Upgrade to enjoy this feature!
Vital MX fantasy is free to play, but Premium users receive great benefits. Premium benefits include:
- View and download rider stats
- Pick trends
- Create a private league
- And more!
Only $10 for all 2026 SX, MX, and SMX series.
2. For the top amateurs, their sponsors dictate they run the 4s. So, you have the best riders on the 4s. Tough for a lesser rider to make up time on those guys, no matter what he's running.
Still isn't a level playing field...not even close.
Hey JTom, check this out.
http://insider.vurbmoto.com/video/slightly-uncut-fmf-2-stroke-invitatio…
In a couple of years we'll be riding electric bikes anyway.
I think I own both the first and second place bike models (2nd place was a CR500AF, wasn't it?). My kid just took over the RM, though. He jumped from a YZ85 to an RM250. Little bastard!
The Shop
DeCal Works Huge Plastic Inventory of UFO and Polisport kits.
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
Honestly Chris I dont think there are many who do ride 450's that are. About the most man handling you see on a 450 comes from JS7, thats pretty lonely company.
Well with everything there are no absolutes, but I disagree. It seems that many of the older Vet racers love their four-strokes. It fits their riding style really well and with their limited seat time it allows them to be competitive without having to pound endless laps at the practice track.
In talking with younger riders and asking questions, it appears that many of the younger guys are the ones that would prefer the two stroke. But because they have dreams of racing professionally they are "forced" to race four-strokes instead, because that's what you need to be competitive at the National level.
There are fewer than a handful of racers that could compete with a 250 cc two stroke in the 450 class and have even a slight chance of winning a National. Names like RC, James Stewart come to mind but there is no chance if you are an up and coming pro racer.
Do a search on Randall Everett (upcoming pro) there's an interview with him about his preferences and what he has to ride to compete.
"MX7MX wrote: ...Started with 4 strokes, 2 strokes came along and sent the 4's packin, new technology came along and sent the 2 strokes packin..."
While this version of history is correct at some level it's missing a couple of points. From most accounts motocross began at a field in England in 1924, all the racers competed on four-strokes. Since then until Yamaha took advantage of the displacement advantage created in the 1990's, rules for motocross have been based on displacement.
To clarify, for 73 years motocross was based on a displacement model for competition motorcycles. For the past 12 years the rules have been lopsided. The displacement rule has made the four-stroke the predominant machine.
How can anyone claim that new technology sent 2 strokes packing, when four-strokes were granted double the displacement of the two strokes they bested?
It's true at the beginning of the "four stroke revolution" the racing was competitive between the two and four strokes of different displacements, but as the engineers and tuners learned to coax additional power out of the four-strokes, the two strokes were no longer competitive.
With the rules remaining lopsided, the two stroke will remain a historic footnote in pro racing history. Motocross rules must be based on displacement and no other lopsided format. This is the path that the FIM have taken for 2010
in that case of 500AF, vs a 450F that was the test riders personal bike.. (surely that familiarity alone accounts for 50cc disparity in an ope nclass bike geez?? the test rider turned an average of 3 seconds a lap faster times on the 500AF
2 stroke ,than on his own 450F that he is far more comfortable with
to say you "cant compare" racing bikes seems odd?
the whole idea of racing is to be both at your best as a rider, and have the bike that works best for you set up properly.
its racing or it isnt?
most racing is rider.skill.
but the whole aftermarket industry is based on small advanatages in fit, finish,and performence.
if i had one bolt on part that had any rider averaging 2 t o3 secnds a lap faster..
it would be huge news ??
not every rider will turn faster laps on a 2 stroke, as it really is about skill level and bike style preference.
but many riders will turn significantly faster laps! ,,
and that should be of inteest to them if they race.?.
the debate isnt as silly as its often made out to be.
personally i ride both, and like both..
but yeah i turn consistently faster laps on a 250 ,or 500 2 stroke.
they suit my style,
other riders would have the same result..
yet others would be faster on a 4 stroke.
choice is good!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
debate over what is best for any give nder is always going to revolve around generalizations.
but time and again when transponders are used instead of seat of the pants "feel",
riders are turning the same , or faster laps on 2 strokes.
its not true for every rider.
it is true often enough it warrants disscusion..
same discusion you would have if
*billybobBRAND" header pipe, had a good percent of rider turning 2 to 3 seconds a lap faster times!
.*(thats big news in motoworld?)
considering that- its a wonder the debate isnt played out far more often than it is.
but then again very few that chime on either side,
have real experience on both bikes with a transponder to verify their gut feel.
and the speculation from a "fan" of one style, or the other , is just message board filler
but good stuff regardless
Yeah, Barcia beat a lot of 2 stks on a 4 stk but look what he did on a 125 vs 250f's, give him a CR250 in the lites class and he's gone.
That won't happen, they wouldn't let Searle do it and the reason was it's too expensive. Why is a cheaper bike that they don't want to use anyway, too expensive? Could it be because they would need to pile more money into the 250f's or is it that they would need to start over with 250 2 stks to be competitive?
Has DC ever explained that on here? That's a good question to ask but I guess we all know the answer. I understand it was a bad time but how could it possibly cost more money unless their current 250f wouldn't get the job done against the 2 stks.
Am I the only one curious about that?
It all centers around greed, and is a big reason the world is in the finacial trouble its in. The auto industry could be the poster child for whats about to happen to the MX industry. They went after the well off buyers, with marketing campaigns making people feel like they needed the biggest SUV possible, and needed a new one every couple of years. Like a drug habit, you get sucked in, and can keep up at first. After a while you cant seem to get away and you start finacing to keep things going. Eventually the mfg starts running finance specials to keep people comming back buying vehicles(whether they could afford them or not)because heavens forbid in the corporate world, that this months sales drops below last months. You can only pull from a well so much per day, exceed that and eventually the well is going to go dry.
(Let it be known that I know there are alot more reasons why the auto industry and the economy are tanking, but for the most part it revolves around greed and hyper-capitalism)
First the specialized 2 stk product wasn't justified by the small number of units compared to the rest of their business that was already 4 stk, now it's too expensive and a huge loss of investment to mess with the infrastructure they said they already had before.
I just don't see such a drastic change, the chassis is different but suspension, wheels, plastic, much of the bike wasn't some radical departure and the engine isn't exactly unrecognizable from the 4 stk of the 50 years or so.
The thing is, they don't have to build anything anyway, KTM , Yamaha and maybe the Chinese can handle that market. An open class 2 stk is a waste and a 250 2 stk too hard to ride, so what don't build one, just let the willing buy and race one.
I doubt the re-staffing part would be much of an issue, but as for the valve munchers being higher profit (for the short term), I don't think there's any doubt there. Follow the money.
1 RR Hoosier $215.00
1 Hoosier front $100
Engine oil - $50
Filter spray - $10
Methanol $50
Tear off - $10
Baby Oil - $5
Pit passes for 4 - $100
Gas for tow truck - $100
Food - $50
Thats right at $700 just to show up per race. If the track was really dry slick, you might end up going thru two sets of tires all the way around. If you made any contact with someone else or the wall, you can easily get in to several thousand in damage in seconds. Flip the car and it goes WAY up from there - top wing alone is >$500 with no painting, wing tree, nose wing and mounts, shocks, radius rods, heims, and jacobs ladder all will certainly be toast and maybe even the drive line and front axle. A bad enough flip may even get the chassis too, thats 5K alone with nothing on it.
Long story short: only rich folks get to race open wheel anymore - the days of a few working guys putting together a sprint project are all but over.
Looks like MX is heading down that same path.
Pit Row
Post a reply to: So lets end the 2 vs 4 stroke argument...