Matthes view on what is needed in racing

Edited Date/Time 2/28/2013 12:25pm
I love Matthes but I can't help but noticing some stuff he is saying lately.

On his review shows and the Pulp show they have been saying things like

"We need to slow the bikes down" Matthes. Also mentioned ECM's or something to do it.

I agree with Matthes, NASCAR did it at the super speedways because it was getting out of control.

Guess what. Bring BACK 250/125cc the two stroke (Possibly make it 300/150) . They're slower, funner, cheaper, simpler, funner, sound better, funner, smell better, and they are funner!

Don't say oh well nobody makes them crap. All the AMA has to do is announce that in 2015 the rules will change so it will be 400/200cc four stroke and 300/150cc two stroke and in 2016 it'll be 350/175cc four stroke and 300/150 two stoke and let capitalism sort it out.

And the tracks need more dirt, bigger jumps, for slower lap times.

I agree here too. They need more dirt. But I think the four strokes have brought about the different track designs ie lower jumps that send bikes further and faster rather than up. That will change when the speeds come down.

Bring BACK the smoker for better racing!
|
2/26/2013 12:46pm
Oh and the reason I wrote that was because Matthes has been a four stoke cheerleader and a two stoke basher for YEARS.

So how is that working out now?

Keep up the good work though!
2/26/2013 1:25pm
Two stroke basher?

site one example...please I dare you to give me one example of him BASHING two strokes...
68
Posts
710
Joined
8/25/2012
Location
Sydney AU
2/26/2013 1:26pm
Yeah but they're aren't going too. sooooo...
IceMan446
Posts
4671
Joined
1/10/2010
Location
Sacramento, CA US
2/26/2013 1:31pm Edited Date/Time 2/26/2013 1:31pm
Never heard him bash two stokes, he has said that they arent as fast as the four strokes and thats why the top tier guys dont ride them.

I do agree with what he was saying about the tracks, Ping, Weege, JT$ and Stewart all pretty much said the same thing.

I wonder how long it will take to get some change to the tracks and see some variety.

I say get rid of Dirt Wurx and bring in Dream Traxx. They make pure magic and I know they would do a good job.

Not sure if they have long contracts or what but do two year contracts that way you have the option to try other track builders if they dont pan out.

The Shop

Derpin' DJ
Posts
6309
Joined
5/27/2011
Location
Newcastle AU
Fantasy
2803rd
2/26/2013 1:33pm
You're really retarded if you think a 175cc four stroke should be equivalent to a 175cc two stroke
Shawn142
Posts
2598
Joined
10/27/2008
Location
Burleson, TX US
2/26/2013 1:34pm Edited Date/Time 2/26/2013 1:34pm
Well get off your ass and petition the AMA for a rule change. Make some phone calls, send some e-mails. Be sure to include the word "funner" a lot so they know you're serious.
Spartacus
Posts
2270
Joined
5/20/2011
Location
PW US
2/26/2013 1:35pm
Derpin' DJ wrote:
You're really retarded if you think a 175cc four stroke should be equivalent to a 175cc two stroke
Yeah, what are you crazy. That would be like a 450 4T racing against a 250 2............on never mind
Panic_Rev
Posts
688
Joined
7/13/2012
Location
Fayetteville, AR US
2/26/2013 1:36pm
IceMan446 wrote:
Never heard him bash two stokes, he has said that they arent as fast as the four strokes and thats why the top tier guys dont...
Never heard him bash two stokes, he has said that they arent as fast as the four strokes and thats why the top tier guys dont ride them.

I do agree with what he was saying about the tracks, Ping, Weege, JT$ and Stewart all pretty much said the same thing.

I wonder how long it will take to get some change to the tracks and see some variety.

I say get rid of Dirt Wurx and bring in Dream Traxx. They make pure magic and I know they would do a good job.

Not sure if they have long contracts or what but do two year contracts that way you have the option to try other track builders if they dont pan out.
If they were as fast as the 4 strokes they would be riding them.
gt80rider
Posts
6275
Joined
4/19/2008
Location
Boulder, CO US
2/26/2013 1:44pm
I remember reading the magazine tests of the 80' YZ465.... they basically said it had crazy amounts of power, more than most mortals could ever control..... hell even more than the factory guys could control at the time....

fast forward to today where the "rookies" in the little bike/250F class have more horsepower at the rear wheel than the old air cooled 465 ping'er... is it a wonder why so many young riders are getting hurt?? would it actually "hurt" the racing if the "little" class only had 25-30 hp at the wheel?

I contend that the quality of racing isn't dependent on rear wheel horsepower, but it certainly affects the number of injuries... and... if track speeds were 5 mph slower the average viewer would probably not even notice the difference...
Derpin' DJ
Posts
6309
Joined
5/27/2011
Location
Newcastle AU
Fantasy
2803rd
2/26/2013 1:45pm Edited Date/Time 2/26/2013 1:47pm
Spartacus wrote:
Yeah, what are you crazy. That would be like a 450 4T racing against a 250 2............on never mind
There is a logical (well, it was logical at the time) reason for doing that. Equivalent cc's is stupid though. I can understand some reasoning behind a 250 vs 250 class, as the 2t can be a handful, but it has a ridiculous power advantage. Now, a 175 2 stroke is not going to be a handful to ride. A 175 4 stroke is going to be significantly slower than a 175 2 stroke. A 175-200cc 2 stroke is what should be up against a 250f imo. It'll still be a tad more powerful than a 250f, but its as close as you'll get to a 250f power curve on a 2 stroke. That, or drop the 4 stroke to 200 cc and keep the 125
1911
Posts
4062
Joined
4/2/2008
Location
LAS VEGAS, NV US
2/26/2013 1:47pm
Panic_Rev wrote:
If they were as fast as the 4 strokes they would be riding them.
They are FASTER then 4 strokes, that's why the 4 strokes have a cc advantage.
500guy
Posts
12478
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
AZ US
2/26/2013 1:50pm Edited Date/Time 2/26/2013 1:50pm
2 Strokes Blow

4 Strokes Go!!!!!!!!!
IceMan446
Posts
4671
Joined
1/10/2010
Location
Sacramento, CA US
2/26/2013 1:54pm
Panic_Rev wrote:
If they were as fast as the 4 strokes they would be riding them.
HIGHLY doubt that.

More CC's and HP doesnt mean faster.
Panic_Rev
Posts
688
Joined
7/13/2012
Location
Fayetteville, AR US
2/26/2013 2:00pm
Panic_Rev wrote:
If they were as fast as the 4 strokes they would be riding them.
1911 wrote:
They are FASTER then 4 strokes, that's why the 4 strokes have a cc advantage.
My comment was made with the assumption that we were comparing a 450-4stroke to a 250-2stroke. Since those two have to compete in the same class.
peelout
Posts
17873
Joined
1/6/2011
Location
Ogden, UT US
2/26/2013 2:02pm
Spartacus wrote:
Yeah, what are you crazy. That would be like a 450 4T racing against a 250 2............on never mind
Derpin' DJ wrote:
There is a logical (well, it was logical at the time) reason for doing that. Equivalent cc's is stupid though. I can understand some reasoning behind...
There is a logical (well, it was logical at the time) reason for doing that. Equivalent cc's is stupid though. I can understand some reasoning behind a 250 vs 250 class, as the 2t can be a handful, but it has a ridiculous power advantage. Now, a 175 2 stroke is not going to be a handful to ride. A 175 4 stroke is going to be significantly slower than a 175 2 stroke. A 175-200cc 2 stroke is what should be up against a 250f imo. It'll still be a tad more powerful than a 250f, but its as close as you'll get to a 250f power curve on a 2 stroke. That, or drop the 4 stroke to 200 cc and keep the 125
nobody ever said anything about equivalent cc to cc.

where did you come up with that?

what's fair about 450cc versus 250cc? or 250cc versus 125cc?

it is worth thinking about, unfortunately, the powers that be will never let the two-strokes back into the game. the mfr's are making too much money off all the sheeple.
Panic_Rev
Posts
688
Joined
7/13/2012
Location
Fayetteville, AR US
2/26/2013 2:03pm
Panic_Rev wrote:
If they were as fast as the 4 strokes they would be riding them.
IceMan446 wrote:
HIGHLY doubt that.

More CC's and HP doesnt mean faster.
I see what you are doing there, so if less cc's and less HP might be faster why have the pro's made the switch? Wait, it's because the big companies make more money, right?
Crush
Posts
20962
Joined
4/26/2009
Location
Sydney AU
2/26/2013 2:05pm
Ya I haven't heard him bash two strokes, just as he says, covers pro racing, they race 4 strokes...

Regardless... They've gotta do something... Having everyone be really close in laptimes is a by product of the current batch of riders, not the bikes or tracks... There are 7-9 guys who are very close in skill level and would be the same on a speedway track.

We need to give them the opportunities to race and pass... Not wait each other out in a single file
Shawn142
Posts
2598
Joined
10/27/2008
Location
Burleson, TX US
2/26/2013 2:06pm
Spartacus wrote:
Yeah, what are you crazy. That would be like a 450 4T racing against a 250 2............on never mind
Derpin' DJ wrote:
There is a logical (well, it was logical at the time) reason for doing that. Equivalent cc's is stupid though. I can understand some reasoning behind...
There is a logical (well, it was logical at the time) reason for doing that. Equivalent cc's is stupid though. I can understand some reasoning behind a 250 vs 250 class, as the 2t can be a handful, but it has a ridiculous power advantage. Now, a 175 2 stroke is not going to be a handful to ride. A 175 4 stroke is going to be significantly slower than a 175 2 stroke. A 175-200cc 2 stroke is what should be up against a 250f imo. It'll still be a tad more powerful than a 250f, but its as close as you'll get to a 250f power curve on a 2 stroke. That, or drop the 4 stroke to 200 cc and keep the 125
peelout wrote:
nobody ever said anything about equivalent cc to cc. where did you come up with that? what's fair about 450cc versus 250cc? or 250cc versus 125cc...
nobody ever said anything about equivalent cc to cc.

where did you come up with that?

what's fair about 450cc versus 250cc? or 250cc versus 125cc?

it is worth thinking about, unfortunately, the powers that be will never let the two-strokes back into the game. the mfr's are making too much money off all the sheeple.
I don't think they're making hardly anything off "sheepie". The profit margin of MX was small to begin with, now it's almost nothing. But most of these Japanese OEMs don't make anything but 4-stroke engines for every other type of product they sell. Honda even went 4-stroke with their weed eaters. I imagine it's more a company philosophy than anything. If we got back 2-stroke it will be because the Japanese quit and the Euro OEMs stepped in to save the day.
4stroke4DWIN
Posts
2766
Joined
1/15/2012
Location
texas city, TX US
2/26/2013 2:07pm
Man, you hanger ons need to let go of the idea that 2 strokes will ever make a come back. Don't get me wrong i like 2t as much as the next guy but FML every week some newb is starting a thread beating a dead horse about it.

Also if you think that the big 4 would shell out money for new tooling, r&d, ect just because the AMA said xyz will happen, you are a crack baby. Most people that ride are not even members of the AMA. In the big picture AMA makes up a fraction of units ridden.
jtomasik
Posts
12898
Joined
8/17/2006
Location
Golden, CO US
2/26/2013 2:09pm
Panic_Rev wrote:
If they were as fast as the 4 strokes they would be riding them.
They were beating the 4 strokes. The 4 strokes didn't start winning until the top riders got on them. A lot of that came from the factories pressuring the riders to make the move.

If they want to slow down the tracks, stop grooming the crap out of them. Let 'em get chewed up, blue grooved, and do more natural terrain. Indoors, go back to more of the early 80's track designs.
Derpin' DJ
Posts
6309
Joined
5/27/2011
Location
Newcastle AU
Fantasy
2803rd
2/26/2013 2:10pm
peelout wrote:
nobody ever said anything about equivalent cc to cc. where did you come up with that? what's fair about 450cc versus 250cc? or 250cc versus 125cc...
nobody ever said anything about equivalent cc to cc.

where did you come up with that?

what's fair about 450cc versus 250cc? or 250cc versus 125cc?

it is worth thinking about, unfortunately, the powers that be will never let the two-strokes back into the game. the mfr's are making too much money off all the sheeple.
Eh, I did misread the cc's he stipulated for 2016. But still, I find them a little too close. If it was kept to 125/250 instead of 150/300, that might work
CamP
Posts
6828
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Colleyville, TX US
2/26/2013 2:11pm Edited Date/Time 2/26/2013 2:15pm
The 4-strokes are "too good". They tear up the track and make the racing boring because they allow everyone to go almost the same speed, with fewer mistakes, which makes passing more difficult. The crashes are also more spectacular because the riders are going Mach 5 when it goes wrong.
peelout
Posts
17873
Joined
1/6/2011
Location
Ogden, UT US
2/26/2013 2:13pm
Shawn142 wrote:
I don't think they're making hardly anything off "sheepie". The profit margin of MX was small to begin with, now it's almost nothing. But most of...
I don't think they're making hardly anything off "sheepie". The profit margin of MX was small to begin with, now it's almost nothing. But most of these Japanese OEMs don't make anything but 4-stroke engines for every other type of product they sell. Honda even went 4-stroke with their weed eaters. I imagine it's more a company philosophy than anything. If we got back 2-stroke it will be because the Japanese quit and the Euro OEMs stepped in to save the day.
yeah, good point.

it doesn't affect me directly anyway, just trying to bench-race a little.

i sold my pig and am riding my 12 year old 250 again. i don't remember the last time i had this much fun on a bike.

that said, my next new bike will not be a japanese brand.
mx_579
Posts
362
Joined
6/27/2009
Location
New Iberia, LA US
2/26/2013 2:18pm
If the AMA and professional racing governing bodies said in 2015 250 2 strokes will race with 250 4 strokes in the 250 class, all of the majors would have a 250 2 stroke ready to go. That still wouldn't solve a thing though. I think the cc limits on the 4t should be reduced but at this point it virtually impossible because amateur racing would be screwed. A guy who just spent 8 grand on a brand new 2013 CRF450 would be very unhappy if he was told in 2015 he would have to buy a new 350 or size his 450 down. I'm on the 2 stroke lovers bandwagon but there is no way they will come back other than a 2 stroke specific class.
Derpin' DJ
Posts
6309
Joined
5/27/2011
Location
Newcastle AU
Fantasy
2803rd
2/26/2013 2:22pm
I forget who mentioned it, but a lower rev limit enforcement wouldn't be a bad idea. If you reduce the 250f to 175-200 or something, its only going to make things more expensive.
2/26/2013 2:29pm
*Spec ECU's (electronic control units). I was worried when F1 went that route since it was a Microsoft product and designed by McLaren (being a Ferrari fan) but I can't really point to one time that rule has been an issue since being instated besides saving teams and the sport money.
2/26/2013 2:38pm
bring back the claiming rule, adjust a bit for inflation since it was last used.
15,000$ to buy the winning bike using the claiming rule would slow down the bikes.
I like the idea of a 300cc 150cc 2 stroke and bringing the 4 strokes down to 350 and
175cc. With the claiming rule, the privateer should have a chance to compete without selling the farm.
GuyB
Posts
35700
Joined
7/10/2006
Location
Aliso Viejo, CA US
Fantasy
1215th
2/26/2013 2:41pm
A few thoughts.

I really doubt you'll ever see a company other than Dirt Wurx doing the tracks.

Yes, having the "rookie" class on 250s makes it a little rough for them, but I also think it's why the elite guys who do move up out of that class are ready to compete with the established 450 riders from the get-go. Remember how long it took RC to get acclimated to the bigger class?

It might not be the easiest thing to do, but I do think that some really smart folks should be able to figure out a formula that makes a big-bore four-strokes compatible with big-bore two-strokes, whether it's some combo of cc, fuel, or weight. In different motorsports, there's a long history of dissimilar engines being run together. NHRA's Top Alcohol class would be one example.

From the NHRA site...

Top Alcohol Dragsters may look like Top Fuelers, but they have ­significant differences. Whereas Top Fuelers use supercharged, nitro-burning engines, Top Alcohol Dragsters may use a supercharged methanol-burning engine or an injected nitromethane combination. The injected nitro cars do not use a transmission, and the supercharged cars have three forward speeds. Weights vary according to combination but are generally between 1,975 and 2,050 pounds. Like Top Fuelers, Top Alcohol Dragsters are restricted to a maximum wheelbase of 300 inches. A typical run is in the 5.2s at more than 270 mph.

Timing is key. No, it shouldn't be changed in the middle of a season. Yes, it should be done in time for everyone to pick and choose which bike(s) they want to ride in the future, and to allow for production planning. I'd guess that most manufacturers are already well done with their '14 bikes, and are already planning on '15 and '16.

I think the manufacturers and sanctioning bodies should work together on this, in the interest of making things better and safer for the riders. But I also think the AMA needs to take the lead, and steward this through.

The engine size rules for amateur and pro classes should be the same, across the board.
IceMan446
Posts
4671
Joined
1/10/2010
Location
Sacramento, CA US
2/26/2013 3:02pm
Panic_Rev wrote:
I see what you are doing there, so if less cc's and less HP might be faster why have the pro's made the switch? Wait, it's...
I see what you are doing there, so if less cc's and less HP might be faster why have the pro's made the switch? Wait, it's because the big companies make more money, right?
You put anyone of the top guys on a 450cc two stroke and I would bet you anything they wouldnt place top 5 maybe not even top 10. They are just too hard to ride and dont have the same power delivery as the four strokes. Thats what makes the four strokes so much easier and faster to ride and why the top guys chose them.

Now 250T vs 250f you would def win on the two stroke.

But not every two stroke is faster then every four stroke.

I dont care about what the big companies want or what they are trying to make money on. I am speaking about what the riders like. Ask any of them, they like the four stroke better for obvious reasons.
IceMan446
Posts
4671
Joined
1/10/2010
Location
Sacramento, CA US
2/26/2013 3:05pm
GuyB wrote:
A few thoughts. I really doubt you'll ever see a company other than Dirt Wurx doing the tracks. Yes, having the "rookie" class on 250s makes...
A few thoughts.

I really doubt you'll ever see a company other than Dirt Wurx doing the tracks.

Yes, having the "rookie" class on 250s makes it a little rough for them, but I also think it's why the elite guys who do move up out of that class are ready to compete with the established 450 riders from the get-go. Remember how long it took RC to get acclimated to the bigger class?

It might not be the easiest thing to do, but I do think that some really smart folks should be able to figure out a formula that makes a big-bore four-strokes compatible with big-bore two-strokes, whether it's some combo of cc, fuel, or weight. In different motorsports, there's a long history of dissimilar engines being run together. NHRA's Top Alcohol class would be one example.

From the NHRA site...

Top Alcohol Dragsters may look like Top Fuelers, but they have ­significant differences. Whereas Top Fuelers use supercharged, nitro-burning engines, Top Alcohol Dragsters may use a supercharged methanol-burning engine or an injected nitromethane combination. The injected nitro cars do not use a transmission, and the supercharged cars have three forward speeds. Weights vary according to combination but are generally between 1,975 and 2,050 pounds. Like Top Fuelers, Top Alcohol Dragsters are restricted to a maximum wheelbase of 300 inches. A typical run is in the 5.2s at more than 270 mph.

Timing is key. No, it shouldn't be changed in the middle of a season. Yes, it should be done in time for everyone to pick and choose which bike(s) they want to ride in the future, and to allow for production planning. I'd guess that most manufacturers are already well done with their '14 bikes, and are already planning on '15 and '16.

I think the manufacturers and sanctioning bodies should work together on this, in the interest of making things better and safer for the riders. But I also think the AMA needs to take the lead, and steward this through.

The engine size rules for amateur and pro classes should be the same, across the board.
Why only Dirt Wurx GuyB???

Post a reply to: Matthes view on what is needed in racing

The Latest