Forum QNA: 2018 Vital MX 450 Shootout

I noticed that RaceTech was involved with dyno, weights, etc. I'm curious if they had any thoughts on the new RMZ shock and what they would be doing to improve it?

Are you going to post the lap charts etc for the test riders? I think that would be interesting information.

Wow, what an impressive read. As a database and software developer by trade, I appreciate the attention to detail. Great job guys.

I'm curious what makes the AER 48 so much better than the SFF TAC in your opinion? From what i gathered from the read, everyone who rode the 17 KX450 agreed that the "settings" (I'm guessing they changed the valving) on the 18 were better. Is the added setup complexity of the SFF TAC (having to set/adjust 3 chambers vs 1 on the AER) the problem? If you were to fit a set of AER48's on the KX450f, would the bike be that much better? If you put the SFF TAC on the KTM, would it be that much worse? If the KX450F had the Showa fork used on the Suzuki, would it have been ranked much higher?

Also, i'm curious about your opinion on how much better the Kawi and Suzuki would have ranked had they had a magic button. It was mentioned a few times by various testers, but you only spend a second or two kicking the bike, and then you usually never worry about it again until you come back to the pits.

Great job on the test! Thanks for not putting me to sleep with all the "what's new" changes. I have to admit I read ML512's details and skimmed the rest so far. Great job on the graphics for VitalMX. Looking forward to making some sense of the lap time charts, I know it's a mountain of data, hopefully you can pull some more insight out of that.

A shocker of a winner for sure, thanks for telling it like you saw it.

No "B" test rider or do you fill that void? Somewhere between really good and really bad doesn't exactly say much lol.

On a serious note it's a little on the long side of things but I don't mind that seeing as there was multiple test riders of different skill levels.

ok the results surprised me a bit...but awesome shootout, set the bar for all other shootouts. You guys all deserve a beer, great job.

Thank you for the shootout, good job! I get the reasons for stock testing. However.., what I hear you saying is that.......IF the YZ had lower bars, ditched fifth gear (to save weight being that it wasn't really usable), and went up a tooth...it would have won the shootout?

Moto88 wrote:

Thank you for the shootout, good job! I get the reasons for stock testing. However.., what I hear you saying is that.......IF the YZ had lower bars, ditched fifth gear (to save weight being that it wasn't really usable), and went up a tooth...it would have won the shootout?

yeah and other bikes could have improvements as well with minor changes, but its a stock shootout...so...

Wow, very insightful. That was a lot of work and writing. I'm also glad there wasn't the long list of bike changes/ updates. I like how you covered a lot of different riding preferences and rider levels. Very thorough, excellent job!

Is the 18 Honda that much better than the 17?
Also will the lap time data be released for this shootout and last years shootout?

Lap times, also riders bring their bars and springs to suit.

-MAVERICK- wrote:

No "B" test rider or do you fill that void? Somewhere between really good and really bad doesn't exactly say much lol.

On a serious note it's a little on the long side of things but I don't mind that seeing as there was multiple test riders of different skill levels.

There were 4 "B" class riders... two 30B riders, as well as a 40B and a 50B. Intermediate = B Class.

-MAVERICK- wrote:

No "B" test rider or do you fill that void? Somewhere between really good and really bad doesn't exactly say much lol.

On a serious note it's a little on the long side of things but I don't mind that seeing as there was multiple test riders of different skill levels.

MelonFan123 wrote:

There were 4 "B" class riders... two 30B riders, as well as a 40B and a 50B. Intermediate = B Class.

I know. I was talking more along the lines of late teens, early 20's fast "B" rider.

Can you summarize last year's dyno results vs this years? Unchanged KX450F and largely unchanged RMZ450 motors gain 4-5hp on the dyno, while the others vary much less compared to last year. Same dyno? Were last year numbers an anomaly?

-MAVERICK- wrote:

I know. I was talking more along the lines of late teens, early 20's fast "B" rider.

gotcha, saw your Canadian location and thought maybe you didn't realize California doesn't go by the standard A, B C classes...

I'm curious on the decision to include mostly "regular joes" in the test. Other media use established pros - Rich Taylor, Pat Foster, Keefer when he was at DR, guys like Ping and Factory Phil when RacerX did shootouts. Never heard of either of the Pro guys that Vital used but maybe they have extensive testing experience, i don't know.

MXVet261 wrote:

I noticed that RaceTech was involved with dyno, weights, etc. I'm curious if they had any thoughts on the new RMZ shock and what they would be doing to improve it?

Rob at RaceTech was talking about replacing the solid piston on the shaft and somehow working around the replenishment system to turn it back into a more "standard shock". They just got a BFRC shock on the suspension dyno yesterday, so they're working on a plan.

MelonFan123 wrote:

gotcha, saw your Canadian location and thought maybe you didn't realize California doesn't go by the standard A, B C classes...

I'm curious on the decision to include mostly "regular joes" in the test. Other media use established pros - Rich Taylor, Pat Foster, Keefer when he was at DR, guys like Ping and Factory Phil when RacerX did shootouts. Never heard of either of the Pro guys that Vital used but maybe they have extensive testing experience, i don't know.

Zach Peddie is your typical fast SoCal kid that just doesn't have support. He's raced a few outdoor nationals and made a few West coast 250 SX night shows.

As for the quality of his speed, last year we had Tommy Week out for the 250F test...when we checked LITPro data, Zach was a bit faster if not the same speed, but more consistent over each day of riding.

-MAVERICK- wrote:

I know. I was talking more along the lines of late teens, early 20's fast "B" rider.

I label myself as a local A rider, that's what I'd line up for and just run around mid pack in I guess. Local B level kids in SoCal are stupid fast, the ones that race "local" level races, I can run the pace fine. Actual national level B rider, like Falk, those kids are basically national pro speed but just inconsistent with their laps.

kiwifan wrote:

ok the results surprised me a bit...but awesome shootout, set the bar for all other shootouts. You guys all deserve a beer, great job.

I'll take a Dr. Pepper, thank you! Ha...

Ted722 wrote:

Can you summarize last year's dyno results vs this years? Unchanged KX450F and largely unchanged RMZ450 motors gain 4-5hp on the dyno, while the others vary much less compared to last year. Same dyno? Were last year numbers an anomaly?

Suzuki's dyno numbers made sense, their aimed for top end gains only with the intake tract, cam change, and throttle body...

Kawasaki, we were a bit perplexed on...for spread of numbers, the KX seems to be one of the highest +/- brands Race Tech dynos. The results are a bit all over for that machine.

Due to the multiple factors that can effect dyno results, I really only put stock in numbers ran on the same day and don't worry as much about numbers from different years. Trust me, I wish things were more consistent, it would save me some explaining.

Jrewing wrote:

Lap times, also riders bring their bars and springs to suit.

Working on bringing laptimes in a better fashion. Due to the times of day the riders ride on different tracks, having multiple tracks, and guys cutting the tracks to make changes (feedback comes before anything else) it makes the numbers hard to use as definite results. It's useful for the guys to scan over, but we haven't gotten to the point I want to put a bunch of stock in them. I have an idea for the 250F Shootout where we might dedicate a day to gathering laptime data...I'm working on ideas.

As for bars and springs, I personally don't believe in either. We test them stock off the floor. In the case of the Yamaha, the bar mounts are taller than '17, not the bars. Lastly, there would be an issue as to what bar we'd use because of flex characteristics.

Springs also create a problem because they take so long to change out just for one dude. If you saw how our riding day schedule goes, this would be impossible to pull off...secondly, the amount of springs we'd need is insane, and riders sometimes prefer softer or heavier springs in feel. Meaning we'd have to do a TON of swapping around.

I respect the ideas, just giving back the responses on why we haven't attempted those in our test.

Moto88 wrote:

Thank you for the shootout, good job! I get the reasons for stock testing. However.., what I hear you saying is that.......IF the YZ had lower bars, ditched fifth gear (to save weight being that it wasn't really usable), and went up a tooth...it would have won the shootout?

Not quite a winner on my list with those changes, It would've led to some hard decision on my top three though...

You folks definitely hold one of the better bike comparisons. That being said, one thing that always seems to be left out with all shoot outs is fit. For example, which bike fits a rider 5' to 5'6", 5'6" to 6', 6' to 6"6", etc. Being 6'4" tall, this is a big factor. In addition, you might want to keep in mind that there are a number of 2-stroke riders considering switching to 4-strokes. A big factor for me when I first made the switch back in 2002 was engine braking. I had the misfortune of purchasing a YZ 426 and that darn thing threw out an anchor every time I let off the throttle. I bought a YZ 250 2-stroke after 4 rides on that pig. So, which bike has the least amount of engine braking? Honda?

I like what you do, thanks. Having the information broken up allows me to pick and choose what I feel is relevant to me, to see things that make me think, hmmm?. Having one rider place the FC450 6th is a Hmmm, moment. But that's a good thing. Seeing what a guy like Manny says potentially means more to me than a pro as I am 50 and a closer match in speed and size than some 20-something pro. Keep up the good work.

1st 4000 words MLS opinion, next 1000 words the other 6-7 guys lol good comparison tho. Suzuki bit of a surprise. Agree with the comment above about which would suit really small and or big guys

theycallmeebryan wrote:

Wow, what an impressive read. As a database and software developer by trade, I appreciate the attention to detail. Great job guys.

I'm curious what makes the AER 48 so much better than the SFF TAC in your opinion? From what i gathered from the read, everyone who rode the 17 KX450 agreed that the "settings" (I'm guessing they changed the valving) on the 18 were better. Is the added setup complexity of the SFF TAC (having to set/adjust 3 chambers vs 1 on the AER) the problem? If you were to fit a set of AER48's on the KX450f, would the bike be that much better? If you put the SFF TAC on the KTM, would it be that much worse? If the KX450F had the Showa fork used on the Suzuki, would it have been ranked much higher?

Also, i'm curious about your opinion on how much better the Kawi and Suzuki would have ranked had they had a magic button. It was mentioned a few times by various testers, but you only spend a second or two kicking the bike, and then you usually never worry about it again until you come back to the pits.

Thoughts on my air fork questions?

theycallmeebryan wrote:

Wow, what an impressive read. As a database and software developer by trade, I appreciate the attention to detail. Great job guys.

I'm curious what makes the AER 48 so much better than the SFF TAC in your opinion? From what i gathered from the read, everyone who rode the 17 KX450 agreed that the "settings" (I'm guessing they changed the valving) on the 18 were better. Is the added setup complexity of the SFF TAC (having to set/adjust 3 chambers vs 1 on the AER) the problem? If you were to fit a set of AER48's on the KX450f, would the bike be that much better? If you put the SFF TAC on the KTM, would it be that much worse? If the KX450F had the Showa fork used on the Suzuki, would it have been ranked much higher?

Also, i'm curious about your opinion on how much better the Kawi and Suzuki would have ranked had they had a magic button. It was mentioned a few times by various testers, but you only spend a second or two kicking the bike, and then you usually never worry about it again until you come back to the pits.

theycallmeebryan wrote:

Thoughts on my air fork questions?

I'm on the road, I'll get you a detailed answer this evening.

Do you have any experience with the longer linkage pull rods for the CRF?

Kenny Lingus wrote:

Do you have any experience with the longer linkage pull rods for the CRF?

Nope, sorry.