Posts
169
Joined
9/12/2018
Location
Cumming, GA
US
I didn’t do an exhaustive search so please forgive me but . . . . . remind me; based on the 1986 production rule, how do the bikes of CS4, CW1, ET3, HL96, etc., compare to stock bikes? For example, do the “factory” bikes have VIN #’s on their frames? Is the 1986 production rule still valid? Which OEM is the best at “pushing the boundaries”? I doubt every isotopic molecule of these bikes is inspected at each round to ensure compliance to the rule.
iirc, the production rule basically means manufacturers have to sell "X" number of production bikes representative of the race bikes- not that they have to have exactly the same specs and exotic parts as team bikes. I could be wrong on that.
The rules stated in 1986 that the frames and engine cases must be stock in origin. Frames may be gusseted or have material added for strength. Suspension must be available to the public (A kit is OK) for outdoors but may be works in Supercross. I don't know how much has been modified or is still true today, but I believe all the above is still in effect.
RC had 4 different frames for the first four supercross races of 2002. Benny Bloss said that KTM would change his bore and stroke to get him the power he wanted when he rode at Butler bros. JGR moved Stewards engine in 2010. Yamaha uses different thickness swing arms to give riders the desired feel, but I’m not sure if that’s legal or not
Reasonably sure 450's are works suspension indoors and out.
The Shop
Free shipping: VITALMX
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
I’m a massive fan of that rule as my 86 CR250R felt absolutely magical to ride in comparison to my previous bike.
I can still remember moments from my first ride on it 40 years later…clicking up through the gears on the trails then dropping into sandwashes. Loved that bike.
MC famously rode a '93 Honda right up until 1997, when he couldn't get away with it and ended up switching to Suzuki instead of riding the aluminum Honda. RC's frames could have been different model years or have different gusseting and still be in compliance with the rule. Same with bore & stroke; you can make adjustments to the engine as long as the cases are the same. Even run works cylinders AFAIK. (But again, I don't know what the rules actually said in 1996, 2002 or now in 2026.)
The Hondas and Kawasaki’s of that era definitely benefited from it.
That could be true now too. Somebody who knows the rule book, please comment!
I’m pretty sure 250/450 could always run factory suspension. O’mara had full factory suspension on his 96 Honda, and on his Suzukis. His Suzukis were super truck to look at.
Bore and stroke must be the same as stock. Tedder let the cat out of the bag that KTM plays with bore and stroke in their race engines. Seems like that would be pretty easy to check unlike something like head tube angle.
Crank cases, cylinders and heads must be the same casting as stock but obviously they can add or remove material, polish, etc. Valve angles must remain the same as stock.
My next bike was an 88 YZ250 and I didn’t think it was really any better than my 86 CR250R. However, I really liked that bike, too. It seemed it was pretty predictable and neutral havdling as I remember.
As I understand it (could be wrong, am frequently…just ask the mrs…):
-full works suspension ok for 450 (formerly 250 2T) indoors and out. Ok outdoors for 250 (formerly 125 2T), indoors has to be available for public purchase with (as I recall) a price limit of 10K or similar. I believe this is how we now have “A kit” available to the masses.
-production engine cases, bore and stroke, maybe a few other things.
-production frame. Material added but not taken away, frame geometry stock.
-production swingarm, I believe same rules as frame.
-at one time I thought gas tanks had to be production (probably in response the awesome lowboy HRC tanks) but that doesn’t seem to be the case now (larger tanks outdoors etc).
The production rule might as well have been called the “we can’t compete with HRC’s spending” rule. Ironically, the first year of the production rule Honda spanked the crap out of everyone by basically making a factory bike the production bike.
^ I believe fuel tanks can be different, but no less fuel capacity than stock. Larger tanks are OK.
the suspension rule was for the 125/250F class the 250/450F class could run whatever they wanted.
I’m building my 2026 Baja Bikes to look like your ‘86. Just ordered the gold rims, today. My wheel builder DOES NOT like that I’m using Red HRC hubs on the wheels…but, black hubs on a new bike…meh…I doing that on my New World Maico.
Anyhoo, your ‘86 is simply The Best Honda MX Production look…ever…to me.
Agreed on the 86 cr250 being phenomenal. My first 250. I was 17.Incredibly smooth power. I too can remember my first ride on that bike. Holy shit. Thats gonna be 40 years ago in April. First mechanical power valve on a Honda. First cartridge fork . I think kawi had a power valve in 84 0r 85?
As good as the '86 models were, I think the '87's were better. I was 17 and got a new '87 CR125 and I thought I had a works bike compared to my previous '85.
Then I got an '88 CR250 and replaced linkage bolts every month, those things bent on the regular.
The 87 CR125 and 250 were great bikes. Especially compared to the competition at the time.
Pit Row
Someone say 1986 CR250? If you absolutely have to have it, hit me up.
beautiful bike. As I recall they were like $2600 new. ...... Oh times have changed. )
MCGrath like the 93 because it flexed. In the 90s we were all brainwashed by the magazines to think flex was so bad. Jody/MXA loved calling bikes “flexi flyers”. Come to find out, the mags were wrong. Not shocked. And now theyre pushing flex onto us. They say the Suzuki is SO rigid. Everyone that rides them shrugs and says idk it feels fine. While Honda is adding pieces to their frames to add rigidity. So. When are we gonna realize these “test riders”. Are really just good bullshitters. Contradicting themselves constantly .
https://www.amaproracing.com/assets/view/28756/2025-AMAP-MX-Rulebook-Final.pdf#page48
https://americanmotorcyclist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/2026-AMA-Su…
my 1st 250 was also a CR250 at same age. Mine was a 1974 CR250M 😁
Word (sticking with the '80s theme).
The 88 YZ250 was such an amazing looking bike though. The 86 CR was refinement, the 88 YZ was revolutionary. Dymond looked so good on those!
Maybe it's just memory of having one talking, but with a rear disc brake I feel like that would still be a good bike today.
Or just get the '87? 😁
what years had the disintegrating clutch covers from the water pump?
Nearly all 80's water cooled models.
'81-'88
Certainly it was an even better bike but somehow for me I liked the look of the 86 better. And I had an 86 but not an 87.
Post a reply to: 1986 Production Rule