At waht point does KTM atleast try the 450?

Dropbear
Posts
1571
Joined
5/7/2008
Location
Adelaide AU
1/11/2011 1:49am
So if we detuned a 450 to produce 350 power and shaved 3 pounds we would have a better bike?

Just thinking out loud.
mumhra
Posts
432
Joined
8/19/2008
Location
BE
1/11/2011 2:10am
No idea. Shaving of weight will help for sure. If 3 pounds will help ? No idea. It's not a lot, but it is better then nothing. Every pound you can shave off will increase the handling of the bike i think.

But that is not the real question. The question is if we really need the power a 450 delivers. Won't it be easier if you just have a little less power, but a less agressive bike.
If we go 10 years back in time we had the 250 and 500 cc class in Europe. In 2001 and 2002 Stefan Everts won the world championship 500 cc and Mickael Pichon won teh world championship 250 cc. At some events we saw the 250cc and 500 cc ride on the same day, on the same track. And every single time, if you looked at lap times or total race times, Michael Pichon was faster. Why ? Was Pichon faster then Everts or was the 250 cc bike faster then the 500 cc bike ? The answer came in 2003 when they merged the 500cc and 250 cc together in 1 class, the motogp class. Everybody thought that Everts would get his ass kicked big time, but Everts became world champion. And he again beat Pichon in 2004 and 2005. Was Everts better then Pichon ? I think so yes. So how was it possible that in 2001 and 2002 Pichon was faster, even though he was on a 250 cc bike and Everts on the big 500 ? My guess is that back then the 250 cc was better, although it produced a lot less horsepower compared to the big bike. It was lighter, more agile, easier to control.
So yes.. i think that at some tracks the 350 will have an advantage over the 450. And at other tracks it will be the other way around. And the same goes for the riders as well. Some riders will like the 350 better, other riders will like the 450 better.

No matter how you turn it. I think KTM made a fantastic bike. For us amateurs the 350 is without a doubt the better bike. Just read Paul Malins test on it. For pro riders however, it can vary.
jamma10
Posts
10576
Joined
8/24/2008
Location
Bristol GB
1/11/2011 3:38am
jamma10 wrote:
Alessi is not a solid Supercross rider so lets just consider Andrew Shorts Supercross credentials for a moment... Is he faster than Villopoto? No Is he...
Alessi is not a solid Supercross rider so lets just consider Andrew Shorts Supercross credentials for a moment...



Is he faster than Villopoto? No

Is he faster than Dungey? No

Is he faster than Stewart? No.

Is he faster than Canard? Debatable.

Is he faster than Reed? No.

Is he faster than Windham? Debatable, probably not.



That leaves Tedesco... who got the holeshot, Metcalfe... who was 2nd/3rd into the first couple of corners... and Grant who is roughly the same speed as Short on a 450.



While Alessi gated third in the main event, Short didn't get a good start (it happens) and settled into 10th after the first couple or corners. During the race he overtook Alessi and Millsaps and was only overtaken by... you guessed it, two of the most winningest SX riders in history Stewart & Reed.



I cannot see for the life of me why is his 10th place seems such a disaster to some people?
RaceFace wrote:
Tedesco go the what.....? What was it Tedesco got......? Oh, the holeshot. Holeshots are a huge help in SX and MX. Short had plenty in 2010...
Tedesco go the what.....?
What was it Tedesco got......?

Oh, the holeshot.

Holeshots are a huge help in SX and MX. Short had plenty in 2010 MX and they were a big part of him getting good results.

You are right though, 10th isn't a disaster in 2011. Short should be as fast as Tedesco though, and pretty much beat him week in and week out in SX 2010.
My point was that Tedesco and Metcalfe both got killer starts and stayed upfront for a number of laps before slowly dropping towards the bottom half of the top ten. Unless you're either (a) within the top 5 off the start or (b) blessed with the same exceptional skill level as a James Stewart or Chad Reed the likelihood is that the you'll be stuck in a gaggle of riders mid pack and within two or three laps the leaders will be gone.

Tedesco rode awesome for the majority of the Main on Saturday, whether or not you think Short is better than him, you can't take that fact away from Ivan, likewise Metcalfe. I just find it funny that some people see it as some sort of travesty that neither Short of Alessi got the holeshot when there are what, 20 other gifted riders to contend with, some of whom even have flippin' launch controls now!

For the record Im by no means 'in love with the bike' as you suggest... I've always ridden Honda's and Suzuki's and have no immediate intention of buying a 350. Im not a huge Alessi fan but I admire Shorts understated talent. I simply take issue with people who don't assess at the situation regarding these race results logically and without any sort of reasoning.

Some people seem intent on trying to label the KTM350 as some sort of conspiracy thats been hatched to fool you all or something.

jleews6
Posts
2305
Joined
8/3/2008
Location
Hardy, VA US
1/11/2011 4:09am
Dropbear wrote:
So if we detuned a 450 to produce 350 power and shaved 3 pounds we would have a better bike?

Just thinking out loud.
Absolutely! Its that 3 pounds man.Who care about all that power under the curve that you loose its that three pounds.lol

The Shop

1/11/2011 4:41am
Maybe what people are getting anxious about is the fact that it just seems counter productive for KTM to be holding this 350 line while they have a great 450 sitting around unpromoted in the grand TV commercial that is Supercross.

Send guys out to get flogged riding this 350, while a perfectly good 450 model sits unspoken for? They can't even put ONE GUY out there on the 450 to see what they get???

People are just wondering what's going on there, and rightly so!

It seems stupid because it IS stupid.
Faceaz
Posts
1365
Joined
7/28/2008
Location
Glendale, AZ US
1/11/2011 4:43am
Faceaz wrote:
Next thing you will tell me, no one has ever said: A 350 can't be competitive against full blown 450's. There's no way a bike 100cc's...
Next thing you will tell me, no one has ever said:

A 350 can't be competitive against full blown 450's.
There's no way a bike 100cc's down can be competive.
People with 350's better sell them quick, they are a POS.
KTM's marketing ploy to take over with the 350 is a total flop.
Making the 350 is the worst marketing decision ever.
The 350 has killed two of the best holeshot artists.
etc.
etc.

None of that sounds anti 350.

Do you believe the BS you spew? Your a waste of time.
RaceFace wrote:
It's absurd that your defense of a bike...a freaking bike.....relegates you to name calling. Are you on the KTM design team or something? It's a bike...
It's absurd that your defense of a bike...a freaking bike.....relegates you to name calling. Are you on the KTM design team or something? It's a bike. This is a phenomena I have never heard of or seen before regarding a particular bike. People just love this bike! What exactly is it about this bike that you love so much that you need to call me waste of time? You'd think people said something about someone's mother the way people react to any comments about the 350.

Dude - I don't think we're reading the same posts. What name did I call you? You didn't answer - have you never seen posts like those before? - I consider them "anti 350" & there are people that don't like the 350. That's a waste of time, because comments like those are plasterred across the internet, but apparently you've never seen them. I don't care if people like or dislike the bike, but it's a statement of fact that people make comments like that all the time.
mumhra
Posts
432
Joined
8/19/2008
Location
BE
1/11/2011 4:45am
Why is James Stewart, over a single lap, so much faster then everybody else ? Because his bike is more powerfull ? I don't think so. James is faster because he seems to be a lot more in control. He does things with a bike no other rider can do. That is just because he seems to be more talented then other riders.
So.. take Andrew Short for instance. If James is more talented, then it is only fair to say that Andrew is less talented. And last year they were both on 450's so their bikes had roughly the same power. The difference was that James was more in control of his bike and therefor faster. So what does Andrew want to do ? He wants to be in control of his bike, just like James Stewart is. Going back to the 350, which is a bike that is easier to ride, means that Andrew will be more in control. He has to loose a little bit of power, but he is more in control of his bike. So do you really think Andrew will be faster on a sx-f 450 ? I don't think so.
R-acer
Posts
4047
Joined
3/20/2008
Location
Toronto CA
1/11/2011 5:00am
KTM is now committed and they are going to have to run with the 350 no matter what.
If they stop racing it, they may as well stop making them because they will be admitting defeat, and people aren’t going to want them.


jamma10
Posts
10576
Joined
8/24/2008
Location
Bristol GB
1/11/2011 5:26am Edited Date/Time 1/11/2011 5:27am
Its 'probably' the perfect bike for the amateur rider who will never learn to ride a 450 to its full potential. These people won't ever have to attempt to nail a 100ft quad every lap. In fact pretty much all the subtle power related differences between a 350 and a 450 at the very top level are virtually insignificant in terms of the common rider, so why why even concern yourself with it?
1/11/2011 6:33am
I disagree with this idea that 450s are too much for amateurs.

When you ride a slow 450, you know it's a slow 450, just as you do when you ride a fast one. Just because the average guy doesn't ride a 450 to it's full potential doesn't mean he'll then go and ride a 250f to it's full potential either.

In fact how many people can truly ride a 125 2 stroke to it's full potential? How many people, Pro or otherwise, can ride a 125 like James Stewart? Yet the majority of people will still be a damn sight faster on the 450. I may not be riding a 450 anywhere near it's potential but that doesn't mean I won't be slower if I then go and jump on a 350 (in fact in my case I most definitely would be).

Amateur or Pro, it doesn't matter. It's only RELATIVE to the rider in question.

The area of the power band I occupy at my skill level is more powerful, more usable on a bigger bike than it is on a smaller one. It doesn't make a damn bit of difference to my universe whether I'm riding the bike in question as well as it can be ridden. It's irrelevant.

And in Shorts case, though it's too early to tell for sure right now - a 350 Andrew Short may prove to be slower than a 450 Andrew Short. It's irrelevant what James can do because Andrew's not James. The only thing that matter's is AS 350 vs AS 450, and is there a difference?

Personally I think it's too early to tell, in fact we may never know for sure. Though I must say, at this stage I I have trouble believing that dropping a 100 cc without dropping much weight won't have an effect on a rider's performance.
R-acer
Posts
4047
Joined
3/20/2008
Location
Toronto CA
1/11/2011 6:38am Edited Date/Time 1/11/2011 6:39am
I disagree with this idea that 450s are too much for amateurs. When you ride a slow 450, you know it's a slow 450, just as...
I disagree with this idea that 450s are too much for amateurs.

When you ride a slow 450, you know it's a slow 450, just as you do when you ride a fast one. Just because the average guy doesn't ride a 450 to it's full potential doesn't mean he'll then go and ride a 250f to it's full potential either.

In fact how many people can truly ride a 125 2 stroke to it's full potential? How many people, Pro or otherwise, can ride a 125 like James Stewart? Yet the majority of people will still be a damn sight faster on the 450. I may not be riding a 450 anywhere near it's potential but that doesn't mean I won't be slower if I then go and jump on a 350 (in fact in my case I most definitely would be).

Amateur or Pro, it doesn't matter. It's only RELATIVE to the rider in question.

The area of the power band I occupy at my skill level is more powerful, more usable on a bigger bike than it is on a smaller one. It doesn't make a damn bit of difference to my universe whether I'm riding the bike in question as well as it can be ridden. It's irrelevant.

And in Shorts case, though it's too early to tell for sure right now - a 350 Andrew Short may prove to be slower than a 450 Andrew Short. It's irrelevant what James can do because Andrew's not James. The only thing that matter's is AS 350 vs AS 450, and is there a difference?

Personally I think it's too early to tell, in fact we may never know for sure. Though I must say, at this stage I I have trouble believing that dropping a 100 cc without dropping much weight won't have an effect on a rider's performance.
I agree with you. Good way to break it down.



I can ride a 450 faster than I can ride a 250F, and yet my son will go by me like I am in reverse on his 250F.

TerryB
Posts
2758
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Cambridge, MN US
1/11/2011 6:42am
jamma10 wrote:
My point was that Tedesco and Metcalfe both got killer starts and stayed upfront for a number of laps before slowly dropping towards the bottom half...
My point was that Tedesco and Metcalfe both got killer starts and stayed upfront for a number of laps before slowly dropping towards the bottom half of the top ten. Unless you're either (a) within the top 5 off the start or (b) blessed with the same exceptional skill level as a James Stewart or Chad Reed the likelihood is that the you'll be stuck in a gaggle of riders mid pack and within two or three laps the leaders will be gone.

Tedesco rode awesome for the majority of the Main on Saturday, whether or not you think Short is better than him, you can't take that fact away from Ivan, likewise Metcalfe. I just find it funny that some people see it as some sort of travesty that neither Short of Alessi got the holeshot when there are what, 20 other gifted riders to contend with, some of whom even have flippin' launch controls now!

For the record Im by no means 'in love with the bike' as you suggest... I've always ridden Honda's and Suzuki's and have no immediate intention of buying a 350. Im not a huge Alessi fan but I admire Shorts understated talent. I simply take issue with people who don't assess at the situation regarding these race results logically and without any sort of reasoning.

Some people seem intent on trying to label the KTM350 as some sort of conspiracy thats been hatched to fool you all or something.

Stop using logic. Most of these Monkeys can't, or refuse to comprehend.
jamma10
Posts
10576
Joined
8/24/2008
Location
Bristol GB
1/11/2011 6:53am
I guess I mean how manageable the bike is, and most amateurs will find manouvering a 350 slightly easier than a 450, which lets be honest is an incredibly powerful motorbike. Anyone can pin the throttle in a straight line, so races are generally won primarily in the way you corner, rather than down the straights.

But I agree that it wont make everyone faster. It'll be personal preference... Ive seen 125 experts beat a field of experts on 450's... which was my point really and why Short or Alessi's results generally mean shit to the rest of us.
TerryB
Posts
2758
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Cambridge, MN US
1/11/2011 7:10am Edited Date/Time 1/11/2011 7:16am
Probably a great amateur bike. I do think it's more than likely a disadvantage in the pro ranks, but most amateur R-acers riding 450's can't come close to using all their power, and would get smoked by a decent rider on a 125.



Give them some time to sort it out.



I'm on the fence, regarding Cairoli's bike being a 350.
jamma10
Posts
10576
Joined
8/24/2008
Location
Bristol GB
1/11/2011 7:29am Edited Date/Time 1/11/2011 7:30am
TerryB wrote:
Probably a great amateur bike. I do think it's more than likely a disadvantage in the pro ranks, but most amateur R-acers riding 450's can't come...
Probably a great amateur bike. I do think it's more than likely a disadvantage in the pro ranks, but most amateur R-acers riding 450's can't come close to using all their power, and would get smoked by a decent rider on a 125.



Give them some time to sort it out.



I'm on the fence, regarding Cairoli's bike being a 350.
Unless somehow they've crowbarred a 450 engine into his frame he's still significantly underpowered compared to the factory 450's with all their engine mods. His riding style makes the 350 work, he loves the bike and Im yet to hear one person who has ridden a 350 say anything negative about it - from amateur to Pro. There was seasoned vet guy on here not so long ago singing its praises... but guess that could just have been a ktm employee right? ha.



What you also have to consider is whether KTM are really prepared to risk their entire reputation and all the effort they have spent building such a strong brand in off road motorcycling by lying about it?



I just don't understand the logic behined this constant this witch hunt. I wish I could remember what the publics reaction was to development of the 4stroke back in the 90's, but at the time I was a teenager and only really concerned with watching the racing!
R-acer
Posts
4047
Joined
3/20/2008
Location
Toronto CA
1/11/2011 7:41am
TerryB wrote:
Probably a great amateur bike. I do think it's more than likely a disadvantage in the pro ranks, but most amateur R-acers riding 450's can't come...
Probably a great amateur bike. I do think it's more than likely a disadvantage in the pro ranks, but most amateur R-acers riding 450's can't come close to using all their power, and would get smoked by a decent rider on a 125.



Give them some time to sort it out.



I'm on the fence, regarding Cairoli's bike being a 350.
TerryB, I think I said that myself. I am calling myself slow. But my point is, i can still go faster on a 450 than a 250f because of the huge grunt and pull that the 450 has. Probably because I am not a super fast rider who can ring out a 250f. And sure, a Fast rider on a 125 can beat me no problem.
And Jamma, there are LOTS of people who tried the 350 and didnt like it. Did you hear Chad read's opinion of it? I also have a friend who got one of the first ones in Canada, he raced it for 3 weekends in a row in the 450 class, then listed it for sale.

Either you have some kind of interest with KTM or you own a 350 and trying to convince yourself that it is a better bike..... It's not.
TerryB
Posts
2758
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Cambridge, MN US
1/11/2011 8:05am Edited Date/Time 1/11/2011 8:08am
R-acer, it was a pun. Relax.



Jamma, I agree that the the 350 is getting bashed before it's been proven to be a success or failure, one way or another, but it's shortcomings, if any, will certainly be pronounced in the pro's, especially outdoors. We'll see.



And I don't equate 222's bike being bored or stroked with KTM risking their entire reputation. The bikes are constantly being developed, and they are free to change displacement over there, are they not? AC's Yamaha was reported to be a 400. I wouldn't be surprised if KTM has found a number in that range that is working better for them, but I also could believe it's a 350. Like I said, I could see it going either way, and I don't think KTM would hesitate to punch it out if they thought they needed more power. Over here is a different story. They don't have that option.



Again, most am's would probably be quite happy riding 350cc bikes.
MikeG.78
Posts
3
Joined
1/7/2011
Location
Austerlitz, NY US
1/11/2011 8:20am
Think of it this way... Short and Alessi are the two best starters in the past two season and it's obvious Mike struggled with starts last summer and both never got a decent start at Anaheim.
jamma10
Posts
10576
Joined
8/24/2008
Location
Bristol GB
1/11/2011 8:21am Edited Date/Time 1/11/2011 8:37am
TerryB wrote:
Probably a great amateur bike. I do think it's more than likely a disadvantage in the pro ranks, but most amateur R-acers riding 450's can't come...
Probably a great amateur bike. I do think it's more than likely a disadvantage in the pro ranks, but most amateur R-acers riding 450's can't come close to using all their power, and would get smoked by a decent rider on a 125.



Give them some time to sort it out.



I'm on the fence, regarding Cairoli's bike being a 350.
R-acer wrote:
TerryB, I think I said that myself. I am calling myself slow. But my point is, i can still go faster on a 450 than a...
TerryB, I think I said that myself. I am calling myself slow. But my point is, i can still go faster on a 450 than a 250f because of the huge grunt and pull that the 450 has. Probably because I am not a super fast rider who can ring out a 250f. And sure, a Fast rider on a 125 can beat me no problem.
And Jamma, there are LOTS of people who tried the 350 and didnt like it. Did you hear Chad read's opinion of it? I also have a friend who got one of the first ones in Canada, he raced it for 3 weekends in a row in the 450 class, then listed it for sale.

Either you have some kind of interest with KTM or you own a 350 and trying to convince yourself that it is a better bike..... It's not.
As I stated above, I have no interest in KTM and I don't even intend to buy a 350 anytime soon. I believe it should suit the majority of amateur riders but I don't necessarily think its a better bike for the pro's, its just a different option.



My only issue in this whole debate really, is to question why people continue to try and prove that its such a bad bike, as though they're gonna be forced into buying one against their will.



People are looking at the results of Anaheim 1, hell even the troubled Alessi's '10 outdoor results, and deciding that it won't be competitive in the amateur ranks, as if the whole thing is just a con.



KTM had a perfectly competitive 450, one of the most powerful on the market, yet they had enough boldness & belief in a new type of bike that they were prepared to stick their neck on the line to build it for the benefit of all of us. Why try and knock them down for that?
jamma10
Posts
10576
Joined
8/24/2008
Location
Bristol GB
1/11/2011 8:27am
MikeG.78 wrote:
Think of it this way... Short and Alessi are the two best starters in the past two season and it's obvious Mike struggled with starts last...
Think of it this way... Short and Alessi are the two best starters in the past two season and it's obvious Mike struggled with starts last summer and both never got a decent start at Anaheim.
In the Main Alessi was third... Short was slow off the line and got squeezed out.

In my opinion they're not the best barometers... KTM should have pushed harder for one of the top 4 or Pourcel.
jamma10
Posts
10576
Joined
8/24/2008
Location
Bristol GB
1/11/2011 8:36am
TerryB wrote:
R-acer, it was a pun. Relax. Jamma, I agree that the the 350 is getting bashed before it's been proven to be a success or failure...
R-acer, it was a pun. Relax.



Jamma, I agree that the the 350 is getting bashed before it's been proven to be a success or failure, one way or another, but it's shortcomings, if any, will certainly be pronounced in the pro's, especially outdoors. We'll see.



And I don't equate 222's bike being bored or stroked with KTM risking their entire reputation. The bikes are constantly being developed, and they are free to change displacement over there, are they not? AC's Yamaha was reported to be a 400. I wouldn't be surprised if KTM has found a number in that range that is working better for them, but I also could believe it's a 350. Like I said, I could see it going either way, and I don't think KTM would hesitate to punch it out if they thought they needed more power. Over here is a different story. They don't have that option.



Again, most am's would probably be quite happy riding 350cc bikes.
Sorry I was just talking in general with reference to Cairoli's bike, I just took what you said about sitting on the fence and ran with it, what I typed wasn't necessarily in direct response to your post.
Faceaz
Posts
1365
Joined
7/28/2008
Location
Glendale, AZ US
1/11/2011 10:04am
R-acer wrote:
KTM is now committed and they are going to have to run with the 350 no matter what. If they stop racing it, they may as...
KTM is now committed and they are going to have to run with the 350 no matter what.
If they stop racing it, they may as well stop making them because they will be admitting defeat, and people aren’t going to want them.


This statement is so far off, here's why & some examples:

KTM is a niche manufacturer, they haven't gotten where they are by competing directly against the Big 4.

When was the last time you saw any of these bikes raced:
125sx
150sx
150xc
250sx
300xc
200xc

KTM makes a ton of different models, that the big 4 don't. They have 100% of the sales in those markets because they have Zero competition.

The 350 is the same deal. There are a ton of people out there that want more power than a 250 & not as much as a 450. My guess is this segment is mostly vet riders & the weekend warriors. KTM will have 100% of these sales because there is no competition. Most vet riders (myself included) could careless about how the 350 finishes in sx because: 1) The bikes KTM (or any manufacturer) is racing far from what's sold on the floor. 2) I know what my wants from a bike are & how it finishes in sx has no impact on my desire because I will never ride sx.

KTM will do excellent with the 350 sales, regardless of how it finishes in sx.
R-acer
Posts
4047
Joined
3/20/2008
Location
Toronto CA
1/11/2011 10:43am
They didn't say anything about it being designed to be a Vet bike. They boldly said it was the "perfect bike" for the 450 class. And that it would handle better and be just as fast...
And from what we are seeing so far, it's a flop. The 2 pro riders that they put on it looks like crap on it, compared to before.
They BOTH looked WAY better on the bikes they came off.
Faceaz
Posts
1365
Joined
7/28/2008
Location
Glendale, AZ US
1/11/2011 10:49am
R-acer wrote:
They didn't say anything about it being designed to be a Vet bike. They boldly said it was the "perfect bike" for the 450 class. And...
They didn't say anything about it being designed to be a Vet bike. They boldly said it was the "perfect bike" for the 450 class. And that it would handle better and be just as fast...
And from what we are seeing so far, it's a flop. The 2 pro riders that they put on it looks like crap on it, compared to before.
They BOTH looked WAY better on the bikes they came off.
I personally don't think Short looks bad on it, just not up to speed. Allessi certainly looks like shit on it. You got a link to the quote, always great to see things out of context?
jamma10
Posts
10576
Joined
8/24/2008
Location
Bristol GB
1/11/2011 10:55am Edited Date/Time 1/11/2011 10:57am
Why did Short look like crap?
wow123
Posts
1164
Joined
4/27/2010
Location
AX
1/11/2011 2:22pm
hmmm dealing with interweb people

here you are debating with guys you would not listen to

about bike advice if you saw them ride or saw their bike set up

at a track.



katooom
Posts
494
Joined
9/3/2010
Location
Broad Run, VA US
1/11/2011 3:33pm
Maybe all of KTM's 450s are at Dakar. Wink

They don't let them ride the 690s over there anymore.
Nealio
Posts
53
Joined
11/17/2006
Location
Meridian, ID US
1/11/2011 4:41pm
350's would be great bikes for local level racers who don't come anywhere near utilizing a 450's full potential. However, I'm pretty sure the top pros...
350's would be great bikes for local level racers who don't come anywhere near utilizing a 450's full potential. However, I'm pretty sure the top pros are running 450's to close to their full potential in SX. At the minimum, they are at least going as fast as a motorcycle can go around a track determined by the laws of physics.
Well I'm pretty sure the riders are not using anywhere NEAR the potential of a 450. The only person I've heard of that can ride a "hopped up" 450 is KDub, and that's because he rides smooth like butta.
You have a limit on traction and how much you can physically hold on. If what you were saying were true more people would riding Aprillia v-twins. But they aren't, because they put out over 65 HP and send your arms into a comatose like state of arm pump.
RaceFace
Posts
1609
Joined
8/15/2010
Location
US
1/11/2011 10:10pm
R-acer wrote:
They didn't say anything about it being designed to be a Vet bike. They boldly said it was the "perfect bike" for the 450 class. And...
They didn't say anything about it being designed to be a Vet bike. They boldly said it was the "perfect bike" for the 450 class. And that it would handle better and be just as fast...
And from what we are seeing so far, it's a flop. The 2 pro riders that they put on it looks like crap on it, compared to before.
They BOTH looked WAY better on the bikes they came off.
I think that is a fair assessment at this point. Originally, people expected this to be a revolution (maybe not everyone of course, but some did). This was supposed to cause nearly as big an upheaval as the YZF400 did. We were hearing of talk about how the Japanese bike manufacturers were going to need to scramble to come out with 350's to compete. I'll point out again.... a LOT of people were predicting Alessi would dominate the MX nationals in 2010. Not win, DOMINATE. That's how superb the 350 was going to be.

This bike was supposed to be easier to ride and easier to go fast on, especially since NO ONE can use ALL the power of a 450.

Now think of this, is it easier to ride a bike making gobs of tractable power at 6,500 rpm or a bike that makes it's best power over 12,000 rpm? It isn't about max horsepower, it's about useable power.

Go read the MXA shootout, KTM 350 vs KTM 450. Yeah blasphemous because MXA sucks blah blah. They make some very keen observations. Guess which wins.

The 350 is a marketing ploy and it actually works very well for sales. Most of the "anti-350 side" is speaking in terms of Pro competition. Which is what the original question of this thread is, when do they at least try the 450? Many say they can't at this point, but I think they will have to sooner or later. Or hire a top top rider for twice what he would make at any other team.

Post a reply to: At waht point does KTM atleast try the 450?

The Latest