So far only 2 people (with 1/124 the power) “sugested” sidecars should be “looked at” , hardly something to get your panty’s in a bunch over… dont sell your rig just yet Mal…
You are 100% allowed to criticise and to agree or disagree, this is a forum for debate. All I wanted to point out is that some of us have arguments that are based on reason (ie. financial, maximising track time for everyone, planning new and better venues, etc.), as opposed to emotional, non-rational arguments (ie. I don’t like your bike, and referring to it as a “plastic rocket”).
Stan, here is what says we need to move forward : the decreasing number of entries in P1-P2, the decreasing revenues, the fact that we might not have the money to race at some of the nicer venues like we all want to (as demonstrated by the show of hands at the AGM), amongst others. Oh, and there is the fact that, even if you are personnaly stuck in the sixties (which is fine by me, no offense intended), the rest of the world has evolved and demand the right to be stuck in the nineties, for a change 
And, guess what ? Someday, when I’m sixty, some thirthysomething punk is going to sign up for this club and will want to register a BMW S1000RR. I, for one will embrace it, with possibly the bittersweet smile I usually have when I notice time passing me by…
To the sidecar guys : I like seeing you guys going around the track (not that it’s relevant if I do or not). Like every decision this club has to make, we need to base it on common sense. If we want to go to Tremblant but can’t make sense, it won’t happen. Same reasoning should apply everywhere, no ? Maybe in the past, we didn’t have to make so much financial sense, but in these days of recession, we need to justify and rationalize if we want this Club to survive.
Glad to see you joining in on the discussions Stan, it really is a shame that you felt you shouldn’t have shared your opinions while an Exec, I sure hope we don’t have any Current Exec’s that feel it inappropriate to let their opinion be known.
Just remember one thing, the only dam reason that there is the “one place in Canada to race vintage/classic bikes” that you refer to is because of the “Semi-modern plastic rockets” that pay the bills so the elite of the club can have a venue to play at. You might also want to be reminded that the Vintage race bikes you refer to are welcomed at the same venues as the “semi-modern” bikes, that being SOAR and RACE. The Club cannot live if restricted to the founders definition of Vintage, there is no winning a debate as to what vintage is but we can define who we are as a club, and like it or not the demographics are similar to 30 years ago and 15-20 year old bikes are what the many members want to ride, they just happen to be 30 years younger.
Hey Stan, and the rest of the purists in the club! Please don’t let the “predictors of the future” deter you. Remember the great words of “Spock” in the TV show that predicted most of our devices we use now, “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few”. There seem to be a few here that feel they need something at any cost. But sometimes you just have to shake your head and laugh!!! The debate will continue…
I think “the few” need “the many” to pay for the track…
We all need everybody to pay for the track.
It would be nice to make a buck but as long as at the end of the season we break even or better we are duing good.
It is even nicer that we can piggyback the insurance on RACE rather than a promoter, this helps hold costs down too.
With only having 4 events and Mosport being the “Big One” if there is a problem it is a loosing proposition.
If the VRRA had a couple of more events (no I am not suggesting making the schedule bigger) there would be the opportunity to have a loosing event but by having a couple of “Big” events that could overcome any loses.
The VRRA is the most affordable organization that I have raced with including the annual membership and per race cost plus RACE insurance and supplimental out of country insurance included.
I race with three other organizations and belong to two of them with an annual membership.
I found this p1 plastic rockethttp://cgi.ebay.ca/Three-1960s-CAP-ROCKET-Space-Ship-SPACEMAN-Toy-MINT-/280604785938?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4155593d12
But I also found this onehttp://cgi.ebay.ca/DM-56215-Dragon-Saturn-V-Apollo-13-Rocket-Diecast-Model-/290511454359?pt=Diecast_Vehicles&hash=item43a3d50097 and since it was unchanged from 1970 and on is it p1 eligible even though it has a manufacture date of 2010? 
I think your Cap Rockets will be elgible with picture proof for P1.
The Apollo 13 Rocket however falls into the P2 group (post-1969).
Any and all additional information that you can provide may allow you to
fly around or off the handle as you see appropriate. 
the public should not assume that the term plastic/crotch rockets ridden by squids is necessary a derogatory phrase, any more than Limey (Count me in, or as Marie calls me $10 Canadian), is derogatory. A favorite scene in a “Porridge” episode has a black guy placed in the cell with Fletcher after being in the hole for an extended period for trying to drown a screw in the cauldron of rice pudding. reason given for the attempt was, He called me a black jock bastard, (it seemed to me most Scots were named Jock), after Fletch reminded him that he was indeed black, with a very pronounced Glasgow accent, and he had no idea who his parents were, he came out with “Oh its not that, its the way he said it” Paul,
Paul would you be so kind to translate the term “squids” to me as I am unfamilliar with it and am quite intrigued?
as for side cars…I agree with Dom, the should be looked at…often as they are fun!!!
How about adding a new class of side car “50cc side car” we could call it “monkey bike mayhem”…think of the hilarity, a bunch of us fat old farts wringing the necks of some honda z50 minibikes with sidecars
My understanding of the term is some thing like “Throttle squirting kids” (the younger set, as we were many moons ago). the 50cc class is just a tad low on HP for a sidecar class, But on a trip to Cuba I had an idea that all those CZ/Jawa 250-350cc sidecars hauling bananas etc would make a great starter class, and the riders were likely very competent. Our problem presently is that the overall numbers need improvement, adding another class would be silly. We have no P1 currently running in sidecar and only one P3, in spite of which we had grids of 4-5? for all but Mosport when the USCRA teams saved our bacon. Things should be different for 2011 with Ian back, a new team or two out and threats of other new rigs. 2010 was certainly a low point for Marie and I. As the song says “tomorrow will be better”. Paul.
If you go to YouTube you can find people racing the pocket bike sidecars. Two adults on a tiny rig and platform that one person can carry under their arm. Can’t say I have raced them but I have (stolen) driven one all day at an event for a toy pit bike. In doing so I also drove around the paddock at 15 - 20 mph with a real sidecar passenger, you really need one once you get rolling.
I love how the 1st place guy gets there with a little leg action…and the Kid America paintjob is also an amusing bonus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idzPxslH8zs
^this is just GREAT!
OK, lets see if we can liven things up a bit 
We will be having our meeting of the rules committee soon and have submitted proposals for consideration. Since 2007 when we tried to get the AM-CAN going again (as opposed to CAN-AM which is cars) I have been trying to get our sidecar rules back in agreement with yours. Problem is it’s not all that clear what your rules say. In your rulebook it says “5% overbore allowed” for P1 and “5% engine cylinder overbore allowed” for P2. I would take both of those to mean 1.05 times the stock bore size, but says nothing about stroke which is needed to calculate displacement. For a different class on page 10 I see “The maximum allowable cylinder overbore is 5% above the class displacement limit.” And on page 12 “The maximum
allowable cylinder overbore (except for Open GP) is 5% above the class limit.” Again no mention of stroke, but the class limit is displacement, not bore size.
So the question here is, what exactly does “5% engine cylinder overbore allowed” mean? Also does the same limit apply to the Yamaha where it is already being allowed to use a 750 kit to enlarge it from 650?
Thanks, Bruce Richmond #66 USCRA
PS
Made it to Mosport this year and hope to again next year. Would like to do at least one more VRRA event. Any thoughts on Mid-Ohio for the Am-Can? It’s a long haul for us in New England but a few make it most every year.
regarding the tech specs for over bore, as Stephen Hawkins would say “you lost me there”, I leave it to the bean counters.
Mid Ohio is a great track and handy but, the club that runs the show now is not one of our current three vintage clubs?. It would seem to me strange to host an inter club event outside the group? Are there any sidecars in that club?
Barber is oft touted as another grand venue but is way too distant to be fair to those who cannot get the required time off, or cover the expense.
My gut feeling is that each club should pick an event to host the extra race, or designate the event as AM-Can if there is only the one race. As the events become more crowded (think Mosport, Mid Ohio) it get harder to insert a second race, so it may be that if the series was reintroduced that it might be easier to do at a non premier event? Paul.
[So the question here is, what exactly does “5% engine cylinder overbore allowed” mean? Also does the same limit apply to the Yamaha where it is already being allowed to use a 750 kit to enlarge it from 650?
Thanks, Bruce Richmond #66 USCRA
Hi Bruce, An example is if the class is 500cc it means you can go to 525cc maximum. The intent was to allow reboring to repair cylinder wear.
Paul Bowyer
Then why do the rules say “overbore” instead of “displacement” ?
That is the trouble with printing rules without the underlying intents with the rules. The rules themselves often do not state the all important ‘why’. (something Rick could work on?) This rule was only intended to allow boring oversize to repair worn cylinders. Hence overbore. I cannot find my old rules but I would bet you a nickle that it did say displacment.
Cheers,
Paul
The way the “overbore” allowance is written in the various places in our rules has been recognized as a problem. I did publish a revised version in the Dec 09/Jan 10 Baffled Muffler tech report and stated that the wording would be changed when next the rules were revised.
Unfortunately the 2009 rule changes have taken a while to be voted on, but now they have I assume the rules can be updated to incorporate the revised wording for the overbore allowance at this time. I will send these “clarifications” (that word again!) to Rick to be incorporated into the rules.
The wording that we proposed for the overbore allowance is “Cylinders may be overbored to give a displacement of 5% over the class limit” As Paul B says, this was originally introduced to allow a longer life for cylinders by allowing reboring over the class limit, not as a means of overboring cylinders to the maximum size allowable as a means of performance gain, but the end result is the same.
So if the class limit for chairs is 750, then they can be bored to 787.5cc in the same way that CB450s, running in P1-500, can be overbored to 525cc, not 5% over their original bore size.
Clear as mud, eh?
Stan
Again, this does not cover all angles because it does not adress the stroke. Are we allowed to modify stroke or not ? If it’s not forbidded, than it’s allowed, right ?