I dont think its a case of that really Alex, these engines are about as agricultural as bike engines get and the chances of one flying apart because it didn't have a few grams added or removed here and there are pretty slim!

I guess it would reduce the chances of a failure but by a very very small margin, I think as far as reliability goes, we are probably racing in one of the series with the least mechanical failures on record.

I dont know what the answer is, but it is nice that people are so meticulous about the preperation of their bikes. I agree with Kev in a big way about it being time on the bike that makes the biggest difference, but knowing that what you have under you is good also helps confidence.

But someone elses could have come out of the factory with poorer flowing heads due to factory tolerances, which wll cause the engine to run out of balance
So where does this line of acceptance get drawn ? is it when everybody can pay out to have there engine Blue printed to factory spec

As for reliability One blow up in 4 seasons under the No modification rule would suggest that as they come from the factory they are pretty reliable

for me personally the bottom line is that this year I just want concentrate on my riding and forget about mechanical issues and if balancing aids it I welcome it!

What engine rules are in place for Superstock racing?

Surely what we have is a similar kind of thing to that?

1.6.21 Crankshaft

No modifications are allowed (including polishing and lightening).


Thats what the rules say quite clearly. Where does it say that balancing is disallowed?

With regard to the crankshaft rule that we have had in the rule book for the 4 previous years, no doubt there are some out there that have already ignored that rule and had work done and got away with it. sadly thats human nature

BUT what is it that is now wrong with that rule.
Its very clear, its in black and white, easy to understand.
So why would we now need to change it.

Excuse 1 = Improve reliability = evidence already says they are reliable
Excuse 2 = Somebody may have a better one than me = and some probably haven't
Excuse 3 = Its good practice = only if the factory balancing is along way out and it costs just to find out
Excuse 4 = No Modification doesn't mean I can't modify it = says who
I'm sure if I read back through the topic I will come across a few more excuses

just here

1.6 Machine Specifications

All items not mentioned in the following articles must remain as originally produced by Ducati on a 600 or 620 aircooled 2 valve model.

It ISNT modified......not in any way, how many more times Kev? And who are you or anyone else to determine someones right to do something within the rules that costs anything if they so choose? If someone wants to spend the money to make sure the engine is as well put together as it can be why cant they? It doesnt say ANYWHERE in the rules that there is a ceiling or a limit on what may/may not be spent on any one area of the bike build? if someone wants to spend £500 on a Nitron shock would you tell them it goes agains the spirit of DD ? Why not have a set of rules that says you can do NOTHING to a Class B bike save remove lights, stand etc, if you really are on a crusade to save other people's money for them? What happened to freedom of choice WITHIN THE RULES?

It doesnt mention wheel balancing either. Is that also disallowed under the same blanket?

try reading the rules rather than making your own up

1.7.1 The following items MAY be altered or replaced from those fitted to the homologated motorcycle:

Any type of lubrication, brake or suspension fluid may be used.

Any type of spark plug.

Any inner tube (if fitted) or inflation valves may be used.

Wheel balance weights may be discarded, changed or added to.

If used Wheel balance weights must be suitably taped.

Gaskets and gasket materials.

Instrument and instrument bracket and associated cables.

Painted external surface finishes and decals.