Are 450's open class bikes, or 2 stroke 250 replacements in your opinion?

gt80rider
Posts
7198
Joined
4/19/2008
Location
Boulder, CO, USA
2/7/2017 10:15am
Torque.. that's what makes it an open classer... While I don't own a 450, I ride them from time to time... A few weeks ago I went into a relatively tight corner... For some reason I thought I was in second, but I was actually in third... At apex I quickly rolled on the throttle and freakn rocketed out of the corner... My 250 smoker could never in a million years have done that.... oh and of course I was over jumping the sh!t out of everything, even with basically no run up...
kott0n
Posts
673
Joined
10/4/2016
Location
Vancouver, WA, USA
2/7/2017 10:34am
450s are closer to the old 500's in terms of power. stock they are pushing 55-57 hp and the old 500's were about the same. a...
450s are closer to the old 500's in terms of power. stock they are pushing 55-57 hp and the old 500's were about the same.

a yz250 puts out 46 hp. and a ktm 250f is pushing 44hp.

basically the open class came back in exchange for the 125's
Except totally different as they take more than twice as many RPM's to obtain.

Potts
Posts
188
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
2/7/2017 11:09am
This is simple... when the 400cc four strokes were introduced by Yamaha their contention was a four stroke could not make as much power as the 250cc two stroke. This was the case back in the early 2000's but not now. MXA has an article currently on their web site comparing a 250cc two stroke with a 250cc four stroke and guess what... they make the same horsepower.

So the world we are living in today is the 450's are the new open class.
doghouse
Posts
548
Joined
1/7/2017
Location
Virginia Beach, VA, USA
2/7/2017 11:35am
Potts wrote:
This is simple... when the 400cc four strokes were introduced by Yamaha their contention was a four stroke could not make as much power as the...
This is simple... when the 400cc four strokes were introduced by Yamaha their contention was a four stroke could not make as much power as the 250cc two stroke. This was the case back in the early 2000's but not now. MXA has an article currently on their web site comparing a 250cc two stroke with a 250cc four stroke and guess what... they make the same horsepower.

So the world we are living in today is the 450's are the new open class.
The 450's are the 450 class. There is no "open" class.

The Shop

Forty
Posts
3084
Joined
7/27/2009
Location
Saint Paul, MN, USA
2/7/2017 12:23pm
I'd consider the current 450 every bit an open bike.
Potts
Posts
188
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
2/7/2017 2:54pm
Potts wrote:
This is simple... when the 400cc four strokes were introduced by Yamaha their contention was a four stroke could not make as much power as the...
This is simple... when the 400cc four strokes were introduced by Yamaha their contention was a four stroke could not make as much power as the 250cc two stroke. This was the case back in the early 2000's but not now. MXA has an article currently on their web site comparing a 250cc two stroke with a 250cc four stroke and guess what... they make the same horsepower.

So the world we are living in today is the 450's are the new open class.
doghouse wrote:
The 450's are the 450 class. There is no "open" class.
It was an expression! The point is the 450cc class, based on horsepower, replaced the 500 two stroke class (Open Class) and the 250 class, again based on horsepower, is still the 250 class (since two strokes and four strokes are making the same power.

Like someone said above, the 125 class is gone!

Ted722
Posts
4575
Joined
9/21/2011
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
2/7/2017 5:13pm
Been lucky enough to race a 125, 250, 327, and 500 2-stroke and race a 250/450 4-stroke. My idea of an open bike is that 60hp CR500 monster. I would never confuse a 450 with a 500 2-stroke. Somewhere, I read David Bailey saying the 450 is a "rideable" 500. That seems about right. The torque and violence are less on a 450, but there's still so much more than a 250 2-stroke. My biggest take away was the amount of traction I could get on a 450, especially on hard pack.

So, in answer to your question, the 450 is it's own bike (class) that took 250 and 500 2-strokes with it in its wake. I don't care what the rule book says or if the mfg. no longer produces one. 250 2-strokes became better and better in the 90's and less riders chose the 500's. 4-strokes came around and all but eliminated the 500's and little by little you'd see less and less 250 2-strokes in the mid-2000's.

Your Suzuki's an amazing bike. Enjoy it, but respect it!
kmp1219
Posts
278
Joined
7/27/2016
Location
Carmel, IN, USA
2/7/2017 5:35pm
The biggest difference for me is that the 4 stroke is easier to ride but it also makes me a lazier rider.

On a 2 stroke I'm all over the gearbox, as you have to be if you want to get the most out of your bike. With the 4 stroke you can finish an entire race and only use 3 gears.

As a result I have to remind myself to stay aggressive on the 4 stroke because before you realize it you'll be relying on the bike way too much and your lines, corners and passes become lazy. The bike puts so much power on the ground that it's tempting to ride the engine brake into a rut and stomp on the throttle through the turn down a straight away.

With the 2 stroke I'm forced to carry as much momentum into the corners as possible, I have to pay attention to my lines and I have to rev the absolute shit out of the thing to keep it in the power band.

At my best, I'm faster on a 4 stroke, as most guys are. But with that said, a 2 stroke forces me to be a better, more cerebral rider. You'll do a lot more work on the 2 stroke to go fast, but you'll also be more prone to riding lazy on the 4 stroke, especially through corners.

Think about when you were on an 80 and had to make a pass, you really had to choose your spots and latch onto the guy in front of you to either wait for him to make a mistake or to leave the door open in a corner. Even then, it was hard as hell to make a pass stick if you're taking the inside line. One mistake in a rhythm section and you're pretty much rolling every jump into the next turn because you've lost all of your momentum. The 4 stroke effectively covers up all of these challenges.

This is why you see a lot more passes to the inside compared to the McGrath days where a rider would charge for 10 laps on the leader's fender before making a move.

Sorry for the novel.
65
Posts
6
Joined
7/12/2016
Location
Camp Douglas, WI, USA
2/7/2017 7:26pm Edited Date/Time 2/7/2017 7:34pm
resetjet wrote:
My 250f is close to a 250. 450 no contest.
i doubt that
at the track my cr250r runs down 250f's like its nothing, the may be similar in hp but that ends right there.
kott0n
Posts
673
Joined
10/4/2016
Location
Vancouver, WA, USA
2/7/2017 8:13pm

Since when are motors equal when they make the same HP... but one does it at 6k rpm and one at 12k?
That instant rush is not replaceable.

Also, has no one seen the 90hp CR500 based motor built by a regular guy?
jeffro503
Posts
27645
Joined
7/22/2007
Location
St Helens, OR, USA
2/7/2017 8:24pm
Joe , what I was trying to say , it's hard to put into words. But Pat Foster does a pretty good job on explaining exactly what I have been feeling these last few years on 450's. The whole video is pretty dang good for a bike review , but if you start at 4:45 of this video , Pat explains it all pretty well.

Ted722
Posts
4575
Joined
9/21/2011
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
2/7/2017 8:31pm
jeffro503 wrote:
Joe , what I was trying to say , it's hard to put into words. But Pat Foster does a pretty good job on explaining exactly...
Joe , what I was trying to say , it's hard to put into words. But Pat Foster does a pretty good job on explaining exactly what I have been feeling these last few years on 450's. The whole video is pretty dang good for a bike review , but if you start at 4:45 of this video , Pat explains it all pretty well.

Pat did a great job of "selling" me on my '06 RM250. The '17 TC250 sounds likes a great bike and he does a great job of explaining the difference from a 4-Stroke.
kott0n
Posts
673
Joined
10/4/2016
Location
Vancouver, WA, USA
2/7/2017 10:08pm
jeffro503 wrote:
Joe , what I was trying to say , it's hard to put into words. But Pat Foster does a pretty good job on explaining exactly...
Joe , what I was trying to say , it's hard to put into words. But Pat Foster does a pretty good job on explaining exactly what I have been feeling these last few years on 450's. The whole video is pretty dang good for a bike review , but if you start at 4:45 of this video , Pat explains it all pretty well.

God, that sounds healthy.
jeffro503
Posts
27645
Joined
7/22/2007
Location
St Helens, OR, USA
2/7/2017 10:14pm
kott0n wrote:
God, that sounds healthy.
Yes it does....and God , I can not wait to get mine!! About 5 more weeks!
haydos25
Posts
1688
Joined
8/4/2010
Location
Sydney, AU
2/8/2017 12:04am
kott0n wrote:
Since when are motors equal when they make the same HP... but one does it at 6k rpm and one at 12k? That instant rush is...

Since when are motors equal when they make the same HP... but one does it at 6k rpm and one at 12k?
That instant rush is not replaceable.

Also, has no one seen the 90hp CR500 based motor built by a regular guy?
Since when has rpm mattered? Are F1 engines not impressive because they spin at 18000rpm?

450's are no longer a replacement for 250 2 strokes though, they've gone well past that. 4 strokes do everything 2 strokes do but easier these days. Yes maybe to easy and out the box they are already probably to much for the average guy.

As for the OP, his new 450 is faster than his 250 and anybody who's spent any decent amount of time on a bike would agree.

Ps. I only own 2 strokes at present so I'm not against them, I'm just realistic
kott0n
Posts
673
Joined
10/4/2016
Location
Vancouver, WA, USA
2/8/2017 6:09am
kott0n wrote:
Since when are motors equal when they make the same HP... but one does it at 6k rpm and one at 12k? That instant rush is...

Since when are motors equal when they make the same HP... but one does it at 6k rpm and one at 12k?
That instant rush is not replaceable.

Also, has no one seen the 90hp CR500 based motor built by a regular guy?
haydos25 wrote:
Since when has rpm mattered? Are F1 engines not impressive because they spin at 18000rpm? 450's are no longer a replacement for 250 2 strokes though...
Since when has rpm mattered? Are F1 engines not impressive because they spin at 18000rpm?

450's are no longer a replacement for 250 2 strokes though, they've gone well past that. 4 strokes do everything 2 strokes do but easier these days. Yes maybe to easy and out the box they are already probably to much for the average guy.

As for the OP, his new 450 is faster than his 250 and anybody who's spent any decent amount of time on a bike would agree.

Ps. I only own 2 strokes at present so I'm not against them, I'm just realistic
An 18k rpm engine sounds impressive but looks LACKLUSTER next to a motor producing same stats but at 9k RPM.

F1 motors are only built to spin 18k because of rules not because its the best motor layout.
haydos25
Posts
1688
Joined
8/4/2010
Location
Sydney, AU
2/8/2017 10:24am
kott0n wrote:
An 18k rpm engine sounds impressive but looks LACKLUSTER next to a motor producing same stats but at 9k RPM. F1 motors are only built to...
An 18k rpm engine sounds impressive but looks LACKLUSTER next to a motor producing same stats but at 9k RPM.

F1 motors are only built to spin 18k because of rules not because its the best motor layout.
What is the best motor layout?

To each his own, i'm impressed by the ability of an engine to rev that high and hold together. Spin your 9000rpm engine to 18k and see what happens.

Different strokes for different folks I guess
BobPA
Posts
8334
Joined
10/31/2013
Location
USA
2/8/2017 10:48am Edited Date/Time 2/8/2017 10:51am
kott0n wrote:
An 18k rpm engine sounds impressive but looks LACKLUSTER next to a motor producing same stats but at 9k RPM. F1 motors are only built to...
An 18k rpm engine sounds impressive but looks LACKLUSTER next to a motor producing same stats but at 9k RPM.

F1 motors are only built to spin 18k because of rules not because its the best motor layout.
Now you are just arguing for the sake of arguing. Show me an engine layout, at 2.4 liters, that would produce 700+ HP, naturally aspirated, and turn only 9k RPMS.....it is not possible.

I used 2.4 liters because that it what the last generation formula 1 cars used
2/8/2017 10:51am Edited Date/Time 2/8/2017 10:53am
I've ridden KX500 and KX450-F quite a bit. 450's make open class power. They weigh about the same as the older open bikes. 450 is a modern "open" class that has nothing in common with the 250 class from before.

Since 250-F's make around the same HP as older 250 two strokes, it's basically the new "old" 250 class.

We gained an open bike at the expense of 125 class. Maybe all the injuries are worth it. I dunno.
kott0n
Posts
673
Joined
10/4/2016
Location
Vancouver, WA, USA
2/8/2017 11:03am
Except your forgetting they only used 2.4l DUE TO RULES. So yes, they made an awesome motor work within the rules but they had to rev it stupid high. They could of used more capacity and less revs... but mah rules.

The rules limited the engine design, actually similar to now. They won't let equal displacement race so 2 stroke development is stagnant.

TXDirt
Posts
7786
Joined
7/29/2015
Location
Plano, TX, USA
2/8/2017 11:11am
The bikes are not the same but the way you ride them is similar so that's why you might think the bikes are the same. Hope that make sense.

You could rip wide open everywhere banging gears on a 125 two stroke. Just slamming everything. The 250 two stroke on the other hand needed to be finessed a lot more. Keep it in the sweet spot of the RPM range so as not to over rev it so you could create maximum power. Was a smoother ride because it weighed more, and you just had to ride it with more technique. That's why a lot of great 125 riders never transitioned well to the 250's. And there are a lot of riders who were not great on 125's but excelled on 250's because it fit their riding style better.
kott0n
Posts
673
Joined
10/4/2016
Location
Vancouver, WA, USA
2/8/2017 11:14am
Not to mention 2 strokes were still winning podiums up until the exact moment the Factories forced riders onto 4 strokes...
BobPA
Posts
8334
Joined
10/31/2013
Location
USA
2/8/2017 12:06pm Edited Date/Time 2/8/2017 12:09pm
kott0n wrote:
Except your forgetting they only used 2.4l DUE TO RULES. So yes, they made an awesome motor work within the rules but they had to rev...
Except your forgetting they only used 2.4l DUE TO RULES. So yes, they made an awesome motor work within the rules but they had to rev it stupid high. They could of used more capacity and less revs... but mah rules.

The rules limited the engine design, actually similar to now. They won't let equal displacement race so 2 stroke development is stagnant.

I am having trouble understanding your argument. Do you just not like big RPM? What is so appealing if a larger engine producing an equal power at lower RPM? I'm not being a dick, I just do not understand what you are getting at.

F1 limits the displacement to limit speed. Of course they could make more power with more displacement. But they are trying to not kill people
haydos25
Posts
1688
Joined
8/4/2010
Location
Sydney, AU
2/8/2017 12:07pm
kott0n wrote:
Not to mention 2 strokes were still winning podiums up until the exact moment the Factories forced riders onto 4 strokes...
That's twisting history to suit your agenda I would say.

2 strokes were on podiums until the best riders stopped riding them. I believe the best riders stopped riding them when they stopped becoming competitive at a professional level. You believe in the manufacturer conspiracy if you like.
Skidaddle
Posts
1707
Joined
7/19/2016
Location
Woodland, CA, USA
2/8/2017 12:21pm Edited Date/Time 2/8/2017 12:23pm
kott0n wrote:
An 18k rpm engine sounds impressive but looks LACKLUSTER next to a motor producing same stats but at 9k RPM. F1 motors are only built to...
An 18k rpm engine sounds impressive but looks LACKLUSTER next to a motor producing same stats but at 9k RPM.

F1 motors are only built to spin 18k because of rules not because its the best motor layout.
BobPA wrote:
Now you are just arguing for the sake of arguing. Show me an engine layout, at 2.4 liters, that would produce 700+ HP, naturally aspirated, and...
Now you are just arguing for the sake of arguing. Show me an engine layout, at 2.4 liters, that would produce 700+ HP, naturally aspirated, and turn only 9k RPMS.....it is not possible.

I used 2.4 liters because that it what the last generation formula 1 cars used
You can get about 400 at 9K with a 2 stroke and 2.4 or 2.5 Liters.
And thats mostly OEM with a few mods. More if you wanted to spend more dough.
kott0n
Posts
673
Joined
10/4/2016
Location
Vancouver, WA, USA
2/8/2017 12:28pm
kott0n wrote:
Except your forgetting they only used 2.4l DUE TO RULES. So yes, they made an awesome motor work within the rules but they had to rev...
Except your forgetting they only used 2.4l DUE TO RULES. So yes, they made an awesome motor work within the rules but they had to rev it stupid high. They could of used more capacity and less revs... but mah rules.

The rules limited the engine design, actually similar to now. They won't let equal displacement race so 2 stroke development is stagnant.

BobPA wrote:
I am having trouble understanding your argument. Do you just not like big RPM? What is so appealing if a larger engine producing an equal power...
I am having trouble understanding your argument. Do you just not like big RPM? What is so appealing if a larger engine producing an equal power at lower RPM? I'm not being a dick, I just do not understand what you are getting at.

F1 limits the displacement to limit speed. Of course they could make more power with more displacement. But they are trying to not kill people
I'm obviously not against high rpms, lol.

I'm saying the open bikes of before are totally different animals because they produce the same power in half the rpm curve.

Its like the Honda crowd over here. No understanding of how significant power differences at different rpm translates to a different experience.

You brought up f1. Yeah f1 evolved to 18k rpm engines because of the rules, not because it makes sense from an engine standpoint.
scooter5002
Posts
4748
Joined
6/6/2010
Location
Nanton Alberta, CA
2/8/2017 12:28pm
Having experience on all 3 bikes, I'd say it's a complex question. Why? 500's have monster bottom end, making them more difficult to ride. A 250 isn't even in the same ballpark, and the 450's just provide a different type of power. As much at peak, or more, as a 500, but no intimidating thrust. Go ride both on hardpack, and let me know what you think.
BobPA
Posts
8334
Joined
10/31/2013
Location
USA
2/8/2017 12:30pm
Skidaddle wrote:
You can get about 400 at 9K with a 2 stroke and 2.4 or 2.5 Liters. And thats mostly OEM with a few mods. More if...
You can get about 400 at 9K with a 2 stroke and 2.4 or 2.5 Liters.
And thats mostly OEM with a few mods. More if you wanted to spend more dough.
I assume you are talking about outboards?
BobPA
Posts
8334
Joined
10/31/2013
Location
USA
2/8/2017 12:32pm
kott0n wrote:
I'm obviously not against high rpms, lol. I'm saying the open bikes of before are totally different animals because they produce the same power in half...
I'm obviously not against high rpms, lol.

I'm saying the open bikes of before are totally different animals because they produce the same power in half the rpm curve.

Its like the Honda crowd over here. No understanding of how significant power differences at different rpm translates to a different experience.

You brought up f1. Yeah f1 evolved to 18k rpm engines because of the rules, not because it makes sense from an engine standpoint.
Ohhh no I get it lol
Skidaddle
Posts
1707
Joined
7/19/2016
Location
Woodland, CA, USA
2/8/2017 12:33pm
Yes, and the 2.0 Liter Merc F1 engine can get 300 stock at less than 10K. 400 also if you do some work.

Post a reply to: Are 450's open class bikes, or 2 stroke 250 replacements in your opinion?

The Latest