At waht point does KTM atleast try the 450?

EatAChode
Posts
327
Joined
12/23/2010
Location
Chandler, AZ US
1/11/2011 10:27pm
It comes down to riding style.

Shown by the lap times in the 250F class vs the 450F class. Not a huge difference. Many times the difference is because of speed in whoops and rhythm section line choices.

Someone pointed out that at some point in SX there will be a jump the 450's are barely making, the 250F's do not attempt, and the 350 will be stuck in the middle. If Short does not step up and at least attempt or make it then that says a lot. Either Short is a puss and cant jump (which I highly doubt) or that Short does not have 100% confidence in his bike.
dunn2500
Posts
516
Joined
5/2/2008
Location
Burbank, CA US
1/11/2011 10:29pm
ktm already stated no 450 for sx........250f's are running the same laptimes, there is no need
Mod Killer
Posts
1829
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Worldwide, CA US
1/11/2011 10:34pm
the 350 is a great bike imo. i really enjoyed riding it.

im far from a pro. im beginner class at best. nevertheless, the 350 has a market.

EatAChode
Posts
327
Joined
12/23/2010
Location
Chandler, AZ US
1/11/2011 10:37pm
It certainly does. Like I said, it really comes down to riding style. AC is a good example of that. Wasnt it rumored his YZ450F was actually a 400? Or is that just total bs?

The Shop

RaceFace
Posts
1609
Joined
8/15/2010
Location
US
1/11/2011 10:46pm
dunn2500 wrote:
ktm already stated no 450 for sx........250f's are running the same laptimes, there is no need
This does hold some merit, but why has no one (seriously) attempted a 250f in the 450 class?

While lap times may be close, how easy is it to pass a 450 on a 250f? Especially when the 450 will be in the fast groove and it's already hard to pass on a 450 out of that groove? The lap times they speak of are clear track, not when passing is needed.
jemcee
Posts
11128
Joined
8/11/2008
Location
AU
1/11/2011 11:48pm
I reckon the people of KTM might know more about riding, racing and selling motorcycles than 99.99% of the people on here..prob 100%
they seem to have faith in the bike

ohhhh that's right it's a massive conspiracy to make their riders ride a bike that they know won't win to make the general public buy the bike

I'm with Jamma I think that's pretty much where short would've ended up but who knows last year was last year, people improve, bikes improve, people get fitter, gain confidence lose confidence... It's stupid to compare two different years
jamma10
Posts
10576
Joined
8/24/2008
Location
Bristol GB
1/12/2011 2:17am
dunn2500 wrote:
ktm already stated no 450 for sx........250f's are running the same laptimes, there is no need
RaceFace wrote:
This does hold some merit, but why has no one (seriously) attempted a 250f in the 450 class? While lap times may be close, how easy...
This does hold some merit, but why has no one (seriously) attempted a 250f in the 450 class?

While lap times may be close, how easy is it to pass a 450 on a 250f? Especially when the 450 will be in the fast groove and it's already hard to pass on a 450 out of that groove? The lap times they speak of are clear track, not when passing is needed.
The lap times they speak of are clear track, not when passing is needed.

Which is exactly why (in my opinion) you cannot judge the merit of Shorts results at Anaheim because he was stuck in the pack. His fastest lap equated to the 7th fastest time in the 250 class... and if a 450 is soooo much faster than a 350... then surely that means a 350 should be faster than a 250 right???

There are too many variables involved.
jamma10
Posts
10576
Joined
8/24/2008
Location
Bristol GB
1/12/2011 2:30am
jemcee wrote:
I reckon the people of KTM might know more about riding, racing and selling motorcycles than 99.99% of the people on here..prob 100% they seem to...
I reckon the people of KTM might know more about riding, racing and selling motorcycles than 99.99% of the people on here..prob 100%
they seem to have faith in the bike

ohhhh that's right it's a massive conspiracy to make their riders ride a bike that they know won't win to make the general public buy the bike

I'm with Jamma I think that's pretty much where short would've ended up but who knows last year was last year, people improve, bikes improve, people get fitter, gain confidence lose confidence... It's stupid to compare two different years
You know the funniest thing.... everyone keeps bringing up the fact that the 350 supposedly has handicapped him, that he used to be 'such an amazing starter', yet I looked back at the SX main events he raced last year before he got injured... you know that 450 CRF really must have been a piece'a crap... !!!!

2010 Supercross starts/holeshot

Anaheim1
Dungey
Villopoto
Stewart
Short
Stroupe

Phoenix
Dungey
Stroupe
Villopoto
Hill
Tedesco
Short

Anaheim 2
Stroupe
Stewart
Hill
Blose
Dungey
Short

San Francisco
Dungey
Millsaps
Wey
Hill
Blose
Villopoto
Short

San Diego
Wey
Dungey
Millsaps
Tedesco
Short

He was hardly hole shotting every race like people seem to want to believe. He got one bad start, while Alessi gated in 3rd... thats BETTER than any of shorts starts on his 450 Honda!
EatAChode
Posts
327
Joined
12/23/2010
Location
Chandler, AZ US
1/12/2011 2:54am
I think everyone is referring to Shorts holeshots during the nationals, not necessarily supercross.

How were Alessi's starts on the 350 compared to his on the Suzuki the year before at the nationals....?

Go ahead do the same research you did above on the nationals. Ill wait.
jamma10
Posts
10576
Joined
8/24/2008
Location
Bristol GB
1/12/2011 3:07am
EatAChode wrote:
I think everyone is referring to Shorts holeshots during the nationals, not necessarily supercross. How were Alessi's starts on the 350 compared to his on the...
I think everyone is referring to Shorts holeshots during the nationals, not necessarily supercross.

How were Alessi's starts on the 350 compared to his on the Suzuki the year before at the nationals....?

Go ahead do the same research you did above on the nationals. Ill wait.
....but we're talking about supercross. Outdoors is different.

And no Im not gonna go back and check all the starts from '09 and '10! Grinning I know you're you're right, Mike starts weren't as good... Mike wasn't good full stop last year and I put that down to a lack of focus/preperation caused by the rather rather erratic shit that was going on in the background.

Another thing though... you're also comparing a Rockstar Makita Suzuki RMZ450, arguably the best 450 in the world, against a totally new model of bike in its first year of competition.
R-acer
Posts
4047
Joined
3/20/2008
Location
Toronto CA
1/12/2011 3:28am
Some of the lap times of the 250F's are close because they are 250F's and turn better to make up that speed. But the 350 is NOT a 250F, its a 450F with less power.
1/12/2011 3:35am
R-acer wrote:
Some of the lap times of the 250F's are close because they are 250F's and turn better to make up that speed. But the 350 is...
Some of the lap times of the 250F's are close because they are 250F's and turn better to make up that speed. But the 350 is NOT a 250F, its a 450F with less power.
why is it a 450 with less power instead of a 250 with more power??
R-acer
Posts
4047
Joined
3/20/2008
Location
Toronto CA
1/12/2011 3:38am
R-acer wrote:
Some of the lap times of the 250F's are close because they are 250F's and turn better to make up that speed. But the 350 is...
Some of the lap times of the 250F's are close because they are 250F's and turn better to make up that speed. But the 350 is NOT a 250F, its a 450F with less power.
why is it a 450 with less power instead of a 250 with more power??
Because they are the same weight. On the showroom floor there is only 3LBS difference. (although KTM's spec sheet says 5LBS)
When they weighed them at the MXDN, the 450 and the 350 was the exact same weight.
jndmx
Posts
9657
Joined
1/20/2008
Location
South Kingston, RI US
1/12/2011 3:42am
R-acer wrote:
Some of the lap times of the 250F's are close because they are 250F's and turn better to make up that speed. But the 350 is...
Some of the lap times of the 250F's are close because they are 250F's and turn better to make up that speed. But the 350 is NOT a 250F, its a 450F with less power.
why is it a 450 with less power instead of a 250 with more power??
R-acer wrote:
Because they are the same weight. On the showroom floor there is only 3LBS difference. (although KTM's spec sheet says 5LBS) When they weighed them at...
Because they are the same weight. On the showroom floor there is only 3LBS difference. (although KTM's spec sheet says 5LBS)
When they weighed them at the MXDN, the 450 and the 350 was the exact same weight.
That's because at the MXDN the 350 actually WAS a 450.








Just kidding.....couldn't resist stirring that pot.
jamma10
Posts
10576
Joined
8/24/2008
Location
Bristol GB
1/12/2011 3:47am Edited Date/Time 1/12/2011 3:48am
R-acer wrote:
Some of the lap times of the 250F's are close because they are 250F's and turn better to make up that speed. But the 350 is...
Some of the lap times of the 250F's are close because they are 250F's and turn better to make up that speed. But the 350 is NOT a 250F, its a 450F with less power.
Then why do they bother to race 450's on a supercross track at all if the likes of Canard, Pourcel, Roczen and Hansen can run similar lap times on a 250? Because the 450 puts out much more power right?

Hey I know what, lets make a bike that turns like a 250 but with a bit more grunt ...
R-acer
Posts
4047
Joined
3/20/2008
Location
Toronto CA
1/12/2011 3:48am
LOL
I think they will secretly "up" the cc's in Shorts and Alessi's bikes soon too instead of switching to the actual 450. They can do it legally too, and we dont need to know, meanwhile the "350" will get faster.
jamma10
Posts
10576
Joined
8/24/2008
Location
Bristol GB
1/12/2011 3:51am
Or they'll have got rid of the cobwebs and Short will have a better start...

If Short doesn't get a top 6 Supercross result this season I will gladly add a derogatory 350 signature! Smile
R-acer
Posts
4047
Joined
3/20/2008
Location
Toronto CA
1/12/2011 3:52am
R-acer wrote:
Some of the lap times of the 250F's are close because they are 250F's and turn better to make up that speed. But the 350 is...
Some of the lap times of the 250F's are close because they are 250F's and turn better to make up that speed. But the 350 is NOT a 250F, its a 450F with less power.
jamma10 wrote:
Then why do they bother to race 450's on a supercross track at all if the likes of Canard, Pourcel, Roczen and Hansen can run similar...
Then why do they bother to race 450's on a supercross track at all if the likes of Canard, Pourcel, Roczen and Hansen can run similar lap times on a 250? Because the 450 puts out much more power right?

Hey I know what, lets make a bike that turns like a 250 but with a bit more grunt ...
The intention was good. If they make a bike the size and weight of a 250F, but with close to the power of a 450, they would have a winner. Then again, isn't that what HONDA has?
The CRF450 is the exact same bike/chassis as the 250F, but with a bigger engine. GuyB's article here on Vital says the "FACTORY Honda's" 450 is 6 LBS lighter than the Geico 250F's.
Freddy
Posts
374
Joined
11/18/2010
Location
SE
1/12/2011 4:33am
sharkey wrote:
short was getting holeshots on the honda all last year and rode great. i dont remember tedesco beating short ever last year. how is it alessi...
short was getting holeshots on the honda all last year and rode great. i dont remember tedesco beating short ever last year. how is it alessi was the king on the starting gate to nothing now. you cant be good on the gate all those years and just fall off the map
Well if you say so, look at Millsaps. He was getting holeshots so easy, now he werent close and then finished 18th.

Stop blaiming the bikes, just look at villopoto. on a bike wtih 200 less cc's he holeshoted twice and was the best rider @ the mxon 2007.

Its the rider.
jamma10
Posts
10576
Joined
8/24/2008
Location
Bristol GB
1/12/2011 4:37am Edited Date/Time 1/12/2011 4:56am
R-acer wrote:
Some of the lap times of the 250F's are close because they are 250F's and turn better to make up that speed. But the 350 is...
Some of the lap times of the 250F's are close because they are 250F's and turn better to make up that speed. But the 350 is NOT a 250F, its a 450F with less power.
jamma10 wrote:
Then why do they bother to race 450's on a supercross track at all if the likes of Canard, Pourcel, Roczen and Hansen can run similar...
Then why do they bother to race 450's on a supercross track at all if the likes of Canard, Pourcel, Roczen and Hansen can run similar lap times on a 250? Because the 450 puts out much more power right?

Hey I know what, lets make a bike that turns like a 250 but with a bit more grunt ...
R-acer wrote:
The intention was good. If they make a bike the size and weight of a 250F, but with close to the power of a 450, they...
The intention was good. If they make a bike the size and weight of a 250F, but with close to the power of a 450, they would have a winner. Then again, isn't that what HONDA has?
The CRF450 is the exact same bike/chassis as the 250F, but with a bigger engine. GuyB's article here on Vital says the "FACTORY Honda's" 450 is 6 LBS lighter than the Geico 250F's.
But 'Factory' means it consists of all the weight saving trick parts not available to the likes of Geico. I doubt you'd be able to buy a stock crf and match that weight no matter how many after market products you buy.
>
The stock 350 may only be 5lbs lighter than the 450 on the scales, but its at high speed that the weight advantage make the difference, and it will - well done to Honda for shaving the weight off their 450's. I applaud them for that, the same way I applaud KTM. It would be interesting to know what Short & Alessi's bikes weigh in comparison.

I still don't think the 350 is a bad bike, that it is better or worse than a 450, or directly responsible for Andrew Short or Mike Alessi's results at Anaheim. Its the suggestion that the 350 will supposedly "ruin careers" that riled me, along with the rhetoric that KTM are trying to pull the wool over our eyes when the simple fact is no one is being forced into buying a 350. Its a matter of choice.

I also wish I hadn't clicked on this thread Grin
Freddy
Posts
374
Joined
11/18/2010
Location
SE
1/12/2011 4:40am
Btw, your comparing a WHOLE season from last year to this ONE race. Lets dig this topic up in may or mabye even after the last national when there are more stats to look at.
Faceaz
Posts
1365
Joined
7/28/2008
Location
Glendale, AZ US
1/12/2011 5:07am
R-acer wrote:
Some of the lap times of the 250F's are close because they are 250F's and turn better to make up that speed. But the 350 is...
Some of the lap times of the 250F's are close because they are 250F's and turn better to make up that speed. But the 350 is NOT a 250F, its a 450F with less power.
jamma10 wrote:
Then why do they bother to race 450's on a supercross track at all if the likes of Canard, Pourcel, Roczen and Hansen can run similar...
Then why do they bother to race 450's on a supercross track at all if the likes of Canard, Pourcel, Roczen and Hansen can run similar lap times on a 250? Because the 450 puts out much more power right?

Hey I know what, lets make a bike that turns like a 250 but with a bit more grunt ...
R-acer wrote:
The intention was good. If they make a bike the size and weight of a 250F, but with close to the power of a 450, they...
The intention was good. If they make a bike the size and weight of a 250F, but with close to the power of a 450, they would have a winner. Then again, isn't that what HONDA has?
The CRF450 is the exact same bike/chassis as the 250F, but with a bigger engine. GuyB's article here on Vital says the "FACTORY Honda's" 450 is 6 LBS lighter than the Geico 250F's.
If the 450 Honda must be so great, why did the 350 beat it in MXA's 450 shootout.
EatAChode
Posts
327
Joined
12/23/2010
Location
Chandler, AZ US
1/12/2011 5:15am
Faceaz wrote:
If the 450 Honda must be so great, why did the 350 beat it in MXA's 450 shootout.
Because shoot outs and this thread are subjective. In stock condition though I would probably chose the 350. It wasnt until I put in a bunch of testing and work to make the CRF450 a great bike.
R-acer
Posts
4047
Joined
3/20/2008
Location
Toronto CA
1/12/2011 5:29am
You can find at least one shootout that chooses 1 of each bike manufacturer as the winner. They mean nothing, and are very biased.
Faceaz
Posts
1365
Joined
7/28/2008
Location
Glendale, AZ US
1/12/2011 6:29am
Faceaz wrote:
If the 450 Honda must be so great, why did the 350 beat it in MXA's 450 shootout.
EatAChode wrote:
Because shoot outs and this thread are subjective. In stock condition though I would probably chose the 350. It wasnt until I put in a bunch...
Because shoot outs and this thread are subjective. In stock condition though I would probably chose the 350. It wasnt until I put in a bunch of testing and work to make the CRF450 a great bike.
This kind of proves my point... Many people feel the current bikes are so close, you just pick a color. While I think all shootouts are biased, MXA seems the most credible. So the 350 (in it's first shootout & first year of production) beat the CRF450 which has 10 years of development. I think it's fair to say the 350 will get better with more development, but has already done pretty well.
1/12/2011 8:42am Edited Date/Time 1/12/2011 8:47am
Faceaz wrote:
If the 450 Honda must be so great, why did the 350 beat it in MXA's 450 shootout.
EatAChode wrote:
Because shoot outs and this thread are subjective. In stock condition though I would probably chose the 350. It wasnt until I put in a bunch...
Because shoot outs and this thread are subjective. In stock condition though I would probably chose the 350. It wasnt until I put in a bunch of testing and work to make the CRF450 a great bike.
Faceaz wrote:
This kind of proves my point... Many people feel the current bikes are so close, you just pick a color. While I think all shootouts are...
This kind of proves my point... Many people feel the current bikes are so close, you just pick a color. While I think all shootouts are biased, MXA seems the most credible. So the 350 (in it's first shootout & first year of production) beat the CRF450 which has 10 years of development. I think it's fair to say the 350 will get better with more development, but has already done pretty well.
I think I see where you're going with this but you can't really use the 09 -11 CRF 450 as the average example of a 450 because in stock form it's a disaster.

The 350 would not win against the 07 or 08 CRF 450, not even close. In fact most of the latest 450s probably wouldn't (MXA).

But you're right it is extremely close. What it comes down to really is fractions. There's isn't any bike that's likely to make you 5 seconds faster or slower. But possibly 2, at a stretch 3 seconds. And for a Pro or any type of serious racer, that's unacceptable. As I said before though I think it's way to early to tell for sure. I mean Andrew could go out next time and finish in the top 5. It's just too early.
1/12/2011 8:48am
Note: Sorry about double spacing, it's a glitch or something.
KAWboy14
Posts
6505
Joined
12/31/2007
Location
Austin, TX US
1/12/2011 8:54am
jemcee wrote:
I reckon the people of KTM might know more about riding, racing and selling motorcycles than 99.99% of the people on here..prob 100% they seem to...
I reckon the people of KTM might know more about riding, racing and selling motorcycles than 99.99% of the people on here..prob 100%
they seem to have faith in the bike

ohhhh that's right it's a massive conspiracy to make their riders ride a bike that they know won't win to make the general public buy the bike

I'm with Jamma I think that's pretty much where short would've ended up but who knows last year was last year, people improve, bikes improve, people get fitter, gain confidence lose confidence... It's stupid to compare two different years
jamma10 wrote:
You know the funniest thing.... everyone keeps bringing up the fact that the 350 supposedly has handicapped him, that he used to be 'such an amazing...
You know the funniest thing.... everyone keeps bringing up the fact that the 350 supposedly has handicapped him, that he used to be 'such an amazing starter', yet I looked back at the SX main events he raced last year before he got injured... you know that 450 CRF really must have been a piece'a crap... !!!!

2010 Supercross starts/holeshot

Anaheim1
Dungey
Villopoto
Stewart
Short
Stroupe

Phoenix
Dungey
Stroupe
Villopoto
Hill
Tedesco
Short

Anaheim 2
Stroupe
Stewart
Hill
Blose
Dungey
Short

San Francisco
Dungey
Millsaps
Wey
Hill
Blose
Villopoto
Short

San Diego
Wey
Dungey
Millsaps
Tedesco
Short

He was hardly hole shotting every race like people seem to want to believe. He got one bad start, while Alessi gated in 3rd... thats BETTER than any of shorts starts on his 450 Honda!
well yeah! hondas are pieces of crap.....duh!
jms217
Posts
207
Joined
11/6/2010
Location
Fort Dodge, IA US
1/12/2011 9:48am Edited Date/Time 1/12/2011 9:50am
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.


Faceaz wrote:
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...
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.
They shouldn't try to bring that bike into the pro ranks because it dosen't work, if average people want more power than a 250 and less than a 450 it's good but how can you be competive in the pros with 100 fewer cc's. It hasn't done good here in america but only once at hangtown and that was because mike had a year to prepare for outdoors when everyone else had supercross and the next week they smoked him and he never did that good for the rest of the season it dosen't work in the 450 class. They should try to market it to people who aren't pro and it dosen't matter to them but it dosen't look that good to good people when they are getting 15 and 16th place. if it dosen't effect people how it dose in supercross than what is the point of putting there riders at a disadvantage? How many tracks is this thing going to be an advantage at? not as many as the 450 would have an advantae on so forget racing the bike and go back to the 450.
Faceaz
Posts
1365
Joined
7/28/2008
Location
Glendale, AZ US
1/12/2011 10:44am Edited Date/Time 1/12/2011 10:46am
kx1984 wrote:
Sell your 350's while they still have some value. The wreck is going down ,get out before you drown.
Going a bit backwards with the arguement here, but 10th place isn't bad in the supercross class with how stacked it is. If you look at all the riders (typically faster than Short) that are healthy this year & weren't last, Shorts results (or 1 result) probably hasn't changed much from where it would have been.

Mike had a year to develop the bike, where others have had 8 to 12 years & have a ton of complied data from those years to know what works. The 350 had 0 National Experience heading into Hangtown.



Marketing to pros? You understand these riders are sponsored with salaries & bonuses. I don't think any of the marketing is geared to them, because they aren't buying bikes. A segment of people that are pro & not in the series is extremely small compared to the public. They are racing it for exposure & the thing I disagree about most is not giving riders the choice, but that exposure is to people who aren't pros, people in the seats.

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

The Latest