Who Was The Last Rider To Win An Official Meaningful Race On An Upright Engine, And Where?

[Sotonian]

How about the last race winner on a 2-valve upright?

 

I think Paul Tyrer won races on a 2-valve Jawa when riding for Buxton in the early days of the BL3 or whatever it was called then. I remember him not being allowed to use it at Somerset because it didn't have a silencer.

Edited May 29, 2014 by Sotonian

[Tsunami]

The advantage of a laydown is that the moving parts are not fighting against gravity, allowing them to rev higher. The lower centre of gravity obviously makes them easier to ride as said above.

Although laydowns appear to be a newish invention, there is history, and I think a thread on the subject on here about a year ago, that laydowns have been played with from about the 30's onwards. I am sure that the thread on here said that Wal Phillips had ridden a lay down regularly, and that must have been at least 70 years ago.

[foamfence]

The advantage of a laydown is that the moving parts are not fighting against gravity, allowing them to rev higher. The lower centre of gravity obviously makes them easier to ride as said above.

Although laydowns appear to be a newish invention, there is history, and I think a thread on the subject on here about a year ago, that laydowns have been played with from about the 30's onwards. I am sure that the thread on here said that Wal Phillips had ridden a lay down regularly, and that must have been at least 70 years ago.

I believe Wal rode a Douglas. They had an engine with one forward and one backward horizontal cylinders. There were also some riders using Rudge 4 valve engines, although it was several decades before the Neil Street 4 valves came into being.

[Fromafar]

Not sure, would an upright be competitive today? I mean it almost certainly wouldn't be on the big open fast tracks, but places like Eastbourne, Lakeside, Plymouth they just might be.....? Any thoughts.....??

 

The whole sport needs to be slowed down,all other forms of Motor sport and Bikesport have been introducing new regs to stop it becoming uncompetitive and too expensive.

[FAST GATER]

The whole sport needs to be slowed down,all other forms of Motor sport and Bikesport have been introducing new regs to stop it becoming uncompetitive and too expensive.

There speaks the voice of reason pity that it will fall on "deaf ears " within this sport, change is something this sport chooses to ignore at it's own peril. It is obsessed with a rider moving at the start( or getting a flyer) but shy's away from sorting out measures to reduce injury ,death and costs within the sport no wonder outsiders think it's a Mickey Mouse sport .

[Shale Searcher]

IF you have 4 engines, made to exactly to the same spec, tolerances and materials, would they perform identically? Also assuming all the settings were identical and the same fuel/oil and plug were theSame. Initially on a test bed, then in identical rolling chassis with the same ignition system, gearing and finally tyres inflated to the same pressures...

How long would it be before they started to perform measurably different, if they performed identically up until the "rider" was introduced......

Edited May 29, 2014 by Shale Searcher

[foamfence]

IF you have 4 engines, made to exactly to the same spec, tolerances and materials, would they perform identically? Also assuming all the settings were identical and the same fuel/oil and plug were theSame. Initially on a test bed, then in identical rolling chassis with the same ignition system, gearing and finally tyres inflated to the same pressures...

How long would it be before they started to perform measurably different, if they performed identically up until the "rider" was introduced......

I remember reading that if you rode four 2 valve Jawa's down a quarter mile drag strip, they would all be within a few feet of each other. I think it was Ivan Mauger who said it. It would seem that technology hasn't made things easier.

[Shale Searcher]

I remember reading that if you rode four 2 valve Jawa's down a quarter mile drag strip, they would all be within a few feet of each other. I think it was Ivan Mauger who said it. It would seem that technology hasn't made things easier.

 

I was wondering how long individual rider usage would take to have detrimental effects on the 4 engines, just wondered how long it would be before some riders began to question the "sameness" of the 4 engines, and start complaining they they were no longer the same......!

[Catabracadabra]

Just for the record Billy Hamill won on an upright at the Austrian at wiener Neustadt GP in 1995, yes with others on laydowns

[weatherwatcher]

I think you are right there the riders need to slow down. Some of them are so out of control of the bikes that it brings your heart into your mouth to watch them. It is just a case of how as the least nerve and can wind the trottle to the max and stay there the longest.

I can never remember riders in the 70's and 80's leaping arouns the track as if they are on a bronko but I may be wrong and just forget.

The way the riders are getting injured these days is getting far to often with at least 2 cases of brain damage at the end of last season and the beging of this. The speed they go is bound to make the accidents worse than they ever where. One of the worst I remember seeing in the 70's was at Weymouth when 2 riders went into the fencing on the straight, one was thrown clear, the other poor lad hid the fence and the handlebars went into his stomach. But accidents like that where far and a lot fewer than now.

[foamfence]

I think you are right there the riders need to slow down. Some of them are so out of control of the bikes that it brings your heart into your mouth to watch them. It is just a case of how as the least nerve and can wind the trottle to the max and stay there the longest.

I can never remember riders in the 70's and 80's leaping arouns the track as if they are on a bronko but I may be wrong and just forget.

The way the riders are getting injured these days is getting far to often with at least 2 cases of brain damage at the end of last season and the beging of this. The speed they go is bound to make the accidents worse than they ever where. One of the worst I remember seeing in the 70's was at Weymouth when 2 riders went into the fencing on the straight, one was thrown clear, the other poor lad hid the fence and the handlebars went into his stomach. But accidents like that where far and a lot fewer than now.

Yes there were definitely less serious injuries then and no air fences either.

[miro]

I believe Wal rode a Douglas. They had an engine with one forward and one backward horizontal cylinders. There were also some riders using Rudge 4 valve engines, although it was several decades before the Neil Street 4 valves came into being.

 

Phillips used a Rudge and the Rudge was the inspiration behind the all conquering JAP, and the argument was settled between the upright engine and the low slung Douglas. He advocated lay down engines and a few were made here and there over the years though I don't know if he actually made any himself or rode one. Off subject he also made a fuel injector that was sold by Hagon and some Speedway riders used them, I saw Peter Collins try one on a Weslake at Hackney in a second half.

[foamfence]

 

Phillips used a Rudge and the Rudge was the inspiration behind the all conquering JAP, and the argument was settled between the upright engine and the low slung Douglas. He advocated lay down engines and a few were made here and there over the years though I don't know if he actually made any himself or rode one. Off subject he also made a fuel injector that was sold by Hagon and some Speedway riders used them, I saw Peter Collins try one on a Weslake at Hackney in a second half.

You are right. I got the engines wrong. I did see a very early picture of Ron Johnson on a Douglas.

[FAST GATER]

It would appear that a return to upright engines would have an immediate effect in slowing the bikes down( due to the gravity effect on the engine) and make it harder for the riders to enter corners at the speed they are at the moment .There would appear no reason that the laydown engines could not be adapted to go in upright frames thus using up the existing stock of these engines and giving existing users time to move over to a more standardised unit .It would not be unreasonable ( a word not known to s/way it would appear) for there to be a timescale of 3yrs for this to happen as i would image any rider would have a change of engine unit in this time what ever level they compete at.It would also give Jawa time to produce a new engine unit and GM to protect their current business if onlry Briggo & Co were attracted to this element of the sport instead of the infamous" dirt deflector " I live in hope .

Edited May 30, 2014 by FAST GATER

[spinkox]

IF you have 4 engines, made to exactly to the same spec, tolerances and materials, would they perform identically?

It doesnt work with children. . .

[Vince]

_{I can't see that changing to upright engines would do a thing apart from cost money and cause more injuries. The engines have been improved and developed so would make the same power, the riders have learned to ride in the modern style and enter corners harder and would continue to ride in that way, tracks have evolved to suit modern bikes and nobody has the money to spend on shale to change that. Added to that there will be some significant outlay in changing engines plus throwing away all the frames and forks while Jawa and the others may or may not re-tool to make uprights so the new frames will be more expensive.}

 

_{All for something that might slow things down but then again might not.}

 

_{If you want to save money and create an equal playing field then to my way of thinking you have to either standardise engines or the ancillaries that are put on them. My opinion is that if you standardise engines it will be a nightmare to police and inevitably some engines will be better than others. If you standardise carbs, ignitions and clutches there is a better chance that you could come up with something that would make excessive tuning worthless, would be relatively easy to police and create a more equal playing field. As for slowing things down, I just can't see it will ever happen by more than the smallest fraction unless you put everybody on 125's or something.}

[FAST GATER]

_{I can't see that changing to upright engines would do a thing apart from cost money and cause more injuries. The engines have been improved and developed so would make the same power, the riders have learned to ride in the modern style and enter corners harder and would continue to ride in that way, tracks have evolved to suit modern bikes and nobody has the money to spend on shale to change that. Added to that there will be some significant outlay in changing engines plus throwing away all the frames and forks while Jawa and the others may or may not re-tool to make uprights so the new frames will be more expensive.}

 

_{All for something that might slow things down but then again might not.}

 

_{If you want to save money and create an equal playing field then to my way of thinking you have to either standardise engines or the ancillaries that are put on them. My opinion is that if you standardise engines it will be a nightmare to police and inevitably some engines will be better than others. If you standardise carbs, ignitions and clutches there is a better chance that you could come up with something that would make excessive tuning worthless, would be relatively easy to police and create a more equal playing field. As for slowing things down, I just can't see it will ever happen by more than the smallest fraction unless you put everybody on 125's or something.}

 

I take your points on board but slowing down by any amount even fractions may be woth it surely lap times have not dropped by that much in the last 20yrs have they but the cost in money and rider injury to gain have and this is unacceptable IMO.

[Vince]

I agree that something needs to change but going back to uprights isn't any sort of sensible answer imo.

 

Is it really the bikes or speed (the actual speed difference is miniscule between the upright era and today) that causes more injuries (if there are more)? Not in my opinion, it's the way riders push harder in every race and given the comments on here if a rider plays safe the spectators are never going to accept any less on that score.

 

Whatever happened to the rev limiter? To my mind there is a huge opportunity there to make small changes to the limit year on year that could eventually result in far less money spent on engines.

[Shale Searcher]

Yes, what happened to the rev limiter? weren't they being trialled last season? How did it work? I cannot work out a safe method of limiting revs, surely if you are mid corner and you gave it a bag full of throttle, would the engine splutter and slow causing another bag full of grip which would fire you in a straight line to the fence? if you were flat out and bordering the rev limiter, how would you get the back end to break-out on a very grippy track without the extra burst of acceleration of the rear wheel? Again you end up spearing the air fence! Again!!

[Vince]

No different to when you reach the limit now, every engine gets to a point where it dies off. Big advantage to my way of thinking would be the possibility of going back to heavier flywheels and engines producing more torque which I think would be more predictable and therefore safer.