Are the 450's too powerfull?

croom mx
Posts
1964
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
miami, FL US
9/24/2008 1:17pm
Brent wrote:
Sort of off topic, but today a friend of mine who races one of those GSXR 1000's in the WERA series came to the house to...
Sort of off topic, but today a friend of mine who races one of those GSXR 1000's in the WERA series came to the house to pick up some spare MX gear I had - he is trying Motocross/Off Road for the first time ever this weekend (thankfully on someone elses bike).

Anyway, he has never been on a 450 four stroke before, so I offer my CRF450 up for a quick blast up and down the street.

Long story short, homey comes back white as a ghost, telling me the bike is just too scary to ride, he cant even crack the throttle for fear he will flip it, and how crazy I am to ride this bike.

Funny that Mr stud knee dragger was totally humbled
Most people who have never ridden a large MX bike , 450 or 500 dont know the brutal acceleration these bike can put out.
ncdirtrider
Posts
198
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
Durham, NC US
9/24/2008 1:43pm
Apart from dunes, dirt roads, dual sport purpose, I think the 450 is too big a motor to put in a bike for trails, SX, and perhaps even MX tracks. But, that's just my opinion. I don't even enjoy riding my friends CRF450 around the building. Not that I'm scared, I just find it excessive and unwieldly. Villopoto showed us a 250F has the potential to whoop some of the fastest 450F riders on the planet, pehaps unless you are of giant sized proportions. I'm not a racer though, so I admit I know very little.
The Rock
Posts
8758
Joined
3/21/2007
Location
HAIKU, HI US
9/24/2008 2:53pm
croom mx wrote:
Most people who have never ridden a large MX bike , 450 or 500 dont know the brutal acceleration these bike can put out.
Off topic question: I was at Croom last year and learned sound testing was coming. Is sound testing coming January 1?
The Rock
Posts
8758
Joined
3/21/2007
Location
HAIKU, HI US
9/24/2008 3:03pm Edited Date/Time 4/16/2016 8:34pm
CR500Rider wrote:
They say 55, I've seen 58 in other tests. Either way, it puts out more and more is easily gotten out of the 500. I don't...
They say 55, I've seen 58 in other tests. Either way, it puts out more and more is easily gotten out of the 500. I don't know why you'd want to but some people do.

BTW, I have no idea how that big blurb at the beginning got in there.
The MXA comparison backs my position it is the tracks not the bikes that is the issue. . Back when we had the 500 Nationals injuries were not nearly as prevalent as they are today but the courses were much safer back then. The article shows what a handful the 500s were and anyone who has ridden both knows how much easier the 450s are to ride compared to a 500.


Granted there are more people riding 450s today than 500s ten years ago but we're seeing people get hurt on 250Fs as well as 450s.


If the 450s are really too much then shouldn't the 250Fs be so much safer? It wouldn't matter if everyone only rode 125 two stokes given the way the tracks are designed today IMO.


The biggest thing this sport is lacking is common sense. It took over eight years and Lord knows how many track and riding area closures before something was done about sound. I hope it isn't another eight years of spinal injury reports and subsequent prayer posts before we wake up and smell the coffee.


Big jumps are great so but I will take being able to walk the rest of my life over a double or triple any day.

The Shop

Racetime
Posts
867
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
US
9/24/2008 3:16pm Edited Date/Time 4/16/2016 8:34pm
You can talk around it and make 10 excuses for 450s, but none of them work.


The 450s are too much. Not everyone in pro racing agrees, but they are.


SX tracks have had to be re-designed and have had trouble keeping whoops together since 450s took over. The nats spent the last 2 summers trying to keep top guys interested by re-thinking tracks to make them better 450 tracks.


The end result of OEMs sticking with 450s (and you can't blame them now, with the economy a mess, sales are down, so new development is off the list) might just be 250F only SX and a weaker turnout for nats. Nice going 450 hard-liners!


When I was asking around about them since 450s took over, the biggest supporters of 450s were the guys making podiums. The SX promoters hate them and the AMA agreed, but deferred to the FIM.


It's moot anyway because even if the OEMs all answered yes, you don't develop much new when yer not making money off what you are doing now.
Tiki
Posts
10601
Joined
8/1/2006
Location
Corona, CA US
Fantasy
9/24/2008 5:37pm
Sounds like a few excuses there to me Steve.

Let the promoters decide what should be raced. The MFG's will follow. It aint gonna be the other way around. For everyone that has gotten hurt on lesser displacement bikes whom do you pony up the excuses for?

This shit is dangerous. Accept it. If it was easy everyone would do it.
Racer92
Posts
17965
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
Central, TX US
9/24/2008 6:10pm
Tell 'em Bruhn......
9/24/2008 6:52pm
The 450,s are the easiest bikes I've ever rode. Its all in the right wrist my friends, control and conquer. I switched back to a 250 2-stroke for a while and still prefer the 450 4-stroke. Click up a gear and enjoy, the same thing you do to a 500 cc 2-stroke (if you ever had the honor).

09450f
Posts
2746
Joined
9/24/2008
Location
Temecula, HI US
9/24/2008 7:34pm
i have ridden both..i had 4 500's..expert level moto..
it just depends on the track..if its big and wide open 500's are very fast..but the tighter it gets,than a 450 will work just as well.or for that matter a 250f
9/24/2008 7:55pm Edited Date/Time 4/16/2016 8:34pm
Racetime wrote:
You can talk around it and make 10 excuses for 450s, but none of them work. The 450s are too much. Not everyone in pro racing...
You can talk around it and make 10 excuses for 450s, but none of them work.


The 450s are too much. Not everyone in pro racing agrees, but they are.


SX tracks have had to be re-designed and have had trouble keeping whoops together since 450s took over. The nats spent the last 2 summers trying to keep top guys interested by re-thinking tracks to make them better 450 tracks.


The end result of OEMs sticking with 450s (and you can't blame them now, with the economy a mess, sales are down, so new development is off the list) might just be 250F only SX and a weaker turnout for nats. Nice going 450 hard-liners!


When I was asking around about them since 450s took over, the biggest supporters of 450s were the guys making podiums. The SX promoters hate them and the AMA agreed, but deferred to the FIM.


It's moot anyway because even if the OEMs all answered yes, you don't develop much new when yer not making money off what you are doing now.
I have to disagree with you Steve, the 450's work great and hold together better then a 250f or a hybrid 350 would. The OEM's could stop further development now and we would still have great bikes.

Further development costs money, not only in R&D but retooling, engineering and set up. Bikes are fast enough as well as suspended to the max. Its time the factories make strides in 4 stroke motor longevity.
todder
Posts
1608
Joined
10/20/2006
Location
Sw, WI US
9/25/2008 12:51am
Why not run a quiet silencer or DB dog on the 450s. Knock a HP or 2 off and really quiet them down. A win win.
Racer92
Posts
17965
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
Central, TX US
9/25/2008 4:31am Edited Date/Time 9/25/2008 4:33am
"Do you really think that a more tame track would turn people away? "

I know for a fact that taming a track will turn riders away. I know many track owners (one of which finally threw in the towel and shut down) who tried to make their tracks into oldskool MX tracks, and in each instance the younger riders (who made up the bulk of their business) whined relentlessly that the track wasnt "challenging enough", "not fun anymore", "nothing to seperate the good from bad riders" on & on. The jump fanatics quit showing up and they lost money and were forced to put the do-or-die jumps back in.

Stoopidcross has somehow convinced a generation of kids that jumps are what makes a track easy or hard, and that jumping is what makes riding fun. Thats why I went to racing harescrambles,,, where the emphasis is on natural terrain.
croom mx
Posts
1964
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
miami, FL US
9/25/2008 5:29am
The Rock wrote:
Off topic question: I was at Croom last year and learned sound testing was coming. Is sound testing coming January 1?
I dont know the exact dates but you can find out from FWC website. Croom is part of their areas. Great place to ride.
croom mx
Posts
1964
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
miami, FL US
9/25/2008 5:32am
Also speaking about injury. From my experience I crashed more on a 125 than anyother bike that I rode. Just something to think about?
CR500Rider
Posts
1272
Joined
4/4/2008
Location
San Antonio, TX US
9/25/2008 5:42am
croom mx wrote:
Also speaking about injury. From my experience I crashed more on a 125 than anyother bike that I rode. Just something to think about?
I was thinking the same thing. Not only more but way harder. On that note, I'm going riding today, on my 125.
todder
Posts
1608
Joined
10/20/2006
Location
Sw, WI US
9/25/2008 5:56am Edited Date/Time 9/25/2008 5:56am
Get back to using hilly terrain to build tracks in and you will need fewer jumps. There are too many parking lot tracks that have to put in a bunch of jumps for something to do.
Racer92
Posts
17965
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
Central, TX US
9/25/2008 6:00am
"Some well placed jumps are necessary IMO."

Jumps mean nothing. All the fast guys do them and it is a non-issue. You wanna challenge yourself, get a stopwatch and have your woman stand by the track and knock seconds off your laptimes. Learn how to enter corners faster, brake deeper, find better - more productive lines, run that pace for 45 minutes and turn the last lap faster than the first two,, theres your challenge.

The stopwatch is the ultimate challenge. Jumps are for posers wanting show off thinking it means something. Pfffffft.
CR500Rider
Posts
1272
Joined
4/4/2008
Location
San Antonio, TX US
9/25/2008 6:00am
The Rock wrote:
The MXA comparison backs my position it is the tracks not the bikes that is the issue. . Back when we had the 500 Nationals injuries...
The MXA comparison backs my position it is the tracks not the bikes that is the issue. . Back when we had the 500 Nationals injuries were not nearly as prevalent as they are today but the courses were much safer back then. The article shows what a handful the 500s were and anyone who has ridden both knows how much easier the 450s are to ride compared to a 500.


Granted there are more people riding 450s today than 500s ten years ago but we're seeing people get hurt on 250Fs as well as 450s.


If the 450s are really too much then shouldn't the 250Fs be so much safer? It wouldn't matter if everyone only rode 125 two stokes given the way the tracks are designed today IMO.


The biggest thing this sport is lacking is common sense. It took over eight years and Lord knows how many track and riding area closures before something was done about sound. I hope it isn't another eight years of spinal injury reports and subsequent prayer posts before we wake up and smell the coffee.


Big jumps are great so but I will take being able to walk the rest of my life over a double or triple any day.
I agree with everything you say except a 450 is easier to ride than a 500. I've found that to be the exact opposite.
CR500Rider
Posts
1272
Joined
4/4/2008
Location
San Antonio, TX US
9/25/2008 6:01am
Racer92 wrote:
[i][b]"Some well placed jumps are necessary IMO." [/b][/i] Jumps mean nothing. All the fast guys do them and it is a non-issue. You wanna challenge yourself...
"Some well placed jumps are necessary IMO."

Jumps mean nothing. All the fast guys do them and it is a non-issue. You wanna challenge yourself, get a stopwatch and have your woman stand by the track and knock seconds off your laptimes. Learn how to enter corners faster, brake deeper, find better - more productive lines, run that pace for 45 minutes and turn the last lap faster than the first two,, theres your challenge.

The stopwatch is the ultimate challenge. Jumps are for posers wanting show off thinking it means something. Pfffffft.
You're just talking crazy now, that would be too much like, well, motocross.
Racer92
Posts
17965
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
Central, TX US
9/25/2008 6:03am
CR500Rider wrote:
You're just talking crazy now, that would be too much like, well, motocross.
Cool
The_PU300
Posts
131
Joined
9/18/2008
Location
Argyle, TX US
9/25/2008 7:15am
Here's one for the 450 column.... racing for privateers. One can take a relatively stock 450 and race at a national level... after spending their money on suspension, guys like Jason Thomas and Ryan Clark have a bike that is much closer to the top guys. In the 250 2 stroke days it was much further apart.
CR500Rider
Posts
1272
Joined
4/4/2008
Location
San Antonio, TX US
9/25/2008 7:32am
The_PU300 wrote:
Here's one for the 450 column.... racing for privateers. One can take a relatively stock 450 and race at a national level... after spending their money...
Here's one for the 450 column.... racing for privateers. One can take a relatively stock 450 and race at a national level... after spending their money on suspension, guys like Jason Thomas and Ryan Clark have a bike that is much closer to the top guys. In the 250 2 stroke days it was much further apart.
That was the beauty of the 500cc nationals.
Suns_PSD
Posts
989
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Austin, TX US
9/25/2008 7:39am
The new 450s are so easy to ride fast that the track builders have started to place huge knarly jumps right out of turns.

I started riding on a 2005 CRF450 and I really sucked but I would just roll thru every turn in 3rd gear and pin it and I would clear all the big jumps.

I didn't actually learn how to ride until I bought my 2 stroke.

Excellent bikes made the tracks more boring I assume, so the tracks had to become a lot more challenging I'm guessing.

I have to admit, when I go and ride these old style tracks where there is a huge straightaway w/ a big pile of dirt in the middle of it, I'm bored as hell. It's a lot funner to be clicking 3-4th gear on a little tight track than have so much space that technically you could be in 5th gear if you were riding fast enough.

I like the tight tracks.
mjskier
Posts
1879
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
CO US
9/25/2008 8:32am
level wrote:
The case with Blair Morgan-it was a jump and wreck that most people would of gotten up from. I'm sure Morgan has been in alot more...
The case with Blair Morgan-it was a jump and wreck that most people would of gotten up from. I'm sure Morgan has been in alot more ugly looking accidents and walked away. However, this one paralyzed him. That's scary. Sometimes it doesn't even take a big jump or a big bike for something like this to happen. I would love to see them start developing more equipment to protect the back. The chest protectors only go down about half way and probably aren't enough protection.

I think what we need is better protection for our bodies. The neck brace was a good start, now they need to work on something to protect the back and stomach area.

Same thing with Aaron Hill in Colorado last week. He lost the front end in a turn and fell. Not a scratch except that he broke his back. That was a freak accident. You could hurt yourself the same way falling off your bicycle.

This track vs. bike debate is interesting.
At the amateur level I don't think it makes that much difference.
I don't know how it is at other tracks, but most of the hard crashes I have seen locally have nothing to do with bike power or track design. The people who get an ambulance ride usually crashed at the start and got run over, or collided with others on higher speed sections.
At the pro level I think that the skill level needed to make it in this sport just keeps getting higher. As a result you have to take more risks to succeed and the margin for error is much lower. That could explain the higher rate of injury. You have a JS or CR doing a longer, higher jump, and everybody needs to start doing it to stay competitive.
The Rock
Posts
8758
Joined
3/21/2007
Location
HAIKU, HI US
9/26/2008 8:35am
You seem to be implying there are more factors than track design (which is a good point) but then you close with "You have a JS or CR doing a longer, higher jump, and everybody needs to start doing it to stay competitive."

Bottom line is there is no definitive answer here I think there are more positives to be gained by toning down the tracks than there are to be lost.
brent26wood
Posts
1103
Joined
11/1/2006
Location
Washington, DC US
9/26/2008 10:29am
The Rock wrote:
You seem to be implying there are more factors than track design (which is a good point) but then you close with "You have a JS...
You seem to be implying there are more factors than track design (which is a good point) but then you close with "You have a JS or CR doing a longer, higher jump, and everybody needs to start doing it to stay competitive."

Bottom line is there is no definitive answer here I think there are more positives to be gained by toning down the tracks than there are to be lost.
Camp332
Posts
8678
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Zoo Jersey US
9/26/2008 10:41am Edited Date/Time 5/29/2013 12:10pm
Blah Blah Blah
IntenseRider
Posts
320
Joined
12/4/2007
Location
Mc Donald, PA US
9/26/2008 10:43am
Racer92 wrote:
[i][b]"Some well placed jumps are necessary IMO." [/b][/i] Jumps mean nothing. All the fast guys do them and it is a non-issue. You wanna challenge yourself...
"Some well placed jumps are necessary IMO."

Jumps mean nothing. All the fast guys do them and it is a non-issue. You wanna challenge yourself, get a stopwatch and have your woman stand by the track and knock seconds off your laptimes. Learn how to enter corners faster, brake deeper, find better - more productive lines, run that pace for 45 minutes and turn the last lap faster than the first two,, theres your challenge.

The stopwatch is the ultimate challenge. Jumps are for posers wanting show off thinking it means something. Pfffffft.
Jump for show, corner for dough!

It's drives my jump-happy buddy nuts when I smoke on a course because he can't corner. He's more worried about setting up for the jump than getting through the turn quickly.
MX7MX
Posts
845
Joined
8/28/2007
Location
AL US
9/26/2008 12:35pm
some tracks, jumps do determine whether you win or lose.
The Rock
Posts
8758
Joined
3/21/2007
Location
HAIKU, HI US
5/27/2013 12:30pm
Just listened to Geoff Meyer's audio interview with Luongo and it got me thinking about this thread. Did a quick search and voila! Five years later what's your take:

Are 450s too much for MX?

What is the general consensus on 450s in SX? Last couple of pages the topic shifted towards track design but since this thread I've seen people questioning having 450s in SX.

Personally I'd like to see 300cc two strokes racing against an equivalent in power four stroke but I'm not sure what that displacement would be.

Post a reply to: Are the 450's too powerfull?

The Latest