David's comments ring very true to me. I'm not wealthy and I was terrified of dropping a bike of that value. I'm sure it inhibited me the few times I raced it. It didn't steer itself as naturally as the Seeley or the Petty and quite frankly over the jumps, at the speed I was travelling, I was worried it would get away from me and I rolled it off a bit. I don't have experience of modern superbike racing and I wanted to stay alive!
I don't think the weight made it difficult to stop, just the speed you were arriving at. Way beyond my previous experiences. Steve, Oli and Ryan have a slight advantage there.
I needed loads of practice to get up to speed on a bike with that sort of performance and feel sure that with more practice on 'dry' roads I could have improved quite considerably. Unfortunately the recent years weather cancellations, damp roads, accidents, no morning practice and marshaling problems all went against that and I believe are responsible for the lack of improvment in laps speeds amongst most riders. Of course the TT riders have a huge advantage there, having had loads of laps in June!!!
This year the pit stop took forever and I was worried about incurring a time penalty so crept up the pit lane slipping the clutch all the way.
No real excuses, just different and it was a thrilling bike to ride.
I would have loved another go ( the weather could just be better next year?) but with disillusioned sponsors and a lack of family support I've had to stop. Maybe it was time anyway?
Andy R.

(12-11-2009, 12:04 PM)David Linsdell Wrote:

(11-11-2009, 12:51 AM)Will Loder Wrote: At the same time we did 105mph with the weslake in 2003, the track is now faster (2mph +), and it doesn't need a pitstop, therefore a replica on a weslake is more than possible and you can build a brand new top spec one for a third of the price of the Paton.

I think too little is made of the fact that the Paton needs to make a pit stop - that is at least one minute lost there and then, and that's without the slowing down into the pit, and the time spent getting up to speed again.

Also, I have first hand experience that (unfortunately) having a ride on a Paton doesn't make you a winner. I was lucky enough to ride one at Donnington and Brands CRMC this season, and, despite it being a fantastic machine, I looked at the results sheets and still found myself midfield!

Whilst there is undoubtably a speed advantage, the Paton has a disadvantage through the twisties, and at at least 20kg more than a single I found myself struggling to make the bike stop! I also found myself scared of highsiding, or crashing a bike of considerable value and ended up pussyfooting around quite a few corners.

A quick look at Andy's results shows you that in previous years, on the norton or his g50 he averaged between 95 and 96 mph each year from 1995 onwards (give or take a few years). This year he averaged 97mph, and I'm sure the improvements to the track had an effect on that difference. Is this an unfair advantage?

In the 1992 Senior Classic dad averaged 103mph on a norton with 42bhp. This speed would achieve a replica in any year. In fact, a race speed of under 98mph would have achieved a replica this year (andy was around 30 seconds off I believe). If there was a bike out this year with less than 42bhp I would be suprised, so to say that a replica is unachievable because of the Paton is ludicrous. I maintain that a replica should be something that you strive for, and should not be easy. However, if altering this will encourage bikes back out then I am all for it. I fear that of the 105 bikes entered in 2004, many have been retired along with the riders, from racing altogether, be it age or money enforced. I know that I plan to enter the classic races one day, and hope they are still there when I come to make that decision - the owners of the bikes need to be encouraged to put younger riders on them, rather than hanging on to them as ornaments ifthe races are to surive.

David