My reference to replicas is a bit misleading. What I meant was a replica of a bike that, although it appeared as a one off or works machine in the period, does not meet our rules for that period. This would not include things like ‘new’ Manx Nortons or G50s as they meet all our rules for period 1, although Dave Roper did say to me that he would not enter the reproduction Manx in the pre-65 class as he felt it does not meet the spirit of this class. Things like replica Drixton or Harris frames also are OK as they fall within the period rules for frame construction and were made in the period.
As for the chairs, even Rudi’s first Cat with tubular frame and leading link forks was fitted with Mini wheels and was incredibly low (the handlebars were 12” from the road!). Sidecar constructors have always been very innovative, from the Owen Greenwood Mini based machine in the mid-60s to the later 3 wheeled racing cars with powered sidecar wheels, hub centre steering and formula car type suspension all around, all running on yard wide ex-F1 slicks. This progress culminated in an abortive move by the FIM in the late 70s to bring these machines back to something resembling the concept of a motorcycle and sidecar. There was widespread complaining from the competitors so the FIM came up with 2 different classes of sidecar for the Grands Prix (B2A & B2B). This was also unpopular and the sidecar class disappeared from international racing not long after.
As for Steve B’s comment about run what yer brung! What are you thinking Steve? 
The whole concept of vintage racing is to replicate, as far as possible, racing as it was in each of the periods. By allowing out of period parts or machines it just raises the anti for everyone else. Yes, we all go out there to win but what does it prove if you have later technology parts or machine. Like Steve Hoffarth writes in last month’s IM, vintage racing has many advantages over modern racing, one being that vintage bikes do not become obsolete as they are already obsolete! If unlimited mods are allowed then we just join the treadmill that is modern racing where the bike has to be constantly updated to even stay in the same place. I think that, for all the reasons Steve points out in his column, is why we continue to attract very large entries while modern racing is dying.
My thoughts, anyway.
Stan
Thanks for the reply Stan, I mostly agree with all the points you make, but if in the 60’s and 70’s racers came up with innovative ways to try new things, why are we not encouraging our members to represent these innovations. What P2 class or championship are we replicating right now?
The question I wonder about is, how many others would build sidecars if all period replicas were allowed, are there enough to warrant creating some kind of P2 sidecar GP replica class? Even if scored separately, if you get 4 more rigs out there…
disclaimer: I know nothing about sidecars, I don’t intend to build one or submit a rule change, I am just asking questions…
I had my first race on a sidecar in 1978 and ther was one class called open U RAN WAT U Brang , is 78 not vintage , I know if i show up at vrra meeting with a sidecar with a imp motor in it witch to me is about a vintage as it gets, SOMEONE WOULD HAV A FIT and say i can not race it , It looks almost like most of the sidecars in the VRRA are 650 yam,s and i don,t remember seeing one back then.. 
Just an old guy with a question.
Whatever happened to the Murphy/McCallum P2 rig? Honda CB750 and at WERA it was 1100CC
" " " Brown/ ?
I should know better than to stick nose in but; having built two replica P2 rigs last winter a BMW and a Yamaha, I built a 10" car wheeled kneeler rig with Disc brakes in 69. We toyed with a V6 Chrysler outboard motor . There were basically no rules in Canada at that point. The P2 rigs in VRRA are essentially state of the art here in about 1970. If some one wants to build a Genuine replica (is that an oxymoron) of a world class special, they can run it currently with SRA in F2 or F1, why do they always want to run in a class that gives them an advantage? How about building a replica of Klaus Enders World Championship rig which sits in Vermont or Chris Vincents TT winning BSA rig both of which still fit VRRA rules. Currently in the British Motorcycle Museum near Birmingham. Paul.
Who is “they”
anyone who feels they should be allowed to use later technology to circumvent the rules; larger motor, upside down forks, aircraft construction frames etc. pushing the envelope is normal in state of the art competition, it is IMO destructive when applied to the “vintage concept”.
No…the point is …it is a 1970’s genuine attempt at a replica…just like all the other P2 1970’s ‘genuine replicas’.
That’s the point. How fast it goes is not the issue.
As we all know, it’s not necasserily the ‘fastest’ bike that wins.
We should do everything to encourage new members , new rig ideas, and diversity in the paddock.
I was just pointing out how to get moor sidecars out to play, I can not see how making the grids larger could be destructive
It could be destructive if we implemented changes that prompted
an arms race. Making existing rigs less competitive could cause them
to stay home. Seems pretty straight forward concept to grasp.
I’m all for more rigs. And I’m all for change, but let’s be careful
moving forward please.
Also, as Michael has pointed out, there has been a lot of
work as of late to streamline the sidecar rules of three organizations
(VRRA, uscra, and AHRMA) into one compatible document.
Change here is and should always be possible regardless of the other
clubs, but do we want to start moving away again, when we’ve just got
everything (finally!) sorted into a “North American” standard?
Mat.
“11b. CHASSIS:
to be built of tubular or box section steel only. No stressed skin or monocoque
construction with the exception of genuine or copies, in which case the owner shall provide proof of
eligibility to the Technical Coordinator”
So this rig would run in P3, No big deal here. Right out of the rule book.
Get the facts together Eddy and submit a request to the tech coordinator.
Sigh! (of relief).
There’s hope!
Thank you commando!
Go for it Eddy.
Streamlining the rules around the various sanctioning bodies is great.
With that in mind … AHRMA has modern bikes racing with the vintage…aaaaand pop!!! goes that can of worms.
The misunderstanding appears to be based on the assumption that the replica was proposed for P2. P2 does not allow monocoque. However as has been noted, P3 allows replica monocoques. When the P3 sidecar rules were first proposed in 2002, the wording for replica monocoques was included. Although hub centre steering is not allowed, an accurate replica monocoque is. Approval requires proof that the replica is accurate which is what Eddy must submit.
Eddy,
It would be great to have you join us in the P3 group (Shelley and I will be P3 for next year).
If Brian gets his out, that would make 5 of us!! Pierre, Rick,you,Brian and us. Any more for P3?
That would be a great sight.
Miles.
I would love to come up and add to one of the P3 races. I can’t make a full series but would love to come back for one race.
First to address eddy’s rig. Built it and you will get to race.
Second and most important is the unification of the rules in North America.
AHRMA sidecar racers are fighting to get the rules incorporated in the rule book.
We have worked closely with the VRRA & USCRA to homogenize the rules. They are up for public comment on the AHRMA website http://www.ahrma.org/?p=8168.
Look at the rules and comment. This is for the health of sidecar racing in general.
I am saying this as a sidecar racer in both AHRMA & VRRA. I am also a member of the SRA-west and also race with the SRA-east. We need your help in getting these rules established.
OK, I am off my soapbox now.