On the afternoon of July 8, 2025, AHRMA’s Board of Trustees met via video conference to review rules proposals for the 2026 racing season. A summary of the proposals, including committee recommendations and trustee preliminary votes may be found below.

Members may comment on the rule proposals / votes using these guidelines:

• If a proposal has already been commented on, please reply to the current thread to keep those comments together
  • Use the find function (shortcuts are command-F on a Mac, Control-F or CTRL-F on a PC) and enter the Entry ID # to find associated comments
• You may only make a comment on ONE rule/Entry ID in each of your comments
• Entry ID is REQUIRED
• Your contact information is REQUIRED although it won’t be displayed

Any comments not following these guidelines WILL BE REMOVED.

The Member Comment Period is July 15-22. Final voting is tentatively scheduled to take place on August 12. Each Trustee’s initials are listed by his/her actions below.

The votes recorded below are votes for/against the proposed change; If “yes”, the preliminary vote is in favor of the proposal, if “no”, the preliminary vote is against the proposal. If the vote is anything other than “yes” or “no”, a note regarding the motion and what was voted on is included in “Discussion”.

Underlined wording would be new for the 2026 Handbook, a strike-through indicates wording proposed to be removed.

July 8:

Chairman of the Board, Greg Tomlinson, called to order at 4:05 pm Eastern

Trustees in Attendance: Bob Robbins, Colton Roberts, Ellen Voermans, Greg Tomlinson (Chairman), Jeff Bushey, Jeff Hargis, Jeff Oakley, Kerri Kress, Luke Sayer (Secretary), Tim Terrell (Treasurer), Tod Miller, Wes Poole.

Guest(s): Daniel May (Executive Director), Ed Roman (Special Committee Chair), Cindy McLean (AHRMA Communications), Steve Massey (Future Chairman, Editorial Committee / Rule Change Proposal Process)

Preliminary vote process conducted. 6:25 pm Eastern motion to adjourn WP, GT seconded. Meeting adjourned.

General & Housekeeping

Entry ID #12765 Section 2-Definitions

• Like design: Any motorcycle or part produced or reproduced after a cutoff date that is essentially unchanged from that produced prior to the cutoff (e.g. 1974 Norton Commando is essentially the same as a ’72 model).  Once the model or part number for a motorcycle or part was changed by the OEM those newer parts are not deemed as like design (e.g. Can-Am MX4 had a new model so it is not “like design” to a MX3).  OEM superseded part numbers on specific replacement parts are allowed if they are identical to the original. Wear items and consumables are exempt from “like design” (e.g. tires, fluids, brake pads, pistons, valves, bearings, gaskets and seals). The spirit of “like design” is that the replacement provides no competitive or performance advantage from the original item (this applies to replacement parts and motorcycles produced after the cutoff date).

(Jimmy Pooler, Member #2869)

Rule Change Rationale

Committee Recommendation: Yes (unanimous)
Committee Discussion:  Pooler’s argument tightens the definition of “like design” by matching part numbers of various components to determine if like design applies.
Board Discussion: 
July Board: yes (5 yes KK, GT, EV, LS, JO / 4 no CR, BR, TT, JH)

Entry ID #12767 New

3.6 ?) If a race experiences more than one red flag, it will be postponed until the end of the day. If time permits, the race will run; if not, it will be considered complete. If the race is deemed complete without any laps completed, no points will be awarded. (Frank Guadagnino, Member #1012886)

Rule Change Rationale:  Often, races are shortened or at times even canceled, due to on track incidents. This rule will help keep the schedule on track, as well as being fair to all.

Committee Recommendation: Reject (Unanimous)
Committee Discussion: The committee feels that policy of “Best Practices” used by race officials covers the proposer’s intent.
Board Discussion: Trustees agreed with the committee’s rational regarding “Best Practices” used by race officials.
GT motioned to vote, JH second
July Board: no (0 yes / 12 no)

Entry ID #12770 3.6 j)

j) In races if the red flag is displayed before the leader has completed less than half the scheduled laps, the race will be restarted with original grids. The race lap count will be lessened by 1 (one) lap to allow for additional warm up lap. If the leader has completed more than half the scheduled laps before the red flag is displayed, the race will be deemed complete and scored by the last completed lap by the field. If a rider causes a red flag after the leader has completed more than half of scheduled laps, the offending rider will receive a DQ. Race Control, Referee and Director will determine if rider, track conditions or other circumstances caused the red flag. (Frank Guadagnino, Member #1012886)

Rule Change Rationale: This rule change will encourage racers to take a safer approach to overtaking.

Committee Recommendation: Accept (Unanimous)
Committee Discussion:  Red flag conditions caused by rider actions puts a strain on the remaining race schedule. Assigning a penalty for the actions resulting in race being stopped is a fair outcome caused by the actions of the offending racer.
Board Discussion: Trustees felt that current wording in the handbook is sufficient.
WP motioned to vote, BR seconded
July Board: no (2 yes / 10 no)

Vintage Road Racing

Entry ID #12704 10.4.2.A 1

1. Single-cylinder/single carb: Dell’Orto SS1, Amal GP or Amal Monobloc to 32mm (1-1/4”) 34mm (1-3/8″). Amal Mk1 Concentric (600, 900 or 1000 series) to 34mm (1-5/16”). (Alex McLean, Member #1938)

Rule Change Rationale: Extremely difficult/impossible to find 1-1/4″ carburetors.

Committee Recommendation: Accept (unanimous)
Committee Rationale/Discussion: Pre-40 was intended to be a “no holds barred” class. We agreed that this change will also make it easier to field these older machines.
Board Discussion: Board was in agreement.
TT motioned to vote, LS seconded
July Board: yes ( 11 yes / 0 no)

Entry ID #12732 10.3.1

RD 400 is excluded from Formula F750 (Mark Halpern, Member #5459)

Other rules affected

10.3.5 RD400 “Bump up” to Formula Vintage

Rule Change Rationale: 10.3.1 Class definition states “Built prior to December 31 1972 and like design”. The RD400 first year is 1976. It is a stroked 400 reed valve that shares very few internal parts with earlier bikes Yamahas it an unfair advantage in this class. The RD400 should “bump up” to Formula Vintage class 10.3.5

Committee Recommendation: Accept – 3-0 CR abstained
Committee Rationale/Discussion:The committee recognized that the RD400 is not within the current class date cutoff of Dec 31st, 1972.
Board Discussion: CR, who abstained due to racing a 400, acknowledged the RD400’s later release date but pointed out that other models like the RD250 and 350 also did not meet the cutoff for their respective classes and had been eligible for years.  DM, also a Formula 750 racer, disagreed with the removal, emphasizing that RD400s were competitive despite a displacement disadvantage and that removing them would reduce participation in a dwindling class. BR questioned what classes the RD400s would be legal for and expressed concern about making previously legal bikes ineligible. LS lamented that the organization had “let it go for so long” and that disallowing previously legal bikes now was problematic. TT argued against removing competitive bikes that contribute to race entries, noting they are not significantly superior to other bikes in the class.
WP motioned to vote, RB seconded.
July Board:  no (0 yes / 8 no / 3 abstain CR, EV, JH)

Entry ID #12737 10.2.5

Yamaha YCS1 180cc twin (pre-1969), maximum 22mm carburetors; CS3 and CS5 (195cc) cylinders may be used. on standard bore only, no overboring allowed. (Mark Halpern, Member #5459)

Rule Change Rationale:  Overboring these cylinders is essential to preserve the motorcycle. The cylinders can be bored twice to 52.50mm (2nd overbore) without exceeding 200cc. A third overbore (52.75mm) would produce 201cc. The attached document proves the mathematical equation.

Supporting Documentation

Attachment

Committee Recommendation: Accept (unanimous)
Committee Rationale/Discussion: The committee agreed that allowing the Yamaha CS3/CS5 to be over bored to the allowable limit would be comparable to other 200cc two stroke twins in the class. Example: Suzuki X5 T200.
Board Discussion: CR motioned to vote, TT seconded
July Board:  yes (10 yes / 0 no)

Entry ID 12750 10.3.5 (a)

Frames must be of period-design tubular steel, or OEM street-based aluminum frames (e.g., RG500) from specificallyallowed motorcycles. There is no displacement limit on 250/350cc based twins. Wheels, forks, and brakes to follow Vintage Superbike Heavyweight rules.
10.3.5 (a) Exception: Formula Vintage may run a 5.5″ rear wheel. All other requirements apply. (Bob Robbins Member #2390)

Rule Change Rationale:  IMO- Limiting the rear wheel width to 4.5 on bikes with higher power output is a compromise on safety and excessive tire wear. A 5.5″ wheel allows the use of a 180 profile tire. A narrower tire also limits tire choices from Trackside vendors or suppliers. Rules allow modern magnesium wheels which are most likely unavailability in a 4.5″ width. Keeping the 4.5″ width on Vintage Superbike may be more sensible in respect to maintaining what was used in the period where Formula Vintage is more of an open rules class.

Committee Recommendation: Accept (unanimous)
Committee Rationale/Discussion: The committee agreed that this change is appropriate due to the high horsepower machines that are eligible to compete within Formula Vintage. We also recognized that Formula Vintage is built on more of an “open” class format.
Board Discussion: TT motioned to vote, JH seconded
July Board: yes (10 yes / 0 no / 1 abstain BR)

Entry ID #12762 10.6.1

10.6.1 RIDER ELIGIBILITY
This Novice Historic Production classes is are intended for entry-level, novice and returning non-professional veterans, NOT SEASONED RACERS. Novice Historic Production classes are not eligible for year end championship awards. At the referee’s discretion, riders can be evaluated to determine whether a rider is who are obviously too fast for the Novice Historic Production class and may be moved to a more appropriate class, such as Sportsman. This does not exclude Novice Historic Production riders from racing another bike eligible for any other class. See section 3.4. (Greg Tomlinson, Member #14562)

Rule Change Rationale: Over the course of the last few years there has been a noticeable amount of seasoned or ex-pro racers entering into the Novice Historic Production classes. This rule proposal is to restore the Novice Historic Production Classes to it’s original intention of being a class for an entry-level or older racer who wants some seat time but is running a slower pace. This submission is to encourage riders in this class to race it for a season or two and move on to other classes as their skill level and confidence increases and to discourage seasoned racers from “sand bagging” the class for a national title, which was never intended for this class. It is suggested by the authors of this rule proposal that the Road Race Director could still recognize the winner of the Novice Historic Production but they are not eligible for the #1 plate or championship jacket. Thank you TT & GT

Committee Recommendation: Reject (unanimous)
Committee Rationale/Discussion: We agreed that the proper wording already exists within the handbook for a rider to be “promoted.” It was agreed that a better job in policing this issue would achieve the same effect. It was also pointed out that taking year end awards away from true novices who are deserving of their award would be unjust.
Board Discussion: GT was surprised the committee rejected this RCP.  Novice Historic Production was never intended to be a national championship class.  Seasoned racers have been coming out to race this class.  It’s a gateway class to attract new riders to AHRMA. Someone titled in another class should not be eligible to chase another title to the new racers’ disadvantages.  LS asked Jim Korn’s opinion, who said we are charging them full price – suggested reducing the entry fee if the championship is taken away.  TT was torn on this – some people prefer to ride slower – safety could be improved  with not having people riding over their heads to try to get points.  GT – This class from the beginning was not intended to be a championship class and did not have a reduced entry fee. New racers were discouraged by seasoned racers racing and beating them badly. It’s mportant to recognize the winner, you get bumped out after winning. Goal is to recognize winner and keep honest people honest.  Additional discussion…
JO motioned to vote, BR seconded
July Board: yes (8 yes / 2 no KK, CR / 1 abstain LS)

Vintage Superbike

No RCPs submitted.

Next Gen Superbike

Entry ID #12718 10.9.3

10.9.3 NEXT GEN SUPERBIKE LIGHTWEIGHT MISSION STATEMENT:
…
Among the eligible machines are:
…

• 1999-2005 Kawasaki ZR750-H1-H5

(Tom Edelston, Member #2012204)

Rule Change Rationale: The Kawasaki ZR-7 (and ZR-7S), (ZR750-H1 through ZR750-H5) was sold in the United States from 1999 through 2003. It is powered by an inline 4-cylinder 4-stroke, double-overhead-cam, 2 valve per cylinder, air-and-oil-cooled engine. Carburetors are four constant-velocity (CV) Keihin CVK 32 mm. Final drive is via chain; the transmission is a 5-speed, coupled with a wet clutch. This configuration is well suited for Next Generation Lightweight Superbike. The machine is now 26 years old, although its engine was sourced from the KZ line dating back to 1977. It has very similar specs to the already legal entry – Yamaha FJ600 with nearly identical horsepower, and more dry weight. These units were mass produced and are readily available in online marketplaces for a range of $500-$2500. This low price point entry, well suited specs, and modern yet 26 year old unit will be highly attractive to our current membership, and even more so to new members on a limited budget.

Supporting Documentation:

• Screenshot-2025-05-06-154830.png
• Screenshot-2025-05-06-154924.png

Committee Recommendation: Reject (unanimous)
Committee Rationale: A 750 should not be allowed in the lightweight class. This bike would be better suited in the Middleweight class. 
Board Discussion: GT motioned to vote, LS seconded
June Board: no (0 yes / 11 no)

Entry ID 12746 10.9.3 b) ENGINE

1. All machines must retain stock stroke. Bore may be increased to 2.0mm over: Kawasaki EX500 bore may be increased to allow 675cc max.  All eligible Ducati production models up to and including 1990 model year may use 650cc Pantah based engines. (Bob Robbins, Member #2390)

Rule Change Rationale: The 600 (597cc) listed for the TT2 was a very limited production engine making parts very difficult to find. Opening this up would encourage the use of bikes that otherwise are not competitive in classes they would be eligible under current rules. A built 650cc Ducati Pantah based engine 1990 or older output is on par with similarly built ones from FZR 400’s, Honda Hawks and other bikes.

Committee Recommendation: Accept (unanimous)
Committee Rationale:  Accept as written here, 1980 -1984 Ducati TT2 maximum 650CC. Can use 650cc Pantah motor.
Board Discussion: JH motioned to vote, CR seconded
June Board: yes (9 yes / 0 no / 2 abstain BR, EV)

Entry ID 12764 10.9.3 a)

1. Engine, frame and bodywork must be from the same make and model, see section “C” chassis and frame. Only exception, up to 700cc air cooled singles with any chassis.  Engine and chassis must be from any North American sold STREET legal motorcycle produced through 1992 model year.  No race engines in custom chassis allowed, or production race only singles.  Examples that were raced,XR500,600,SRX600,DR600 and 650 engines in Honda GT650 Hawk chassis,Yamaha FZR400 chassis, Suzuki GS500 chassis. (Jeff McKinney, Member #6927)

Rule Change Rationale: Rationale being that most club organization lightweight classes and AHRMA had regular participation from this type hybrid in the 80’s-90’s.These bikes are now obsolete in AHRMA due to evolution of rules and modern single cylinder machinery, Kramer, KTM, etc.

Committee Recommendation: Reject (unanimous)
Committee Rationale: We reject this rules proposal only for it being too broad on implementation. We would love for singles to be eligible. we suggest an eligibility request be submitted for a particular model, versus saying any engine and any chassis up to 1992. We will accept them on a case by case basis. 
Board Discussion: WP motioned to vote, TT seconded
June Board: no (0 yes / 11 no)

Sidecar

Entry ID #12705 10.10.8.1

ENGINES/FUEL – Minimum of 500cc 400cc. Must not exceed 1300cc. Cannot include any components unavailable before the cutoff date. Two-cylinder engines. Three and Four-cylinder engines 750cc maximum. Electronic ignitions are allowed. Naturally aspirated motorcycle carburetors only. DOHC prohibited. (Ansylene Enciso Fink, Member #18039)

Rule Change Rationale:

Two rules change proposals:
#1 – 400cc minimum – This proposed change will allow the existing machines, that were instrumental in building up this class (more than doubling its registration numbers) AND that were built to the original CBW Rules package, that was developed and distributed in 2020, to compete without exclusion. The rules were proposed in 2024 without consideration or communication with the teams that have competed with AHRMA since 2020 and have maintained speeds competitively with the SC2 class.

Additional rationale: The availability of the lower 400cc machines in the US secondary market, in good condition, is high. The cost of retrofitting, parts availability and ground-up builds is low, compared to some of the other classes.

#2 – DOHC Prohibited – There is a safety concern with entry level teams utilizing power plants with the higher horsepower and potentially overdriving their experience level. This classes implementation was intended to be an entry level class providing an affordable way for interested teams to learn their craft prior to progressing on to higher (faster) classes.

Committee Recommendation: Reject (unanimous)
Committee Rationale/Discussion: Dan May – I do not support this RCP. We have already ruled that the 400cc Big Wheel machines are grandfathered in with a Rules and Eligibility statement. I do not want to encourage any additional smaller engines as the speed difference between the Big Wheels and other sidecars are already a safety concern. We should encourage the larger displacement engines to reduce the speed differentials. This applies to the DOHC also, I am not in support of anything that reduces the eligible machines or power. Vote is to deny.

Tim Joyce – I strongly agree no change is needed and the existing 400 machines are already grandfathered. This was for safety and as far as the DOHC bikes being to fast for beginners, nothing states it’s a beginners class . The change last year was strictly for safety in hopes it might reduce the closing speeds . Vote is to deny.

Tony Doukas – As previously discussed, the speed differential is extreme between all the slower sidecars. Vote is to deny.
Board Discussion: DM Trying to get the big wheels to be faster, not slower. Safety concern.
TT motioned to vote, JH seconded
July Board: no (0 yes / 11 no)

Entry ID #12716 10.10.1 CLASSES

b) SUPER VINTAGE SIDECAR (SC2): Front-exit sidecars. Air-cooled, one- or two-cylinder, two- or four-stroke engines, built before December 31, 1972. Twostroke, 500cc maximum. Four-stroke, 750cc maximum. Carbureted only, 34mm maximum venturi. Fuel injection, supercharging and turbocharging are prohibited. Stock stroke with crankshafts phased as per the manufacturer’s intent and stock bore plus allowable overbore with allowable overbore (see 9.7.2.c). Stock valve sizes. Motorcycle-based powerplants only. (Daniel May, Member #11215)

Other Rules Affected:

10.10.4.1 ENGINES: Air-cooled, one- or two-cylinder, two- or four-stroke engines, built before December 31, 1972. Two-stroke, 500cc maximum. Four-stroke, 750cc maximum. All engines in this class are restricted to stock valve sizes and carb venturi diameter of 34mm. Carbureted only. Fuel injection, supercharging and turbocharging are prohibited. Stock stroke with crankshafts phased as per the manufacturer’s intent and stock bore with allowable overbore (see 9.7.2.c). Stock valve sizes. Motorcycle-based powerplants only.

Rule Change Rationale:  The term “Stock Valve Sizes” is ambiguous. All other AHRMA classes are performance indexed by carburetor venturi diameter, and having both restrictions are redundant.

Committee Recommendation: Accept (DM, TD Accept, TJ Reject)
Committee Rationale/Discussion:  Dan May – I submitted this RCP. The term “Stock Valve Sizes” is ambiguous. All other AHRMA classes are performance indexed by carburetor venturi diameter, and having both restrictions are redundant. A soft survey of SC2 riders shows that many are not complying. Although I comply, I do not feel it is in the best interest of the class. Vote is to Accept.

Tim Joyce – After looking at the other two club rules in North American that state stock size valve I am not for this proposal. I feel if we have some guys cheating then why change to make them legal while the others that are ,get penalized . We should clarify the rule simply by saying must be stocks valves from your year make and model . Racers already feel sc2 is out of reach to build and that only adds to the cost because most brands require larger seats for a larger valve . I strongly oppose this . Vote is to deny

Tony Doukas – Vote is to Accept.

Board Discussion:  Dan – it’s ambiguous. Most people are not complying already. Allows more flexibility when building an engine. More to bring it in line with the rest of the classes.
GT – our index in all other classes is carburation. This class is currently limited by valves.
GT motioned to vote, TT seconded
July Board: yes (10 yes / 1 no LS)

Modern Road Racing

Entry ID #12766 8.4 Sound of Thunder

b) SOUND OF THUNDER 2 (SoT2)
… and two strokes to 250cc Open Two-Stroke-class machines. …
(Frank Schoenbeck, Member #10037)

Other Rules affected by this Rule Change Proposal

10.12.1 SOUND OF THUNDER

b) SOUND OF THUNDER 2 (SOT2)
…
and two-strokes to 250cc  Open Two-Stroke-class machines are allowed.

Rule Change Rationale: Currently 250cc two-strokes are allowed to race in Sound of Thunder 2 but they are generally not competitive. To run competitive laps, a 250cc two stroke needs to ride a very wide line and maintain high corner speeds and momentum. With the typical more powerful four-stroke machines able to ride like a point and shoot corner technique, they can in many cases, come up the inside of the 250cc riders, square off the corner and basically park a 250, ruining momentum possibly causing the need for a down shift and/or a line change. Losing drive out of the corner with a downshift, the 250cc two-stroke rider can also be out accelerated easily to the next turn. Many times, even the best 250cc riders can be seen moving backward during the race even if they happen to manage a good start.

Most Sound of Thunder 2 races in the last few seasons haven’t seen many 250cc bikes trying to be competitive. If they are entered it can be just to get more track time rather than compete. This rule change would still allow them this option. At some tracks there have been larger two-strokes beginning to appear that don’t have all big disadvantages of the 250cc bikes. This rule change would allow them to compete in Sound of Thunder 2.

Committee Recommendation: Reject (unanimous)
Committee Rationale/Discussion: Claims he can’t get proper lines on a 250 2-stroke against 4-strokes.
Board Discussion: CR – I get this rationale and this is true.  Hard to ride a 250 2-stroke with bilt SV650s.  Proposer may be looking for another class to race a larger displacement 2-stroke.  GT isn’t this already a well attended class?  Would be concerned with safety for adding yet another bike to this class.  More discussion regarding safety concerns.
GT motioned to vote, BR seconded
July Board: no (1 yes CR / 7 no / 2 abstain EV, WP) 

Entry ID #12822 10.12

c) SOUND OF THUNDER 3 (SoT3):  Harley-Davidson XR1200, pushrod OHV twin-cylinder machines to 1000cc, OHC two-or 3 valve twins to 805cc, SOHC liquid-cooled V-twins to 750, OHC liquid-cooled four valve twins to 650cc 700cc. Pushrod OHV machines over 900cc must run under SuperSport specifications (see 9.8.1) Suzuki SV650 must meet mechanical requirements in 9.8a) through m only. SV650 except carbureted GEN 1. Buell XB9R, Ducati 800ss and Monster limited to SuperSport specifications (see 9.8.1): otherwise must compete in SOT2. Gen 1 All years Suzuki SV650 may be equipped with Suzuki suspension from any-year GSXR. Thruxton Cup Challenge eligible machines may compete (see 10.14). Ducatis up to 750cc originally fitted with carburetors (e.g., 1991-98 750 SuperSports and Monsters ) must meet requirements in 9.8 a through M) only, with the additional requirement being they must use OEM or aftermarket carburetors. Kawasaki 650R must meet mechanical requirements in 9.8 a through m only. HD XR1200 and Ducatis up to 805cc originally fitted with fuel injection (e.g., 750SSie, 800SS) must run under SuperSport specifications (see 9.8.1). Machines originally equipped with 18″ wheels may convert to 17″ wheels.
Aprilia 660 all models must run under SuperSport specifications (see 9.8.1)
Yamaha Twin cylinder R7, MT07 models must run under SuperSport specifications (see 9.8.1)

Rule Change Rational:  SOT3, being a modern bike class has many aging bikes and there are new models not eligible for SOT3 yet not competitive in SOT2. The Suzuki SV 650 has been the most popular choice over the years, replacing a lot of Honda Hawks and other bikes throughout its run of time.

The Aprilia 660 and Yamaha R7 models are legal in both ASRA and WERA classes along with the SV650s. The goal would be to attract riders on these bikes in those organizations to join AHRMA as well as our members looking to get into SOT3 and expand those grids. The bump up class of SOT2 would probably still gain some of those as well. Currently, both the Aprilia 660 and Yamaha R7 would only fit into SOT2 or above and would have a hard time competing with the performance of the Kramer 890, Triumph 765 and many other bikes in the class. The Suzuki SV 650 as proposed here would be opened up to Superbike modifications. With a new 700cc displacement limit and performance improvements vs these two bikes would create a smaller performance gap in SOT 3 than they face in SOT2 and keep the SV and Ninja 650 competitive.

Committee Recommendation:  Accept (unanimous)
Committee Rationale/Discussion:  Includes concessions for SV650
Board Discussion: BR – SV is getting dated, Aprilia 660 and R7 are becoming more popular. Need more bikes to get more people in this class and open up spec for SVs to be competitive.
GT – Does an SV have a chance vs R7 in SS form? Yes.
DM – vetted with a lot of racers. Evolution that needs to happen.
GT motioned to vote, LS seconded
July Board: yes (9 yes / 1 abstain BR)

Vintage Motocross

Entry ID #12757 11.1.11-11.1.14

11.1.14 SPORTSMAN OPEN TWINS: Unit-construction or pre-unit, four-stroke motorcycles with two or more cylinders through the 1974 model year, and like-design machines, manufactured as 600cc and larger (see “like design”note below).

Note: Like-design Sportsman machines:

a) 1975 Maicos are not legal for AHRMA vintage competition, although the 1975 frame may be used as a replacement for the 19741/2 GP models. The ‘74-1/2 fork assembly, swingarm, hubs and engine must be retained. Any and all 1975 models must meet the seven-inch-front/four-inch-rear wheel suspension travel requirement measured at the axle.
b) 1975 Bultaco model 134-136, 143 and 144 frames may be used as replacement frames in Sportsman. Swingarm must be pre-1975, four-inch travel. 1975 Bultaco models 134-136, 143 and 144 may be used in Sportsman. Swingarm must be pre-1975, four-inch travel and front forks must be lowered in clamps or otherwise modified so travel is 7″ or less.

The Sportsman eligibility list is now complete with regard to non-like-design post-1974 machines. However, proposals for inclusion of like-design machines are always welcome.

Rule Change Rationale:  The primary reason for this request is to be able to provide a more-readily available, more affordable, simpler solution to allow left-shifting Bultaco race bikes to compete in Vintage Motocross Sportsman classes to attract younger riders and perpetuate the sport.

Rationale is as follows:

1. Currently, all Sportsman-eligible 125cc & 360cc Bultaco engines shift on the right side. Left-shifting Bultaco engines were not available until the Mk8 series and, while most every other make already used left-side shifting, Bultaco didn’t.
2. Alhough this engine incorporated changes from Mk7 designs, there was no significant mechanical or power advantage gained beyond the ability to shift the bikes on the left side.
3. Mk8 Pursangs represented Bultaco’s “high water mark” for production and there are many still available.
4. Modifying a Mk7 engine to shift on the left, while possible, generally requires machining operations and may be beyond the ability or resources of many.
5. Few riders currently under the age of 70 have ever ridden a motorcycle that doesn’t shift on the left side and, while some may be able to adapt (like a switch hitter in baseball), the majority cannot do so safely.

Supporting documentation:

Mk7-specs2.jpg
Bultaco-Pursang-Mk8-specs2.jpg
AHRMA-Rule-Change-Support.pdf

Committee Recommendation: Accept (WP accept, JS reject)
Committee Rationale/Discussion: Wes Poole’s opinion as follows:

1. The MK8 engine has around 15more CC’s however I have heard from multiple sources that the earlier engines had more power and regardless you can bore the MK7 out to be the same CC’s
2. The MK8 is still very much so in the “Spirit of AHRMA”
3. The MK8 had more suspension in the rear from the factory, however the rule still requires the MK7 swing arm which fixes the issue of suspension
4. Ultimately I do not think this rule change will have much of an effect other than allowing a slightly newer machine that is still the underpowered compared to just about every other bike in its class, and if it gets a few more old bikes out there I’m all for it as long as they fit in to the “Spirit of AHRMA”

Board Discussion: WP – get more left hand shift Bultacos out there. No advantage to anybody at all. Possible unintended consequence – could put MK9-11 top end on – gives a minimal amount of HP, but still less than others in that class. GTasked where can MK8s run now? Post-vintage. LS expressed concern that it sets a precedent for a newer looking bike being in the class. May open the floodgates to get other bikes through. WP – need to keep MK7 swingarm. Would need to be taken care of in Tech. LS – more entries is good in VMX. WP – There isn’t anything similar to this. We’re getting the shifting on the left side. ER – This is the sportsman class. Wouldn’t be eligible for age class. 
WP – Marty provided evidence of sales in ’74 – US mandated left hand shift. GT – not in the spirit of sportsman. Setting up to have an upstream bike in a downstream class.
WP motioned to vote, GT seconded
July Board: no (0 yes / 9 no / 1 abstain BR)

Entry ID #12758 11.1.11

11.1.11 SPORTSMAN 125: 88-125cc two-stroke and 88-150cc four-stroke motorcycles through the 1974 model year, and like-design machines. Eligible like-design 1975 model machines include (see “like design” note below):

• Bultaco, see note at end of Sportsman rules Bultaco 125 Pursang (model 144; must use 1974-configuration swingarm). Also see note at end of Sportsman rules.
• Can-Am 125 TNT • Honda CR125 (VIN CR125ME-200000 and CR125M-200000 series only)
• Honda MT 125 1975/1976 (VIN MT125E-200000, MT125-200000, MTE125E-300000 and MT125-300000 series only)
• Honda XL 125 1974-1975
• Kawasaki KX125
• Suzuki TM100, TM125
• Yamaha DT 125, 1975
• Yamaha YZ125, MX125

Rule Change Rationale: Same as Entry ID #12757

Supporting Documentation: Same as Entry ID #12757

Committee Recommendation: Accept (WP accept, JS reject)
Committee Rationale/Discussion: Same as Entry ID #12757
Board Discussion: Same as Entry ID #12757
EV motioned to vote, JO seconded
July Board: no (1 yes WP / 8 no / 1 abstain BR)

Entry ID #12760 11.1.13

11.1.13 SPORTSMAN 500: Motorcycles manufactured as 325-625cc through the 1974 model year, and like-design machines. Eligible like-design 1975 model machines include (see “like design” note below):

• Bultaco, see note at end of Sportsman rules Bultaco 360 Pursang (model 136; must use 1974-configuration swingarm). Also see note at end of Sportsman rules.
• CZ Falta (1974-configuration swingarm encouraged)
• Honda SL350 and CL360
• Husqvarna 400WR
• Kawasaki KX400 (also 1976), F5 Bighorn
• Suzuki TM400 (1974-configuration swingarm encouraged), also TS model
• Yamaha DT 360/400 1975

Rule Change Rationale: Same as Entry ID #12757

Supporting Documentation: Same as Entry ID #12757

Committee Recommendation: Accept (WP accept, JS reject)
Committee Rationale/Discussion: Same as Entry ID #12757
Board Discussion: Same as Entry ID #12757
WP motioned to vote, JH seconded
July Board: no (1 yes WP / 9 no)

Entry ID #12771 11.1.12

11.1.12 SPORTSMAN 250: Motorcycles manufactured as 126-250cc two-strokes or 151- 300cc four-strokes through the 1974 model year, and like-design machines. Eligible like-design 1975 model machines include (see “like design” note below):

…
• Honda CR250M 1975-1976
…

(Peter Marcin, Member #18037)

Other Rules Affected:

15.1.1 VINTAGE: In most aspects, machine eligibility and other requirements mirror those of AHRMA vintage motocross (Section 11), with the exception being engine displacement, as defined below. The minimum age for riders is 16 years. Each of the following classes is further divided into Novice, Intermediate and Expert skill-levels.
a) 100cc: 88-100cc two-stroke and 88-120cc four-stroke production motorcycles manufactured as up to 1974-model-year machines, and like-design. All motorcycles in this class must have been manufactured 100cc-or-smaller-displacement bikes.
b) SPORTSMAN 200: Machines manufactured as 88-200cc; includes Sportsman 125 motocross machines, plus pre-1975 Bultaco 175/200, Husqvarna 175, Penton/KTM 175, Puch 175, 1975-1977 Honda MR175 Elsinore. Regardless of original displacement, engines may be built to the class limit (plus allowable overbore).
c) SPORTSMAN OPEN: Machines manufactured as 201cc and larger. Regardless of original displacement, engines may be built to the class limit (plus allowable overbore).
d) CLASSIC: Includes all machines eligible for Classic and Early Sportsman Stock (ESS) classes in vintage MX (not further divided into engine-displacement classes; Classic 125 machines may compete in Sportsman 200). Sportsman Open Twins MX machines are eligible for this class (see rule 11.1.14). Regardless of original displacement, engines may be built to the class limit (plus allowable overbore).
e) PREMIER: Includes all machines eligible for Premier classes in vintage MX (not further divided into engine-displacement classes). Note: The BSA B40 is eligible for this class. Regardless of original displacement, engines may be built to the class limit (plus allowable overbore).
f) 50+: Riders age 50 and older on any size or type of eligible vintage machine.
g) 60+: Riders age 60 and older on any size or type of eligible vintage machine.
h) 70+: Riders age 70 and older on any size or type of eligible vintage machine.
i) WOMEN: Female riders on any size or type of eligible vintage machine.

Rule Change Rationale: No change to the 15.1.1 verbiage is required but this proposal does impact Cross Country as they follow vintage motocross. As noted, with the exception of engine displacement, Cross Country mostly mirrors the machine eligibility in vintage motocross.

Supporting Documentation:

1975-Honda-CR250M-page-21.JPG
1975-Honda-CR250M-cover1.JPG

Committee Recommendation: Reject (unanimous)
Committee Rationale/Discussion:  Ultimately this was Rejected because of the following:

1. The motorcycle altogether has a different look and feel to it
2. From what I have learned, the engine has a more usable power range.
3. The 1974 CR250 is already one of the top motorcycles in the class

One thing to ponder however is, this motorcycle is still very Vintage compared to the 1977 and later models which are completely different. The only place for it to ride right now is in the Historic class I believe.
Board Discussion: BR – the only real difference is the shocks are mounted differently. 73-74 250s have become living room jewelry. 75s could be purchased for   much less.  TT– I own all these motorcycles. There’s no power difference. Many of the parts interchange. Same piston in all three. ½” spacer in the rear shock gets it to 4” travel.  Rarely see them in Historic because they are outclassed in that class. Honda didn’t make a 250 in 77 because they were so far behind. It used to be allowed. GT – Owns a 73, not interested in adding post-vintage bikes into a vintage class.  Adding a spacer puts onus on the racers to comply to the rules.
July Board: no (4 yes BR, JH, KK, TT / 6 no)

Observed Trials

Entry ID #12706 13.1.11

13.1.11 AIR COOLED MONO (ACM) All stock production air-cooled mono-shock trials motorcycles manufactured from the early 80’s into the early 90’s will be eligible. with drum brakes only. Trials machines manufactured just after the twin shock era, but before significant performance advances were introduced to trials bike technology.
Typically, mid-to-late 1980s models.
Eligible machines include:

• Yamaha TY250/350 monos
• Honda RTL250
• Beta TR32-34
• GasGas Halley 325
• JCM 32
• Montesa 304/330
• Fantic 301
• Merlin DG350 mono
• Mecatechno Dragonfly
• Armstrong 240-350
• Can-Am 240-350
• Alfer TX300
• Aprilia TX125-311, etc.

Some of these machines came standard with disc brakes (particularly on front), and period correct retrofits are permitted.
Eligible drum brake machines include:

• 1984-1987 Yamaha TY250/350 monos
• 1985-1986 Honda RTL250
• Beta TR32
• JCM – all drum brake models
• 1986 Fantic 301
• Armstrong 240-350 – drum brake models only
• Can-Am 240-350 – drum brake models only

Rule Change Rationale:

This rule change would accomplish the following:

• Allow for more than just one motorcycle manufacturer to participate in this class.
• Increase membership levels as the Executive Director Daniel May and AHRMA Special Committee Chair Ed Roman have commented “membership levels have remained stable, but we still need to find creative methods to bring in new members.”
• Increase rider participation in Trials Events.
• Increase officials, riders, and spectators exposure to more motorcycle manufacturers.
• Bring the class in alignment with every single other class, as all have more than one motorcycle manufacturer.
• Enhance morale and provide positive, future-oriented growth for AHRMA.

Committee Recommendation: Reject (unanimous)
Committee Rationale/Discussion:  The moratorium on new Trial class proposals runs through the 2026 season. This proposal is not a small modification to an existing class, but is of such major change regarding the disc/drum brakes issue, that it requires a new proposal for the 2027 season. 
Board Discussion:   
June Board:  no (1 yes BR / 7 no CR, EV, GT, JO, KK, LS, TT)

Cross Country

Entry ID #12739 15.1.3

15.1.3 NEXT GEN: In most aspects, machine eligibility* and other requirements mirror those of AHRMA Next Gen Motocross (Section 16) with the exception being engine displacement; regardless of original displacement, engines may be built to the class limit (plus allowable overbore). The minimum age for riders is 16 years. Each of the following classes is further divided into Novice, Intermediate and Expert skill-levels.

a) PRE-MODERN 200: Pre-Modern-class machines manufactured as 88-200cc.
b) PRE-MODERN OPEN: Pre-Modern-class machines manufactured as 201cc and larger. Includes Pre-Modern 4-Strokes per Section 16.5.3.
c) NEXT GEN 200: Next Gen-era machines manufactured as 88-200cc.
d) NEXT GEN OPEN: Next Gen-era machines manufactured as 201cc and larger.
e) MILLENNIUM TWO-STROKE 200: Millenium-era machines manufactured as 88-200cc.
f) MILLENNIUM TWO-STROKE OPEN: Millenium-era machines manufactured as 201cc and larger.
g) 40+: Riders age 40 and older on any size or type of eligible Pre-Modern, or Next Gen class machine.
e h) 50+: Riders age 50 and older on any size or type of eligible Pre-Modern, or Next Gen class machine.
f i) 60+: Riders age 60 and older on any size or type of eligible Pre-Modern, or Next Gen class machine.
g) 70+: Riders age 70 and older on any size or type of eligible Pre-Modern, or Next Gen class machine.
h j) WOMEN: Female riders on any size or type of eligible Pre-Modern, Or Next Gen class machine.
i) Novice: Novice riders on any size or type of eligible Pre-Modern, Or Next Gen class machine.

*Note: Millennium and Current Two-Stroke machines are not eligible for AHRMA National Cross Country Series Championship Points. Any racing class offered that includes Millennium and Current Two Stroke machines at a AHRMA National Cross Country event will be Promoter Optional and subject to course and schedule availability. Regional Cross Country events may include Millennium and Current Two Stroke machines.
(James Smith, Member #23)

Rule Change Rationale:  This rule change is to align the Next Gen Cross Country classes with the vision of the Cross Country Committee. Also after discussion with promotors and members on their wants and needs.

Committee Recommendation: Accept (unanimous)
Committee Rationale/Discussion:  James Smith, Committee Chair: There is a need to reduce the number of classes to better fit any format a National Cross Country event can take, 1 day, 2 day, morning of a Motor Cross, or afternoon after a Trial.
In Cross Country, the Millennium 2 Stroke motorcycles did not “suffer” the same fate as MX, they were not ruled out and replaced by the “must have a new” Modern 4 stroke. So, from a National level AHRMA does not have a Historic reason to have a National Championship for these motorcycles.
However, a Regional Millennium program is very much needed to help the regions grow and attract new riders to AHRMA and hopefully show them the fun of older motorcycles.
As for the removal of the 40+ class from Next Gen, the addition of the 70+ class was felt to be more aligned with the rest of the Cross Country Vintage and Post Vintage rules which have 70+ classes.
Again, the Regions should have the ability to run the classes they need to be successful in their area of the country and can include additional classes per the last statement in the proposal. 
Board Discussion:  JO- Structure is 6-months old. Wanted to attract and grow younger members. Wanted to mirror next gen motocross structure. No benefit to remove classes only 6-months in. Leave the structure the way it is. 40+ class is target for growth.
GT – James Smith is chair. Jeff O. point is correct. Added next gen CC last year and there wasn’t a class structure that came with it. There was a proposal for 10 classes and the committee felt that they weren’t consulted. This is an attempt to course correct from their perspective. CC coordinator and the committee are not aligned.  JO There is evidence that they were consulted.
TT – Need to keep these classes in here. Need to bring more bikes and younger generation in while still being able to race vintage bikes. Next Gen is the red headed
stepchild, but we need to embrace it so we can still have a place to race our old bikes.
EV – in the Northwest, we can’t figure out why, there have been 3 people step forward to be PV coordinator, but they can’t get the riders.
ER – What helps the northeast Unadilla MX rewind. PV is helping to grow participation in this area. It’s taking us off course, but we need to go there.
LS – too soon to narrow the classes.
July Board: no (0 yes / 8 no / 2 abstain GT, WP )

Dirt Track

No RCPs submitted

Post-Vintage Motocross

No RCPs submitted

Next Gen Motocross

Entry ID #12772

16.5.3 PRE-MODERN FOUR-STROKE: Certain four-stroke motorcycles 250-600 195-600cc that were produced within the guidelines of the Pre-Modern class specifications and also certain Next Gen era dual-disc machines.

Eligible machines include, but are not limited to:

…
• 1980-2002 Honda XR200, XR200R

…

• 1986-’90 Suzuki DR200

…

• 1985-“‘00 Yamaha XT350

Rule Change Rationale

Via the popularity of the Honda XR 200’s there is a large group of racers who have modified their machines to utilize disc front brake and various later model XR Honda components. There is additionally a group of Suzuki DR200 four stroke machines that fit the guidelines as well from 1986-1990. In reviewing with the Next Gen committee it was realized that the displacement verbiage was unaware of the advent of these bikes when written several years ago. The current Pre-Modern Four Stroke class has extremely low participation rates and we feel this would give these bikes a place to race as they are relegated to intermission races which do not produce revenue for AHRMA in the promoter model. The modification is to lower the displacement range from 250-600cc to 195-600cc which will accommodate these machines.

Additionally, please correct the double quote sign to a single quote on the line for

• 1985-”00 Yamaha XT350

And please remove the underline under that single quote before publishing as it would be easy to miss!

Committee Recommendation: Yes (unanimous)
Committee Rationale/Discussion: Committee agreed with need to add similar machines to increase participation and allow an addition class for highly modified XR200s to run in
Board Discussion: TT – On the committee and voted yes because there are a lot of XR200s out there.
XR200 won’t outrun a 600 or 650.
July Board: yes (10 yes / 0 no )

NOTE: In order for readers to readily identify the rule you are commenting about, the proposal Entry Id is required. Please also include the Section # (if any) at the beginning of your comment.  You may only comment on ONE PROPOSAL/ENTRY ID at a time.