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.
Best comment i've ever seen on this site.... LOL. Sad but true..... What is our sport going to look like in ten years?
No argument there - it's a defined class for that event and I never objected to any of that, so not sure where the confusion is.
To clarify, my comments were made in reponse to L2S and his post about e-bikes obsoleting current ones because riders choose the fastest bikes. I believe that would only happen if the AMA once again allowed disimilar machines to race in the same class where one of them has an obvious and virtually insurmountable advantage (like double displacement and fuel restrictions). That only proves which bike is capable of circluating the track faster, not who the better rider is, which is the purpose of classes to begin with.
Stark was perfectly jetted that made difference.
Actually the only folks saying it wouldn’t be competitive where the ones lobbying to race against the ICE bikes.
The Shop
Free shipping: VITALMX
DeCal Works Huge Plastic Inventory of UFO and Polisport kits.
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
Thx man I’ll remember that. I think gas engine is straight to the point but whatever lol.
It was electronic!
You could argue in the 70s and 80s bikes with long travel suspension or cartridge forks should not have been allowed to compete, the bikes could circulate the track faster, they provided an insurmountable advantage!
Rider chose the faster bikes, riders who didn't couldn't compete, the same thing happened with 4 strokes, the same thing will happen with electric.
Change is inevitable, some people accept change, some people don't.
I ride for fun, I'll keep my 2 stroke.
No one cares, make a new class. We don’t want a silent A1 we want noise.
Dean Wilson didn't hear Vince Freise of a 450f...
I’m going to stop engaging now because you’ve already stated you’re a 2 stroke guy, but yet you say it’s everyone else who needs to change and accept and embrace the electric future. This is going nowhere productive. My only real issue is that the Stark is clearly an unfair advantage vs ICE bikes and it will ruin the integrity of the competition/race if they are lumped together. You can disagree, that’s fine. Have a good day bro.
You claim electric bikes are dangerous because you can't hear them, but Dean Wilson didn't hear Vince Freise on a 450f and was taken out. Do 450Fs need to be louder?
Just because I'm a 2 stroke guy, doesn't mean I can't accept other peoples choices and understand why they would want to compete on the fastest bike they can buy.
I ride/race for fun, so I ride a 2 stroke, if I rode to win I would race the most competitive bike I could buy, currently that would be the Stark.
That is the worst example possible. Grampa Earl has a history of hearing loss.
So pro riders should pass a hearing test?
Okay one last reply, I went and removed that claim from my previous post about it being unsafe because it was getting away from the real issue, it was a side note on top of my only real issue which you obviously either disagreed with or completely ignored which is that it ruins the integrity of the race. Even you say it’s “the most competitive bike”. So you agree it has a clear advantage but you don’t see it as unfair like I do. Your logic is that everyone who wants to win should obviously sell their 450 and buy a Stark because it clearly has an advantage. That’s garbage.
If they can't hear the choice to race is on them. If the bike is The Silent Assassin they have no choice.
Apples and Oranges....
I'm curious about the reasoning behind two points regularly appearing in these discussions.
About safety:
Electrics race with ICE at World vets, Big Hill Jam, Arenacross UK, France SX tour, Finland SX Tampere, Italy Fastcross plus dozen of regional and national championships around Europe and Australia.
Would it somehow be more dangerous if races were AMA-sanctioned or how is it not an issue in so many countries (nor US races not sanctioned by the AMA)?
About separate classes:
IF electrics were proven superior to ICE (or whenever they will be), how could it benefit ICE bikes to keep them in a separate class (at pro level), that is effectively, in this hypothesis, relegating ICE to a second class championship ?
In the past, would have 2 strokes benefited from a separate class from 4 strokes? Would the sponsors, manufacturers and top riders not immediately jump ship to the fastest class, leaving 2 strokes with minimal relevance and exposure?
It seems to me that mixed class with performance balancing rules could guarantee more exposure and more chances to shine on the racetrack for both. Plus leave more time to manufacturers to make the switch (Honda plans to stop producing gas bikes in 15 years).
I will take a stab at both of them. The first is simply a numbers game.The bikes are far too uncommon to get a good sample size. Second, there is way too much hypothesis to have any kind of stable discourse.
The displacement rules and ban of leaded fuel killed the 2 stroke in the pros but that’s a seperate discussion. The issue is electric vs ICE right, and we’re really talking Stark vs the 4 stroke at the moment if we’re talking in present tense. Here’s Forkner speaking on the issue and he had some good points.
Pit Row
Apples and oranges.
Again, they have classes for a reason - primarily displacement and skill based. While undergoing the massive improvements of the late '70s and early '80s, at no time were the displacement rules changed to allow one to race a 500 in the 125 class. Each has it's own pluses and minuses and, under class structure, the goal is to measure the riders, not the design differences. If you want to change rules to have one "open", run-whatcha-brung class, then so be it. I just don't see that being a wise decision since the logical conclusion would be a single platform - and who wants no choices on what they ride?
And riders chose thumpers for racing primarily because they were forced to by the race-governing bodies who (intentionally) severely handicapped them with the displacement rules, resulting in an artificial outcome in the market. There is no need to come up with some "formula" to help balance competition if you don't mix platforms. As we've seen, the powers-that-be will do the bidding of the ones looking to make money from the decisions, not the ones paying the bills.
But none of this is a revelation - it's been beaten to death for decades now... and is precisely why I don't trust those involved to make prudent decisions.
And to clarify, I'm talking about this in the context of racing - primarily pro racing since that's where the OEMs are going to showcase their goods and spend their R&D dollars. I don't think it makes good sense to repeat the mistake of 20+ years ago because it resulted in increased costs for the consumer, and you don't "grow the sport" by making it more expensive. Leave things as they are and let the markets decide if there is room for both or if one gets wallet-voted out of production.
A quick stab at your questions -
About separate classes:
IF electrics were proven superior to ICE (or whenever they will be), how could it benefit ICE bikes to keep them in a separate class (at pro level), that is effectively, in this hypothesis, relegating ICE to a second class championship ?
Define superior. Is the goal to develop one single platform that results in the quickest lap time or to offer different platforms and let people race to see who can best master that class? And how would it relegate it to "a second class championship"? Why don't you say it relegates ICE championships to second-class status? I'll come back to this "second-class" status later.
In the past, would have 2 strokes benefited from a separate class from 4 strokes? Would the sponsors, manufacturers and top riders not immediately jump ship to the fastest class, leaving 2 strokes with minimal relevance and exposure?
There would be no need for a separate class if the displacement rules hadn't created a situation where a racer on a 2T was at a huge disadvantage. And you keep referring to a "fastest class", so again I'll ask what is the end goal? One fastest design or fastest racer on the designated design?
It seems to me that mixed class with performance balancing rules could guarantee more exposure and more chances to shine on the racetrack for both. Plus leave more time to manufacturers to make the switch (Honda plans to stop producing gas bikes in 15 years).
We've already seen the race-governing bodies idea of "performance balancing rules" and they should be more accurately named "performance imbalancing rules". There is a very simple solution - you can totally avoid these issues by not going down this road to begin with. Why do so many have a problem with e-bikes racing solely against e-bikes? Why the insistence on competing against ICE bikes? Would you be in favor of rules similar to what the 2T riders faced - relegating e-bikes to very low wattage, requiring them have a clutch and transmisson and limit their battery to 15 minutes of run time? Or would these handicaps eliminate your interest in racing one against ICE bikes? Things seem different when the shoe is on the other foot. It would be interesting to see how the e-bike/ICE mixed class proponents would react if they were allowed to race in ICE classes but only with massive handicaps.
On a side note - I find it massively ironic (even humorous) that e-bikes are being pushed so hard as "superior" and "the fastest class" and as such, should be what the OEMs develop and race at a pro level. I always thought a "Pro" racer was extremely skilled - one who spent a lot of time and effort to hone his craft and increase his skills through minimizing mistakes while operating the bike and conquering obstacles faster than others. The touted "advantages" of e-bikes are the easy to use, high-ouput power and the elimination of clutching and shifting... meaning the rider isn't suddenly a better rider when he gets on one, he can simply go faster than before with the same (or lower) skill level. When the required skills to go fast are removed from the equation, the opportunity to make mistakes are also removed, resulting in less variables during the course of a race and likely boring "competition". The real race would be the drag race to the first turn, since there would be very few opportunites for the racers to separate themselves from each other during the race.The skill floor and ceiling have now been lowered... meaning the top-level pros wouldn't need to be as skilled as someone on an ICE bike to go as fast. So, why wouldn't that result in those champions being viewed as the champ of the beginner/moped skill level class and not as skilled as the riders of bikes requiring more skill to operate? The attitude being, "wow, so you can go faster on a beginner-level, easy to ride bike. Why not step up to the big-boy bikes and try going fast on something that requires some skill to ride?". Sounds like the e-bike series might be an inherently second class one.
Hope it's food for thought. 👍
Did he change batteries between motos? Or was he able to charge the bike between the motos? We've heard a lot about how the Stark loses power too quickly for a pro level rider, and I'm assuming that this is similar to a local pro level race or faster. If he did switch batteries, did he use a different one for each moto or did he juggle two of them?
Epic quote in the comments:
I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE TO PUT IT. DON[T KNOCK WHAT YOU HAVEN'T TRIED. REMEMBER YOU USED TO THINK GIRLS WERE ICKY UNTIL YOU RODE ONE.
Moto 1 was Saturday, 2 and 3 were on Sunday. Had plenty of time to charge inbetween.
Vet classes being open , Run what ya brung. I've seen a stark here in Kansas and I'm pretty sure it's still going to boil down to the Pilot. Some you crack me up with the argument of having different bikes with different characteristics on the track. I think the difference in rider worries me more than what the guy is riding. If I'm faster, I'm winning, no matter what fn bike it is.
It's a fools errand to try to keep up with the moving goal posts of why the Stark haters don't think it should be legal to race.
Lucky it wasn’t a deep ripped sand track or he wouldn’t have had the battery to finish.
If they are going to run 80+ hp elbikes at A1, then Matthes better start building some bigger nets.
I bet most of the 450's on the line can be tuned up to well over 80 if wanted. My flattrack 450 is hovering in that area and it's 20 years old.
Ah, the old "if things were different then things would be different"
You must be new to the sport, if you've never had somebody cut inside you, that you didn't know was there.
Post a reply to: Trevor Stewart goes 2-1-1 25+ Pro on the Stark at World Vets . . .