Upgrade to enjoy this feature!
Vital MX fantasy is free to play, but Premium users receive great benefits. Premium benefits include:
- View and download rider stats
- Pick trends
- Create a private league
- And more!
Only $10 for all 2026 SX, MX, and SMX series.
Is that a dopey thought in it's extreme; yeah, only because Joe's point begs the real issue. If we were racing 2013 two strokes, you could still make the same statement; the racing would be good if they were on 1990 bikes instead.
One of the things works bike worshipers pine about is the loss of trickness and the development process that attended those bike. But development didn't stop; the OEM always try to make a better product for racing and for sales. That's the nature of things, in bikes or computers or cars or whatever. Bikes just developed differently without works bikes, but they didn't stop developing. In spite of the conspiracy theorists, I don't think anyone planned or intended that the situation today was the intended point B destination from the starting place of point A back in the mid 90's when Husaberg and a few other off brands started running competitive four strokes. It was an ongoing incremental process where people made an unfolding series of decisions along the way, which included both rules makers underestimating the upside of four stroke development consumers buying into four strokes and ignoring two strokes until they dropped off the production cycle with some of the major brands.
I don't know that the biggest equation ~ the talent of the riders ~ would play out a lot differently one way or the other. RC was kicking the crap out of everyone on two strokes, and so was Stewart. The top talent still is just that much better still today. Certainly guys who lack support (usually because they are not fast enough at this level) would have an cheaper go of it in the small bike class if they didn't have to run hopped up 250f's in the delusion that they can compete with the fastest guys on the fastest teams, and you might have a few more riders or marginal teams sustaining themselves in top 20. But I don't know that it makes the racing a lot better.
The Shop
DeCal Works Huge Plastic Inventory of UFO and Polisport kits.
Free shipping: VITALMX
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
Your argument that it doesn't is just as much of an opinion........ realllll piece of work.
Honestly, if cost is what warrants banning an add on like a holeshot device (because it no longer makes a difference if everyone owns one), this may not be the best target if one really is trying to put a dent in costs. Start with fuel, given that its a consumable that keeps on taking, unlike a one pop accessory like this.
I brought up cost before...mainly in the context that peelout mentioned. This is one of those things that has a trickle down effect to the local amateur scene while really adding nothing qualitative to the actual racing.
(reads entire thread over a foot long sub)
Just like discussing politics and religion, we have not made any progress on banning the w"hole" paycheck starting device. Guess we can go back to helping the "urgent threads" Happy Friday everyone..
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Happy hour boys and girls..
https://youtu.be/kpdTBaNo2Ao
Bike parked along the side with engine off. Run to it, start it (hurrah for the electric starter) and go. No more first turn pile up.
Pit Row
Post a reply to: Should we ban starting devices?