Forum QNA: 2018 Vital MX 450 Shootout

mikec265 wrote:

So the KTM and Husky like inside lines now. How much effort does it take to make them lean over in the turns compared to a...

So the KTM and Husky like inside lines now.
How much effort does it take to make them lean over in the turns compared to a Suzuki?

I have been a hardcore RM/RMZ guy for 16 years because of the turning ability. Do any of the new bikes turn enough like a Suzuki to make a guy like me happy to switch?

At 6ft 1in 215 I keep my bikes stock except bars, seats, spring rates, and valving.

JWACK wrote:

I'm a Suzuki handling fan myself. I tried to buy an 18 rmz but ended up walking out of the dealership after waiting an hour for...

I'm a Suzuki handling fan myself. I tried to buy an 18 rmz but ended up walking out of the dealership after waiting an hour for a price. They never called back either. Salesman must make too much money I guess.! Anyways I'm coming off a 16 ktm and to answer your question, no they don't turn like a Suzuki. They turn good but not that good! I ended up with the 18 Honda and while I don't think it has the cut in that a Suzuki has, it has excellent front-end "feel" and goes where you look very easy.
It does not suck one bit.

racingfortheson wrote:

2 things 1st, all the shootouts are done out west. The bikes act completely different in the great dirt we has here in Texas or the...

2 things
1st, all the shootouts are done out west. The bikes act completely different in the great dirt we has here in Texas or the sand. Even if you ride different SoCal tracks, they aren't like here or out east.

2nd, me all know the tires make such a difference and they use what ever tire they get the best deal on. Any rider who cares enough to read a shootout, is ditching the stock tires, asap. Why not run they on the same tires?

ML512 wrote:

As much as I'd like to test somewhere East, that's insanely out of our budget...like, not do-able. As for tires, it's just like bars, grips, etc...we...

As much as I'd like to test somewhere East, that's insanely out of our budget...like, not do-able.

As for tires, it's just like bars, grips, etc...we test the bikes stock. If a manufacturer steps up like KTM did a few years ago, going from MX52s to MX32s then they're rewarded with better results. Tire decisions like that actually cost the OEMs more money, so I see it as them trying to do a better job. Personally, I always run the stock tires until they're dead, especially if they're decent tires. Plenty of people actually run the bikes in stock trim and upgrade as components wear out. I'd say 90% of my riding buddies run their stock tires until they wear out.

ML512 wrote:

Sure, let's just make the video super confusing by being vague about something we have no info about. The article explains the tracks and conditions, the...

Sure, let's just make the video super confusing by being vague about something we have no info about.

The article explains the tracks and conditions, the video is meant to be a quick overview of the results and if people want to learn more they can hit up the article.

ML512 wrote:

Also, unless your riding straight clay or sand, the handling characteristics of the bikes don't differ that much from what we experience in the mornings at...

Also, unless your riding straight clay or sand, the handling characteristics of the bikes don't differ that much from what we experience in the mornings at Zaca or Pala, before it degrades. The conditions we test in are some of the most common soils I've experienced riding in about 12 different countries so far.

theycallmeebryan wrote:

Wow, what an impressive read. As a database and software developer by trade, I appreciate the attention to detail. Great job guys. I'm curious what makes...

Wow, what an impressive read. As a database and software developer by trade, I appreciate the attention to detail. Great job guys.

I'm curious what makes the AER 48 so much better than the SFF TAC in your opinion? From what i gathered from the read, everyone who rode the 17 KX450 agreed that the "settings" (I'm guessing they changed the valving) on the 18 were better. Is the added setup complexity of the SFF TAC (having to set/adjust 3 chambers vs 1 on the AER) the problem? If you were to fit a set of AER48's on the KX450f, would the bike be that much better? If you put the SFF TAC on the KTM, would it be that much worse? If the KX450F had the Showa fork used on the Suzuki, would it have been ranked much higher?

Also, i'm curious about your opinion on how much better the Kawi and Suzuki would have ranked had they had a magic button. It was mentioned a few times by various testers, but you only spend a second or two kicking the bike, and then you usually never worry about it again until you come back to the pits.

ML512 wrote:

AER and SFF TAC share a main design, they are a separate function fork with air on on side and valving on the other. The main...

AER and SFF TAC share a main design, they are a separate function fork with air on on side and valving on the other.

The main difference is the air side... AER and Showa both use positive and negative/balance air chambers, while Showa also uses a third chamber (outer pressure).

For AER, you only have one valve because the positive and negative/balance chambers are separate, but connected by a small bleed when the forks are full extended. (most people call positive and negative chambers "inner and TAC" on Showa)

With this nifty feature, the AER forks constantly balance their air pressure between the positive and negative multiple times per lap.

The Showa TAC struggles because as the temperature rises during action, the positive and negative build...but because they have different volumes (they aren't the same size chamber) they build at different rates of pressure. Say one chamber goes up four PSI during a moto while the other climbs eight PSI. This really changes not only the overall stiffness of the fork but also the action as the two chambers effect each other differently when the pressure spread is changed.

AER faces the same heat build, but with the forks self balancing the two chambers off every jump and even occasionally in braking chop, it keeps the pressures even between the two chambers even though they have different volumes. This may only leave the fork with a three to four PSI build during a moto. When both chambers build at the same rate, the effect is barely noticeable...say a three to four PSI gain may feel like only one click stiffer on compression for instance.

It's when the pressures spread away from each other you face a problem.

Say this... Showa SFF TAC

Before moto: Positive/inner 150psi TAC/negative 150psi outer 8psi

During moto: Positive 157psi negative 153 psi outer 9psi

AER WP 48

Before: positive 150psi negative 150psi

During: positive 153psi negative 153psi

The WP will work much, much better over the length of a moto as keeping the chambers even will keep similar performance over the length of a moto...where the changes in the Showa fork will change the progressiveness of the stroke, not just the overall stiffness.

Beyond that, there's something to be said about the actual settings WP is using and they fork leg stiffness.

With the right settings, yes, the WPs would work better on the Kawi then the Showa units...and yes, imo, the Showas would work worse on the KTM then the WPs.

For me, the button would've been nice for each the Kawasaki or Suzuki but neither would've ultimately bumped the bikes up by themselves as it was one of a list of things about each bike.

The lack of a button on the Kawi didn't bother me as much as the Suzuki...Why? The Suzuki was a pain to start when hot and it's the heaviest bike...even without it...annoying...

The KXF isn't that hard to start and is light, so at least they have a minor excuse. Lastly, I know the 19 KX will have E-Start...

datkin128 wrote:

Will the '19 KX have a spring fork?

datkin128 wrote:

Will the '19 KX have a spring fork?

Cashmore wrote:

And gain all that extra weight with the E start... I bet not

ML512 wrote:

AER and SFF TAC share a main design, they are a separate function fork with air on on side and valving on the other. The main...

AER and SFF TAC share a main design, they are a separate function fork with air on on side and valving on the other.

The main difference is the air side... AER and Showa both use positive and negative/balance air chambers, while Showa also uses a third chamber (outer pressure).

For AER, you only have one valve because the positive and negative/balance chambers are separate, but connected by a small bleed when the forks are full extended. (most people call positive and negative chambers "inner and TAC" on Showa)

With this nifty feature, the AER forks constantly balance their air pressure between the positive and negative multiple times per lap.

The Showa TAC struggles because as the temperature rises during action, the positive and negative build...but because they have different volumes (they aren't the same size chamber) they build at different rates of pressure. Say one chamber goes up four PSI during a moto while the other climbs eight PSI. This really changes not only the overall stiffness of the fork but also the action as the two chambers effect each other differently when the pressure spread is changed.

AER faces the same heat build, but with the forks self balancing the two chambers off every jump and even occasionally in braking chop, it keeps the pressures even between the two chambers even though they have different volumes. This may only leave the fork with a three to four PSI build during a moto. When both chambers build at the same rate, the effect is barely noticeable...say a three to four PSI gain may feel like only one click stiffer on compression for instance.

It's when the pressures spread away from each other you face a problem.

Say this... Showa SFF TAC

Before moto: Positive/inner 150psi TAC/negative 150psi outer 8psi

During moto: Positive 157psi negative 153 psi outer 9psi

AER WP 48

Before: positive 150psi negative 150psi

During: positive 153psi negative 153psi

The WP will work much, much better over the length of a moto as keeping the chambers even will keep similar performance over the length of a moto...where the changes in the Showa fork will change the progressiveness of the stroke, not just the overall stiffness.

Beyond that, there's something to be said about the actual settings WP is using and they fork leg stiffness.

With the right settings, yes, the WPs would work better on the Kawi then the Showa units...and yes, imo, the Showas would work worse on the KTM then the WPs.

For me, the button would've been nice for each the Kawasaki or Suzuki but neither would've ultimately bumped the bikes up by themselves as it was one of a list of things about each bike.

The lack of a button on the Kawi didn't bother me as much as the Suzuki...Why? The Suzuki was a pain to start when hot and it's the heaviest bike...even without it...annoying...

The KXF isn't that hard to start and is light, so at least they have a minor excuse. Lastly, I know the 19 KX will have E-Start...

aees wrote:

Wondering also why/if you none of the test riders switched to the bigger throttle cam that comes as standard accessory to KTM and Husky? That gives...

Wondering also why/if you none of the test riders switched to the bigger throttle cam that comes as standard accessory to KTM and Husky?

That gives the bike a total different power package, and in my view cant be ridden without.