONSHIP AND SEASON RUINED

I know I'm going to come off as an ass here, so I apologize in advance.
If you would like to see changes to the rule book, bylaws, or the way the club does things, please make a proposal for the new rule, bylaw, or procedure. Pointing out that something is wrong without offering a solution is just complaining.

Claiming that "CHAMPIONSHIP AND SEASON RUINED" because you got black flagged for sound is insulting to the exec who volunteer their time to make racing possible, and the volunteers who run the sound meter. Our sound limit is generous, and it is very easy to have a bike that complies. Any rider who was close to getting flagged knew it (at least they should have, as everyone else in the pits knew it) and was choosing to take that risk. Don't blame the exec and the volunteers for "ruining your championship". Take some responsibility for your actions. If the championship was that important to you, you should have taken precautions to make sure your bike would stay within the sound limit.

 

[M87]

Well, well you’re right about something.
I have done a little volunteering with the EMRA in the past and I tried to help out when I could.
I no longer race and, since I now live 3000 miles away it might be hard to get there to do the tests, but based on your comments I now understand why you might think it's too difficult a task.
If you ask some of the other members of the EMRA, including those in this discussion, you might discover that if I was there it is likely I would show up and do the testing myself. I generally try to back up my words with actions, not always, but a lot of the time.
I think you're reaction to someone doing the research and making a suggestion was not helpful.

 

[M87]

By the way the current limit at Stratotech of 93db at 100 ft is higher than any of the ones I found in Britain. The maximum there was typically less 92db at 20 meters. If my math is right that means Stratotech is the equivalent of 96 db at 20 meters. That’s more than the difference between a 50 watt stereo and a 100 watt stereo.

 

[2quickrides]

Well, well you’re right about something. Yup you’re an ass.
I have done a little volunteering with the EMRA in the past and I tried to help out when I could.
I no longer race and, since I now live 3000 miles away it might be hard to get there to do the tests, but based on your comments I now understand why you might think it's too difficult a task.
If you ask some of the other members of the EMRA, including those in this discussion, you might discover that if I was there it is likely I would show up and do the testing myself. I generally try to back up my words with actions, not always, but a lot of the time.
I think you're reaction to someone doing the research and making a suggestion is childish and a disgrace to the exec. Grow up.

Resorting to name calling and then calling someone else childish? Ummmm.......perhaps this isn’t the discussion for you.

By the way the current limit at Stratotech of 93db at 100 ft is higher than any of the ones I found in Britain. The maximum there was typically less 92db at 20 meters. If my math is right that means Stratotech is the equivalent of 96 db at 20 meters. That’s more than the difference between a 50 watt stereo and a 100 watt stereo.

Exactly. The limit at Strato is already quite lenient compared to other places. No point adding unnecessary complexity to it.

 

[M87]

Actually he said he was likely to come off as an ass. I was just agreeing with him. I'm an agreeable sort of guy.
And I even agree that all of this discussion should be unnecessary except, somehow, there are people who are getting DQ and they feel they have been wronged.
I would just ignore this and consider it to be sour grapes except that someone else, not CBR600 rider, told me that their bike was black flagged because the sound level was 107db. At 100 feet.
Damn straight you got black flagged I thought, you deserve it.
Then I got thinking, thats really loud. Really, really, loud.
I won't bore you with the math but it means that the bike must have been over 130 db at 3 ft. Thats louder than the a MotoGP bike.
So that is what started me down this rabbit hole.
There seemed to be three possibilities, although he swears that he has a completely standard after market exhaust, he was lying, the track worker who told him it was 107 Db was lying or the course worker made a mistake.
I'm not great at spotting liars so I gave him the benefit of the doubt, I never met the course worker but, in my experience, just the fact that they show up to help strangers race speaks volumes about their integrity. And they are almost universally pretty smart.
To me that meant there had to be another option. Perhaps the system is flawed. So I read all I could find on the subject.
And here we are.
The limit at Strato is already quite lenient compared to other places. No point adding unnecessary complexity to it.
Except that it returned a sound reading for a 600 cc motorcycle that can only be matched by a MotoGP bike.

 

[2quickrides]

Actually he said he was likely to come off as an ass. I was just agreeing with him. I'm an agreeable sort of guy.
And I even agree that all of this discussion should be unnecessary except, somehow, there are people who are getting DQ and they feel they have been wronged.
I would just ignore this and consider it to be sour grapes except that someone else, not CBR600 rider, told me that their bike was black flagged because the sound level was 107db. At 100 feet.
Damn straight you got black flagged I thought, you deserve it.
Then I got thinking, thats really loud. Really, really, loud.
I won't bore you with the math but it means that the bike must have been over 130 db at 3 ft. Thats louder than the a MotoGP bike.
So that is what started me down this rabbit hole.
There seemed to be three possibilities, although he swears that he has a completely standard after market exhaust, he was lying, the track worker who told him it was 107 Db was lying or the course worker made a mistake.
I'm not great at spotting liars so I gave him the benefit of the doubt, I never met the course worker but, in my experience, just the fact that they show up to help strangers race speaks volumes about their integrity. And they are almost universally pretty smart.
To me that meant there had to be another option. Perhaps the system is flawed. So I read all I could find on the subject.
And here we are.
The limit at Strato is already quite lenient compared to other places. No point adding unnecessary complexity to it.
Except that it returned a sound reading for a 600 cc motorcycle that can only be matched by a MotoGP bike.

The highest 600 readings were high 90’s. I did not hear of any breaking 100. Even 1 I know was stupid loud.

 

[M87]

Hmmm that’s interesting. Sort of makes me see your point.

 

[DEFBOY35]

If it is the case I am thinking about, The volunteer in question mike is a very well known, very fair volunteer. I witnessed the readings myself and it was why it wasn’t until many laps in a row with a very high reading(when other bikes were not blowing over albeit some close. But not over) that the call was put in to race control. It is race controls decision from there.
Perhaps some tests could be done to see if the readings are more consistent under different conditions taken from a lower position closer to the track. but to add sound testing to tech is realistically not feasible with volunteers running tech.

 

[Dangerboy]

Hi Matt, thanks for commenting on the AMRA/EMRA lightweight class subject.

There are going to be some GP's coming that way from here regardless of what happens now that Stratotech has reopened and we have some time to prepare. I have a stock TZ125 as does another AMRA member and we have intentions on bringing them there again. I need to clarify why I'm suggesting the rules of Lightweight SBK stay unchanged. It isn't to allow AMRA bikes as they are now to race and be competitive there. We are also discussing a class in the AMRA that is new, or perhaps changes to a recently created larger displacement class. This class needs to be pretty open because we already have GP bikes with non-stock engines in them and the bikes that will be created/modified for the AMRA class need to be able to be run in the EMRA too to help give the entire idea traction. Stock 125GP bikes are not affordable to race anymore with the scarcity of parts so throwing larger dirtbike engines in them turns them into some of the most entertaining motorcycles that exist. They were first called Supermonos (Now supermini's? They don't necessarily have to be single cylinder) Lightweight sportbike is more appropriate for the R3, RC390 and so on as they are already production based bikes. It wouldn't be good if we restrict lightweight superbike as a means to be still competitive on a bike that really belongs in a sportbike class. I think spec racing is great but SBK classes are for custom/heavily modified bikes, at least typically at the club level.

I don't think an FZ-07 (400lb bike stock?) is going to stand a chance against a well setup GP based lightweight SBK. These "mini"s will have 50+ RWHP and will weigh around half the FZ-07. Middleweight SBK is modded 600's which have 130HP or more so I'm not sure they are a great fit there. I don't think there are motorcycles that more suit the very definition of "Super" "Light-weight" than 125 based/sized grand prix custom bikes, though I suppose that is just semantics.

I'm not sure what the grid looks like now but with the right stimulus it could be one of the greatest classes to watch. I can't say for certain but I'm pretty confident now that we all know Stratotech is back for certain that some of the motards/Supermotos will be returning to Stratotech as well.

 

[Matt Stokes]

Hi Matt, thanks for commenting on the AMRA/EMRA lightweight class subject.

There are going to be some GP's coming that way from here regardless of what happens now that Stratotech has reopened and we have some time to prepare. I have a stock TZ125 as does another AMRA member and we have intentions on bringing them there again. I need to clarify why I'm suggesting the rules of Lightweight SBK stay unchanged. It isn't to allow AMRA bikes as they are now to race and be competitive there. We are also discussing a class in the AMRA that is new, or perhaps changes to a recently created larger displacement class. This class needs to be pretty open because we already have GP bikes with non-stock engines in them and the bikes that will be created/modified for the AMRA class need to be able to be run in the EMRA too to help give the entire idea traction. Stock 125GP bikes are not affordable to race anymore with the scarcity of parts so throwing larger dirtbike engines in them turns them into some of the most entertaining motorcycles that exist. They were first called Supermonos (Now supermini's? They don't necessarily have to be single cylinder) Lightweight sportbike is more appropriate for the R3, RC390 and so on as they are already production based bikes. It wouldn't be good if we restrict lightweight superbike as a means to be still competitive on a bike that really belongs in a sportbike class. I think spec racing is great but SBK classes are for custom/heavily modified bikes, at least typically at the club level.

I don't think an FZ-07 (400lb bike stock?) is going to stand a chance against a well setup GP based lightweight SBK. These "mini"s will have 50+ RWHP and will weigh around half the FZ-07. Middleweight SBK is modded 600's which have 130HP or more so I'm not sure they are a great fit there. I don't think there are motorcycles that more suit the very definition of "Super" "Light-weight" than 125 based/sized grand prix custom bikes, though I suppose that is just semantics.

I'm not sure what the grid looks like now but with the right stimulus it could be one of the greatest classes to watch. I can't say for certain but I'm pretty confident now that we all know Stratotech is back for certain that some of the motards/Supermotos will be returning to Stratotech as well.

Thanks Dave. I hope you are right and we get some new LW bikes out next season. We had solid grid numbers in this class last year and some fast lap times. I would love to see some GP chassis out there. A 450cc dirt bike motor in a GP chassis is a weapon. A lot of the MotoGP guys train with these bikes. That says a lot. I'm sure you know about this thing - https://www.facebook.com/BeOnAutomotive/posts/4816816351693401

Agreed that a 50 horsepower GP style bike will outrun a 700cc production twin. Let's make it happen. The current issue with our LW Superbike class is that we don't have any GP bikes around. So its a 700cc production twin class, which we already have called Middleweight Twins, and the small displacement bike owners only have one class (Lightweight Open (sportbike)).

If GP bikes are coming, I'm all for leaving the LW Superbike rules as is. If they are not, then the class isn't set up correctly and should be changed to reflect the bikes that will be racing at the club.


Matt

 

[budoka]

Having been there, MotoGP bikes are freaking LOUD. If your bike is anywhere near that sound level, it's due to be flagged. I put the extra baffles in my bike for Strato and Area 27 and had no issues. TBH I can't tell the difference on the seat, and it passed muster so I don't care. Do the right thing.