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.
With battery tech that's probably what racing in the future might look like but for now they have to cap them or the entire structure will fall apart quickly. If a stark is out there running at 80hp tracks have to change, displacement rules have to change, really everything. On top of that the severity of the injury will probably get much worse and more often.
Got me there. Either way. It’s regulated. An electric bike can’t be, they proved it
It’s a good thing the major manufacturers have all the top riders under contract. You had Michael Hicks on a (highly regulated bike) in super pole go under .3 seconds slower than a factory rider on his works bike. Not a good look for dinosaur technology.
FIM regulates and measures the Stark's power using FIM mandated sensors and a data logger, that's how they determined the maximum energy tolerance was exceeded.
Teams running ICE bikes would never break the rules!
The Shop
Free shipping: VITALMX
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
DeCal Works Huge Plastic Inventory of UFO and Polisport kits.
What happens if a manufacturer releases a new model 450 with more power, would Stark be allowed more power?
4 strokes made bikes easier to ride than 2 strokes, causing changes in track design, resulting in higher speeds and bigger jumps, electric will continue the trend. The riders who will suffer the most injuries will be less skilled amateurs.
Thats sorta the idea im getting at. The stark needs to have a hp limit or else the power race could get out of control. If that's the direction people want to go have an open class at the pro level and run what you brung.
Based on it happening in the Super Bowl and the final my guess is it was a new battery. has more energy release for the first and then of slows down and then it really dies off.
Hmmmm
Two different energy sources should not be allowed to race together. Especially where one source has more energy output ability than the other. De Ja Vu - 2 and 4 stroke.
the AMA and FIM currently use displacement, cubic centimeters, to regulate the 2 classes for the professional racing series, 250 and 450 cubic centimeter… can any of you guys describe what the displacement of the STARK is to someone that isn’t smart enough to figure it out on their own?
please and thank you!
I'll bite.
ICE are restricted by capacity because that's easy to check. Electrics are restricted by power because that's easy to check (FIM data logger and sensors).
Don't you think that if 4T could have easily been restricted by maximum power (and further restricted if 4T became too successful against 2T), 2T might have stuck around longer ?
There obviously isn't one. That's the conundrum - how do you regulate two different power plants that are racing together.
I get that the FIM are using power as the regulatory measure - there really isn't anything else practical to use for an electric bike (maybe voltage but I don't know enough about how they work to know if that's viable). What's interesting is that power output isn't really what's limiting anyone in the 450 class - factory teams could easily put much more powerful bikes on the track but are choosing not to. Maybe the 450 class already is the unlimited/open class.
That's the real answer - the rules are designed around what's easy to check and regulate.
There's no limit on power output in the 450 class.
It's history repeating itself.
In the late 60's two strokes, despite their deficiencies at the time, replaced 4 strokes because they were faster around a track.
500 2t bikes disappeared in the '90's because no-one needed that much power and they weren't the fastest bikes around the track.
In the 2000's four strokes gained ascendency because, despite their deficiencies at the time, they were faster around a track. Admittedly they were helped at the time by lopsided displacement limits but that was only delaying the inevitable - I don't think a 2 stroke of any variety would be a better race bike than a modern four stroke regardless of displacement.
Now we have electric bikes that are potentially better than four strokes despite some deficiencies. The governing bodies are right to be cautious about how they are introduced to racing as no-one wants a repeat of the 2T/4T transition. However they have to tread a careful path because if they restrict progress too much someone will disrupt them and take things out of their hands.
That’s what we should have. Unlike, say drag racing, more power isn’t the universal panacea.
500cc 2 strokes, factory 4 strokes of any capacity. My Husky 701 SM makes 79.78hp. Same as an unrestricted Stark. Put one of those lumps in a 450mx frame if you think it will help. Supercharged if you want.
Regulate min weight (for safety) and max noise. Drop the flag. May the best man win!
I would like to see 3 classes - lites (up to 250cc either 2 or 4 stroke), stock 450 (privateer friendly and good for manufacturers to show their production models) and an open tier 1 class where it’s the top riders and engineers riding whatever they need to get around the track the fastest…
Why have a weight limit in pro racing?
Because like in any other form of Motorsport Racing, the search for lighter eventually trumps safety.
The easy answer to your question of how do you regulate two different power plants that are racing together?....the easy answer is you don't as you will never get them equal when you are using different measurement criteria, what needs to happen is just separate classes....E bikes need their own class and not be mixed in at the pro level
Pit Row
You have to count the number of cells.
This for sure
And to limit costs.
Difficult to say. What many overlook, or simply don't understand is the power restrictions are electrical power utilized, not motor or wheel HP. Stark claims their motor is 95% efficient over it's useful range. That may be true, but in instantaneous high torque situations (think whacking open the throttle for a seat bounce or table to table situation), motor efficiency drops significantly. Further, as the batteries, conductors, controller, motor, etc.. heat up, efficiency drops further. Say you start at 60HP. That's 57 motor HP according to Stark's published figure. Now factor in friction losses between the motor and rear wheel. Maybe you have 54HP at the rear wheel. Drop the motor efficiency to 85% from heat, and now maybe you have 48 rear wheel HP. Not really as simple as it seems.
The answer is really easy here. 250cc 4 strokes race with 250cc 4 strokes. 450cc 4 strokes race with 450cc 4 strokes. E bikes race with E bikes. Seems pretty simple, really. We saw what happened when we tried to combine 250cc 4 strokes with 125cc 2 strokes and 450cc 4 strokes with 250cc 2 strokes.
There's a reason the NHRA separate E and ICE.
While reading the rules, I noticed that a 250 2 stroke was legal to race in the SX2 class. If they allow wildcards in the SX2 class it would be cool to see one of the top guys that ride for a brand that makes a 2 stroke 250 line up on one. Cole Davies? or one of the Star guys. I don't know who's healthy and racing an Austrian bike, but that would be cool to see if a 2 stroke with a modern Chassis would do well when the displacement is even.
I see it as more of a progression and not so drastically different that it needs its own class. The 4 strokes made it easier to stay in the power and had a wider RPM range than 2 strokes. Less shifting and more torque. Electric can be restricted easily enough that You could make them similar enough that the riders style would dictate which bike they went faster on. And unlike the issue of cost to change a production run of engines , You can change the rules almost weekly and finetune them without getting stuck with electric having a big advantage or disadvantage powerwise. You can just reprogram it and reduce the power output.
The chances of another mistake like the 2 stroke to 4 stroke one is less likely to happen . With an ICE bike You have a lot of money invested in the tooling to build the engines that would drive costs through the roof if they kept playing around with the displacement allowed. While with the electric bikes , You can give them a little more or less and the production bikes can stay the same. And everybody can buy one and set it to race class spec power levels.
I'm sure there will be some bugs to work out. I hope thats all this recent rule violation was, an unintended violation and not done intentionally.
I was and still am excited to see the Vargs racing. I was looking forward to seeing Vince and how he adapted to the Varg. I hope that wasn't a sign of how Vince and Stark's relationship will go. Hopefully he's OK and back to riding like the ass we mostly all dislike.
It's not just displacement based racing, because a 2T is limited to 250cc. Different rules for different technologies. Regardless, where the AMA screwed up is peak power isn't the right metric. I haven't done the math to see how this really works out, but I suspect the area under the torque curve is the equalizer.
I think you are correct that the current system is inconsistent. That said, I don't agree with your premise. The phrase "no replacement for displacement" exists for a reason. A larger displacement 4T can make more power, be more reliable, and have a better power spread. Eliminating the 450cc limit would be an advantage for the ICE bikes.
ICE bikes have 2 different energy sources in them lmao. Outlaw batteries and while you're at it ECUs! Too much of that technology making me scared!
You have to give them the benefit of the doubt , as much as that pains me, but once Stark get a 100% legal and approved setting, it doesn't take much to make sure they have what they are supposed to .
We have seen teams disqualified in Moto2 and Moto3 in the last few weeks for having incorrect issues of software present, and while there is no question of advantage being gained, the teams were pinged, and rightly so.
So Stark need to be EMailing the fix to owners, and there should be no difficulty in policing it.
We left a Road Race series because we were no longer allowed to supply maps, which were cheap and easy , and allowed performance to be done safely and cheaply, so folk had to go back to mechanical tuning, which made the bikes flaky and unreliable.
If they get done again, they are not going to be considered honest .
The minimum weight limits were mainly introduced for safety. People making frames/axles/forks/etc thinner and thinner to gain an advantage. For example.
There is also an issue of cost, but seeing most pro run many Ti parts this seems less relevant. At one stage Ti axles were banned in MX (World championship?) I believe on a cost basis.
Matthes reported that it was the torque spikes in landings that caused the KJ usage spikes.
Post a reply to: Stark Cheating in WSX?