Sports and Street Rule Clarification
Printed From: BHPC Forum
Category: Public: Open to anyone
Forum Name: Etc
Forum Description: Any other racing-related topics
URL: https://forum.bhpc.org.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=4354
Printed Date: 27 March 2026 at 4:46am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.07 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Sports and Street Rule Clarification
Posted By: Paul Goodwin
Subject: Sports and Street Rule Clarification
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 9:59am
|
A pretty valid concern has been bought up about the eligability of certain machines to race in street and sports classes, in my case whether a Raptobike is suitable.
I have no real disagreement about the fact that a Rapto and similar bikes can be seen as a touch too low for entry into such a class. The problem is that there is no minimum seat height ruling, indeed the regulations state that entry is at the rider's discretion. Unfortunately this creates a situation where it becomes a subjective opinion rather than objective fact. My proposal is to reintroduce a minimum seat height for the street / sports classes as of the beginning of next season to in order to prevent similar concerns. I feel however that eligability should be frozen for this year, if a competitor has raced in a class with a machine that remains identical throughout the season, then they should continue to be allowed in the same classes. I'm not a particular fan of mid-season rule changes. |
Replies:
Posted By: AlanGoodman
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 10:01am
|
There has been a lot of discussion of Sports Class Rules in the past, and they usually end up adding confusion rather than reducing it! See http://forum.bhpc.org.uk.activeboards.net/sports-class-rules-ok_topic302.html - http://forum.bhpc.org.uk.activeboards.net/sports-class-rules-ok_topic302.html And http://forum.bhpc.org.uk.activeboards.net/sports-class-at-the-agm_topic222.html - ------------- |
Posted By: Adrian Setter
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 10:24am
When it just too late to liven-up the AGM agenda with the customary annual discussion on the subject, too... 
I'll be back later with some comment, at a time when the evil squirrels aren't expecting me to be labouring in the nut mines. ------------- Challenge Hurricane - MicWic Delta (Front half) - Burrows Ratracer |
Posted By: AlanGoodman
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 10:32am
I'm gutted about that as well... If this had come up two days ago we wouldn't have had time for any racing at Hillingdon...  ------------- |
Adrian Setter wrote:Posted By: Adrian Setter
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 1:26pm
|
The history of the Sports class is a tad murky, if not particularly long, being clouded by seemingly endless discussions, multiple proposals for rules and adoption at different times of different definitions - but, to make it even more fun, not all documented in one place. There's probably a book in it, if any professional historians are reading. But not, I imagine, a best-seller.
The original class definition was based on an eye-line height of 105cm, with an express intention of encouraging Kingcycles out of sheds and onto the race track. The KC had not long gone out of production, and there might also have been a motive to encourage the sales of the most obvious replacement at the time, the Burrows Ratcatcher. Still - if I recall correctly - Mike did provide prizes for a couple of years.
No sooner was the ink dry on that rule than it was subverted by certain tall riders (Mr Larrington and me), who took bikes rather lower than the intended ones, sat the seats upright, screwed the suspension to maximum pre-load and thereby scraped inside the eye-line rule.
Sports class having been won by me, on a Hurricane, Alan and Dave Goodman - who I shall describe as being closer to Mark Cavendish's height than I am - quite reasonably expected to ride their Hurricanes as Sports, too. At this point I lose the plot slightly, but the eye-line rule was dead and I think it was then that a seat-height rule came in. I don't remember what the measurement was though, and I think you'd have to trawl old magazines to find out. When I became CompSec, I didn't even remember that rule existed, which contributed to me inadvertently causing the first upset of my tenure.
I'm sure a Raptobike would never have met the eye-line rule, not even with a McDee or a Dutchman on board. Similarly, I'm all but certain it wouldn't have passed the seat height rule. On the other hand, there are those on the Continent proclaiming that "high-racers [large-wheeled, high-seated, extremely recumbent machines] are the new low-racers". If they're right (personally, I don't think they are) we might expect an influx of such machines. They would pass both versions of the height test, but are they practical road-going machines? The precedent there is that McDee decided he wouldn't enter his M5 high-racer as Sports.
The spirit that I have tried to encourage for the class is that it is principally for fun (hey, isn't that what our racing is for?), providing a feeling of competition for riders of bikes that simply can't win against the out-and-out race bikes. That seems to have worked pretty well for the last two and a bit seasons.
After all that ramble, we have two questions:
------------- Challenge Hurricane - MicWic Delta (Front half) - Burrows Ratracer |
Posted By: AlanGoodman
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 1:39pm
|
Nicely summed up Adrian... The minimum seat height was set at 350mm for the 2006 race season...
------------- |
Posted By: ND4E
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 3:48pm
|
I agree with a minimum seat height for next season. But personally I think it should be low enough to include the Rapto as this is a very popular and great value for money current production bike and I'm sure there must be many more like Paul that use it as a daily bike. The old height rule was based on Kingcycle seat which was a popular production model at that time.
This clarification could encourage other Rapto owners to have a go at racing or non owners to take the plunge (cheques payable to ND4E Mr.Rapto) ------------- ND4E |
Posted By: AlanGoodman
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 3:55pm
|
The 350mm seat height wasn't based on the Kingcycle... It was actually designed to include bikes such as the Challenge Hurricane (fairly practical bike which by pure coincidence was ridden by the person who proposed that height... Reducing it below that would allow a lot of the out and out race bikes and in my opinion would probably defeat the object of Sports Class... ------------- |
Posted By: ND4E
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 4:05pm
|
Most of the low racing bikes are a little lower than the Rapto so if you made the Rapto the minimum and measured to the mm I think it would encourage new entry into the sport and reflect the gradual lowering of seat heights. Appart from the high racers of course! ------------- ND4E |
Posted By: AlanGoodman
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 4:17pm
|
According to their web sites...
A Rapto seat is 270mm high
A Challenge Hurricane seat is 400mm high...
A Challenge Fujin SL seat is 330mm...
An Optima Baron is 340mm...
I really wouldn't want to reduce the minimum seat height to 270mm... Assuming a minimum seat height is reinstated...
 ------------- |
Posted By: BarneyH
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 4:31pm
|
Apologies to all, especially Paul, for re-opening the debate, I hadn't even seen the new rules page on the website but was going from memory of the 350mm because when looking to join the club back in 2007 I'd looked at the classes etc and what was allowed where.
When looking to buy the Rapto I'd been specific about checking the seat height and had said "oh dear" but its a nice enough bike so I'll forget about the classes and just get on and enjoy it.
Personally having raced the Kingcycle in my first season and been able to gain points in an "entry level" class against similar machines that technologically were less competitive I think its critical that we keep some form of "less racy" class to encourage new participants, not everyone can immediately take to a low racer.
I'm happy to go with whatever the majority decision is on how we define and interpret the rules but as stated above think its critical we have a method of encouraging new people to try our form of racing.
|
Posted By: Paul Goodwin
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 4:39pm
|
Compared to the Nocom, Cuckoos and Ratracers a Rapto feels pretty high up, but my personal feeling is that a stock Rapto being used as the base height for the regulations is probably a touch too low, but N4DE makes a valid point, we had another new rider on a Rapto at Lancaster and pricewise they certainly fall into the starter recumbent category. Maybe there's another way of classifying Streets and Sports rather than height but currently my brain is tied up trying to do DIY without flooding the house. I'll try and get the cogs turning over the next few hours and provide an solution rather than causing an issue! No need to apologise Barney, I think it's something that definitely needs clarifying! |
Posted By: Adrian Setter
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 4:40pm
Agree 100%, largely from my personal experience that Sports class was pretty important to me getting the bug, too. ------------- Challenge Hurricane - MicWic Delta (Front half) - Burrows Ratracer |
Posted By: Adrian Setter
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 4:42pm
I toyed with seat angle for a few minutes this afternoon, but what on earth is the seat angle on a Ratracer - or any other Burrows recumbent blessed with a "Norfolk hunch" seat? ------------- Challenge Hurricane - MicWic Delta (Front half) - Burrows Ratracer |
Posted By: Paul Goodwin
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 4:47pm
|
Quick thought, perhaps we could investigate using the seat height to BB height as a basis? Caertainly bikes such as the NoComs have a greater height difference than a bike such as the Rapto, Hurricane, etc.
I'm not sure on the height difference for something such as a Burrows Special though... |
Posted By: ND4E
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 4:50pm
------------- ND4E |
Posted By: Adrian Setter
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 5:02pm
That's certainly correct. The key question to me is, do they also make suitable road-going bikes? I make no judgment on the matter, not having ridden any of those three anywhere. I just point out what I think is the important question. The scenarios I have in mind are:
Someone who is buying a bike just to race is already hooked! ------------- Challenge Hurricane - MicWic Delta (Front half) - Burrows Ratracer |
Posted By: AlanGoodman
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 5:03pm
|
Quite a few people have Raced Fujins but I can't remember anybody claiming Sports Class on one... Lowering the minimum seat height would mean a significant shift in the purpose of Sports Class... Average speeds of those at the front end of Sports Class would be likely to rise to a level where it really ceases to be entry level.
There has been a lot of discussion of this in the past (the two threads I linked to earlier and several more if you look back through the forum) and my opinion is that it is best left alone - Reducing the seat height would be a mistake and would probably see a reduction in people turning up to race bikes such as Kingcycles, Hurricanes, Bacchettas etc etc...
------------- |
Posted By: Adrian Setter
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 5:22pm
|
Of course, there is currently no formal maximum seat height, though it's a factor that generally gets included in the consideration of whether a bike should be Sports of not. Indeed, Paul kicked this thread off to propose that the class be defined, again, through a minimum seat height.
Maybe we should take a guide from the manufacturers? Their respective websites refer to the Fujin, Baron and Raptobike as "low racers". And the likes of the M5 high racer is referred to as, well, a high racer. If the maker says its a race bike then it's not Sports? ------------- Challenge Hurricane - MicWic Delta (Front half) - Burrows Ratracer |
Posted By: AlanGoodman
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 5:25pm
Sounds sensible to me... Challenge describe the Hurricane as a "Mid-racer" but go on to say...
"The Mid Racer blends the Low Racer's ultimate aerodynamics with a more day-to-day friendly seat elevation and a more upright seat angle. Better maneuverability, visibility, and climbing power are the result. Fast in the city, fast in the country. "
------------- |
Posted By: Adrian Setter
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 5:26pm
|
OK, before anyone else points it out, Challenge call the Hurricane and Furai "mid racers" but then add the description:
"The Mid Racer blends the Low Racer's ultimate aerodynamics with a more day-to-day friendly seat elevation and a more upright seat angle. Better maneuverability, visibility, and climbing power are the result. Fast in the city, fast in the country"
So clearly they're not intended mainly as race bikes ------------- Challenge Hurricane - MicWic Delta (Front half) - Burrows Ratracer |
Posted By: AlanGoodman
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 5:27pm
Great minds...  ------------- |
Posted By: Adrian Setter
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 5:27pm
Spooky!! ------------- Challenge Hurricane - MicWic Delta (Front half) - Burrows Ratracer |
Posted By: Adrian Setter
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 5:28pm
I'm stopping now 
 ------------- Challenge Hurricane - MicWic Delta (Front half) - Burrows Ratracer |
Posted By: GeoffBird
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 5:31pm
|
A problem with SWB bikes with low seats (under ~350mm) is that your legs/feet tend to get tangled up in the front wheel when you turn tightly. IMHO, anything that can't be U-turned in the width of the track isn't very practical. Some high racers with big front wheels have similar problems incidentally.
------------- Right Time - Right Place - Wrong Speed |
Posted By: Yowie
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 5:32pm
|
Writing as an ex- Sports Class competitor (ICE B1), I favoured the more relaxed approach. The spirit of the class would be violated by an M5 CHR or indeed a Rapto, IMO. Let it be written in the rules if necessary, that competitors be informally allowed in/disallowed by the concensus who attend each particular race. Nothing more formal than that. It is only for Fun and to encourage new riders who probably have only one recumbent bike (yet!). |
Posted By: tosgh
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 7:39pm
|
going back to the seat angle idea; I think it has a lot going for it as manufacturers who design bikes to be fast generally aim at getting the rider into a flat/flattish position. How do we work out what the angles of each model are? well some manufacturers give the seat angle parameters in the sales specs, but for those that don't we just need a side photo of the bike in question and measure it. is this unrealistic before next season? ------------- weight is everything |
Posted By: graydog
Date Posted: 02 August 2011 at 11:02pm
|
evening all, Think I was the last to argue the seat heigth cos I'm a short A##
I argee in part with GB.... and many of the points about feature and use.. But the key point I put is 'do you use it regularly as a road bike?' not for training but riding to and from work etc when I build my carbon bike it was build to make the 350mm hight dead!!! and to be fair it took the pi## a bit, as it was 22lb in race mode had a 760gram front wheel when fitted with a tyre and also ran a 200psi carbon disc (ye ye so why was I so slow......) but in road mode it used a 650c rim on the rear and did 8000 miles before it passed to a new rider... But I challenged the seat height based on the fact I was a short a##. I found having the seat at about 290mm allowed my legs to stand flatter in trafic and therefor was safer for me, ie when it was used regularly in the streets..... so please don't bring in seat height/eye line/ etc regs, imho only real reg one needs self governing classes, 'do you use this bike in the main for regular road use? (you may need to show evidence)' rgd gd (sadly not raced yet this year) |
Posted By: Gerry
Date Posted: 03 August 2011 at 11:22pm
| I may have misunderstood but wasn't part of the sports/street class to encourage home builders. Most first home builds (although not all) I have seen ,are parts of other bikes reconfigured to make a recumnent, usually with a reasonable seat height and not a lowracer. To base the rules around what is comercially available, will make it very difficult for a newcomer to be competative on his home build, they would need to BUY what is available if they are interested in a trophy. |
Posted By: Adrian Setter
Date Posted: 04 August 2011 at 10:56am
|
Home-building and home-builders are great. I'm sure the HPV movement would, without them, have been far behind where it is, if it existed at all. The Sports class has never been about encouraging home-builders. Its original aim - pretty explicity expressed, if I remember correctly - was to get people who owned Kingcycles (which had not long before been the BHPC racer's weapon of choice but which had become uncompetitive with the emergence of low-racers) back into racing.
Home-built machines that fit the spirit of Sports class are, of course entirely welcome in it.
Street class exists to encourage the development of road-going bicycles with fairings. Currently, the market for such machines is such that there are none being made commercially, but it's not so long since that was the case for HPV's in general. In that sense, Street does have an affinity with home-builders, but that's more to do with the state of the development of the class and the lack of commercial machines than an explicit intention.
There is, of course, the Home-Builders' trophy for those who've built and raced a machine. Not that it's a racing class, though I'm sure speed (of the machine, if not the athlete) would be a factor in selection of the winner. ------------- Challenge Hurricane - MicWic Delta (Front half) - Burrows Ratracer |
Posted By: Gerry
Date Posted: 04 August 2011 at 1:22pm
|
I have a bit of a dilema, my friend who raced this weekend on a Giant MCR compact, really enjoyed the racing and liked the attitude of the club. He now wants to buy a recumbent, start racing and is looking to me for advice. He has never ridden a recumbent so I would be incline to push him towards something upright with scorpion bars as that would be the easiest bike for a beginner ,or do I push him into something with better performance and hope he gians confidence quickly.
How easy are these bikes the first time, can anybody take them out of the box and race them.
I just feel at least one class should be suitable for a nervous newcomer. The classes need to evolve, the reasons they were created may or may not be revelant now. There will always be beginners and they would want to win trophys.
|
Posted By: GeoffBird
Date Posted: 04 August 2011 at 1:30pm
I think Mike is plenty fast enough as it is - I'd recommend a BikeE  To be serious, it really depends on the rider. In my experience, seasoned cyclists usually have more problems with recumbents and motorcyclists often take to them quickly, but it's a small sample group. As people always say, its best to try out a range of bikes, preferably for a meaningful distance - what feels good scooting round a carpark for 2 minutes isn't necessarily the best bike for you. If he really wants to go fast, I'm sure he'll get used to a low-racer with practice (or even, God help us, a streamliner!). but you do need confidence in your machine in close combat. But I'm sure you know this anyway Gerry. ------------- Right Time - Right Place - Wrong Speed |
Posted By: Gerry
Date Posted: 04 August 2011 at 2:07pm
|
Thanks Geoff,
Thats my point not everyone will have the confidence to race a lowracer at first and you need confidence to race, it would be nice to keep a class for poeple with little experienve. I'll start Mike on my Kingcycle as its easy to ride and I'm sure in the future when more confident he will be looking for something faster.
|
Posted By: Adrian Setter
Date Posted: 04 August 2011 at 2:18pm
I couldn't agree more and this is one reason why, through all the debates, I've remained a strong supporter of a Sports class. ------------- Challenge Hurricane - MicWic Delta (Front half) - Burrows Ratracer |
Posted By: Gerry
Date Posted: 04 August 2011 at 3:41pm
| The difference between the sports and street class seem mainly based around the farings used. The street class could involve to include what is now comercially available although not out and out racers, and base the sports class on what is easiest for a novice to ride? |
Posted By: Crossie
Date Posted: 04 August 2011 at 9:27pm
|
Err...........how long is this piece of string?!
Having read all the posts so far and not ever having raced, but hopefully next year and on a homebuilt at that, it would be mildly annoying to spend time, effort and money building a machine only to have it barred from the very class that a competetive minded newbie would make as their starting point.
I think that Yowie's suggestion is just about the most reasonable, and as he suggests, if the fellows on the start line say it's in, then that should be okay. After all if it is 'Sports Class', then the sporting ethos should hold sway over more precise and ever more pedantically applied Rules which are much more relevant to the pure race machine, where the ultra competetive person will sail as close to the rules as possible to gain the best advantage over their fellow competitors.
Maybe a Sports machine could be required to have minimum radius of turn so as to demonstrate it's fitness for road use.
Crossie
|
Posted By: Yanto
Date Posted: 04 August 2011 at 9:38pm
Gerry, i'm sure if your mate wanted to he would be able to race something low. I'm no expert rider and my first recumbent was a Baron x-low, I bought from a chap who had raced it. I only got it because i thought it looked cool! It took me a week or so to master setting off, then about a hundred miles to be confident, i then used to use it on a 25 mile each way commute into N Bristol. So, if one doesn't know any different and that it is supposed to be difficult, being low with tiller bars, then go for it. It will save the hassle of having to change bikes when the alure of a low racer strikes. As a footnote i sold it to a chap who had never ridden a recumbent before, after a few weeks he was flying around SE London, and racing with a full body sock (Bike not him).. |
Posted By: Adrian Setter
Date Posted: 05 August 2011 at 12:45pm
|
The impression I'm getting is that, among the differing views, the nearest there is to a consensus is to stick with the principle that Sports class is a club that determines its own membership.
If adjudication - independent seeing as I don't race as Sports these days - is required on whether a Raptobike (or any other machine) should be eligible for the class, I'm here to be asked. ------------- Challenge Hurricane - MicWic Delta (Front half) - Burrows Ratracer |
Posted By: Adrian Setter
Date Posted: 05 August 2011 at 12:52pm
If you're in any doubt, post details/pics of your machine, which should soon resolve any contention over whether it would be acceptable for Sports.
Let's not forget, either, that we do have a prize - though awarded slightly subjectively rather than being a formalised race class - aimed specifically at new racers: "Best Newcomer". (A "newcomer" is someone in their first or second season of racing.) ------------- Challenge Hurricane - MicWic Delta (Front half) - Burrows Ratracer |
Posted By: Yanto
Date Posted: 05 August 2011 at 5:42pm
but don't expect it to be awarded even if you win two classes in your second year!  , sorry that was uncalled for!
|
Posted By: Adrian Setter
Date Posted: 05 August 2011 at 10:27pm
I did say it was subjective... ------------- Challenge Hurricane - MicWic Delta (Front half) - Burrows Ratracer |
Posted By: Gerry
Date Posted: 06 August 2011 at 10:17pm
|
If adjudication - independent seeing as I don't race as Sports these days - is required on whether a Raptobike (or any other machine) should be eligible for the class, I'm here to be asked. [/QUOTE]
If Adrian is willing to make decisions about eligiblity of bikes for the sports class, considering he is the competition secretary, I think that is a great idea. Its simple and saves making lots of rules
|
Posted By: AlanGoodman
Date Posted: 07 August 2011 at 11:16am
|
That's pretty much how it has been working for a while - self-regulating with the comp sec available to make a decision if there any disputes...
To be honest, anybody who is taking Sports Class seriously enough to worry about who else is in it is probably in the wrong class... ------------- |
Posted By: jes@gcre
Date Posted: 08 August 2011 at 9:46am
|
Which raises the question: if no one in a particular class cares who else is in that class what is the point of the class in the first place? ------------- Racing is life... Anything which happens before or afterwards is just standing around waiting to race.... |
Posted By: AlanGoodman
Date Posted: 08 August 2011 at 10:01am
|
I've always seen it as a bit of fun and a chance for those not at the sharp end to race for a trophy if they really want it...
Most years there are only one or two people who are really in with a chance of winning Sports Class so in that respect it's not a lot different to any other class - on both of the occasions when I won it the main reason was that the faster people didn't turn up to enough races...
For me it's just racing purely for the fun of racing... I've never really found that I need more reason than that... In BHPC races I've often found myself in groups that include Sports, Street, Multitrack, unfaired, part-faired, Juniors, Ladies... Pretty much everyone.
When we get to the last lap it never crosses my mind who is in what class - I just pedal has hard as I can... ------------- |
Posted By: jes@gcre
Date Posted: 08 August 2011 at 11:42am
|
Thats all true.
To be honest, there are several "dormant" classes in pedal car racing at present.
Doesn't mean they should be scrapped because we may find next year or the year after that they take off again and it doesn't do anyone any harm to have, for example, just 1 team in ladies class for a few races. Its there should people want it in the future. ------------- Racing is life... Anything which happens before or afterwards is just standing around waiting to race.... |