Jody, MXA, Two Strokes and Matthes

vet323
Posts
3606
Joined
7/31/2010
Location
Lead, SD, USA
1/14/2011 10:20am
Lets scrap this whole displacement deal, it seems too unfair to the factories to cause them to spend literally hundreds of dollars to compete with the privateers (that's a joke, btw).

We don't have to change the displacement rules at all, just change the noise rules and implement a real-world, full-throttle noise standard, that should be enough to make 2-strokes more competitive. Who knows, maybe we could hear the race announcers again.
MX7MX
Posts
845
Joined
8/28/2007
Location
USA
1/14/2011 10:48am
burn1986 wrote:
Hopefully Soubeyras has success and creates some excitement within the current AMA Rules. He has a huge uphill battle though. He is certainly out powered and...
Hopefully Soubeyras has success and creates some excitement within the current AMA Rules. He has a huge uphill battle though. He is certainly out powered and out gunned, but there is still hope. How much more of a chance would he have if he had at least 25 or 50cc? Many people just say "Why doesn't he just race a 4-stroke?" The point is that he should at least have a choice.



Contrary to some on here I don't hate DC, I just think he's a little fearful of making any waves with anyone about 2-strokes. 2-strokes aren't the savior of SX or MX, its would just be nice to see the displacement raised a little, or have some inclusion at the Pro level.



DC and FTE have not answered the question - Are the current rules in the AMA ProRacing Rulebook fair for the 2-stroke?



If some guys only have access to a 250 smoker, then the answer is it's not fair. If a rider can have either, then it is...
If some guys only have access to a 250 smoker, then the answer is it's not fair. If a rider can have either, then it is fair because all riders have the same choice. The same goes for running a 250 smoker against a 250f in the amateurs. If everyone has the same choice of bikes available to them, then it's fair.

Is it a real choice given the difference between a 250 smoker and a 450? No. That's not really a fairness issue. Would a larger smoker make it a better choice, yes.

I think its unfair to say Davey is fearful of making waves. Maybe he's not being stupid. Maybe he's just making what he feels is the wisest choice he can at the moment given the recent precedent of the OEMs walking and the threat to do so here in MX. Keep in mind how in jeopardy the nationals were by the time the AMA decided it was screwing everything up would sell pro racing.

But if folks think winning the two stroke battle on principle is worth losing Pro MX, then - in fairness - you could at least credit the guy for simply disagreeing with you and doing what he thinks best rather than suggesting he doesn't have a spine or, worse, is a sell out.
Great post FTE! The only problem I see with this whole topic is that it will NEVER be completely even. A 250T is not fair racing with 450F's. However, a 250T is not fair racing against a 250F.

People only see the numbers being the same, or the displacement as the end all be all. Thats like my Vette with a procharger being equal to a bone stock vette simply because the displacement is the same. However, HOW they make they power is different.

FTE, your posts are about as unbiased as they come. Great job!
newmann
Posts
24438
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
USA
1/14/2011 11:26am
MX7MX wrote:
Great post FTE! The only problem I see with this whole topic is that it will NEVER be completely even. A 250T is not fair racing...
Great post FTE! The only problem I see with this whole topic is that it will NEVER be completely even. A 250T is not fair racing with 450F's. However, a 250T is not fair racing against a 250F.

People only see the numbers being the same, or the displacement as the end all be all. Thats like my Vette with a procharger being equal to a bone stock vette simply because the displacement is the same. However, HOW they make they power is different.

FTE, your posts are about as unbiased as they come. Great job!
Yeah, no doubt about it, a 450 against a 250 just isn't fair nor is a 250 against a 125. Great post MX7MX! Good job!Wink
Dropbear
Posts
1568
Joined
5/7/2008
Location
Adelaide, AU
1/14/2011 11:29am
'73 Honda cr-125; .....$895.00
'83 Honda cr-125; ...$1738.00
'93 Honda cr-125; ...$3799.00
'10 Honda crf 250; ...$7199.00

The Shop

mxb2
Posts
22437
Joined
6/15/2010
Location
Bowie, MD, USA
1/14/2011 11:45am
Heres an idea buy the bike you want LOL! 4 stroke s are good 2 strokes are good, debate over! The 2 strokes are out there you might have to drive further to get one, thats if you want one that bad, or it can be shipped to you . So excuse is done! And the money you save between the 2 can paying for the bike being crated up or your gas money to go pick it up. Do you really think a top privateer on a 2 stroke could beat a PC or Geico rider? And the factories are in it to make money, if the 2 strokes in 07,08 were selling Honda and Suzuki would still be making them, now all of a sudden people want 2 strokes. I guess they should have kept buying them and instead fixed up their bikes or bought used. I give KTM credit for making progress on their line of 2 strokes, but why would i buy a new yz 2 stroke when i can get almost the same bike used at less than half the price. Yamaha needs to update some stuff (plastic,etc, make it more appealing to the 2 stroke fan). The debate can go on til eternity.
newmann
Posts
24438
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
USA
1/14/2011 11:49am
gaines1016 wrote:
in the current state of affairs i believe this idea has the most legs
wpark89 wrote:
You're right. I think we all agree that since minis are staying 2 strokes we need a 125 class. It's a necessary bike. It's more likely...
You're right.

I think we all agree that since minis are staying 2 strokes we need a 125 class. It's a necessary bike. It's more likely to get going than getting 250's in the 250 class.

Look at the model in Europe...they have a good series for kids to aspire to race 125's in. So they will buy them and ride them locally as well. The manufactures have obviously taken notice, because you can go buy a RM 125 in Italy for 1800 Euro ($2400) less than an RMZ 250. In England a new RM 125 is 2000 pounds (about $3000) less than a new RMZ 250. They have the option to decide how they race.

We will too. I think more and more promoters are adding 125 classes and it can grow. Manufactures will have to bring back their 125's to the US. We need to develop a small series. 6 races may be too much to start with. But we need to come up with some sort of model and plan to build it.
I think the six race series would be perfect. It would be on the off weekends of the WMA races. They could be spaced out far enough so that working families would have time to recover and get everything back in order to get to the next race. Never have to worry about criss-crossing the country from one weekend to the next. As a national series, there would of course be those serious about the championship and then there would be those just wanting to hit some of the races close to them. If it came down to it, make your best five out of six overalls count towards the championship allowing you to drop your worst finish or the race you couldn't make.

The time frame is already there on a race weekend as it would occupy the same time slots as the WMA classes do.

Since it would be sort of an "experimental" class to test the waters, drop the homologation rules for the class and allow the OEM's to bring over enough 125's to fill the demand. TM, Husky, KTM and some of thos cottage industry Euro names that are popping up would be cool to see at a top level event here in the US. Maybe, just maybe Cobra has a 125 in the works??? There was rumor of that a few months back. Would Pro-Circuit show up and dominate? Who knows, but another AMA rule says a bike can't be over five years old. That puts the KX's pretty close to being ineligible. Might be good to drop that rule too. Regardless I would love to hear a full gate of tiddlers at full song.
raddad
Posts
2286
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Wrenshall, MN, USA
1/14/2011 11:57am
'73 Honda cr-125; .....$895.00
'83 Honda cr-125; ...$1738.00
'93 Honda cr-125; ...$3799.00
'10 Honda crf 250; ...$7199.00
Dropbear wrote:
[img]http://i991.photobucket.com/albums/af39/gf079/1975%20Laurie%20Boulter/LaurieBoulter1976pg7.jpg[/img][img]http://i991.photobucket.com/albums/af39/gf079/1975%20Laurie%20Boulter/LaurieBoulter1976Frontcover.jpg[/img]
I had one of those nasty MX400's man what a death trap that thing was! I have had lots of 2 strokes and lots of 4 strokes since 72 and even back then i liked my BSA better than anything as far as power output goes but they stopped development when the rice burners-ring dings came along so i was forced to go that route.

Funny how things come around isn't it? Now we seem forced to ride 4 strokes and development has slowed or stopped on 2 strokes! I for one do not have a tear to shed as i have always been a 4 stroke guy and love everything about them! The idea of getting a new or better bike for me has always been to make racing easier and me faster.. that's the bottom line for me and i think i speak for most racers out there.

If you ask around at the track, most would never go back to a two stroke unless it made winning easier, simple as that! I am in one of the largest AMA districts in the USA and we can run what we want in the 250 class or the vet classes. Guess what all but maybe two or three people run competitively in the A classes?? Yep that's right we run what works best and wins races..

True old schoolers are 4 stroke guys!Smile
Dropbear
Posts
1568
Joined
5/7/2008
Location
Adelaide, AU
1/14/2011 12:03pm
'73 Honda cr-125; .....$895.00
'83 Honda cr-125; ...$1738.00
'93 Honda cr-125; ...$3799.00
'10 Honda crf 250; ...$7199.00
Dropbear wrote:
[img]http://i991.photobucket.com/albums/af39/gf079/1975%20Laurie%20Boulter/LaurieBoulter1976pg7.jpg[/img][img]http://i991.photobucket.com/albums/af39/gf079/1975%20Laurie%20Boulter/LaurieBoulter1976Frontcover.jpg[/img]
raddad wrote:
I had one of those nasty MX400's man what a death trap that thing was! I have had lots of 2 strokes and lots of 4...
I had one of those nasty MX400's man what a death trap that thing was! I have had lots of 2 strokes and lots of 4 strokes since 72 and even back then i liked my BSA better than anything as far as power output goes but they stopped development when the rice burners-ring dings came along so i was forced to go that route.

Funny how things come around isn't it? Now we seem forced to ride 4 strokes and development has slowed or stopped on 2 strokes! I for one do not have a tear to shed as i have always been a 4 stroke guy and love everything about them! The idea of getting a new or better bike for me has always been to make racing easier and me faster.. that's the bottom line for me and i think i speak for most racers out there.

If you ask around at the track, most would never go back to a two stroke unless it made winning easier, simple as that! I am in one of the largest AMA districts in the USA and we can run what we want in the 250 class or the vet classes. Guess what all but maybe two or three people run competitively in the A classes?? Yep that's right we run what works best and wins races..

True old schoolers are 4 stroke guys!Smile
You will like this then, Our No 1 in 76 was Lester Rowley on a CCM. I was a huge fan.
FreshTopEnd
Posts
13286
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
1/14/2011 12:06pm
There are plenty of people in this thread on both sides making sensible posts. With a couple exceptions it's one of the more reasonable long threads on the board in awhile.

There's a lot going on here, love of smokers, concern for entry level riders, and how to deal with the different resources available to the 40/20 guys on the gate. There's other issues, too. I think it helps not to conflate them.

A two stroke is just machine and I don't think it's apt to talk about fairness to two strokes. The fairness issue really is the issue of what's fair in racing where there's a disparity of resources between one rider and another.

There's always going to be a disparity of resources in racing, and better talent will almost always attract more resources. You can't escape that.

Saying the two stroke is an answer or one of many answers to that at the pro level, which is all we're talking about, just chases the problem. If the 250 smoker is so much better than the 250F that it is an inexpensive path to the sort of power PC or FC has, then there is nothing to stop the teams with more resources from exploiting that to continue stretching their advantage.

Can two strokes be a means of giving privateers a leg up on the cost of performance issue? Sure. Do the current displacement rules enable that? Obviously not; no one races two strokes competitively. Would a 150/300 rule be better? Maybe/probably. But then you run into the practical issues with the other OEM's. They'd likely view it as the KTM variant of the "Harley rules" in flat track and the "Ducati rules" in superbike a few years ago; it favors a brand rather than a class of riders scratching it out.

There's a similar thing going on with the 350, which is in the class of four strokes folks believe the OEM's are committed to. The FIM pushed to drop the 450 class to 350, and the other OEM's said no. KTM has come out with the 350, and I think you have to say the jury's out on how successful that investment has been so far.

I don't know what the answer is until the day the sport doesn't need as much OEM money as it does now.
raddad
Posts
2286
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Wrenshall, MN, USA
1/14/2011 12:07pm
Cool dropbear! We had a few of those here also and looking back, the guys that ran those monsters were like hero's of the time and considered "real men"!
bd
Posts
6036
Joined
4/6/2007
Location
Las Vegas, NV, USA
1/14/2011 12:21pm
Motocross and Supercross Racing

250F/180T

450F/360T

Adjust if needed.

Dropbear
Posts
1568
Joined
5/7/2008
Location
Adelaide, AU
1/14/2011 12:29pm
raddad wrote:
Cool dropbear! We had a few of those here also and looking back, the guys that ran those monsters were like hero's of the time and...
Cool dropbear! We had a few of those here also and looking back, the guys that ran those monsters were like hero's of the time and considered "real men"!
Yeah, old Lester didn't need any pansie displacement advantage!
seth505
Posts
10210
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
SD, CA, USA
1/14/2011 12:49pm
raddad wrote:
I had one of those nasty MX400's man what a death trap that thing was! I have had lots of 2 strokes and lots of 4...
I had one of those nasty MX400's man what a death trap that thing was! I have had lots of 2 strokes and lots of 4 strokes since 72 and even back then i liked my BSA better than anything as far as power output goes but they stopped development when the rice burners-ring dings came along so i was forced to go that route.

Funny how things come around isn't it? Now we seem forced to ride 4 strokes and development has slowed or stopped on 2 strokes! I for one do not have a tear to shed as i have always been a 4 stroke guy and love everything about them! The idea of getting a new or better bike for me has always been to make racing easier and me faster.. that's the bottom line for me and i think i speak for most racers out there.

If you ask around at the track, most would never go back to a two stroke unless it made winning easier, simple as that! I am in one of the largest AMA districts in the USA and we can run what we want in the 250 class or the vet classes. Guess what all but maybe two or three people run competitively in the A classes?? Yep that's right we run what works best and wins races..

True old schoolers are 4 stroke guys!Smile
and lazy as well apparently haha. You don't speak for all of us. I'd rather have a lower cost/simpler/lighter 2stroke that I have to work harder to ride.
rocrac
Posts
2454
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
Indianapolis, IN, USA
1/14/2011 1:11pm
There are plenty of people in this thread on both sides making sensible posts. With a couple exceptions it's one of the more reasonable long threads...
There are plenty of people in this thread on both sides making sensible posts. With a couple exceptions it's one of the more reasonable long threads on the board in awhile.

There's a lot going on here, love of smokers, concern for entry level riders, and how to deal with the different resources available to the 40/20 guys on the gate. There's other issues, too. I think it helps not to conflate them.

A two stroke is just machine and I don't think it's apt to talk about fairness to two strokes. The fairness issue really is the issue of what's fair in racing where there's a disparity of resources between one rider and another.

There's always going to be a disparity of resources in racing, and better talent will almost always attract more resources. You can't escape that.

Saying the two stroke is an answer or one of many answers to that at the pro level, which is all we're talking about, just chases the problem. If the 250 smoker is so much better than the 250F that it is an inexpensive path to the sort of power PC or FC has, then there is nothing to stop the teams with more resources from exploiting that to continue stretching their advantage.

Can two strokes be a means of giving privateers a leg up on the cost of performance issue? Sure. Do the current displacement rules enable that? Obviously not; no one races two strokes competitively. Would a 150/300 rule be better? Maybe/probably. But then you run into the practical issues with the other OEM's. They'd likely view it as the KTM variant of the "Harley rules" in flat track and the "Ducati rules" in superbike a few years ago; it favors a brand rather than a class of riders scratching it out.

There's a similar thing going on with the 350, which is in the class of four strokes folks believe the OEM's are committed to. The FIM pushed to drop the 450 class to 350, and the other OEM's said no. KTM has come out with the 350, and I think you have to say the jury's out on how successful that investment has been so far.

I don't know what the answer is until the day the sport doesn't need as much OEM money as it does now.
In terms of trying to provide a more level playing field the easiest solution would be to limit the amount of modifications that can be done to these bikes especially the 250 class.

Why in this difficult economy wouldn't the caretakers of the sport make some provisions to lower the skyrocketing cost to go racing.? Other forms of racing have been doing it for quite some time.

Do the aftermarket companies have that much influence over the governing body?

The only conclusion I can draw is they just don't give a crap so long as they get enough riders to show up at each race. This indifference IMO fuels the fire of aggravated enthusiasts no matter what strokes you like.


Indy mxer
Posts
1869
Joined
6/15/2010
Location
The Villages, FL, USA
1/14/2011 1:14pm
There are plenty of people in this thread on both sides making sensible posts. With a couple exceptions it's one of the more reasonable long threads...
There are plenty of people in this thread on both sides making sensible posts. With a couple exceptions it's one of the more reasonable long threads on the board in awhile.

There's a lot going on here, love of smokers, concern for entry level riders, and how to deal with the different resources available to the 40/20 guys on the gate. There's other issues, too. I think it helps not to conflate them.

A two stroke is just machine and I don't think it's apt to talk about fairness to two strokes. The fairness issue really is the issue of what's fair in racing where there's a disparity of resources between one rider and another.

There's always going to be a disparity of resources in racing, and better talent will almost always attract more resources. You can't escape that.

Saying the two stroke is an answer or one of many answers to that at the pro level, which is all we're talking about, just chases the problem. If the 250 smoker is so much better than the 250F that it is an inexpensive path to the sort of power PC or FC has, then there is nothing to stop the teams with more resources from exploiting that to continue stretching their advantage.

Can two strokes be a means of giving privateers a leg up on the cost of performance issue? Sure. Do the current displacement rules enable that? Obviously not; no one races two strokes competitively. Would a 150/300 rule be better? Maybe/probably. But then you run into the practical issues with the other OEM's. They'd likely view it as the KTM variant of the "Harley rules" in flat track and the "Ducati rules" in superbike a few years ago; it favors a brand rather than a class of riders scratching it out.

There's a similar thing going on with the 350, which is in the class of four strokes folks believe the OEM's are committed to. The FIM pushed to drop the 450 class to 350, and the other OEM's said no. KTM has come out with the 350, and I think you have to say the jury's out on how successful that investment has been so far.

I don't know what the answer is until the day the sport doesn't need as much OEM money as it does now.
well said.
The bottom line is, until Honda, Kaw and Suz believe that selling 2 strokes again is going to be profitable, they're going to stay with 4 strokes.
For them, it really is all about the money.

Even though there is some demand for them, I think if all the OEM's had them, you'd see a lot of unsold 2 strokes on the showroom floors. And that's the last thing they want after the last couple of years of trying to clear out 2 and 3 year old mx bikes.

I do agree, it would be nice to have 125s and 250s available. But while the few that are out there seem to sell fast in some areas, I feel some are overestimating the demand.

As far as the pros go, there's more than a few forces at work there, I'm going to trust DC on this one.
He's done one hell of a job improving the Nats since he's been in charge!!
Indy mxer
Posts
1869
Joined
6/15/2010
Location
The Villages, FL, USA
1/14/2011 1:20pm
There are plenty of people in this thread on both sides making sensible posts. With a couple exceptions it's one of the more reasonable long threads...
There are plenty of people in this thread on both sides making sensible posts. With a couple exceptions it's one of the more reasonable long threads on the board in awhile.

There's a lot going on here, love of smokers, concern for entry level riders, and how to deal with the different resources available to the 40/20 guys on the gate. There's other issues, too. I think it helps not to conflate them.

A two stroke is just machine and I don't think it's apt to talk about fairness to two strokes. The fairness issue really is the issue of what's fair in racing where there's a disparity of resources between one rider and another.

There's always going to be a disparity of resources in racing, and better talent will almost always attract more resources. You can't escape that.

Saying the two stroke is an answer or one of many answers to that at the pro level, which is all we're talking about, just chases the problem. If the 250 smoker is so much better than the 250F that it is an inexpensive path to the sort of power PC or FC has, then there is nothing to stop the teams with more resources from exploiting that to continue stretching their advantage.

Can two strokes be a means of giving privateers a leg up on the cost of performance issue? Sure. Do the current displacement rules enable that? Obviously not; no one races two strokes competitively. Would a 150/300 rule be better? Maybe/probably. But then you run into the practical issues with the other OEM's. They'd likely view it as the KTM variant of the "Harley rules" in flat track and the "Ducati rules" in superbike a few years ago; it favors a brand rather than a class of riders scratching it out.

There's a similar thing going on with the 350, which is in the class of four strokes folks believe the OEM's are committed to. The FIM pushed to drop the 450 class to 350, and the other OEM's said no. KTM has come out with the 350, and I think you have to say the jury's out on how successful that investment has been so far.

I don't know what the answer is until the day the sport doesn't need as much OEM money as it does now.
rocrac wrote:
In terms of trying to provide a more level playing field the easiest solution would be to limit the amount of modifications that can be done...
In terms of trying to provide a more level playing field the easiest solution would be to limit the amount of modifications that can be done to these bikes especially the 250 class.

Why in this difficult economy wouldn't the caretakers of the sport make some provisions to lower the skyrocketing cost to go racing.? Other forms of racing have been doing it for quite some time.

Do the aftermarket companies have that much influence over the governing body?

The only conclusion I can draw is they just don't give a crap so long as they get enough riders to show up at each race. This indifference IMO fuels the fire of aggravated enthusiasts no matter what strokes you like.


I agree with that rocrac. I think it's time to put some limits on the SX 250 class. The difference between the haves and have nots, seems to be getting larger all the time.
I'm not saying we need to become NASCAR, but a move in that direction might help.

But, as always, I could be wrong!
JB 19
Posts
4343
Joined
3/8/2009
Location
Marion, OH, USA
1/14/2011 1:42pm Edited Date/Time 1/14/2011 1:47pm
seth505 wrote:
JB 19, not trying to say you are wrong but in the 90s I worked a paper route and worked as a dish washer to afford...
JB 19, not trying to say you are wrong but in the 90s I worked a paper route and worked as a dish washer to afford racing and save up for a new bike. I remember my first brand new bike was a 94 yz80. I forget but the retail was like 2800 or so and I got it from a shop for like 400 under, so around 2500 bucks and I paid cash. That felt good. Never got another brand new bike until my 09 yz 250 last year.
I"m not disputing the fact that a kid can't afford or couldn't afford to buy a dirt bike. What I keep saying is the "racing life style." Racing every weekend: transportation to the track, buying new tires, paying entry fees, buying different district memberships, repairing the bike when you get in a first turn crash......



Sure a kid can buy a bike and ride on his uncles land......supporting a racing habit every weekend is different and thats what I was talking about because thats what the guys were talking about when they said kids used go racing simply by "mowing yards."



I find it hard to believe that anyone has done that since the 70's. This stuff has been getting more expensive for a long time. I don't know the answer, but bringing back 2 strokes is not going to make us all sing the Sesame Street song. Some of the cost may go down, but the bikes will still cost 6-7000$. ........and how long til they put fuel injection on those 2 strokes.....it will happen...you can't stop the march on of technology......
Dropbear
Posts
1568
Joined
5/7/2008
Location
Adelaide, AU
1/14/2011 1:50pm Edited Date/Time 1/14/2011 1:51pm
We had a "Stock appearing" rule locally for a while, meaning bikes had to look stock from a certain distance, but that would not really work with 4 strokes.

With 2 strokes it was OK as a port job did not break the bank.
wpark89
Posts
1161
Joined
12/9/2009
Location
Mattawa, WA, USA
1/14/2011 1:55pm
newmann wrote:
I think the six race series would be perfect. It would be on the off weekends of the WMA races. They could be spaced out far...
I think the six race series would be perfect. It would be on the off weekends of the WMA races. They could be spaced out far enough so that working families would have time to recover and get everything back in order to get to the next race. Never have to worry about criss-crossing the country from one weekend to the next. As a national series, there would of course be those serious about the championship and then there would be those just wanting to hit some of the races close to them. If it came down to it, make your best five out of six overalls count towards the championship allowing you to drop your worst finish or the race you couldn't make.

The time frame is already there on a race weekend as it would occupy the same time slots as the WMA classes do.

Since it would be sort of an "experimental" class to test the waters, drop the homologation rules for the class and allow the OEM's to bring over enough 125's to fill the demand. TM, Husky, KTM and some of thos cottage industry Euro names that are popping up would be cool to see at a top level event here in the US. Maybe, just maybe Cobra has a 125 in the works??? There was rumor of that a few months back. Would Pro-Circuit show up and dominate? Who knows, but another AMA rule says a bike can't be over five years old. That puts the KX's pretty close to being ineligible. Might be good to drop that rule too. Regardless I would love to hear a full gate of tiddlers at full song.
My hypothetical Racer X 2 stroke Rookie Cup

4 races. 2 at a West Coast National. 2 at a East Coast National.

1 East Champion, 1 West. I think initially running a nation wide 6 race series is too much to bite off. Winners get a full page picture and interview in the mag…benefiting sponsors.

They should run on non WMA weekends and fill their time slot.

The cc limit is 144. (otherwise everyone’s going to cheat and cause complications) It would be dumb to exclude KTM’s or any of the Japanese 125’s that have been overbored. Absolutely drop the homologation rule.

Can we guarantee 30 upper level rider capable of putting on a show? It has to look professional. The gate needs to be close to full. It can’t be Novice riders on 10 year old bikes.

WMA riders should be allowed to compete (given of course that they are on a 2 stroke) I don’t know if setting a certain age limit should be in effect either. Try to keep it as broad as possible to encourage participation. How about anyone who has ever scored National or SX points or made a main can’t compete.

Can we get sponsors to support it? Would the manufactures support it? Would Yamaha, KTM, or Husky commit to having a few riders on their machines at each event? If they feel there is potential to make money they will. How many 3 year old 4 strokes do they have to have sitting on their dealers floors before they decide….hmmmmm……maybe we need to reevaluate.
themrtoad
Posts
1254
Joined
5/29/2009
Location
SE
1/14/2011 2:53pm
FlaNard wrote:
More two strokes at the track every week. Fewer riders at the track every week. More tracks closing. A pro system set up to where if...
More two strokes at the track every week. Fewer riders at the track every week. More tracks closing. A pro system set up to where if you are on a 250f and not riding for a major team you have NO shot. Thus far, the only response I have heard is "Well, we cant do anything. Honda may take their ball and go home." So this is 100% controlled by what Honda wants. Good to know that they have the sport and its future as their primary interest. And to the people who claim that Nascar is doing fine as a spectator sport and that tv trumps sales, maybe you should go take a look at how badly Nascar is doing right now. They even did a Daily Show on it last night. Its going down hill fast. So is Motocross. If you kill the riders, you kill the sport. Do you think my future kids will give a shit about watching rich kids ride around doing something they can never afford to do? I doubt it. Meanwhile Mitch and FC will continue to dominate and get a pat on the back for beating overmatched kids who barely break even if lucky. But you say leave it alone or Honda will take its ball and go home. What a group of forward thinking leaders we have. That must be why all the tracks are closing. We have no leaders.
I totally agrre with you. You have to scratch a bit on the surface, but when you do that you see we are really a sport in big trouble.
CR250Rider
Posts
6706
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Moses Lake, WA, USA
1/14/2011 3:34pm
There are plenty of people in this thread on both sides making sensible posts. With a couple exceptions it's one of the more reasonable long threads...
There are plenty of people in this thread on both sides making sensible posts. With a couple exceptions it's one of the more reasonable long threads on the board in awhile.

There's a lot going on here, love of smokers, concern for entry level riders, and how to deal with the different resources available to the 40/20 guys on the gate. There's other issues, too. I think it helps not to conflate them.

A two stroke is just machine and I don't think it's apt to talk about fairness to two strokes. The fairness issue really is the issue of what's fair in racing where there's a disparity of resources between one rider and another.

There's always going to be a disparity of resources in racing, and better talent will almost always attract more resources. You can't escape that.

Saying the two stroke is an answer or one of many answers to that at the pro level, which is all we're talking about, just chases the problem. If the 250 smoker is so much better than the 250F that it is an inexpensive path to the sort of power PC or FC has, then there is nothing to stop the teams with more resources from exploiting that to continue stretching their advantage.

Can two strokes be a means of giving privateers a leg up on the cost of performance issue? Sure. Do the current displacement rules enable that? Obviously not; no one races two strokes competitively. Would a 150/300 rule be better? Maybe/probably. But then you run into the practical issues with the other OEM's. They'd likely view it as the KTM variant of the "Harley rules" in flat track and the "Ducati rules" in superbike a few years ago; it favors a brand rather than a class of riders scratching it out.

There's a similar thing going on with the 350, which is in the class of four strokes folks believe the OEM's are committed to. The FIM pushed to drop the 450 class to 350, and the other OEM's said no. KTM has come out with the 350, and I think you have to say the jury's out on how successful that investment has been so far.

I don't know what the answer is until the day the sport doesn't need as much OEM money as it does now.
"A two stroke is just machine and I don't think it's apt to talk about fairness to two strokes. The fairness issue really is the issue of what's fair in racing where there's a disparity of resources between one rider and another. "


YAMAHA YZ250 VERSUS YAMAHA YZ250F



Q: WHICH BIKE PRODUCES THE BEST LAP TIMES?

A: Although MXA had a wide range of test riders spend time on both bikes, we left all lap time testing to a single test rider. We picked a 20-something Intermediate test rider because he was old enough to have raced a 250cc two-stroke and yet not immune to the charms of a four-stroke.

When we examined his lap times, taken from actual races not hot laps, we weren’t surprised to discover that his laps times on both the two-stroke and four-stroke were almost identical. Read that again. His lap times were identical regardless of which bike he was on. Across the board, if an MXA test rider could turn in a 2:35 on the YZ250, he could back it up with a 2:35 on the YZ250F in the next moto.


source: MXA
hellion
Posts
1089
Joined
12/19/2009
Location
Westfield, MA, USA
1/14/2011 3:54pm
DC used a pretty big portion of his editorial in this weeks Racerhead to discuss the issue we are hashing out here. I don't agree with his opinion that the factory teams will turn and run like they did in road racing ( they are completely different sports with completely different demographics ) but I respect his thoughts on the matter.

This thread made an impression on one of the most powerful men in Moto. We didn't win him over yet, but the fact that he couldn't help but notice is a start.

I remember a couple of years ago when DC first took over that he was really considering allowing the two strokes to be included in the lights program outdoors. His opinion has since gone the other way, but if enough of us get together on this just maybe we can change his way of thinking again.
Motodude
Posts
5281
Joined
2/2/2008
Location
Sydney, AU
1/14/2011 4:11pm Edited Date/Time 1/14/2011 4:14pm
Smokers will be back, thumpers will go back to being used for boat anchors, but watch out for Ebikes! 2 strokes are more fun, cleaning running, easier to ride and cheaper to maintain. period. There are a number of semi-pro unsponsored riders who'll be on 2 strokes this season downudner.



I would be super happy if they brought back the 500's for a universal AMA/FIM genuine outdoor GP series, which would run AFTER the SX series..



FreshTopEnd
Posts
13286
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
1/14/2011 4:13pm
CR250Rider wrote:
[i][b]"A two stroke is just machine and I don't think it's apt to talk about fairness to two strokes. The fairness issue really is the issue...
"A two stroke is just machine and I don't think it's apt to talk about fairness to two strokes. The fairness issue really is the issue of what's fair in racing where there's a disparity of resources between one rider and another. "


YAMAHA YZ250 VERSUS YAMAHA YZ250F



Q: WHICH BIKE PRODUCES THE BEST LAP TIMES?

A: Although MXA had a wide range of test riders spend time on both bikes, we left all lap time testing to a single test rider. We picked a 20-something Intermediate test rider because he was old enough to have raced a 250cc two-stroke and yet not immune to the charms of a four-stroke.

When we examined his lap times, taken from actual races not hot laps, we weren’t surprised to discover that his laps times on both the two-stroke and four-stroke were almost identical. Read that again. His lap times were identical regardless of which bike he was on. Across the board, if an MXA test rider could turn in a 2:35 on the YZ250, he could back it up with a 2:35 on the YZ250F in the next moto.


source: MXA
Are we talking about intermediates who can buy and race two strokes, or professional racing and the 300 or so people who have deal with the pro rules? I thought it was the latter, especially on the fairness issue.

So what does that article have to do with that? My recollection is that it stated that it takes more skill to extract all of the power of a 250 smoker and that 250 bangers were easier for less skilled riders to go fast one.

My "fairness" point is that fairness is an human concept that relates to people, not an inanimate machine. It was in response to a question whether I thought the displacement rules were "fair" to two strokes. Let's keep the fairness notion focused where it belongs. Machines are an instrumentality, not the main point. If the issue is problems with fairness for professional privateers with limited resources, that's a lot bigger problem that "two stroke fairness." Changing the displacement rules to better suit two strokes may be a means to that end, but it's not an end in itself for the sake of the two stroke ethic.
OW38B
Posts
3619
Joined
8/17/2006
Location
Coto de Caza, CA, USA
1/14/2011 10:19pm
Seems that these two stroke and/or MXA threads are a tad popular on here lately.



HOGIE888
Posts
23
Joined
4/2/2010
Location
Glendale Heights, IL, USA
1/14/2011 10:38pm
hellion wrote:
It seems like the hip thing to do to bash Jody and MXA these days. He's older than the other current editors, seems to be grouchy...
It seems like the hip thing to do to bash Jody and MXA these days. He's older than the other current editors, seems to be grouchy, and is set in his ways.

On the other hand he lives for Moto, still races and rides weekly, and has vast experience with the machinery we ride and the people who are responsible for building it. Plus he is not afraid to speak his mind regardless of who he offends.

Lately he has really been pushing the two stroke issue. He has been in the sport longer than just about anyone, has seen where it's been, and has a good idea about where it's going. I applaud him for using his voice to make a difference. For a long time I've thought this two stroke vs. four stroke argument was futile. The four stroke was being crammed down out throats and there was nothing we could do about it. But these threads keep popping up more and more regularly, and more and more two strokes keep showing up at the tracks and trails. Surely the manufacturers must be feeling the sting of decreased sales. KTM can't keep their two stroke line in stock though. Is anyone paying attention at the wheel.

I see now that the main problem is the AMA, and their resistance to change a simple rule. Sure, all the manufacturers would have a fit at first, but ten years from now when the sport is growing again they will see this as a landmark moment in our sports history. Make the 450 class a true 450 class, two strokes and four strokes up to 450 cc's. The same with the 250's. And for gods sake bring back the 125 class. Kids moving off 85's onto 250f's makes so little sense it's unbelievable.

I'm dating myself here, but when I was coming up we used to have four classes. 100's, 125's, 250's, and open. And all the experts raced all the classes. Bikes were relativeley cheap, and you'd race half the year in 100's and 250's, and the other half on 125's and open's. And you know what? The 100's were a freaking blast to race. Sure they were slow, but man you had to wring that thing out and be real creative and smart with line choice and race craft. You should have seen JoJo Keller make a 100 go, and he was a pretty big boy even then. The racing was both affordable and exciting to watch or participate in.

I know Steve Matthes is working at Racer X again and he probably likes his job and doesn't want to piss Davey off too much. But I've even heard him complain that four strokes have ruined racing. And he's just talking about it as a pure spectator. He is so right. Go on youtube and look up any race from the 90's and tell me it's not way more exciting than todays racing where they crawl through the corner and then blast off leaping the whole straight. Watch Reed ride his YZ250 and appreciate an awesome display of talent, or RC just flogging his KX and swapping and bucking and never letting off. You can't ride a 450 like that, you'd get splattered. It makes the racing boring when there is only one guy (JS) willing to hang onto a 450 on the limit.

I guess that if we speak with our wallets we can eventually effect a change here. But it will be slow and the sport will suffer greatly in the meantime. The AMA could make the change happen a lot faster, but do they have the balls? I doubt it.
Real Motocross people don't give a rat's ass whose to blame anymore, we just want it fixed


then hold a gun to the heads to the manufacturers! it is very smiple.
HOGIE888
Posts
23
Joined
4/2/2010
Location
Glendale Heights, IL, USA
1/14/2011 10:47pm
CamP wrote:
Egos and greed are going to saw off the limb that this sport is standing on.
CamP wrote: Egos and greed are going to saw off the limb that this sport is standing on.


read....DC and MX Sports.......
HOGIE888
Posts
23
Joined
4/2/2010
Location
Glendale Heights, IL, USA
1/14/2011 10:55pm Edited Date/Time 1/14/2011 10:55pm
kaboom645 wrote:
I've bought 3( (2) YZ250's and a KTM250sx) in the last year.. I also bought a 450F.. When I sold my YZ250's I sold one for...
I've bought 3( (2) YZ250's and a KTM250sx) in the last year.. I also bought a 450F.. When I sold my YZ250's I sold one for what I paid for it, and the other for a few hundred more... My 450F, well thats a sore subject as I barely got half of what i paid for it, and we wont even get into the $4300 repair bill it cost me when it blew up on the 3rd ride.. I am VERY happy with my less than 1 yr old 250sx, and right now I have a guy throwing money at me to get it.. He is currently at $5500, once he gets to $6000 I will let him have it and get a 2012.. Regardless though I am ordering a 2012 in April
gaines1016 wrote:
how in the name of all that is holy do you blow up a 450 on its third ride.
wrote: how in the name of all that is holy do you blow up a 450 on its third ride


thats easy.....its a 4 stroke!!!
the_wood109
Posts
3008
Joined
7/6/2008
Location
Edgewater, FL, USA
1/14/2011 10:58pm
There are plenty of people in this thread on both sides making sensible posts. With a couple exceptions it's one of the more reasonable long threads...
There are plenty of people in this thread on both sides making sensible posts. With a couple exceptions it's one of the more reasonable long threads on the board in awhile.

There's a lot going on here, love of smokers, concern for entry level riders, and how to deal with the different resources available to the 40/20 guys on the gate. There's other issues, too. I think it helps not to conflate them.

A two stroke is just machine and I don't think it's apt to talk about fairness to two strokes. The fairness issue really is the issue of what's fair in racing where there's a disparity of resources between one rider and another.

There's always going to be a disparity of resources in racing, and better talent will almost always attract more resources. You can't escape that.

Saying the two stroke is an answer or one of many answers to that at the pro level, which is all we're talking about, just chases the problem. If the 250 smoker is so much better than the 250F that it is an inexpensive path to the sort of power PC or FC has, then there is nothing to stop the teams with more resources from exploiting that to continue stretching their advantage.

Can two strokes be a means of giving privateers a leg up on the cost of performance issue? Sure. Do the current displacement rules enable that? Obviously not; no one races two strokes competitively. Would a 150/300 rule be better? Maybe/probably. But then you run into the practical issues with the other OEM's. They'd likely view it as the KTM variant of the "Harley rules" in flat track and the "Ducati rules" in superbike a few years ago; it favors a brand rather than a class of riders scratching it out.

There's a similar thing going on with the 350, which is in the class of four strokes folks believe the OEM's are committed to. The FIM pushed to drop the 450 class to 350, and the other OEM's said no. KTM has come out with the 350, and I think you have to say the jury's out on how successful that investment has been so far.

I don't know what the answer is until the day the sport doesn't need as much OEM money as it does now.
Great post, man. However, the Ducati rules seem to be more of a plague to road racing. Their logic seems to be to increase the displacement of twins when they aren't winning. Nevermind the fact that they have the best torque curves and higest top speeds. Ducati also has the resources available to produce the fastest 4cyl. engine on the track.

Harley rules became Buell rules in AMA road racing as well. Where else could you race a 1400cc twin against a 600cc 4 cyl. (both 4 stroke, might I add.)

The point is that this isn't really comparable. MotoGP went through a period that had 2 and four strokes together, as did motocross and supercross. However, they were never really equal.

The manufacturers self regulate. Honda left the board in DMG road racing because they were racing against 1400cc Buells. They have since made changes, but the reputation is forever damaged. If anyone has the resources to make a racebike, it is Harley. The Jap companies self regulate, it is a pretty good thing.

Again I say that it doesn't matter if the bike has 2 strokes or 4. The best way to keep any type of racing fair is have them all similar.
HOGIE888
Posts
23
Joined
4/2/2010
Location
Glendale Heights, IL, USA
1/14/2011 11:06pm
JB 19 wrote:
I didn't get to read the whole thread, but the problem I see is that the cat is out if the bag with 4 strokes being...
I didn't get to read the whole thread, but the problem I see is that the cat is out if the bag with 4 strokes being better. I don't know if they are good or bad for the sport...........but the bottom line that many can't accept is that if we go back to 2 strokes that means going backward in performance and I don't see that happening.

For the guy just trail riding out riding for fun it doesn't matter.......for the guy who views racing just slightly less important than eating the performance difference is important.
CR500Rider wrote:
Backwards in performance? You got to be kidding. A modded 2011 450 4 stroke won't make the Hp or Torque numbers a 25 year old CR500...
Backwards in performance? You got to be kidding. A modded 2011 450 4 stroke won't make the Hp or Torque numbers a 25 year old CR500 did. You can throw that tractable and easy to ride garbage out the window. If you ride it correctly you hook up and move forward, if not, you dig ruts and tire yourself out. Lap times? Pffffft. I raced a 450 once. Guys I normally run away from were on my butt AND I got tired quicker. It felt heavier, had less power and turned as bad, if not worse than a steel framed CR500. So you can ride the whole track in 2 gears on a 450, so can I. The bottom line is 4 strokes are only better if given a huge displacement advantage and it took FI and alot of engineering to do that. 4 strokes are good for one thing and that's being chassis donors for 2 stroke engines.
4 strokes are good for one thing and that's being chassis donors for 2 stroke engines.


amen, brother, amen!!!!!

Post a reply to: Jody, MXA, Two Strokes and Matthes

The Latest