KDub..."450's have to go".

wsc96
Posts
1019
Joined
8/26/2013
Location
AU
3/25/2015 5:57pm
This is a hot topic and rightfully so.

Not to say that nothing should be done before we have it, but until we have the supporting data we don't know if it is a problem of displacement, safety gear, tracks etc and all we can do is speculate and share ideas. It's not likely the same causes for pros versus amateurs versus weekend warriors that accounts for the serious injuries.

Regarding indoor supercross tracks; perhaps governing a maximum average speed could be the answer, we know how long each track is and how long lap times are and so we could adjust obstacles (add wall jumps and sand sections etc after press day) to ensure average speed per lap is within a safer range.
Jaybird67k
Posts
566
Joined
10/27/2013
Location
Vidor, TX US
3/25/2015 5:59pm
gerg wrote:
Do we really know what the issue is? I listened to Kevin Windham on the pod cast. The man speaks very well but made a few...
Do we really know what the issue is?
I listened to Kevin Windham on the pod cast. The man speaks very well but made a few statements that he just cant back up until the facts are there.

EG: Injuries have progressed from broken bones, to paralysis, to deaths.
I can remember when I raced the 2-stroke days in the early '90s there was a broad mixture....mostly broken bones, one paralysis and 2 deaths (that I remember). One of the deaths was a young local kid of a motocross family in it for fun. The other I remember is Joel Elliot who passed away in the US. That was word of mouth, no internet, and absolutely zero coverage on MX in the media.

Death and serious injury in this sport is nothing new...we are on bikes flying through the air. You can case a jump, go down in the first corner and get run over, landed on, you could be paralyzed from a minor awkward tip over...you could calculate the list of potential causes risks for possible death or injury into the millions.

I'm all for increasing the safety of the sport but I dont know how it can be done other than safety equipment.

IMO the argument the bikes are too powerful (less likely), or the tracks are dangerous (more likely and depends on rider skill level) are a knee jerk because we are living in a media driven age where all the information we want is at our fingertips in the news, or international bulletin boards like this.
And of course a lot of the news we are given, or people post about is bad news, debatable news etc.
Are deaths and injuries increasing as a fact or is it because it is far easier to know find out about it?

Would KW be able to tell you the exact number of people who died in the sport in 1992? I bet there were deaths at club, pro, international at all levels, but did we know about it?

Without facts and statistics over serious injuries and death of the sport the world over (of which i am betting there are none) we are not in any position to start gauging or making knee jerk changes based on what we are saying on TV.

When I raced, every major event I attended, the meat wagon was in full swing. There was rarely ever a major event (eg two day we used to call them in AU) where someone or multiple riders werent either concussed, broken bones etc.

It's a part of the sport you can never forget and without any facts or stats mentioned above how can anyone tell you that there's a distinct rise in some line on a graph that says: "Hey in 2006 when 450 4 strokes were the norm or there was an increase of triples designed into the tracks, there was a distinct rise in the annual serious injuries and deaths".

Based on that, how can ANY decision be made on track design, engine specification and capacity with any confidence that it is going to make any difference whatsoever??? I think it's a pretty valid question.

So lets say we ban the 450 because they are "too powerful" and go to a 350cc capacity. Who's to say that in some aspects a 450 is safer than a 250...eg; More power to be able to get out of trouble if things go wrong.
Then we all start riding 350s and the serious injuries/deaths still continue. What next?

I dont understand how you can just draw a line in the sand and start taking potshot targets at something as a cause of increased injury/death based on zero statistical data.

Smile

Preach to me Brother gerg ^^^^Smile Very good points.
If you don't have the Data you can't do an Analysis because if you do it's knee jerk and does little good and we all suffer.

Plus I wanna do this and I could but my skill set says NO. Now the guy doing it has a different skill set and he feels perfectly comfortable some of us do on a 60' Table top.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=439168642912511&pnref=story

Jason
bd
Posts
6036
Joined
4/6/2007
Location
Las Vegas, NV US
3/25/2015 8:00pm
Without any data to back up any of your claims, your arguments mean dick. Are 450Fs killing more riders than 250Fs? How many riders have died on 85s? Why were big bikes practicing with small bikes?

We need data to analyze to recommend the safest recommendations.

I am expecting something like - high risk for death and paralysis: 13-15 Year Old Male, Novice to Intermediate. 250F

In that case - recommend 125cc and 180F class for 13-15 years old.

Look at Cianciarulo..... he rode a 125 for while before going 250F. Smart dad and Team Manager.

Need hypothesises. Data. Analysis. Prove or Disapprove.

This data analysis needs to be ongoing. This sport has radically changed in 20 years. Had four strokes never been developed..... were would two strokes be today? Better


Major injury analysis:

Variables:

Sport (arena cross, supercross, motocross)
Gender (male female)
Bike Size (50cc -450cc)
Skill (beginner, novice, intermediate, expert, pro, vet, vet pro)
Engine Type (two stroke, four stroke)
Type of Injury (death, paralysis)
Obstacle
Relevant information

And we need a large sample size.

The mission is not to attack and manufacturer, gear company, track owner, promoter.... its to provide the safest, most exciting racing at all levels.

Should novice riders be on the same track as National Pro?

There is a lot of moving parts to shift through to find the best answers.

What we need to explore -

* Other Sports Best Practices (from football to Nascar)
* Data Analysis
* Track design (slow it down? more moto style?)
* Gear (lead innovation)
* Proper training
* Bikes



gerg
Posts
1510
Joined
10/29/2014
Location
AU
3/25/2015 8:31pm
Also...

How do you factor in the aspect of skill level + flat out balls/llack of fear/pressure on a rider that maybe throw a bit of water over the bikes are too powerful argument.

I mentioned Joel Elliot in my earlier post (RIP).
I remember him at a local SX event in my home town showgrounds many many years ago...there was a section where everyone (250 pro 2 strokes included) were doing double single. Joel was coming out of the corner with zero run up and doing a massive huck to triple double. He was the only one doing it the whole night, everyone was amazed and he was riding a 125.

What about Laroccos leap? Larocco did it on a 125 and how many pros jump it these days constantly on the 250F? Bagget, Musquin? Then you get riders who (from pressure) try an obstacle like this and come unstuck.

So theoretically if an massive obstacle is there it's safer to be on a more powerful bike if you are even going to attempt it right? Wrong?
So then we go back to Chad's argument for everyone to race flat track...oh dear Evil


The Shop

GuyB
Posts
35722
Joined
7/10/2006
Location
Aliso Viejo, CA US
3/25/2015 8:54pm
#991 wrote:
IMO. We'll see Electric motors in MX/SX before we see DFI 2T's. I wouldn't be surprised to see MX and SX merge and become an Indoor...
IMO. We'll see Electric motors in MX/SX before we see DFI 2T's. I wouldn't be surprised to see MX and SX merge and become an Indoor sport.
Once they sort out the noise and emissions dust will become the enemy. Take it in doors and they can control the environment. Like Hydroponics lol

I think the future of DFI 2T's is in off road riding.
So far I don't think there are any rules being developed for electric bike racing, and for sure not to compete against internal combustion bikes.
3/25/2015 10:18pm
Talk all you want. Unless the pro riders take a stand, nothing will change. They won't because
They are too young and they get out right away. J
#991
Posts
1685
Joined
8/7/2013
Location
Melbourne AU
3/25/2015 10:25pm Edited Date/Time 3/25/2015 10:45pm
#991 wrote:
IMO. We'll see Electric motors in MX/SX before we see DFI 2T's. I wouldn't be surprised to see MX and SX merge and become an Indoor...
IMO. We'll see Electric motors in MX/SX before we see DFI 2T's. I wouldn't be surprised to see MX and SX merge and become an Indoor sport.
Once they sort out the noise and emissions dust will become the enemy. Take it in doors and they can control the environment. Like Hydroponics lol

I think the future of DFI 2T's is in off road riding.
GuyB wrote:
So far I don't think there are any rules being developed for electric bike racing, and for sure not to compete against internal combustion bikes.
Was total speculation on my part. I did say "IMO" Tongue

I don't think we'll see new lower CC bikes. I'd bet my left testy the factories are getting ready for the Electric revolution. We know KTM's been preparing themselves.

Another F1 comparo. Mercedes had a jump start on the competition with the new technology. Look where they are in respect to the rest of the field ATM. If you were going to buy an F1 engine. What would it be? Not Renault I'm betting.

The big 4 would want to be keeping their eye on the ball. The ball would be, KTM.

When it happens. It will happen quickly. Like the 4T revolution.

We have to make the sport safer. We also have to coexist with the general public. More land isn't becoming available and in the future the world will be facing a food shortage. Land will be prioritized for agriculture. All bad news for our sport if we refuse to change.

Hence why I think MX will end up pretty much, indoors only.

Think I'm tripping?
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Indoor+Quad+MX+track
dkg
Posts
1885
Joined
9/12/2010
Location
Rancho Cucamonga, CA US
3/25/2015 10:34pm
bd wrote:
Without any data to back up any of your claims, your arguments mean dick. Are 450Fs killing more riders than 250Fs? How many riders have died...
Without any data to back up any of your claims, your arguments mean dick. Are 450Fs killing more riders than 250Fs? How many riders have died on 85s? Why were big bikes practicing with small bikes?

We need data to analyze to recommend the safest recommendations.

I am expecting something like - high risk for death and paralysis: 13-15 Year Old Male, Novice to Intermediate. 250F

In that case - recommend 125cc and 180F class for 13-15 years old.

Look at Cianciarulo..... he rode a 125 for while before going 250F. Smart dad and Team Manager.

Need hypothesises. Data. Analysis. Prove or Disapprove.

This data analysis needs to be ongoing. This sport has radically changed in 20 years. Had four strokes never been developed..... were would two strokes be today? Better


Major injury analysis:

Variables:

Sport (arena cross, supercross, motocross)
Gender (male female)
Bike Size (50cc -450cc)
Skill (beginner, novice, intermediate, expert, pro, vet, vet pro)
Engine Type (two stroke, four stroke)
Type of Injury (death, paralysis)
Obstacle
Relevant information

And we need a large sample size.

The mission is not to attack and manufacturer, gear company, track owner, promoter.... its to provide the safest, most exciting racing at all levels.

Should novice riders be on the same track as National Pro?

There is a lot of moving parts to shift through to find the best answers.

What we need to explore -

* Other Sports Best Practices (from football to Nascar)
* Data Analysis
* Track design (slow it down? more moto style?)
* Gear (lead innovation)
* Proper training
* Bikes



The outcome of such a study may be interesting, but, how would you eliminate unwise decision making by the rider.
Crush
Posts
21089
Joined
4/26/2009
Location
Sydney AU
3/25/2015 10:38pm
Premix wrote:
See this is why I love data. Eliminates all of the "my cousins friend told me" bullshit: In Dirt riders 2004 the KTM 125 topped the...
See this is why I love data. Eliminates all of the "my cousins friend told me" bullshit:

In Dirt riders 2004 the KTM 125 topped the charts at 36 HP. 4 horsepower less than the previous YZ250f I compared of 2014 produced 10 years later. So you're statement that it was "much less" is again way off.

http://www.dirtrider.com/tests/motocross-bikes/164_0402_jday/

Dirt Rider's 250 shootout test had the Honda making 45 horse(which if I recall correctly the KTM 2 stroke made even more but can't find the exact number)

http://www.dirtrider.com/misc/141_0401_250/

**Edit found the 2004 number for the KTM (50HP) http://www.dirtrider.com/tests/motocross-bikes/141_0310_ktm/****

So lets make this comparison: Each respective class 125 and 250 compared to 250 to 450. 2004 vs. 2014

2004: 2014:
125: 36 HP (KTM) 250: 42 HP (KTM) Difference of 6 HP
250: 50 HP (KTM) 450: 58 HP (YZF) Difference of 8 HP

Difference of 14 HP between classes in 2004
Difference of 16 HP between classes in 2014


Yes HP number were less back in the day, but with todays advances in technology, you're foolish to think that the OEM's couldn't produce a 40HP plus 125. I mean after all KTM's 250 2 stroke is putting out around 50 now and their 150 at just over 38.

So I pose the questions: When is too much? Can your regulate how much the OEM's can produce? Is an average of 7hp increase considered radical?
Which is why I've been using the word capable rather than just outright power.

Those charts show a four stroke making 90% of their power over a really broad range.

IF an oem could make a 40HP plus 125, if, there's no way that shit would be usable and capable like a current four stroke. It'd still be peaky.

Irrespective of that, it's the capability bit... You say it's only a little more, but when you're dealing with 36 to 42Hp, that's a 15% swing. That's huge! And it's traction, and characteristics of the motor and the ability of the suspension.

Bikes have always been dangerous, but bones and bodies have remained the same whilst the bikes have gotten faster, the jumps longer and the suspension better... which is why I posted the video of 86 anaheim to 14 toronto. The biggest jump on the track was that triple at Anaheim, and they had to swing wide to do it. RJ cased it, nasty, but it was fine.... The quads and rhythms that James was doing was about the same, and more consequences if he fucked up.
er0ck33
Posts
77
Joined
9/12/2010
Location
Brunswick, GA US
3/26/2015 3:53am
Radical wrote:
I've been saying this for 5 years. We need to manage the maximum speed. We HAVE to or the problem will get worse. We can argue...
I've been saying this for 5 years. We need to manage the maximum speed. We HAVE to or the problem will get worse.

We can argue all day about whether there are more crashes with the faster bikes, and why, but the truth is crashes at 70MPH are going to be far more brutal than crashes at 60.
For one you're hitting the ground harder and for two, you have less time to react and position you body for the fall.

I would love to race at the highest level.
Granted I'm pretty old for that, but I train hard.
But, I have have no desire whatsoever to crash at that speed.

I ride my 125 as fast as I can and have more fun than anyone out there. I've managed my own speed by limiting my own displacement.

I propose that we make one sweeping change to displacement that will last 10 or 15 years.

Class -> New limit
50 -> 45cc
60 -> 50cc
85 -> 125f or 75cc 2-stroke
250f -> 175f or 125 2-stroke
450f -> 250f or 250 2-stroke (Maybe allow 300F)

Then provide guideline to trackbuilders on how to design for the safety and the new displacements.

I have ideas on how to handle the transition over a period of 5 years.

Industry should embrace it because:

Safer sport means more participants.
Lots of new bikes to be be sold.
Lots of upgrades and conversions, pipes, etc... to be sold.

Full gates.
Keeps regulation out of our sport.








NV825 wrote:
The speed/size of the bikes is definitely an issue, but I think everything is fine in terms of bike power until a rider graduates from an...
The speed/size of the bikes is definitely an issue, but I think everything is fine in terms of bike power until a rider graduates from an 85. I personally think it should be:

50cc
65cc
85cc 2-stroke / 135cc 4-stroke
125cc 2-stroke / 175cc 4-stroke
250cc 2-stroke / 300cc 4-stroke

Smaller bike sizes with safer track designs could help keep kids from dying, but unfortunately we will never rule out the possibility of someone dying from a freak accident where the bike lands on a kids neck as an example.
Agree 100%
neysbo
Posts
2010
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Edelstein, IL US
3/26/2015 4:19am
Radical wrote:
I've been saying this for 5 years. We need to manage the maximum speed. We HAVE to or the problem will get worse. We can argue...
I've been saying this for 5 years. We need to manage the maximum speed. We HAVE to or the problem will get worse.

We can argue all day about whether there are more crashes with the faster bikes, and why, but the truth is crashes at 70MPH are going to be far more brutal than crashes at 60.
For one you're hitting the ground harder and for two, you have less time to react and position you body for the fall.

I would love to race at the highest level.
Granted I'm pretty old for that, but I train hard.
But, I have have no desire whatsoever to crash at that speed.

I ride my 125 as fast as I can and have more fun than anyone out there. I've managed my own speed by limiting my own displacement.

I propose that we make one sweeping change to displacement that will last 10 or 15 years.

Class -> New limit
50 -> 45cc
60 -> 50cc
85 -> 125f or 75cc 2-stroke
250f -> 175f or 125 2-stroke
450f -> 250f or 250 2-stroke (Maybe allow 300F)

Then provide guideline to trackbuilders on how to design for the safety and the new displacements.

I have ideas on how to handle the transition over a period of 5 years.

Industry should embrace it because:

Safer sport means more participants.
Lots of new bikes to be be sold.
Lots of upgrades and conversions, pipes, etc... to be sold.

Full gates.
Keeps regulation out of our sport.








NV825 wrote:
The speed/size of the bikes is definitely an issue, but I think everything is fine in terms of bike power until a rider graduates from an...
The speed/size of the bikes is definitely an issue, but I think everything is fine in terms of bike power until a rider graduates from an 85. I personally think it should be:

50cc
65cc
85cc 2-stroke / 135cc 4-stroke
125cc 2-stroke / 175cc 4-stroke
250cc 2-stroke / 300cc 4-stroke

Smaller bike sizes with safer track designs could help keep kids from dying, but unfortunately we will never rule out the possibility of someone dying from a freak accident where the bike lands on a kids neck as an example.
er0ck33 wrote:
Agree 100%
Not sure that really would help because at the end of the day the young kids will be on 250 2 strokes and those have way more power than the 250F's they are riding now.

There is no single answer but certainly track design some bike changes could help although you will never prevent death and serious injuries in this sport.

ky_savage
Posts
2615
Joined
12/4/2008
Location
Kentucky, KY US
3/26/2015 4:21am
I get so tired of hearing people say that they have to have a 450 because of their size and that a 250f isn't big enough for them. BS!! Just an excuse! I raced some of these same guys on their 450's on my 125 and beat them and I'm 180 lbs. Some might say that's heavy for a 125, but if you can make it work then go for it. Some get 450's just to become a lazy rider or to become stricken with fear when they open the throttle too much. I've had a couple 450's and hated them. IMO they take far less skill due to just having to twist the throttle to clear a section.
Premix
Posts
1505
Joined
1/5/2014
Location
AS US
3/26/2015 5:27am
Premix wrote:
See this is why I love data. Eliminates all of the "my cousins friend told me" bullshit: In Dirt riders 2004 the KTM 125 topped the...
See this is why I love data. Eliminates all of the "my cousins friend told me" bullshit:

In Dirt riders 2004 the KTM 125 topped the charts at 36 HP. 4 horsepower less than the previous YZ250f I compared of 2014 produced 10 years later. So you're statement that it was "much less" is again way off.

http://www.dirtrider.com/tests/motocross-bikes/164_0402_jday/

Dirt Rider's 250 shootout test had the Honda making 45 horse(which if I recall correctly the KTM 2 stroke made even more but can't find the exact number)

http://www.dirtrider.com/misc/141_0401_250/

**Edit found the 2004 number for the KTM (50HP) http://www.dirtrider.com/tests/motocross-bikes/141_0310_ktm/****

So lets make this comparison: Each respective class 125 and 250 compared to 250 to 450. 2004 vs. 2014

2004: 2014:
125: 36 HP (KTM) 250: 42 HP (KTM) Difference of 6 HP
250: 50 HP (KTM) 450: 58 HP (YZF) Difference of 8 HP

Difference of 14 HP between classes in 2004
Difference of 16 HP between classes in 2014


Yes HP number were less back in the day, but with todays advances in technology, you're foolish to think that the OEM's couldn't produce a 40HP plus 125. I mean after all KTM's 250 2 stroke is putting out around 50 now and their 150 at just over 38.

So I pose the questions: When is too much? Can your regulate how much the OEM's can produce? Is an average of 7hp increase considered radical?
Crush wrote:
Which is why I've been using the word capable rather than just outright power. Those charts show a four stroke making 90% of their power over...
Which is why I've been using the word capable rather than just outright power.

Those charts show a four stroke making 90% of their power over a really broad range.

IF an oem could make a 40HP plus 125, if, there's no way that shit would be usable and capable like a current four stroke. It'd still be peaky.

Irrespective of that, it's the capability bit... You say it's only a little more, but when you're dealing with 36 to 42Hp, that's a 15% swing. That's huge! And it's traction, and characteristics of the motor and the ability of the suspension.

Bikes have always been dangerous, but bones and bodies have remained the same whilst the bikes have gotten faster, the jumps longer and the suspension better... which is why I posted the video of 86 anaheim to 14 toronto. The biggest jump on the track was that triple at Anaheim, and they had to swing wide to do it. RJ cased it, nasty, but it was fine.... The quads and rhythms that James was doing was about the same, and more consequences if he fucked up.
You have yet to use the word "capable" anywhere in this thread except for after I've presented you with the above data. Traction is also a variable and not a consistent measurement.

Motor characteristics and traits can be modified in the blink of an eye. Don't believe me? Go ride an early crf450 then a 2015 crf450 and tell me your thoughts on the engine braking. Furthermore, forget the engine braking, just add a slipper clutch and you've all but eliminated that. Suspension more advanced? From what 1970? Sure. Otherwise the majority of the technology in the suspension category has been around for a long time. Don't believe me? Then how did Jerry Robin qualify for Loretta's on a freaking 85 CR250. Almost 30 year old suspension must be inferior!

You've all but solved your own argument with your OWN statement: Bikes have always been dangerous, but bones and bodies have remained the same

Yes our bodies have remained the same. What advancements other than a Leatt and hats off have been made in terms of safety gear? None. That is where we need to start. I even posted this earlier in the week. Could easily be adapted to MX through body armor. Check it out:

http://www.alpinestars.com/tech-air

3/26/2015 5:32am
So much fear about the manf's potentially stopping production of 450's. This same debate was had in the early 90s when the 500 class went the way of the dinosaur.
Crush
Posts
21089
Joined
4/26/2009
Location
Sydney AU
3/26/2015 6:19am
Premix wrote:
You have yet to use the word "capable" anywhere in this thread except for after I've presented you with the above data. Traction is also a...
You have yet to use the word "capable" anywhere in this thread except for after I've presented you with the above data. Traction is also a variable and not a consistent measurement.

Motor characteristics and traits can be modified in the blink of an eye. Don't believe me? Go ride an early crf450 then a 2015 crf450 and tell me your thoughts on the engine braking. Furthermore, forget the engine braking, just add a slipper clutch and you've all but eliminated that. Suspension more advanced? From what 1970? Sure. Otherwise the majority of the technology in the suspension category has been around for a long time. Don't believe me? Then how did Jerry Robin qualify for Loretta's on a freaking 85 CR250. Almost 30 year old suspension must be inferior!

You've all but solved your own argument with your OWN statement: Bikes have always been dangerous, but bones and bodies have remained the same

Yes our bodies have remained the same. What advancements other than a Leatt and hats off have been made in terms of safety gear? None. That is where we need to start. I even posted this earlier in the week. Could easily be adapted to MX through body armor. Check it out:

http://www.alpinestars.com/tech-air

Check my other posts, said capable a bunch of times, is this the only thread on the issue?... And why is it convenient to leave off the second part of that statement ... The bikes are definitely faster and suspension more capable. Likewise traction is a billion times better on modern four strokes.

How are you gonna modify and moderate the engine traits to be safer? The AMA uses a fucking tape measure to look at swingarms... Couldn't organise a root in a brothel.

One kid qualifying for a race on an old bike doesn't prove jack about anything except he had the skill to do it, how does that apply to the masses... Should every kid run an old bike and see what happens? Are you really trying to say they aren't faster around a track now than they were!? Why the fuck did they change to them then?

And how do you suggest safety equipment is the answer in the over litigious environment you guys have over there? There's not even qualified privately funded, publicly available data out there, let alone any robust enough to stand up in a potential court case.

Simplest action is to regress the bikes ability... Funnily enough, it's not gonna be the first time it's happened in out sport or other motorsports.
Crush
Posts
21089
Joined
4/26/2009
Location
Sydney AU
3/26/2015 6:20am
So much fear about the manf's potentially stopping production of 450's. This same debate was had in the early 90s when the 500 class went the...
So much fear about the manf's potentially stopping production of 450's. This same debate was had in the early 90s when the 500 class went the way of the dinosaur.
Another redundant argument... They're in the business of selling bikes, they're of gonna walk away from it while there is money being made...
Premix
Posts
1505
Joined
1/5/2014
Location
AS US
3/26/2015 6:55am
Premix wrote:
You have yet to use the word "capable" anywhere in this thread except for after I've presented you with the above data. Traction is also a...
You have yet to use the word "capable" anywhere in this thread except for after I've presented you with the above data. Traction is also a variable and not a consistent measurement.

Motor characteristics and traits can be modified in the blink of an eye. Don't believe me? Go ride an early crf450 then a 2015 crf450 and tell me your thoughts on the engine braking. Furthermore, forget the engine braking, just add a slipper clutch and you've all but eliminated that. Suspension more advanced? From what 1970? Sure. Otherwise the majority of the technology in the suspension category has been around for a long time. Don't believe me? Then how did Jerry Robin qualify for Loretta's on a freaking 85 CR250. Almost 30 year old suspension must be inferior!

You've all but solved your own argument with your OWN statement: Bikes have always been dangerous, but bones and bodies have remained the same

Yes our bodies have remained the same. What advancements other than a Leatt and hats off have been made in terms of safety gear? None. That is where we need to start. I even posted this earlier in the week. Could easily be adapted to MX through body armor. Check it out:

http://www.alpinestars.com/tech-air

Crush wrote:
Check my other posts, said capable a bunch of times, is this the only thread on the issue?... And why is it convenient to leave off...
Check my other posts, said capable a bunch of times, is this the only thread on the issue?... And why is it convenient to leave off the second part of that statement ... The bikes are definitely faster and suspension more capable. Likewise traction is a billion times better on modern four strokes.

How are you gonna modify and moderate the engine traits to be safer? The AMA uses a fucking tape measure to look at swingarms... Couldn't organise a root in a brothel.

One kid qualifying for a race on an old bike doesn't prove jack about anything except he had the skill to do it, how does that apply to the masses... Should every kid run an old bike and see what happens? Are you really trying to say they aren't faster around a track now than they were!? Why the fuck did they change to them then?

And how do you suggest safety equipment is the answer in the over litigious environment you guys have over there? There's not even qualified privately funded, publicly available data out there, let alone any robust enough to stand up in a potential court case.

Simplest action is to regress the bikes ability... Funnily enough, it's not gonna be the first time it's happened in out sport or other motorsports.
Crush. I think you're having a small case of tunnel vision here. I appreciate the fact that you're passionate about our sport but I think your focus is misguided.

Once again traction is a variable and that's an opinion. Modification of engine traits is once again a very easy thing to modify. Ever ridden a two stroke with a large flywheel weight? Slipper clutch on a 4 stroke? Better yet put a slipper in one of the early redesigned R6 street bikes and take it for a rip and get back to me on that. If you think the OE's wouldn't consider this, you are sadly mistaken.

Jerry Robins case is the proof in the pudding. In the hand of a capable mechanic (I believe Chad Watts built Jerrys bike for Lorettas, correct me if I'm wrong here). Any bike can be made into a highly competitive machine. What you were trying to portray by showing the two races above is that the bikes were slower and couldn't clear the smaller obstacles. So yes, you were insinuating we should digress with our technology and make the bikes "slower". However Jerry proved bikes of 30 years yesteryear are still competitive with todays machines. The OEM's changed based on what the EPA regulated and what the public wanted. Case closed.

And this my friend is where you can pull your foot out of your mouth. I have worked for multiple large insurance companies as a data analyst for a good while now. If you think we don't have data on motorcycle accidents already, take this into consideration: none of the big 5 insurance companies offer collision coverage on any type of closed course motorcycle event. What's that tell you. If we really want to make an impact we would enforce each state to require helmet laws on the street. Then we would be making headway in reducing overall motorcycle deaths.
brocster
Posts
4528
Joined
6/9/2009
Location
Aliso Viejo, CA US
3/26/2015 6:57am
So much fear about the manf's potentially stopping production of 450's. This same debate was had in the early 90s when the 500 class went the...
So much fear about the manf's potentially stopping production of 450's. This same debate was had in the early 90s when the 500 class went the way of the dinosaur.
Crush wrote:
Another redundant argument... They're in the business of selling bikes, they're of gonna walk away from it while there is money being made...
think he was meaning the people not the manufacturers are the ones in fear. IMO the ones in fear of losing the 450 are the same ones that use it as a "crutch" for their riding ability but their ego won't let them admit it.

I ride a 450 BTW and also believe that it is too much fuggin bike, same as I thought of the 500's
Micahdogg
Posts
1263
Joined
1/3/2011
Location
US
3/26/2015 7:17am
What is so painful to me is that this progression could have been postponed for probably 10 years because the 2 strokes were perfectly suited for the job they had to do. This was all preventable.

It is exactly like someone waltzing into your garage and informing you that you had to use a briggs and stratton motor strapped to your weedwacker now. Nevermind that your weedwacker is doing just fine for the purpose it serves, but now you have a heavier engine to deal with, and it's underpowered. The solution obviously is to redesign the 4 stroke to make more power - so now you have a firebreathing weedwacker that is still heavier and obliterates the weeds. But it's also snapping shafts and can't keep string in it. So you have to visit your dealer way more often to pay lots of money in upgrades and tweaking your new (more expensive) fire breathing weedwacker. And when it works, sure, it works beautifully, but you have to hold it at half throttle or else the thing will torque out of your hands and break shafts.

At some point you have to ask yourself, what was wrong with my old weedwacker? Why have all the older more user friendly weedwackers been phased out for this thing? You had a tool that worked, but now you've been d*cking around with this "better' one for 10 years, spending countless dollars in upgrades just to kind of get back to where you used to be.
Suns_PSD
Posts
989
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Austin, TX US
3/26/2015 7:28am Edited Date/Time 3/26/2015 7:31am
People get hurt on dirtbikes because of: other riders, ruts, kickers, mechanical malfunctions, and poorly located immovable objects. That's most of it right there. Its not because of capable motorcycles or large jumps, that's just not what we see hurting people. 98% of the guys ranting about this stuff are just of an age where fast bikes and big jumps make them personally uncomfortable. But in my unofficial tally of devastating injuries, these are not the causes of the accidents.

Some people fall over in the tub and die and some people are going to endo over a 6' long tabletop and end up in a chair. That's just life unfortunately.

If you want to reduce injuries, pay attention to those 5 things I listed above and try to figure out how to reduce the risk caused by these factors. Fuck just getting the water trucks off the racing line and keeping riders from going backwards on the track would give us a 20% reduction in severe injuries! That's the easy stuff.

I do have a theory that 4 strokes are more prone to flicking a rider off at inopportune moments but it's just based on personal experiences of mine and I'm not willing to point a finger at the 'wet fart' machines just yet.
Premix
Posts
1505
Joined
1/5/2014
Location
AS US
3/26/2015 7:30am
Micahdogg wrote:
What is so painful to me is that this progression could have been postponed for probably 10 years because the 2 strokes were perfectly suited for...
What is so painful to me is that this progression could have been postponed for probably 10 years because the 2 strokes were perfectly suited for the job they had to do. This was all preventable.

It is exactly like someone waltzing into your garage and informing you that you had to use a briggs and stratton motor strapped to your weedwacker now. Nevermind that your weedwacker is doing just fine for the purpose it serves, but now you have a heavier engine to deal with, and it's underpowered. The solution obviously is to redesign the 4 stroke to make more power - so now you have a firebreathing weedwacker that is still heavier and obliterates the weeds. But it's also snapping shafts and can't keep string in it. So you have to visit your dealer way more often to pay lots of money in upgrades and tweaking your new (more expensive) fire breathing weedwacker. And when it works, sure, it works beautifully, but you have to hold it at half throttle or else the thing will torque out of your hands and break shafts.

At some point you have to ask yourself, what was wrong with my old weedwacker? Why have all the older more user friendly weedwackers been phased out for this thing? You had a tool that worked, but now you've been d*cking around with this "better' one for 10 years, spending countless dollars in upgrades just to kind of get back to where you used to be.
I actually have a Makita 4 stroke weed eater for the last 4 years and it's by far superior to the old Husqvarna 2 stroke I used to have. Weighs the same, vibrates less, same performance, I don't have to mix gas and I've done ZERO maintenance to it. Although I do miss running my Klotz premix in my old Husky. Cool
Crush
Posts
21089
Joined
4/26/2009
Location
Sydney AU
3/26/2015 7:34am
So much fear about the manf's potentially stopping production of 450's. This same debate was had in the early 90s when the 500 class went the...
So much fear about the manf's potentially stopping production of 450's. This same debate was had in the early 90s when the 500 class went the way of the dinosaur.
Crush wrote:
Another redundant argument... They're in the business of selling bikes, they're of gonna walk away from it while there is money being made...
brocster wrote:
think he was meaning the people not the manufacturers are the ones in fear. IMO the ones in fear of losing the 450 are the same...
think he was meaning the people not the manufacturers are the ones in fear. IMO the ones in fear of losing the 450 are the same ones that use it as a "crutch" for their riding ability but their ego won't let them admit it.

I ride a 450 BTW and also believe that it is too much fuggin bike, same as I thought of the 500's
Yeah I was agreeing it's silly...
cslacker
Posts
376
Joined
6/6/2014
Location
Glendale, AZ US
3/26/2015 7:35am Edited Date/Time 3/26/2015 7:47am
Crush wrote:
Stock YZ250F 40 HP?

Really?
Premix wrote:
[img]https://p.vitalmx.com/photos/forums/2015/03/25/85117/s1200_hp_shootout.jpg[/img]


Peak hp is not a good measurement of speed and ease of riding. It is how easy the 250f's go fast that might be a problem.

Since you're keen on using MXA for info here is some more from them regarding the bike you are comparing:

A: Many modern motocross bikes are fast in spite of their riders’ ham-fisted riding. You can just sit on them, twist the throttle and run out of talent before you run out of speed. Not so with a 2014 KTM 150SX. It only goes fast if you ride it fast. If you sit on a 150SX like a lump of coal and expect it to turn you into a diamond, you will have a long wait.

Unlike with a four-stroke, you have to generate speed from a two-stroke by riding like a spree-killer. Turn it on, never shut it off, reload fast and take no prisoners. If both hands aren’t moving as fast as Liberace’s on the keyboard and you aren’t moving your body like a soap opera actress on “Dancing With the Stars,” you aren’t riding it right.

Here’s a clue. If you can’t hear the engine screaming, you aren’t going fast. It takes an all-out commitment to race a 150SX. That means that it’s not the proper weapon for the old, fat, lazy, uncoordinated, timid or maladroit. It is not an axe that you swing blindly; it is a scalpel.

BobPA
Posts
8329
Joined
10/31/2013
Location
PA US
3/26/2015 7:38am
wsc96 wrote:
This is a hot topic and rightfully so. Not to say that nothing should be done before we have it, but until we have the supporting...
This is a hot topic and rightfully so.

Not to say that nothing should be done before we have it, but until we have the supporting data we don't know if it is a problem of displacement, safety gear, tracks etc and all we can do is speculate and share ideas. It's not likely the same causes for pros versus amateurs versus weekend warriors that accounts for the serious injuries.

Regarding indoor supercross tracks; perhaps governing a maximum average speed could be the answer, we know how long each track is and how long lap times are and so we could adjust obstacles (add wall jumps and sand sections etc after press day) to ensure average speed per lap is within a safer range.
A slower average speed will do nothing. If you have a Supercross track with a 50 second lap time, and you ad wall jumps and bring it up into the 1 minute range, how does that make the rhythms or the whoops safer?
Premix
Posts
1505
Joined
1/5/2014
Location
AS US
3/26/2015 7:44am
Crush wrote:
Stock YZ250F 40 HP?

Really?
Premix wrote:
[img]https://p.vitalmx.com/photos/forums/2015/03/25/85117/s1200_hp_shootout.jpg[/img]


cslacker wrote:
Peak hp is not a good measurement of speed and ease of riding. It is how easy the 250f's go fast that might be a problem...
Peak hp is not a good measurement of speed and ease of riding. It is how easy the 250f's go fast that might be a problem.

Since you're keen on using MXA for info here is some more from them regarding the bike you are comparing:

A: Many modern motocross bikes are fast in spite of their riders’ ham-fisted riding. You can just sit on them, twist the throttle and run out of talent before you run out of speed. Not so with a 2014 KTM 150SX. It only goes fast if you ride it fast. If you sit on a 150SX like a lump of coal and expect it to turn you into a diamond, you will have a long wait.

Unlike with a four-stroke, you have to generate speed from a two-stroke by riding like a spree-killer. Turn it on, never shut it off, reload fast and take no prisoners. If both hands aren’t moving as fast as Liberace’s on the keyboard and you aren’t moving your body like a soap opera actress on “Dancing With the Stars,” you aren’t riding it right.

Here’s a clue. If you can’t hear the engine screaming, you aren’t going fast. It takes an all-out commitment to race a 150SX. That means that it’s not the proper weapon for the old, fat, lazy, uncoordinated, timid or maladroit. It is not an axe that you swing blindly; it is a scalpel.

So you're insinuating that some of the top amateur racers (which I think most can agree is where we are having most of our injury and death occurrences) couldn't ride a 150 as fast as a 250F?
Tumblin
Posts
1206
Joined
7/27/2011
Location
Jacksonville, OR US
3/26/2015 7:44am
I've made my thoughts known on the crime of eliminating 125's from competition. And don't come back here and tell me they're not eliminated, because they had, as soon as the 250f's rolled onto the same start pad. Regardless, here we are and although I haven't gone through all of these pages, let me say I'm very impressed with the mood and the maturity of discussion on this page. I'm sure when I have time to read them all...and I will...and I'll also find some of our classic Vitards. But cheers to our community, because we need this.
One point that may have been discussed, but I want to emphasize with is data collection. Our sport, specifically on the local, armature level was never larger than when I began racing in the early 70's into the early 90's. when you count up laps made across the world, in my mind we've fucked our sport and many lives totally devastated with this so called "progression".
I believe with out a doubt...and in my not so humble opinion -the difference in traumatic injury and also death in porportion to laps is off the charts today from our hay day.
So glad my son never caught the bug, but wish he had what I had in my early years.
Suns_PSD
Posts
989
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Austin, TX US
3/26/2015 7:45am
Suns_PSD wrote:
People get hurt on dirtbikes because of: [b]other riders, ruts, kickers, mechanical malfunctions, and poorly located immovable objects[/b]. That's most of it right there. Its not...
People get hurt on dirtbikes because of: other riders, ruts, kickers, mechanical malfunctions, and poorly located immovable objects. That's most of it right there. Its not because of capable motorcycles or large jumps, that's just not what we see hurting people. 98% of the guys ranting about this stuff are just of an age where fast bikes and big jumps make them personally uncomfortable. But in my unofficial tally of devastating injuries, these are not the causes of the accidents.

Some people fall over in the tub and die and some people are going to endo over a 6' long tabletop and end up in a chair. That's just life unfortunately.

If you want to reduce injuries, pay attention to those 5 things I listed above and try to figure out how to reduce the risk caused by these factors. Fuck just getting the water trucks off the racing line and keeping riders from going backwards on the track would give us a 20% reduction in severe injuries! That's the easy stuff.

I do have a theory that 4 strokes are more prone to flicking a rider off at inopportune moments but it's just based on personal experiences of mine and I'm not willing to point a finger at the 'wet fart' machines just yet.
And I need to add racing to my list. Racing is an all out event. Just riding at 95% decreases your accidents 20 fold. Your kid can ride and have a great experience with the family and get some exercise, if he just rides to have fun.

Racing is a special thrill, that comes with special risks. Choose wisely.
Crush
Posts
21089
Joined
4/26/2009
Location
Sydney AU
3/26/2015 7:46am Edited Date/Time 3/26/2015 8:01am
Premix wrote:
You have yet to use the word "capable" anywhere in this thread except for after I've presented you with the above data. Traction is also a...
You have yet to use the word "capable" anywhere in this thread except for after I've presented you with the above data. Traction is also a variable and not a consistent measurement.

Motor characteristics and traits can be modified in the blink of an eye. Don't believe me? Go ride an early crf450 then a 2015 crf450 and tell me your thoughts on the engine braking. Furthermore, forget the engine braking, just add a slipper clutch and you've all but eliminated that. Suspension more advanced? From what 1970? Sure. Otherwise the majority of the technology in the suspension category has been around for a long time. Don't believe me? Then how did Jerry Robin qualify for Loretta's on a freaking 85 CR250. Almost 30 year old suspension must be inferior!

You've all but solved your own argument with your OWN statement: Bikes have always been dangerous, but bones and bodies have remained the same

Yes our bodies have remained the same. What advancements other than a Leatt and hats off have been made in terms of safety gear? None. That is where we need to start. I even posted this earlier in the week. Could easily be adapted to MX through body armor. Check it out:

http://www.alpinestars.com/tech-air

Crush wrote:
Check my other posts, said capable a bunch of times, is this the only thread on the issue?... And why is it convenient to leave off...
Check my other posts, said capable a bunch of times, is this the only thread on the issue?... And why is it convenient to leave off the second part of that statement ... The bikes are definitely faster and suspension more capable. Likewise traction is a billion times better on modern four strokes.

How are you gonna modify and moderate the engine traits to be safer? The AMA uses a fucking tape measure to look at swingarms... Couldn't organise a root in a brothel.

One kid qualifying for a race on an old bike doesn't prove jack about anything except he had the skill to do it, how does that apply to the masses... Should every kid run an old bike and see what happens? Are you really trying to say they aren't faster around a track now than they were!? Why the fuck did they change to them then?

And how do you suggest safety equipment is the answer in the over litigious environment you guys have over there? There's not even qualified privately funded, publicly available data out there, let alone any robust enough to stand up in a potential court case.

Simplest action is to regress the bikes ability... Funnily enough, it's not gonna be the first time it's happened in out sport or other motorsports.
Premix wrote:
Crush. I think you're having a small case of tunnel vision here. I appreciate the fact that you're passionate about our sport but I think your...
Crush. I think you're having a small case of tunnel vision here. I appreciate the fact that you're passionate about our sport but I think your focus is misguided.

Once again traction is a variable and that's an opinion. Modification of engine traits is once again a very easy thing to modify. Ever ridden a two stroke with a large flywheel weight? Slipper clutch on a 4 stroke? Better yet put a slipper in one of the early redesigned R6 street bikes and take it for a rip and get back to me on that. If you think the OE's wouldn't consider this, you are sadly mistaken.

Jerry Robins case is the proof in the pudding. In the hand of a capable mechanic (I believe Chad Watts built Jerrys bike for Lorettas, correct me if I'm wrong here). Any bike can be made into a highly competitive machine. What you were trying to portray by showing the two races above is that the bikes were slower and couldn't clear the smaller obstacles. So yes, you were insinuating we should digress with our technology and make the bikes "slower". However Jerry proved bikes of 30 years yesteryear are still competitive with todays machines. The OEM's changed based on what the EPA regulated and what the public wanted. Case closed.

And this my friend is where you can pull your foot out of your mouth. I have worked for multiple large insurance companies as a data analyst for a good while now. If you think we don't have data on motorcycle accidents already, take this into consideration: none of the big 5 insurance companies offer collision coverage on any type of closed course motorcycle event. What's that tell you. If we really want to make an impact we would enforce each state to require helmet laws on the street. Then we would be making headway in reducing overall motorcycle deaths.
The oe's are in the business of making and selling the fastest bikes they possibly can given the main parameter of displacement.

If you tell them they need a universal heavy flywheel, they'll come up with different mapping and gearing, blah blah blah. If you tell them they can't have more than X-horsepower, (Which again, the AMA couldn't pour tea from a teapot) they'd work out a way to have it at X for testing and Y for racing (see sound testing)

The base issue, and the one that needs to be addressed is the bikes are fast as fuck and have suspension/handling that far outstretches the ability of the human body to deal with any possible miscalculations. Again. It's always been the case, but it's worse now than it had been for a long long long time.

And since you're in insurance, you'd surely know that! The only thing what you said about insurance tells me is that someone said it's not viable financially... Cause that's what insurance companies are in the business of, making money. If you guys have data, that's great, good for you. No one else does. It doesn't do dick for the safety of anyone else or help the companies making the equipment... and that still doesn't address anything to do with liability, which is IMPOSSIBLE to solve in the USA... Coffee Cup!

And again, using the Robin example is silly. It's one riders skill, and now you're looking at me posting SX videos and him qualifying at a regional at Millville... an outdoor sand track. He went great, but I bet RJ went faster... but are we judging how safe the bikes are/were by a few exceptions or by common sense that the bikes have progressed in 20 years... OH and every pro from RJ to RC saying they have... I mean... hey... KW cleared a 110feet uphill triple on a bultaco, they must be ready for A1 2016. Let's all buy one!

Are you really trying to suggest the bikes aren't an issue?
Crush
Posts
21089
Joined
4/26/2009
Location
Sydney AU
3/26/2015 7:47am
Apologies for long quote, forgot to press the button.
cslacker
Posts
376
Joined
6/6/2014
Location
Glendale, AZ US
3/26/2015 7:51am
Premix wrote:
So you're insinuating that some of the top amateur racers (which I think most can agree is where we are having most of our injury and...
So you're insinuating that some of the top amateur racers (which I think most can agree is where we are having most of our injury and death occurrences) couldn't ride a 150 as fast as a 250F?
Some, maybe... Most, no...

Post a reply to: KDub..."450's have to go".

The Latest