Upgrade to enjoy this feature!
Vital MX fantasy is free to play, but paid users have great benefits. Paid member benefits:
- View and download rider stats
- Pick trends
- Create a private league
- And more!
Only $10 for all 2024 SX, MX, and SMX series (regularly $30).
With 250 two stroke I can rebuild the top end for less than $200 and it only takes couple of hour me to do it in my own garage. Used 250 two stroke doesn't lose it's resale value as fast as the 2500F and is quite easy to sell. BTW I think it's more fair to compare 250F to 250 two stroke because they have almost similar power these days and you can ride them in same class in many countries
At the pro level 250f are very expensive to race.
Ironically, in some ways, the junior class is dearer to compete in than the premier class. (Where more power than stock makes less difference.)
This should be exactly what we do not want as a sport, as those who are priced out stop pumping cash into the industry and take up mountain biking or golf.
My whole point is the cost of four-strokes pricing people out of the sport.
Remember that demographically, the Boomers are getting too old to ride, Gen. X getting older/busier, and Gen. Y will soon be booted out of the home and have to deal with adult expenses. Gen. Z is smaller due to declining birth rates and may be too coddled to want to risk getting smashed on a dirt bike. My parents said have fun and sent me on my way on an RM125. God Bless em'!
Four-strokes and changing demographics could be a double-whammy that could really downsize the sport. Pro racing, Loretta's, GNCCs, and such will carry on and be fine, but local racing could go away. And of course, less local participation will result in less riding areas, which starts a death spiral. And if the energy drink money goes away, the sport could really be in trouble. Back in the two-stroke era the sport appeared to be self-sufficient without energy drink money.
Four-strokes are great bikes, but are they good for working class folks of limited means? Back in the good old days, fathers and sons could and would both ride. Now, dad can't afford to ride because he cashed in the 401K to get Junior a 10K built 250F. This is a shame.
The Shop
Please provide the name of the dealership where these deals can be had. I'd gladly buy a 5K 250F for a trail bike.
I see the MSRP of the new KTM 450 at $10,955 (before fees). My YZ250 was $7,500 OTD.
History may show that amateur participation (riding, racing entries, bike sales) peaked in 2003-2006, and then gradually declined. Which of course coincides with the rise of the four-strokes.
Coincidence? I think not.
And starting in 2025 or so we will have huge generational turnover that could further shrink the sport. We won't be able to rely on Baby Boomers pumping millions into the sport after 2025. One could argue their spending fueled the explosion of motocross in the late 90s and kept the industry afloat through 2008-2014. Gen. X and Y aren't as financially well-off.
If anyone has any data regarding bike sales, race entries, practice entries, number of AMA members who race, ect. from 2000-2015 I'd like to see some data.
When these bikes are sold that should allow the seller to have the resources to get a new bike, which should benefit dealers and the OEMS.
The used smoker market doesn't really help the OEMs, but perhaps they will get the message that the market demands a less expensive and lightweight machine. I'd wager a guess that Suzuki or Kawasaki would sell 125s and 250s if offered again, but from a business perspective the juice may not be worth the squeeze. Suzuuk would sell less RMZs if they offered a bitchin' new RM125 and 250 or even 2008 duplicates. I'd buy a steel frame RM250 over a new YZ250. But I didn't because new RM250s no longer exist.
The bottom line is this: less people are racing and do not need the newest, latest, and greatest. They cannot afford a 10K toy that costs 2K to rebuild. A two-stroke allows them to enjoy their hobby affordably. And more asses on seats and hands on throttles will pump more money into the industry. A rising tide raises all boats.
How many shootout winning (or nearly winning) bikes are offered at these price points?
Are rebuilds discounted as well when these machines get tired?
In fantasyland four-strokes cost exactly the same as two-strokes to purchase, operate, and resell.
We do not live in fantasyland.
Shootouts are conducted to educate and inform buyers of the new bikes. There is a link between shootouts, how much bikes sell for, and which ones are sold dirt cheap as leftovers. KTMs do well in shootouts, command top dollar in showrooms, and leftovers appear to be few and far between. Suzukis do not do well in shootouts, sell for less, and leftovers are available. Coincidence? No. This is the market and economics at work. If bikes were the same, they would sell for the same cost at the same rate. Also, each brand would have an identical market share. This isn't the case.
Regarding cost, here is a good analysis by someone in the know. https://motocrossactionmag.com/start-the-four-stroke-revolution-without…
If you can argue against his points, feel free to post them.
I have nothing against four-strokes, but the argument that they are identical to two-strokes in cost or "cheap" is not founded by dollars and cents. Perhaps a slow rider can putt around on a four-stroke at a non-competitive pace and not spend a lot of money. But ride that machine long and hard, put 50 hard hours on it every season, and try to make a 450 or 250f last without spending a lot of money either on the bike or the repairs. And then try to sell it after 3 seasons and 150 hours without taking a big hit. I wish anyone luck doing that.
Any other form of 'classing' is just perpetuation of 'Handicap Class' racing that was only ever remotely appropriate when lunatics like I were putting XR level engines in MX chassis.
CC for CC - anything else is complete and utter bullshit.
And, do any of you really think the big manufacturers are going to make the engines you think might meet you idea of 'fair' sizing? If so, you really are a drongo. Put out new rules requiring totally different engines, and you'll damned near ensure the loss of a few manufacturers from our sport.
Now, if any decided to take their little red wagon, put their thumb in their mouth, and run away home if those scary Two Strokes were allowed equivalency, well, so bloody be it. So long, fair well, aufvederzen and fuck right off to those manufacturers.
Pit Row
You just refuse to listen to the facts. Refusing to listen to facts makes you either ignorant, or dumb enough that you cannot absorb new knowledge. Either way, good luck on your pointless two stroke conquest. The day you realize that 450’s are more reliable than a 250 two stroke please come talk to me. You’re better off embracing the four strokes, they will be around for a long, long time.
The Willy Musgrave article has just been regurgitated by you in this very thread. You provide no hard evidence, nor real world scenarios to back up your claim. You are just making open ended statements and calling them facts. People then provide you with facts, and you run from them while typing non sense.
That guy is talking about crazy costs while his kid is in professional karting....No there is a sport that has no value for the all mighty dollar.
We will have far fewer dealers in the future which is sad. People can get bikes dirt cheap at volume big box stores and parts/accessories via online ordering. If local dealers try to compete they cannot prosper and pay employees well due to razor-thin margins. If they try to hold margin customers think they are being screwed.
I visited a local dealer in a decent sized market. The GM told me he could only pay the parts manager ~$15/hour and have a clerk for ~$10/hour. This isn't a lot of money in a decent sized market in the USA. At that moment a customer brought in a set of tires purchased online for ~$50 each and asked where the service department was so he could get them mounted.
It is just creative destruction. Some industries will downsize in the near future. Even sports like golf seem to be losing popularity with generational turnover. The Boomers will be dropping like flies come 2025 or so.
Four-strokes are popular because they allow lesser-skilled riders to go fast. Put the same riders on a 250 or 125 two-stroke and lap times will increase and be less consistent.
Four-strokes are heavier on average than two-strokes.
Four-strokes are louder and the sound pulse carries further, agitating neighbors of riding areas. *Personal note: when I sold my house I camped out at an RV park for a few days while the deal was closing. I was able to hear four-strokes from the motocross track at least a mile away. No one away from the track wants to hear thundering bikes on rev limiters.
Four-strokes require more mechanical skill to repair than two-strokes.
On average, four-strokes cost more to purchase, maintain, and modify. A four-stroke explosion is expensive to fix. Not everyone has 1.5-3K sitting around.
Many industry insiders would agree that the switch to four-strokes has raised the cost of racing for amateur and pro racing.This increased cost has resulted in reduced participation.
Four-strokes have resulted in more powerful machines which result in more severe injuries.
Four-strokes on average lose more value when resold.
Mini-bike racing is still mostly two-stroke. This allows parents and kids to get involved at an affordable price point. If minibikes switched to four-strokes, cost more initially, were more capable of higher speeds/bigger jumps, and were more expensive to repair, the sport would lose popularity among kids and parents.
People can ride whatever they like, but two-strokes are more cost-effective on average. The sport was more affordable when we rode/raced two-strokes. Affordable is good in my book when it comes to hobbies, housing, women, and the like.
The four-stroke business model is unsustainable at the amateur level. Soon we will not have Boomers pumping millions into the sport. Soon Gen. Y will be booted from the nest and spending money on housing and such. Soon Gen. Z will be off minis and on big bikes.
Imagine what would happen in 1996 if Keith McCarty asked Doug Henry to race a 250 four-stroke race bike against 50HP VP C12 fueled 250 two-strokes? He would have probably said no. Why? The bike wouldn't have been competitive without a massive displacement advantage. Chad Reed loved his YZ250 and hated his YZ250F. Coincidence? Would Ricky have gone for the SX title in 2005 on an RMZ250? Probably not!
The coup de grace was taking away unleaded fuels.
Now the OEMS are selling less bikes, less are showing up to ride and race, and the sport is being kept afloat by energy drinks, well to do vet riders, and parents allowing kids to live at home until 30 (proving them disposable income to go moto).
Giving four-strokes a massive advantage was a Drongo move. That is motocross affirmative action. I can't compete on an equal basis so I need an advantage. Stamp it.
Four-strokes increased the gap between the haves and the have nots in motocross. With four-strokes, the bike and set-up play a bigger role in success. And the cost of the technology is too much for moto's blue-collar participants of limited means.
Post a reply to: Correct AMA 2 Stroke displacement