The difference between Husky / KTM....and Honda. ( allowed machines )

Please cite your sources for these statements

Johnny Ringo wrote:

Please cite your sources for these statements

would you prefer MLA or APA formating?

Generally looking at stock power, 2 strokes have 10-15 more hp than a 250f. 35hp for a 250f and 45ish for a 2 stroke.

I think factory 250fs are pushing close to 50 hp . A stock 250 2 stroke is around 42-48 depending on the brand. So if you build a factory 250 2 stroke it will be faster than a factory 4 stroke. And for brands who dont manufacture 2 strokes its unfair. i understand hondas point completely. 250fs are supposed to be the 125 equivelent. Not 250 2 strokes. Were in the times of modern engines that are better all around. No need to try to bend rules to make them compete with outdated engines.

Acidreamer wrote:

Generally looking at stock power, 2 strokes have 10-15 more hp than a 250f. 35hp for a 250f and 45ish for a 2 stroke.

I think factory 250fs are pushing close to 50 hp . A stock 250 2 stroke is around 42-48 depending on the brand. So if you build a factory 250 2 stroke it will be faster than a factory 4 stroke. And for brands who dont manufacture 2 strokes its unfair. i understand hondas point completely. 250fs are supposed to be the 125 equivelent. Not 250 2 strokes. Were in the times of modern engines that are better all around. No need to try to bend rules to make them compete with outdated engines.

Wait a minute bro, I thought 4t's were superior? How can they make less power with same CC? MIND BLOWN.


It must not be better all around if it doesn't make the same power and takes twice as many revs to make less power...

Acidreamer wrote:

Generally looking at stock power, 2 strokes have 10-15 more hp than a 250f. 35hp for a 250f and 45ish for a 2 stroke.

I think factory 250fs are pushing close to 50 hp . A stock 250 2 stroke is around 42-48 depending on the brand. So if you build a factory 250 2 stroke it will be faster than a factory 4 stroke. And for brands who dont manufacture 2 strokes its unfair. i understand hondas point completely. 250fs are supposed to be the 125 equivelent. Not 250 2 strokes. Were in the times of modern engines that are better all around. No need to try to bend rules to make them compete with outdated engines.

lol...your last sentance
isnt that exaclty what happened with the 250 displacement for the fourstroke??

Acidreamer wrote:

Generally looking at stock power, 2 strokes have 10-15 more hp than a 250f. 35hp for a 250f and 45ish for a 2 stroke.

I think factory 250fs are pushing close to 50 hp . A stock 250 2 stroke is around 42-48 depending on the brand. So if you build a factory 250 2 stroke it will be faster than a factory 4 stroke. And for brands who dont manufacture 2 strokes its unfair. i understand hondas point completely. 250fs are supposed to be the 125 equivelent. Not 250 2 strokes. Were in the times of modern engines that are better all around. No need to try to bend rules to make them compete with outdated engines.

cbarber wrote:

lol...your last sentance
isnt that exaclty what happened with the 250 displacement for the fourstroke??

Yea youre exactly right.. kindof a bonehead statement by me. STILL, i dont think its fair to give an advantage to 3 manufacturers. When you factor in the development, production, sales, etc it just doesnt make sense. If i had the chance to make the rules id make hp, torque and weight limits. Other than that, run what motor style you want.

Acidreamer wrote:

Generally looking at stock power, 2 strokes have 10-15 more hp than a 250f. 35hp for a 250f and 45ish for a 2 stroke.

I think factory 250fs are pushing close to 50 hp . A stock 250 2 stroke is around 42-48 depending on the brand. So if you build a factory 250 2 stroke it will be faster than a factory 4 stroke. And for brands who dont manufacture 2 strokes its unfair. i understand hondas point completely. 250fs are supposed to be the 125 equivelent. Not 250 2 strokes. Were in the times of modern engines that are better all around. No need to try to bend rules to make them compete with outdated engines.

cbarber wrote:

lol...your last sentance
isnt that exaclty what happened with the 250 displacement for the fourstroke??

That is exactly right! I think Acidreamer has his numbers a bit off as well for stock power. Maybe the 250f(s) made 35hp in 2004 but those numbers have continued to rise. Hell, a Sx150 is around 40hp stock.

Acidreamer wrote:

Generally looking at stock power, 2 strokes have 10-15 more hp than a 250f. 35hp for a 250f and 45ish for a 2 stroke.

I think factory 250fs are pushing close to 50 hp . A stock 250 2 stroke is around 42-48 depending on the brand. So if you build a factory 250 2 stroke it will be faster than a factory 4 stroke. And for brands who dont manufacture 2 strokes its unfair. i understand hondas point completely. 250fs are supposed to be the 125 equivelent. Not 250 2 strokes. Were in the times of modern engines that are better all around. No need to try to bend rules to make them compete with outdated engines.

Can't do a long reply at the moment. But Canadian rules work. No cylinder work. Only reeds , Exhaust and so forth on the 250 2 strokes. And their racing up north is excellent. Most all fast guys will be on 4 strokes anyways.

Honda needs to put their big boy pants on and realize they don't make two strokes anymore, but other companies do and that they SHOULD be allowed to race together. Get over it Honda.

" Pick a bike , and lets go racing ".

Why are we still splitting hairs over CC based classes. Let them run what they want, 350's, electric, 500's whatever floats your boat. Split the classes up by some other method. They run the same speeds anyways.

As a factory rider in the premier class you should be able to pick whatever bike you think suits the track and your style best. Glen Helen on your 450 is good, and you might think a 250 two stroke suits you better on another track when it's wet, or super rutty. Same goes for indoors. Pick a bike from your factory and race. I'm sure most will stick with the 450, but open it up to your rider's choice anyway. Remember RV2 at Budd's and O'Mara on his 125? Bring whatever you want and pin it to win it.

Some people are living under a rock, it seems.

MXA has shown something like 43 - 44 HP for the KTM / KTHusky 'f's. KXs and YZFs around the 41/42HP mark. I think only the Honda was just below 40. Classic. They show YZ250s at around 46 - KTM /KTHusky 250s 47 /48.

Not a huge difference.

The 10 to 15 HP difference was a fair few years ago, boys.

250 2ts currently pretty much drop like a stone after around 9 /9.5K rpm. Most 250 2ts Max power is delivered around the 8300 / 8500 mark. 250Fs range from the 12 /13+K RPM. That's a hell of a rev range advantage, that can offset any outright power deficit.

Different types of power delivery - advantages of one, are met / cancelled by the advantages of the other, and vice versa for disadvantages .

250Fs don't have high torque - it's just steady / linear torque, over a wide range. 250 2ts, have far more torque than an 'f', over a far narrower range. HP is simply a product of torque x revs (with a factor of, I think 5150?) It makes me laugh when people describe 4ts as being more torquey than a comparably tuned and sized 2t. Their 'superior' torque is purely from the capacity advantage they are allowed to have.

Cut the Bull Shit and have Equivalency. Let Honda (and others) show how much 'better' their 4 strokes are, on equal footing. They so believe their 4ts are the bees knees, well stop hiding behind Handicap Class Rules.

Letting 2 strokes run would be admitting that 4 strokes suck. They will never do it. Canada only does it because they need all the entries and interest they can get. The US can pick and choose....for now.

Not a lot of dirtbikes are sold, there's only so much profit to go around. It's probably better for business if they only have a limited number of products to carry (4 strokes only).

You create a competitive 2 stroke class again and have to sell 2 strokes again and sales become spread across multiple product lines, multiple product lines that require a good deal of money to stay relevant.

Well i have both and i am riding my 250f on the track and hs and everything but enduro. Traction and stability are the reason.

Ebs wrote:

Not a lot of dirtbikes are sold, there's only so much profit to go around. It's probably better for business if they only have a limited number of products to carry (4 strokes only).

You create a competitive 2 stroke class again and have to sell 2 strokes again and sales become spread across multiple product lines, multiple product lines that require a good deal of money to stay relevant.

Build something consumers want to buy or suffer the consequences of the market speaking with their wallet.
That may or may not have anything to do with fitting some Pro class rules. There are twice as many offroad/enduro models sold as MX, and KTM's 350 is their top selling powerplant, although they sell more 2 strokes than 4 strokes.

There are several forms of off road racing where CC's is not mandated and all sizes and strokes have their day.

My 2003 KTM 250 smoker put out 50hp stock. It was however a real handful to control. If the money put into 4-stroke development went into the 2-strokes we would have some awesome 2-strokes with direct injection and nearly the same amount of emissions with way less noise. The whole 4-stroke double displacement advantage was unfair and ridiculous to begin with.

When's the husky 250 coming jeffro

GreaseMeter wrote:

When's the husky 250 coming jeffro

I'm not sure as of now. Usually when I get a new bike , I sell one and roll the money over into a new one. I don't think I could sell either that 125 or my old RM....so basically I have to save up the money to buy one outright. Maybe end of summer...maybe next spring , not sure at the moment.

The business case on the part of the manufacturers vs. the cost of riding to the consumer and the resulting health of MX racing is interesting and complicated. Like politics, people fall into camps and don't really look at it objectively. I'm no different. Would slightly cheaper to purchase bikes that have significantly less expensive, and less complicated, maintenance result in more participation? Seems easy to answer, but maybe not. Maybe the smartphone generation has other things to do than ride dirt bikes. But I do think each manufacturer has a unique position right now regarding 2T bikes. Clearly KTM/ Husky, as the sole producers of modern bikes, would have the most to gain by a rule change allowing 2Ts. Yamaha would be close behind. The others would only see a loss of sales.

Johnny Depp wrote:

" Pick a bike , and lets go racing ".

Why are we still splitting hairs over CC based classes. Let them run what they want, 350's, electric, 500's whatever floats your boat. Split the classes up by some other method. They run the same speeds anyways.

Run what ya brung. I like it. That could be a cool MEC type, only outdoors. Run one and see how it goes. Reminds me of Johnny O on the 125 tearing up the Des Nations.

Johnny Ringo wrote:

Please cite your sources for these statements

Well..when asked about 250 vs 250 racing in Aus, here is what the Honda rep said:

"Mike Landman – Penrite Honda Racing team manager:
In the Lites class, definitely not. Not a 250 two-stroke anyway, maybe a 150 or something like that. A stock 250 four-stroke out of the box, is anywhere from 35, 36 to 38hp and a stock 250 two-stroke is 8-10 more horses than that. It is possible to get a 250 four-stroke to about 40 or 41hp but you can increase the power in the two-stroke as well and it’s faster to begin with. They should be in separate classes. I think that’s something that could be worked out. My concerns are with running the two together – one, is the big horsepower advantage, and two, I can see that the average person who goes to buy a bike is paying similar money for something that has 10 more hp, probably less in maintenance, and I can see it killing the 250 four-stroke class because you can’t blame people. If you’re a privateer riding in that class it’s a no brainer, you will ride a 250 two-stroke. I totally disagree with it because it’s not a fair and level playing field."

http://www.motoonline.com.au/2014/07/31/point-two-stroke-vs-four-stroke-solutions/

Johnny Ringo wrote:

Please cite your sources for these statements

Plugga wrote:

Well..when asked about 250 vs 250 racing in Aus, here is what the Honda rep said:

"Mike Landman – Penrite Honda Racing team manager:
In the Lites class, definitely not. Not a 250 two-stroke anyway, maybe a 150 or something like that. A stock 250 four-stroke out of the box, is anywhere from 35, 36 to 38hp and a stock 250 two-stroke is 8-10 more horses than that. It is possible to get a 250 four-stroke to about 40 or 41hp but you can increase the power in the two-stroke as well and it’s faster to begin with. They should be in separate classes. I think that’s something that could be worked out. My concerns are with running the two together – one, is the big horsepower advantage, and two, I can see that the average person who goes to buy a bike is paying similar money for something that has 10 more hp, probably less in maintenance, and I can see it killing the 250 four-stroke class because you can’t blame people. If you’re a privateer riding in that class it’s a no brainer, you will ride a 250 two-stroke. I totally disagree with it because it’s not a fair and level playing field."

http://www.motoonline.com.au/2014/07/31/point-two-stroke-vs-four-stroke-solutions/

Wow lol

Johnny Ringo wrote:

Please cite your sources for these statements

Plugga wrote:

Well..when asked about 250 vs 250 racing in Aus, here is what the Honda rep said:

"Mike Landman – Penrite Honda Racing team manager:
In the Lites class, definitely not. Not a 250 two-stroke anyway, maybe a 150 or something like that. A stock 250 four-stroke out of the box, is anywhere from 35, 36 to 38hp and a stock 250 two-stroke is 8-10 more horses than that. It is possible to get a 250 four-stroke to about 40 or 41hp but you can increase the power in the two-stroke as well and it’s faster to begin with. They should be in separate classes. I think that’s something that could be worked out. My concerns are with running the two together – one, is the big horsepower advantage, and two, I can see that the average person who goes to buy a bike is paying similar money for something that has 10 more hp, probably less in maintenance, and I can see it killing the 250 four-stroke class because you can’t blame people. If you’re a privateer riding in that class it’s a no brainer, you will ride a 250 two-stroke. I totally disagree with it because it’s not a fair and level playing field."

http://www.motoonline.com.au/2014/07/31/point-two-stroke-vs-four-stroke-solutions/

JW381 wrote:

Wow lol

Basically if you are a "person" that buys a bike with 10 more horsepower and less maintenance, you will kill the 250 4 stroke class. If you are a privateer, this is a valid option and you too will kill the 250 4 stroke class. That my friend is not a fair and level playing field..... LMAO The Koolaid is plentiful

Plugga wrote:

Well..when asked about 250 vs 250 racing in Aus, here is what the Honda rep said:

"Mike Landman – Penrite Honda Racing team manager:
In the Lites class, definitely not. Not a 250 two-stroke anyway, maybe a 150 or something like that. A stock 250 four-stroke out of the box, is anywhere from 35, 36 to 38hp and a stock 250 two-stroke is 8-10 more horses than that. It is possible to get a 250 four-stroke to about 40 or 41hp but you can increase the power in the two-stroke as well and it’s faster to begin with. They should be in separate classes. I think that’s something that could be worked out. My concerns are with running the two together – one, is the big horsepower advantage, and two, I can see that the average person who goes to buy a bike is paying similar money for something that has 10 more hp, probably less in maintenance, and I can see it killing the 250 four-stroke class because you can’t blame people. If you’re a privateer riding in that class it’s a no brainer, you will ride a 250 two-stroke. I totally disagree with it because it’s not a fair and level playing field."

http://www.motoonline.com.au/2014/07/31/point-two-stroke-vs-four-stroke-solutions/

JW381 wrote:

Wow lol

Markee wrote:

Basically if you are a "person" that buys a bike with 10 more horsepower and less maintenance, you will kill the 250 4 stroke class. If you are a privateer, this is a valid option and you too will kill the 250 4 stroke class. That my friend is not a fair and level playing field..... LMAO The Koolaid is plentiful

Haha...that shit right there cracks me up!!

Factory 250F's are putting out more than 50go...and that came strait from Mitch Payton 2 years ago. Possibly a little more now.

All the factory guys are on these bikes....which leaves every privateer or small team , completely shit out of luck for having a competitive machine!!

Allowing 250 2 strokes ( with the same rules Canada implements ).....Helps everyone who isn't factory or super rich! It would ALSO make for some better racing....as many of the bikes would be on a more level playing field!

This 8 , 10 or 15hp advantage....complete and utter horse shit , and is just a strait out lie!

You get a 250F and 250 2 stroke together with the same HP together...most every fast guy out there would choose the 4 stroke because it's easier to ride.....but costs a small fortune to have a fast / well built / competitive bike.

Hence why.....the 250 2 stroke is a viable option for guys on a shoe string budget.

Here's the part that I have an issue with. In the 2 stroke days, we had basically 2 divisions in the pro ranks 125 and 250/500... or 125 and 250 for simplification. The 125 was a nearly perfect step up from 80's and several top mini racers made successful jumps straight from 80's to 125 pro. So now we are wanting to have 250 2 strokes and 250 4 strokes as equal displacement... does this mean the jump from mini's to 250 4 strokes is too much? Should there be something as more of a stepping stone... more on the level of a 125 2 stroke?

FTR... I'd be a huge fan of having a 200 4 stroke/125 (150) 2 stroke class as the "entry level" class and then have 250 and 450 (open) classes respectively. Let the 2 "premier" classes be equal displacement.

MX1 and MX2 classes solve the cc problem. MX1 is just the "premier" class.

ga_pike wrote:

Here's the part that I have an issue with. In the 2 stroke days, we had basically 2 divisions in the pro ranks 125 and 250/500... or 125 and 250 for simplification. The 125 was a nearly perfect step up from 80's and several top mini racers made successful jumps straight from 80's to 125 pro. So now we are wanting to have 250 2 strokes and 250 4 strokes as equal displacement... does this mean the jump from mini's to 250 4 strokes is too much? Should there be something as more of a stepping stone... more on the level of a 125 2 stroke?

FTR... I'd be a huge fan of having a 200 4 stroke/125 (150) 2 stroke class as the "entry level" class and then have 250 and 450 (open) classes respectively. Let the 2 "premier" classes be equal displacement.

Honda doesn't make a 2 stroke but they make a 150f. That'd be a good step up...but the other manufacturers don't make them so back to the same argument.

I have a shop full of honda smokers.

but what is funny as hell it was and still is ok for HONDA to bless us with that pos 150 and try to force it in the amateur ranks. We said no it can stay in super mini/ schoolboy classes.

Of course the big boys capitulated to Honda's whims mainly I am assuming the dollars made them.

But wait now they make the 150 fuel injected and it rocks.

Wow no one seen that coming.

bottom line, screw honda and it's bullshit pressure. They have pulled this crap for a very long time, but i wonder how good old ktm and husky look in the dirt bike market now, compare to big red. Of course they will whine and complain about allowing 250 smokers heads up. Let em's. good for the goose is good for the gander