(*)Vital 2 Stroke Community ain't helping the cause...

Grieby54
Posts
2826
Joined
7/1/2008
Location
Castle Rock, CO, USA
3/20/2015 11:21am
Grieby54 wrote:
TeamGreen - You should probably give up. You're arguing a business case and discussing market demand to a bunch of people who don't understand how a...
TeamGreen - You should probably give up. You're arguing a business case and discussing market demand to a bunch of people who don't understand how a business actually works. Whether this is because MX is a predominantly blue collar sport or if there are people who are just that uneducated about how a business runs, I'm not sure.

It's simple really - companies put their R&D money into the highest selling commodities. If I'm selling 20 pens to every 1 pencil I sell, why in the world would I sink money into further R&D for the pencils? Few people are buying them, therefore there's not way to recoup my R&D costs. I understand people saying that an 06 YZ250 is just as good as any new 2 stroke, and I don't disagree, but Yamaha doesn't make a single penny when you buy a used YZ250, therefore there aren't any additional funds to put into R&D.

It's not rocket science - it's basic business.
seth505 wrote:
4 strokes were the "pencils" when they started sinking R&D dollars into them.
They weren't really in existence when they started sinking R&D dollars into them over at Yamaha. That would be called "innovation." At one point the steam engine was the way to go, and then we "innovated" combustion. In the same way, 4 Strokes were the evolution of the motorcycle engine. Sure, peak HP isn't equal when CCs are equal, but it's the environmental concerns and the usability of the power.
#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne, AU
3/20/2015 11:24am Edited Date/Time 3/20/2015 11:29am
Grieby54 wrote:
TeamGreen - You should probably give up. You're arguing a business case and discussing market demand to a bunch of people who don't understand how a...
TeamGreen - You should probably give up. You're arguing a business case and discussing market demand to a bunch of people who don't understand how a business actually works. Whether this is because MX is a predominantly blue collar sport or if there are people who are just that uneducated about how a business runs, I'm not sure.

It's simple really - companies put their R&D money into the highest selling commodities. If I'm selling 20 pens to every 1 pencil I sell, why in the world would I sink money into further R&D for the pencils? Few people are buying them, therefore there's not way to recoup my R&D costs. I understand people saying that an 06 YZ250 is just as good as any new 2 stroke, and I don't disagree, but Yamaha doesn't make a single penny when you buy a used YZ250, therefore there aren't any additional funds to put into R&D.

It's not rocket science - it's basic business.
seth505 wrote:
4 strokes were the "pencils" when they started sinking R&D dollars into them.
Grieby54 wrote:
They weren't really in existence when they started sinking R&D dollars into them over at Yamaha. That would be called "innovation." At one point the steam...
They weren't really in existence when they started sinking R&D dollars into them over at Yamaha. That would be called "innovation." At one point the steam engine was the way to go, and then we "innovated" combustion. In the same way, 4 Strokes were the evolution of the motorcycle engine. Sure, peak HP isn't equal when CCs are equal, but it's the environmental concerns and the usability of the power.
So, your logic dictates the DFI 2T will be the next big Innovation.

Wouldn't a DFI 2T engine be more cost efficient and environmentally friendly to build as well?

4T V's 2T engine for MX. The torque of the 4T is what wins out. Look at the torque an electric Motor makes. 20 laps around an SX track with full battery power. That was possible yesterday.
seth505
Posts
10210
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
SD, CA, USA
3/20/2015 11:28am
Grieby54 wrote:
TeamGreen - You should probably give up. You're arguing a business case and discussing market demand to a bunch of people who don't understand how a...
TeamGreen - You should probably give up. You're arguing a business case and discussing market demand to a bunch of people who don't understand how a business actually works. Whether this is because MX is a predominantly blue collar sport or if there are people who are just that uneducated about how a business runs, I'm not sure.

It's simple really - companies put their R&D money into the highest selling commodities. If I'm selling 20 pens to every 1 pencil I sell, why in the world would I sink money into further R&D for the pencils? Few people are buying them, therefore there's not way to recoup my R&D costs. I understand people saying that an 06 YZ250 is just as good as any new 2 stroke, and I don't disagree, but Yamaha doesn't make a single penny when you buy a used YZ250, therefore there aren't any additional funds to put into R&D.

It's not rocket science - it's basic business.
seth505 wrote:
4 strokes were the "pencils" when they started sinking R&D dollars into them.
Grieby54 wrote:
They weren't really in existence when they started sinking R&D dollars into them over at Yamaha. That would be called "innovation." At one point the steam...
They weren't really in existence when they started sinking R&D dollars into them over at Yamaha. That would be called "innovation." At one point the steam engine was the way to go, and then we "innovated" combustion. In the same way, 4 Strokes were the evolution of the motorcycle engine. Sure, peak HP isn't equal when CCs are equal, but it's the environmental concerns and the usability of the power.
Sorry man, the only part I agree with is usability of power. Labeling it as innovation is questionable. There is something to be said for engineering something that works well and is simple. You came in here questioning the intelligence of the reader base and then compared 2-stroke vs 4-stroke dirtbike argument to steam vs internal combustion for transportation, not really apples to apples.
TailSoHard
Posts
1656
Joined
10/18/2014
Location
Beer City, MI, USA
3/20/2015 11:30am
seth505 wrote:
4 strokes were the "pencils" when they started sinking R&D dollars into them.
Grieby54 wrote:
They weren't really in existence when they started sinking R&D dollars into them over at Yamaha. That would be called "innovation." At one point the steam...
They weren't really in existence when they started sinking R&D dollars into them over at Yamaha. That would be called "innovation." At one point the steam engine was the way to go, and then we "innovated" combustion. In the same way, 4 Strokes were the evolution of the motorcycle engine. Sure, peak HP isn't equal when CCs are equal, but it's the environmental concerns and the usability of the power.
#991 wrote:
So, your logic dictates the DFI 2T will be the next big Innovation. Wouldn't a DFI 2T engine be more cost efficient and environmentally friendly to...
So, your logic dictates the DFI 2T will be the next big Innovation.

Wouldn't a DFI 2T engine be more cost efficient and environmentally friendly to build as well?

4T V's 2T engine for MX. The torque of the 4T is what wins out. Look at the torque an electric Motor makes. 20 laps around an SX track with full battery power. That was possible yesterday.
Just like they had 4-strokes before 1997 in a different industry (offroad), they already have DFI 2T in a different industry (snowmobiles). Adaptation, not Innovation.

The Shop

Grieby54
Posts
2826
Joined
7/1/2008
Location
Castle Rock, CO, USA
3/20/2015 11:30am
seth505 wrote:
4 strokes were the "pencils" when they started sinking R&D dollars into them.
Grieby54 wrote:
They weren't really in existence when they started sinking R&D dollars into them over at Yamaha. That would be called "innovation." At one point the steam...
They weren't really in existence when they started sinking R&D dollars into them over at Yamaha. That would be called "innovation." At one point the steam engine was the way to go, and then we "innovated" combustion. In the same way, 4 Strokes were the evolution of the motorcycle engine. Sure, peak HP isn't equal when CCs are equal, but it's the environmental concerns and the usability of the power.
#991 wrote:
So, your logic dictates the DFI 2T will be the next big Innovation. Wouldn't a DFI 2T engine be more cost efficient and environmentally friendly to...
So, your logic dictates the DFI 2T will be the next big Innovation.

Wouldn't a DFI 2T engine be more cost efficient and environmentally friendly to build as well?

4T V's 2T engine for MX. The torque of the 4T is what wins out. Look at the torque an electric Motor makes. 20 laps around an SX track with full battery power. That was possible yesterday.
For what it's worth, I am never going to genuinely respond to a single post that you make. You and crash82 are in a bar-to-bar race for "Most Annoying VitalMX Member." I wish you the best of luck in your title pursuit.
Grieby54
Posts
2826
Joined
7/1/2008
Location
Castle Rock, CO, USA
3/20/2015 11:32am
seth505 wrote:
Sorry man, the only part I agree with is usability of power. Labeling it as innovation is questionable. There is something to be said for engineering...
Sorry man, the only part I agree with is usability of power. Labeling it as innovation is questionable. There is something to be said for engineering something that works well and is simple. You came in here questioning the intelligence of the reader base and then compared 2-stroke vs 4-stroke dirtbike argument to steam vs internal combustion for transportation, not really apples to apples.
A fair point on steam v combustion not being apples to apples with 2T v 4T. The point remains, though, that companies only survive by improving their product.

In the sport of MX, a 4T was an innovation. Sure, it's an adaptation of other uses, but it's an innovation in the sport itself.

Questioning the intelligence of VitalMX posters is something I do on a daily basis, regardless of topic Laughing
#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne, AU
3/20/2015 11:32am Edited Date/Time 3/20/2015 11:36am
Grieby54 wrote:
They weren't really in existence when they started sinking R&D dollars into them over at Yamaha. That would be called "innovation." At one point the steam...
They weren't really in existence when they started sinking R&D dollars into them over at Yamaha. That would be called "innovation." At one point the steam engine was the way to go, and then we "innovated" combustion. In the same way, 4 Strokes were the evolution of the motorcycle engine. Sure, peak HP isn't equal when CCs are equal, but it's the environmental concerns and the usability of the power.
#991 wrote:
So, your logic dictates the DFI 2T will be the next big Innovation. Wouldn't a DFI 2T engine be more cost efficient and environmentally friendly to...
So, your logic dictates the DFI 2T will be the next big Innovation.

Wouldn't a DFI 2T engine be more cost efficient and environmentally friendly to build as well?

4T V's 2T engine for MX. The torque of the 4T is what wins out. Look at the torque an electric Motor makes. 20 laps around an SX track with full battery power. That was possible yesterday.
Grieby54 wrote:
For what it's worth, I am never going to genuinely respond to a single post that you make. You and crash82 are in a bar-to-bar race...
For what it's worth, I am never going to genuinely respond to a single post that you make. You and crash82 are in a bar-to-bar race for "Most Annoying VitalMX Member." I wish you the best of luck in your title pursuit.
Enjoy life in your box Wink

BTW. I don't give a Rats flying fuck if you respond to my posts or not mate. I don't value your opinion even half as much as you do yourself.
TeamGreen
Posts
37303
Joined
11/25/2008
Location
Thru-out, CA, USA
3/20/2015 11:34am
TeamGreen wrote:
Yesterday, while out riding, I had a talk with a young man that's an accomplished rider, tester, photographer and writer. He IS a fan of 2-Strokes...
Yesterday, while out riding, I had a talk with a young man that's an accomplished rider, tester, photographer and writer. He IS a fan of 2-Strokes. As am I. I've got a KX500SR stashed in my office that is simply Awesome and I have a '78-'79 CR250R (FIM-RC conversion) that's kinda silly cool, too (Thanks Newman!).

We were talking about New Bikes, Homologation, the Rules for the Nationals & SX...etc.

We got back to the discussion of 2-storkes and the people responsible for/promoting/making them at the OEM's... namely the ones that make current 2-strokes...and how the sales aren't in tune with what is "said" on the forums.

The most notable issue: The number of units sold and the needs for homologation (400). You know those "$1000 off KTM 2-Strokes"? Those hold-over YZ's standing right next to the New '15s on the showroom floor? Well, those are indicative of the simple fact that they AREN'T moving in the numbers that some people think.

That means people AREN'T BUYING THEM.

So, to revisit the obvious:

1. You can't homologate without a certain number of units.
2. You can't get the company to allow you to import a bunch of '15s when there's still plenty of '14s in Inventory (The dilemma for the guys at Yamaha and KTM, USA that're fighting for YOUR cause)
3. 4-Strokes are winning; because, that's what people ARE BUYING.
4. Better sales would fund MORE R&D. Period.
5. Where's all the "I put my money where my mouth is!"?

If you're going to scream about some sort of conspiracy?
If you're going to blame the OEMS?
If you've got a point?

PROVE IT. Buy SOMETHING.

Bring'em Back!



* "Vital 2 Stroke Community " is utilized due to the simple fact that this is the home of the Vital 2-Stroke crowd, you know: The guys that've thrown everyone and everything UNDER THE BUS...from the AMA, MX Sports, Honda to the companies that're still making the bikes in question.
Zracer wrote:
So where is your new 2 stroke? You say you care about 2 strokes and hand out all this good info so where is yours?
My current bikes are...

14 KTM450SXF
14 KX450F
15 FE350S

I race "Old-Guy" MX and I ride in Baja & off-road quite a bit. I ride the bikes that I prefer. The TC250 comes close; but, I'm a helluva lot faster, on the track, on a 450. The 350 is the perfect off-road bike, for me.

I'm Not the One Screaming "2 Strokes!". I'm simply reflecting on what I'm seeing and hearing within' the industry versus what I'm reading in here.

I believe that point is made throughout the thread.
TeamGreen
Posts
37303
Joined
11/25/2008
Location
Thru-out, CA, USA
3/20/2015 11:40am
seth505 wrote:
4 strokes were the "pencils" when they started sinking R&D dollars into them.
Grieby54 wrote:
They weren't really in existence when they started sinking R&D dollars into them over at Yamaha. That would be called "innovation." At one point the steam...
They weren't really in existence when they started sinking R&D dollars into them over at Yamaha. That would be called "innovation." At one point the steam engine was the way to go, and then we "innovated" combustion. In the same way, 4 Strokes were the evolution of the motorcycle engine. Sure, peak HP isn't equal when CCs are equal, but it's the environmental concerns and the usability of the power.
#991 wrote:
So, your logic dictates the DFI 2T will be the next big Innovation. Wouldn't a DFI 2T engine be more cost efficient and environmentally friendly to...
So, your logic dictates the DFI 2T will be the next big Innovation.

Wouldn't a DFI 2T engine be more cost efficient and environmentally friendly to build as well?

4T V's 2T engine for MX. The torque of the 4T is what wins out. Look at the torque an electric Motor makes. 20 laps around an SX track with full battery power. That was possible yesterday.
Enviro-friendliness is a skewed subject: The 2T requires some secondary treatment (post combustion) of the exhaust gases to get "clean". Honda and some of the Boat and SnoMo engine builders have "gone there" in the last decade. Fuel metering is showing a lot of promise in the digital age. KTM seems to be pursuing this.

Even Yamaha had the RD/RZ line of 2T streeters with Catalytic Converters...back in the '80s.
seth505
Posts
10210
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
SD, CA, USA
3/20/2015 11:40am
Grieby54 wrote:
A fair point on steam v combustion not being apples to apples with 2T v 4T. The point remains, though, that companies only survive by improving...
A fair point on steam v combustion not being apples to apples with 2T v 4T. The point remains, though, that companies only survive by improving their product.

In the sport of MX, a 4T was an innovation. Sure, it's an adaptation of other uses, but it's an innovation in the sport itself.

Questioning the intelligence of VitalMX posters is something I do on a daily basis, regardless of topic Laughing
I'm gonna go ahead and agree that you should continue to question intelligence... haha
#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne, AU
3/20/2015 11:42am Edited Date/Time 3/20/2015 11:49am
Grieby54 wrote:
They weren't really in existence when they started sinking R&D dollars into them over at Yamaha. That would be called "innovation." At one point the steam...
They weren't really in existence when they started sinking R&D dollars into them over at Yamaha. That would be called "innovation." At one point the steam engine was the way to go, and then we "innovated" combustion. In the same way, 4 Strokes were the evolution of the motorcycle engine. Sure, peak HP isn't equal when CCs are equal, but it's the environmental concerns and the usability of the power.
#991 wrote:
So, your logic dictates the DFI 2T will be the next big Innovation. Wouldn't a DFI 2T engine be more cost efficient and environmentally friendly to...
So, your logic dictates the DFI 2T will be the next big Innovation.

Wouldn't a DFI 2T engine be more cost efficient and environmentally friendly to build as well?

4T V's 2T engine for MX. The torque of the 4T is what wins out. Look at the torque an electric Motor makes. 20 laps around an SX track with full battery power. That was possible yesterday.
TeamGreen wrote:
Enviro-friendliness is a skewed subject: The 2T requires some secondary treatment (post combustion) of the exhaust gases to get "clean". Honda and some of the Boat...
Enviro-friendliness is a skewed subject: The 2T requires some secondary treatment (post combustion) of the exhaust gases to get "clean". Honda and some of the Boat and SnoMo engine builders have "gone there" in the last decade. Fuel metering is showing a lot of promise in the digital age. KTM seems to be pursuing this.

Even Yamaha had the RD/RZ line of 2T streeters with Catalytic Converters...back in the '80s.
AFAIK. The currant Sherco 300 2T engine is DFI ready. I.e. They've designed the engine to adapt DFI.

Gilera (sp?) in Spain have DFI on their scooters

KTM aren't the only Interested party either. There is 2T R&D actually happening right now. I'm excited to see what's around the next few corners. With Electric motors and DFI 2T engines
OldYZRider1
Posts
848
Joined
7/10/2009
Location
Bushnell, IL, USA
3/20/2015 11:44am
I guess the foundation of your statement is that if the manufacturers were selling more two strokes they could meet homologation requirements and therefore be willing to compete in AMA Pro events?

Well maybe homologation requirements need to be tweaked to better reflect the sales aspects of the market. Therefore if the sales of two strokes are low manufacturers won't be required to supply as many as if they were? I actually wonder if the 400 unit requirement isn't becoming unrealistic for any manufacturer considering the size of the MX bike market in general.

But I don't think it matters how many two strokes are being sold as far as seeing them compete in AMA Pro racing because the displacement rules and fuel restrictions as they are currently written would still overwhelmingly favor the four strokes.
peelout
Posts
18387
Joined
1/6/2011
Location
Ogden, UT, USA
3/20/2015 11:44am
i couldn't give two shits what bikes other people want to buy. i'll always own a 2-stroke, but i still want a big 4-stroke for the longer rides like Baja and Tour of Utah.

quit worrying about what other people prefer
Grieby54
Posts
2826
Joined
7/1/2008
Location
Castle Rock, CO, USA
3/20/2015 11:48am
peelout wrote:
i couldn't give two shits what bikes other people want to buy. i'll always own a 2-stroke, but i still want a big 4-stroke for the...
i couldn't give two shits what bikes other people want to buy. i'll always own a 2-stroke, but i still want a big 4-stroke for the longer rides like Baja and Tour of Utah.

quit worrying about what other people prefer
I agree with this fully.

I'm looking for a cheap 125 to help improve my technique a bit, and I couldn't care less about what someone lined up next to me is riding.
Canadad
Posts
192
Joined
12/5/2012
Location
CA
3/20/2015 11:49am
To say that the average vitard is uneducated and understands nothing of the business world might be a little shortsighted. Team Green makes the point that there are too may previous model year 2 smokes on the dealer floor. That does not appear to be the case for KTM, my understanding is that it is difficult to find one anywhere. That leaves Yamaha and I am a perfect example of a Yamaha 2 stroke owner. I have 3 of these bikes, a 2008, 2010 and 2012 (they are all identical machines). I recently had the choice of buying a new one for the upcoming season but instead I purchased the 2008 with a JMS 150 motor that is an absolute monster. Would I have done this if Yamaha offered a direct injection bike or a bike with a new frame design with adjustable power valve? Absolutely not.

The 2-stroke crowd on vital are evidence of the throng of consumers willing and able to spend their money on the next development in 2 stroke technology, KTM is also strong evidence of the demand. If the Japanese manufacturers provide a product that the market demands they will sell. Likely the largest market segment in the MX community with $ (vet riders) would be all over a new 2 stroke.

The other point that has been made is no sales=no R&D budget. By this same logic, would sales with no R&D spend not fund an R&D budget for the next new thing? Yamaha has spent zero R&D on their 2 strokes for how long?

I believe the bigger issue for the Japanese is the size of the MX market overall. It's all about ROI on your R&D investment. For every $1 spent in R&D in the MX segment, it may yield $2. In the side by side market segment, it may yield $12. If this is true, the real issue is the shrinking of our sport, its not about 2 vs 4 stroke. Not to derail this topic but having tragedies at national amateur events now on a regular basis and not taking steps to make this sport safer to me is criminal and will play a major role in its demise.
hylo
Posts
180
Joined
2/24/2015
Location
NO
3/20/2015 11:49am
Many of you guys just seem to forget one fact.

Been riding 250F's for years and this year I made the switch to a 250 2stroke. It was much more fun, flickable and it got my adrenaline pumping overtime.
It's too bad the OEMs won't make any new 2strokes. I don't think average joe wants one anymore either. He's blown away by going fast with a bike which is both torquey and revs to the moon (read: he runs out of talent before the bike does). As much as I'd like a brand new KX250 I don't see it happening. Ever.

I'm still gonna enjoy my SX250 and make her scream whenever I can. Cheerful
#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne, AU
3/20/2015 11:50am
Grieby54 wrote:
A fair point on steam v combustion not being apples to apples with 2T v 4T. The point remains, though, that companies only survive by improving...
A fair point on steam v combustion not being apples to apples with 2T v 4T. The point remains, though, that companies only survive by improving their product.

In the sport of MX, a 4T was an innovation. Sure, it's an adaptation of other uses, but it's an innovation in the sport itself.

Questioning the intelligence of VitalMX posters is something I do on a daily basis, regardless of topic Laughing
seth505 wrote:
I'm gonna go ahead and agree that you should continue to question intelligence... haha
As they say. "What ever makes you feel better about yourself".
CR250Rider
Posts
6706
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Moses Lake, WA, USA
3/20/2015 11:51am
What difference does it make if any 2 stroke is homo-lagated? The factories will never race one.
#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne, AU
3/20/2015 11:57am Edited Date/Time 3/20/2015 12:03pm
IMO. SX and MX will go Electric before they go back to 2T. This will be forced upon them soon if they want to survive as a sport. Off road, trail riding etc will go DFI 2T next.
Grieby54
Posts
2826
Joined
7/1/2008
Location
Castle Rock, CO, USA
3/20/2015 12:09pm
#991 wrote:
IMO. SX and MX will go Electric before they go back to 2T. This will be forced upon them soon if they want to survive as...
IMO. SX and MX will go Electric before they go back to 2T. This will be forced upon them soon if they want to survive as a sport. Off road, trail riding etc will go DFI 2T next.
Ok, I'm going to deviate from my last comment this one time.

I agree with you on all of your points here.
#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne, AU
3/20/2015 12:12pm
#991 wrote:
IMO. SX and MX will go Electric before they go back to 2T. This will be forced upon them soon if they want to survive as...
IMO. SX and MX will go Electric before they go back to 2T. This will be forced upon them soon if they want to survive as a sport. Off road, trail riding etc will go DFI 2T next.
Grieby54 wrote:
Ok, I'm going to deviate from my last comment this one time.

I agree with you on all of your points here.
You have to. I was using your logic Tongue Laughing
TeamGreen
Posts
37303
Joined
11/25/2008
Location
Thru-out, CA, USA
3/20/2015 12:13pm
peelout wrote:
i couldn't give two shits what bikes other people want to buy. i'll always own a 2-stroke, but i still want a big 4-stroke for the...
i couldn't give two shits what bikes other people want to buy. i'll always own a 2-stroke, but i still want a big 4-stroke for the longer rides like Baja and Tour of Utah.

quit worrying about what other people prefer
You know the problem with 4 Strokes in Baja?
Grieby54
Posts
2826
Joined
7/1/2008
Location
Castle Rock, CO, USA
3/20/2015 12:13pm
#991 wrote:
IMO. SX and MX will go Electric before they go back to 2T. This will be forced upon them soon if they want to survive as...
IMO. SX and MX will go Electric before they go back to 2T. This will be forced upon them soon if they want to survive as a sport. Off road, trail riding etc will go DFI 2T next.
Grieby54 wrote:
Ok, I'm going to deviate from my last comment this one time.

I agree with you on all of your points here.
#991 wrote:
You have to. I was using your logic Tongue Laughing
You should have gone back and edited it to say "Grieby54 is an idiot and two strokes are the best thing since sliced bread." Then you'd have a screen shot of me quoting that post saying "I agree" hah.
Mr Bean
Posts
481
Joined
6/18/2014
Location
USA
3/20/2015 12:17pm
TeamGreen wrote:
Take a look at some of the stuff posted in the responses... "Is this another "buy a brand new 2-stroke every 6 months or shut the...
Take a look at some of the stuff posted in the responses...

"Is this another "buy a brand new 2-stroke every 6 months or shut the fuck up" thread?"

"So only people who are in the new bike market are allowed to have an opinion on rules in pro racing?"

"Yes because only those with massive amounts of disposable income are allowed to have an opinion."

The usual snide and "us-n-them" crap we hear from you guys. Better, yet, is the personal implications of my intent, thanks, to which you guys are welcome to "EABOBOD". Silly

Address the point; if, you will: There are OEM's that're fulfilling the need AND are still developing, albeit -slowly-, new 2T technology. Better sales would incentivize better development.





Your last section is where I think there is room for disagreement on the subject.

Are they truly "fulfilling the need" (or the want)?

Or are they doing just enough so they can claim they still support the 2-stroke market (or make some more profit on a long-ago paid for item)?

And "better sales" is a bit ambiguous - how much better? One unit worldwide? Some quantification would help tighten the discussion - put a number on it that is supported by facts regarding the sales level (and corresponding dollar amount) that is required/needed to financially justify/permit a manuf to develop the product.

You do include the escape clause "albeit -slowly", but there's the rub for me - just because Yamaha decided to put that god-awful 2008 KTM-looking sidepanel design on the 2015 YZ isn't enough of an incentive to make me part ways with my 06 YZ125 and 07 YZ250 (because the first mod I'd do is buy the old sidepanels and airbox!).

This is a many faceted discussion but I think it's a combination of forces that include economics, manufacturers that aren't generating any interest in their products because of a lack development and improvement in the last decade (especially when it sits next to the latest shiny, sparkly valve and cam release... with air forks... and traction control... and a reversed engine... etc, etc) and a programmed/conditioned market (riders that have never ridden a two stroke in their entire riding career).

I don't see much of an incentive to buy a new bike (unless I've completely worn out my old one) just to replace it with what is essentially an exact replacement, not an upgrade. New? Yes. Improved? Not so much.
Who would buy a new, huge, low-def CRT TV every year or two, not because it quit working but just to replace it with the same thing in the hopes that in doing so the TV manuf would come out with something better for them?
It seems silly to admonish the buyer for not behaving in that manner.
People are still buying 2Ts but it seems reasonable to believe that sales would be better (how much?) if they were improved regularly.

A new KTM 250SX is still not arguably a better out-of-the-crate bike than a 2006 YZ250 - so where's the incentive? And that's after almost a decade of development... which might mean that the 2Ts are going to be difficult to improve upon or that even after almost 10 years they haven't been shown a lot of innovation, just refining.

So, do you reward a manufacturer for simply continuing to make the same bike for 10 years by buying one when you don't need it or does the manufacturer take the risk of kicking out the jams, spending some cash on R&D and delivering the latest sliced bread to the table... and hope to be rewarded with massive sales? And if buyers continue to buy the same recycled product does that send the message that they're content with it and don''t need improvements to continue their loyalty? This might make the manufs think "why fix it if it ain't broke" and perpetuate the discontented cycle with the buyer.

It's the proverbial chicken or the egg argument... which is where I think an argument could be made to support your last sentence if it were reversed - "Better development would incentivize better sales".

Do I think there's a market for cutting edge 2-stroke?

Sure.

Am I going to lose any sleep over not seeing one every time a new model year rolls around?

Nope.

So in the meantime I'll be riding all my scoots (2 and 4 stroke) when I can.

Just some thoughts, not a pissing contest.

Cool
#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne, AU
3/20/2015 12:21pm Edited Date/Time 3/20/2015 12:24pm
Grieby54 wrote:
Ok, I'm going to deviate from my last comment this one time.

I agree with you on all of your points here.
#991 wrote:
You have to. I was using your logic Tongue Laughing
Grieby54 wrote:
You should have gone back and edited it to say "Grieby54 is an idiot and two strokes are the best thing since sliced bread." Then you'd...
You should have gone back and edited it to say "Grieby54 is an idiot and two strokes are the best thing since sliced bread." Then you'd have a screen shot of me quoting that post saying "I agree" hah.
Here's what you really need to concern yourself with. You think I'm a goose, obviously Tongue . But. I 110% agree with your logic. There's a worry Dry

The post that you responded to was an extension of your thoughts. Well, was Intended to be. I was agreeing with you.

BTW, I have mild Asperger's Syndrome. Myself agreeing with your logic is actually a compliment Laughing .
I also have thick skin Wink
cslacker
Posts
382
Joined
6/6/2014
Location
Glendale, AZ, USA
3/20/2015 12:22pm
#991 wrote:
Here's what you really need to concern yourself with. You think I'm a goose, obviously :P. But. I 110% agree with your logic. There's a worry...
Here's what you really need to concern yourself with. You think I'm a goose, obviously Tongue . But. I 110% agree with your logic. There's a worry Dry

The post that you responded to was an extension of your thoughts. Well, was Intended to be. I was agreeing with you.

BTW, I have mild Asperger's Syndrome. Myself agreeing with your logic is actually a compliment Laughing .
I also have thick skin Wink
And a never ending library of emoticons...
APLMAN99
Posts
12713
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR, USA
Fantasy
3/20/2015 12:22pm
The homologation argument seems a bit hollow, at best. If 400 is the "magic" number, then that equates to a whopping 8 bikes for an "average" sized state (Tennessee, Arizona, Missouri, etc.). With decent gains in technology, that seems pretty attainable. But in the case of Yamaha, it is hard to imagine that many buyers rushing out to replace their older bikes with a new one that is only incrementally improved and maybe not at all compared to their already personalized bike.

It's hard to think of a market scenario where a manufacturer demands that consumers purchase a current product that isn't being updated before they begin to put development dollars into a new product. Generally the manufacturer makes changes that they feel will make their product more attractive to increase sales.
#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne, AU
3/20/2015 12:36pm Edited Date/Time 3/20/2015 12:42pm
#991 wrote:
Here's what you really need to concern yourself with. You think I'm a goose, obviously :P. But. I 110% agree with your logic. There's a worry...
Here's what you really need to concern yourself with. You think I'm a goose, obviously Tongue . But. I 110% agree with your logic. There's a worry Dry

The post that you responded to was an extension of your thoughts. Well, was Intended to be. I was agreeing with you.

BTW, I have mild Asperger's Syndrome. Myself agreeing with your logic is actually a compliment Laughing .
I also have thick skin Wink
cslacker wrote:
And a never ending library of emoticons...
I can't argue with that .

Anyway. Getting back on topic. I'm happy to try whatever they decide to make and I'm happy with what's currently available ATM. "Varity is the spice of life". As long as it moves in a forward motion under It's own power. Life's Good.
kaboom645
Posts
435
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
USA
3/20/2015 1:17pm
When I got back into riding a few months ago, my local dealer had already sold out of every 2 stroke bike both Yamaha and KTM would let them order, and all he had left was a KTM 150sx. When the dealer went looking at other dealers to find bikes, they either didn't have any, or wanted the same money for them as a 4 stroke. My dealer ended up selling me a new kx 450, and 250f (for my son) for the same cost as a new 125 and 250 2 stroke. My son loves the 250f because its an easy to ride trail bike.. I have my 450, and it will be for sale soon in favor of a new 250 2 stroke when the '16 models come out.

Part of the problem is the mfg's telling the dealers they can only have so much of a certain inventory, and telling them they have to take a certain amount of another. Look at jetski's. A dealer in Florida is going to sell way more than a dealer in northern alaska. I bet if you you looked at a sales graph, you would find regions where the 2 strokes sell considerably better than 4 strokes, and vise versa
mxfiend
Posts
310
Joined
1/30/2013
Location
Riverside, CA, USA
3/20/2015 1:31pm
Darryl916 wrote:
I get the point of the OP and all the other "speak with your wallet" stuff but here is where I stand... My smoker is a...
I get the point of the OP and all the other "speak with your wallet" stuff but here is where I stand...

My smoker is a 2007. It's a 2007 because

1. it cost me $2500 and is as good as any other 250 2 stroke available new for 6k.
2. other than cheap to rebuild the motor, it's not a better bike to race.
- it's harder to ride
- less forgiving
- harder to jump
- not as competitive in a class full of 4 stroke as another 4 stroke which is easier to ride fast in more situations


I love 2 strokes as much as anyone else as they are super fun and such, but I must admit technology has moved forward. 4 strokes are so much more tractable and so much easier to ride with such broad power.

The only way 2 strokes will come back main stream in MX and SX is if a sanctioning body forces it. And I don't see them doing that, because why would they? The sport is bigger than it ever has been. I'm not going to stop racing until 2 strokes come back and neither is anyone else. We are all going to buy a 4 stroke because it's what is most effective against other 4 strokes and life will go on. Period, end of discussion.
Motofinne wrote:
This. I got back to MX 4 months ago(had a 3 1/2 year break because of multiple serious knee injuries) and i bought an RM 250...
This.

I got back to MX 4 months ago(had a 3 1/2 year break because of multiple serious knee injuries) and i bought an RM 250 -08. Before a took the break i ha been riding 4 strokes for about 4 years and geting on a 2 stroke was weird. To sum up a long story to a short one i am buying a KTM 450 2014 tomorrow, why? Because a 450 is economical, easy to ride fast, safer than a 2 stroke.

I will keep the RM but i don't think i will ride it this summer, maybe once or twice.
Not sure how one bike is safer than another... unless u know of a bike with a cage around it and seatbelts.

Post a reply to: (*)Vital 2 Stroke Community ain't helping the cause...

The Latest