TM MX 250 FI / 450 FI are these bikes able to be raced in AMA 2019 Supercross / Motocross series.?

Related:
Create New Tag

9/9/2018 7:59 PM

Max Nagl been racing the TM 450 FI in the Grand Prix's
haven't heard anything bad or good.?
Photo
Photo

|

9/9/2018 8:04 PM

They are not allowed to race. They are not homologated. Not enough of them imported to the USA.

|

9/9/2018 8:04 PM

I don’t think they move enough units to be allowed.

|

Thank you,
Fly Racing, WPS, Dt-1, Mika Metals, Maxima, 100%, Motostuff, Factory Connection, Evs

9/9/2018 8:37 PM

Can't have a TM Supercross/Motocross team because they don't sell enough motorcycles.?
Isn't that the reason to have a factory team, to sell motorcycles.?
Photo

you would think AMA would welcome new brand, new team more riders... equals more money.!

|

9/9/2018 9:48 PM

Bennett59 wrote:

I don’t think they move enough units to be allowed.

Because that makes perfect sense.

|

Ride like a girl!!!
2016 KTM 500 EXC-F
Current project: 2007 Kawasaki KX250-R7 retro build
Current project #2: 1987 Kawasaki KX250-E1 rider/racer resto
1989 KX125 resto
1987 RM250 resto

9/9/2018 10:07 PM
Edited Date/Time: 9/9/2018 10:08 PM

Sad but true. They don't sell enough units in the USA to be homologated. If TM sold every bike they make in the USA, it probably still wouldn't be enough. If you want confirmation or more details, probably best to ask Ralf Schmidt, the US TM importer and all around great guy.

|

9/9/2018 11:52 PM

I agree with the idea behind homologation, but there should be a 'micro manufacturer clause' where total world sales for relating models are under a certain number and the bike is available as a year based model in a US dealer network of a certain size - AKA it must be available to the public to a certain extend throughout the US.

You dont want a backyard built bike to be able to compete because that is kinda scary, but small overseas manufacturers like TM, Beta, GasGas and Sherco should be able to field a team as long as the prove that the bikes are available to US buyer through dealers

|

9/10/2018 7:25 AM

Zacka 161 wrote:

I agree with the idea behind homologation, but there should be a 'micro manufacturer clause' where total world sales for relating models are under a certain number and the bike is available as a year based model in a US dealer network of a certain size - AKA it must be available to the public to a certain extend throughout the US.

You dont want a backyard built bike to be able to compete because that is kinda scary, but small overseas manufacturers like TM, Beta, GasGas and Sherco should be able to field a team as long as the prove that the bikes are available to US buyer through dealers

Homologation needs to be based on a % of units manufactured up to a specific production number (maybe what it is now). Not an arbitrary number made up 30 years ago when sales were much higher. Choose whatever % you want to keep for public access.

Say a factory TM team has 2 riders and a new bike every weekend (ignoring practice bikes). That's 58 bikes a year in the U.S. Make homologation something like 50% and that means they need to provide 29 bikes of that model to the U.S. consumer at a minimum. It would still give access to a privateer or support team. They can look at previous years sale records and come up with a realistic number to make this possible. Raise the % incrementally the following year if they meet their minimum the year before. If they eventually get to the current homologation number remove the % clause.

|

9/10/2018 7:45 PM

The rule is stupid nowadays. No small builder is going to make bikes that are that much better than the big 4 or 5, that the public cant have access to, and thus creating some kind of perceived unfair advantage.

The public doesnt have access to the top factory riders equipment as it is. The best you can do is a high dollar aftermarket everything bike.

|

My post is my opinion. If you don't agree with it, I'm OK with it.

9/11/2018 11:04 PM

Moto96 wrote:

The rule is stupid nowadays. No small builder is going to make bikes that are that much better than the big 4 or 5, that the public cant have access to, and thus creating some kind of perceived unfair advantage.

The public doesnt have access to the top factory riders equipment as it is. The best you can do is a high dollar aftermarket everything bike.

the problem though is that the big companies could. Like the special edition ktms if they didnt go on sale, and have these versions that are far removed from the on sale bikes.

I actually think that the rule has increased the performance but also the cost of production bikes massively as they need to have so much already there to build a race bike. As apposed to focussing on keeping production costs low and making one off hyper specific race bikes

|

9/12/2018 3:42 PM

The GP's are full works rule - and all it's really done is showcased smaller private teams getting creative with parts.

Even the factory teams run largely production machines.

|

9/12/2018 3:45 PM

This topic is getting about as stupid as James Stewart coming back. Unless the rules change TM is never gonna race professionally in the good ole USofAwink wink

|

9/12/2018 3:48 PM

Is there still a 1 year "works" exemption rule ? If so I don't think TM has used it. They could try that and see if it increases demand.

|

9/12/2018 4:01 PM

ATKpilot99 wrote:

Is there still a 1 year "works" exemption rule ? If so I don't think TM has used it. They could try that and see if it increases demand.

To what point?
They wont meet sales requirements for the next year - and a first year - start up national effort, wouldn't be very successful - at least not for the investment amount

|

9/12/2018 4:04 PM
Edited Date/Time: 9/12/2018 4:06 PM

I think part of the deal is that you have a distributor handling the bikes here, not direct factory support...and likely they lack the budget to go racing.

|

9/12/2018 6:32 PM

Derek Harris wrote:

The GP's are full works rule - and all it's really done is showcased smaller private teams getting creative with parts.

Even the factory teams run largely production machines.

Herlings has a completely unique frame built to his liking. Completely different than cairoli’s. All thats oem is the cases on the engine and even then theyre coated.

|

9/13/2018 8:06 AM

Derek Harris wrote:

The GP's are full works rule - and all it's really done is showcased smaller private teams getting creative with parts.

Even the factory teams run largely production machines.

drt410 wrote:

Herlings has a completely unique frame built to his liking. Completely different than cairoli’s. All thats oem is the cases on the engine and even then theyre coated.

Good

Give that option to most pros - and they will make the bike worse. They often make the bike worse with the “legal” changes they do now

Herlings somehow still kicked everyones ass on a production bike - 2 years back
The majority of gp teams start with production bikes and tweak to suit

Opening the rules could allow frame constructors into the sport like what is done for moto 2 in gp racing

For some teams, being able to make a specfic part that isnt production could save money vs what is required to modify oem parts

|

9/13/2018 10:19 AM

Moto96 wrote:

The rule is stupid nowadays. No small builder is going to make bikes that are that much better than the big 4 or 5, that the public cant have access to, and thus creating some kind of perceived unfair advantage.

The public doesnt have access to the top factory riders equipment as it is. The best you can do is a high dollar aftermarket everything bike.

Zacka 161 wrote:

the problem though is that the big companies could. Like the special edition ktms if they didnt go on sale, and have these versions that are far removed from the on sale bikes.

I actually think that the rule has increased the performance but also the cost of production bikes massively as they need to have so much already there to build a race bike. As apposed to focussing on keeping production costs low and making one off hyper specific race bikes

Exactly. I don’t think he understands the impetus behind the rule in the first place. They’re not concerned with the small guys as much as the big guys that actually have the resources necessary to produce a bike capable of throwing competitive balance out of whack.

|

9/13/2018 11:28 AM

Here are part of the current requirements:

Photo


Interesting subsection here:

Photo

|

9/13/2018 1:36 PM

Yep, and TM produces maybe two thousand bikes a year total, spread across all models (MX, Enduro, SMX, two stroke, four stroke, all displacements), and that's worldwide supply, not just for the US. So as I said, they could sell their entire production into the USA and it still wouldn't be enough. Apparently not even close.

|