Looking over the Rule book for AFM the limit has been set at 450cc for 4-stroke Multi cylinders.

From the racing results the SV650 has a lock down on all comers-A 450cc 4-stroke multi cylinder is not close on power parity-and the choices for 400cc donors HIGHLY limited.

Would an increase in CC's to say 575cc be more of an equal result power wise and competition wise?

I pull that number arbitrarily from the air-but it would be a number in which the 600 could not enter.Thus keeping the spirit of the grid.

I'd like to hear the opinion of the SV ranks here.

I don't race and SV, I race a 400, not a 400 bored to 450. A 125cc bump is too much to be considered for a water cooled multi-cylinder engine. It's not just the bikes in the class but the riders too. Elena did 56's on a 125 at Thill on her third trackday, age 12. With the right rider I'm sure my bike is capable of vying for wins in the class. What your asking for is actually greater than the original cc limit of 560cc that was deemed to be too great. A year later it was changed to 450cc's. Since then a Kawi 400 and a honda 400 have won races. The first year of the class saw a honda 400, a tzr250 and a single in a 125 frame in the top 6 overall.

How would a proposal to increase the "multi-cylinder CC limit" to 562cc's sound?

With the Entry of the Ducati on this years Formula 4 grid,and based on precedents of the 675cc Triumph legal for 600Superbike, If you start with the % of power numbers . I think with an allowance for a 3 CYLINDER motor allowed to displace 562cc is a completely fair rival to the current SV's and now Ducati dominating the Formula 4 class. In the current formula the only thing OEM on the current crop of highly modified SV's are the frame,swing arm,outer motor cases-basically a complete "franken bike". For people wanting to come to the class the current economic bar has been set so high ,that it has become completely unfeasible for new competitors to join in in the current economic climate.
What I propose is an avenue for new arrivals to the class for under 5000.00$-Race ready.

ILOAD2 wrote:and now Ducati dominating the Formula 4 class.

It hasn't won a single race... yet. I don't think "dominating" means quite what you think it does.

Honestly, I doubt the Ducati is any cheaper to run in F4. Anyways, I don't think every class needs to be inexpensive. 250P is cheap. And if Dave Wallis gets his way, 450 will be even cheaper. People who want to run a cheaper F4 have 650P which is basically some fork internals and rear shock away from a competitive bike.

Anyways, F4 seems alive and well... I'm not sure why tweaking the rules is necessary?

Aaron-

Th SV platform has not been sold since 2010. "Alive and well"?.. The big five have a policy of discontinuing OEM parts for a model after 5 years.. What I am proposing is whats know as- forward thinking.

The Ducati that has come to the class is dominating.. It has charged to the front in just 2 races-how long has the SV's its competing against been in development-certainly NOT 2 races.

The model I propose is available ON showrooms today and in the used market. The modification to make it formula 4 ready (assuming the multi cylinder spec is increased to 562cc) would cost around 500.00$. If you purely look at an apples to apple comparison of power,torque,weight, the racing would be fair and the precedent for triple cylinder new comers to the grid has been set in 600SB and 450SB.

You can still buy cranks and other parts for 1st gen SV's. Ask me how I know. My point was that the class is currently alive and well and tweaking with the rules can be dangerous.

That said, I'm a bit slow... what make/model bike can easily/cheaply modified to that spec?

Anyways, if you're serious about this, I'd strongly recommend you talk to Dave Wallis about his project of taking GSXR600's and turning them into 450's for the 450 class and how he's going about making that acceptable to the AFM. Actually fielding a bike or two, showing that it's competitive but not overly so, cost effective and having plentiful parts would be a big win for FIV and something that I would be interested in hearing more about.... especially since I'm planning on dropping 650P and building a 650T/FIV bike.

Actually, that wouldn't be legal for 650Twins either without a major change... seems unlikely since it's not a formula class. So what would be the secondary class for such a bike?

Aaron.

I have been aware of the triple concept for about 2 years now. I know exactly what has gone into the 450 entry fielded by M.Lomyer as an exhibition entrant. I rode the bike back in February before any of the General membership knew of the projects completion. Seeing that it is a viable alternative to the anemic 450 grid. The next logical step is to bring an affordable triple cylinder concept to the Formula IV grid. The main classes it would run in is Formula IV and F40 LtW. I think those are the traditional 2 classes the Formula IV heavy hitters run in -is it not?

A number of people who run FIV are less then 40 years old. Take myself for example, F40 isn't an option.

Can't really compare the 675 running against 600's IMHO since the 675 isn't competing against bikes which have engine designs nearly 15 years old. Don't get me wrong, you can get lots of HP out of a 650twin... just making it reliable & last a year is challenge.

Anyways, I dunno... I'm not an engine builder/designer. Seems to me under Formula rules you could make plenty of HP out of a _modern_ converted gsxr750 562cc triple... maybe too much. I'm not saying I'm against it, just either get a few well known engine builders to give their .02 on it or do what Wallis/Lomyer are doing and show us what it can do.

Anyways, don't let my skepticism disappoint you... I'm interested in hearing more actual details/analysis.

Still looking for a way to make a triple out of a 750 I see.

When I raced my VFR400 (450cc engine) in FIV, it was totally competitive vs. the SV650's. I finished in the top 5 most the time (lots of 2nd places and 1 win), and I received several top 3 overall in points. To allow a 560 cc limit (or so) would be disproportionate for the class. Mark Elrod's RVF450 right now is capable of 90+ HP, and my old tired 450 engine is still making 83 HP. Wow, if we had been allowed 560CC (like was proposed many years back and thankfully shot down), we would have swept the class.

Tim Wheeler also raced a ZXR400 (450cc engine) that was equally competitive. If he had longer in FIV, I have little doubt he would have taken trophies home regularly. But, his bike too was fraught with difficulties being an older machine and a Kawasaki instead of a Honda 400. <--- Bait for Craig.

The problem is, bikes like Elrod and my VFR/RVF 400's or Wheeler's ZXR400 are expensive and difficult to build and race. It's getting too difficult to find bikes and parts. But, you have to design the class based on the possibilities of the cc limit, not based on the fact nobody is campaigning a 450 in FIV competitively anymore. A 450cc four is absolutely capable of winning FIV. Anything bigger would be unfair.

That's why I'm doing the 450 triple. It is currently legal in FIV. Only 450SB is exhibition "no points", but that will likely change for next year.

Right now the bike is making less than 70 HP. It's pretty much stock (and I just found out it was making even less power than we thought after making a change - but Wally has rectified that). Plus a built engine is coming soon from Patrick Ho at Performance Concepts so we can uncork one of these things and see what they can do. Of course, it would help if I could remember how to ride. I'm getting there.

By built, I don't mean the insane 450 builds like we did on our VFR/RVF400's. I mean mainly top end (higher compression, porting, cams, ignition kind of stuff). Plus consider the chassis I'm riding now is 15 years newer than my VFR400. I didn't put modern forks/brakes on my 450 until the last year I raced, and didn't get a chance to dial it in before I quite - so my previous success was on 15 year old forks! The VFR chassis (and original forks) are pretty amazing, but a bike with modern forks is better. Oh, and I'm getting much better starts on the 450 Triple than I ever did on the VFR (better clutch).

Either way, it's pretty cheap fun (my current bike cost about $3500 as it sits). Even built it doesn't have to break the bank. That's a far cry better than what I spent on my VFR. I'm thinking the 450 Triple is an even better value than racing an EX250! Better bang for the buck in my opinion.

Mike,
while I of course agree on the 450 triple, I dont think that Yuri's idea is so far out for F4.
The two 450's thus far average 65 rwhp (one is 68, the other is 62). IF in stcok trim as a 600 it put out 95 rwhp, thats basically a 1/3 drop in pony.

So, if a 750 of the same era put out 115, it is feasible to say that it would put out about 87 hp, which is in the ballpark of built SV's (as far as I know) but it still will get beat on torque.

It is entirely possible that someone will build one and get 115 again, sure, but this can be controlled with a couple of simple rules, much like the 450 triple will probably be to avoid the same issue.

Anyways, conceptually is a bit far out, yes, and I dont see a second class for it either, but I dont think its far out enough to fully reject.

I think another response is that perhaps some rules/ exceptions should be written around triples.

The Triumph get a 75cc advantage...... 12.5%

the 450 is not asking for one in 450 (or anywhere else for that matter)

but the 562 essentially is, so... 450 x 1.125= 506 ....... so it would need a 25% cc allowance...

ok, just thinking out loud...

Lohmeyer wrote:When I raced my VFR400 (450cc engine) in FIV, it was totally competitive vs. the SV650's. I finished in the top 5 most the time (lots of 2nd places and 1 win), and I received several top 3 overall in points. To allow a 560 cc limit (or so) would be disproportionate for the class. Mark Elrod's RVF450 right now is capable of 90+ HP, and my old tired 450 engine is still making 83 HP. Wow, if we had been allowed 560CC (like was proposed many years back and thankfully shot down), we would have swept the class.

Tim Wheeler also raced a ZXR400 (450cc engine) that was equally competitive. If he had longer in FIV, I have little doubt he would have taken trophies home regularly. But, his bike too was fraught with difficulties being an older machine and a Kawasaki instead of a Honda 400. <--- Bait for Craig.

The problem is, bikes like Elrod and my VFR/RVF 400's or Wheeler's ZXR400 are expensive and difficult to build and race. It's getting too difficult to find bikes and parts. But, you have to design the class based on the possibilities of the cc limit, not based on the fact nobody is campaigning a 450 in FIV competitively anymore. A 450cc four is absolutely capable of winning FIV. Anything bigger would be unfair.

That's why I'm doing the 450 triple. It is currently legal in FIV. Only 450SB is exhibition "no points", but that will likely change for next year.

Right now the bike is making less than 70 HP. It's pretty much stock (and I just found out it was making even less power than we thought after making a change - but Wally has rectified that). Plus a built engine is coming soon from Patrick Ho at Performance Concepts so we can uncork one of these things and see what they can do. Of course, it would help if I could remember how to ride. I'm getting there.

By built, I don't mean the insane 450 builds like we did on our VFR/RVF400's. I mean mainly top end (higher compression, porting, cams, ignition kind of stuff). Plus consider the chassis I'm riding now is 15 years newer than my VFR400. I didn't put modern forks/brakes on my 450 until the last year I raced, and didn't get a chance to dial it in before I quite - so my previous success was on 15 year old forks! The VFR chassis (and original forks) are pretty amazing, but a bike with modern forks is better. Oh, and I'm getting much better starts on the 450 Triple than I ever did on the VFR (better clutch).

Either way, it's pretty cheap fun (my current bike cost about $3500 as it sits). Even built it doesn't have to break the bank. That's a far cry better than what I spent on my VFR. I'm thinking the 450 Triple is an even better value than racing an EX250! Better bang for the buck in my opinion.

Michael- My understanding is that the increase in the "multi cylinder" rule,when addressed was shot down because of the architecture of the proposed machine I.E. a fully functional inline 4 cylinder motor. It is also my understanding that when the Formula IV class was created the multi cylinder rule was put in place at a time when the SV development was in it's infancy. After watching last weeks formula IV race and the power and dominance of the Ducati I would say it is clear that the rules/allowances for the class should be re evaluated.NONE of the 450 Superbikes now or back then can match the power and torque of the current front runner. The bikes you fondly reminisce about are denizens of the past that are nearly impossible to locate-and at a cost of 50,000.00$ to replicate in motor power even approaching a equitable level -not only that but would not last a 7 round series in such a high stat of tune, I think is disingenuous to put forth as a valid argument in our current economic condition not to mention the machinery market and availability. Putting into the rule book to allow for 3 cylinder motors displacing no larger that 562cc I think is a VERY fair,Cost Effective way to not only bring new participants to the FIV class-but also in a way that new entry's do not have to be beholden to an aging SV650 platform AND a Frankenstein vendor cottage industry.

Dave suggested that an otherwise stock 750 running 3 cyl would likely put out ~87HP. That doesn't sound too far off to me. And that would be in the ballpark of a built SV motor. Problem is then you're comparing a completely stock motor vs. a built motor with flat sides, 1mm over bore, etc.

And that's where I see the problem... Maybe 575cc would be viable if they had to run under the production rules, but I don't see how that makes any sense in a Formula class.

Side note Yuri: You've used the phrases like "Frankenstein vendor cottage industry" a few times now and frankly it sounds like you've got an axe to grind. Not sure if that's your intent, but it's likely to invoke a knee jerk reaction from some people which really isn't going to help you reach your goal. My .02