Posts
27442
Joined
7/22/2007
Location
St Helens, OR
US
From interviews I have read over the past year or so , it seems that Husky and Ktm ( maybe even Yamaha? ) would be ok with letting 250 2 strokes run at the pro level in the 250 class. The interview from one of the head guys at Honda said...he was totally against it.
Obviously the OEM's make more money with selling 4 strokes , as they cost a little more and repairs cost quite a bit more. I can see why Honda would be against it since they would lose revenue. But as far as them saying " It's not fair to put up a 2 stroke 250 against 250F's ".....??? I don't think that's the case any more.
If that's the case now , then why would KTM , Husky and Yamaha be ok with it? They would lose out on some 4 stroke sales and the revenue that goes along with it too.
I think Honda is saying it isn't fair , based on that they don't make a 2 stroke 250 any more. NOT that they think racing them together is unfair.
And " IF " they did produce one....what do you think their thoughts on the matter would be? My belief is , they would say " Pick a bike , and lets go racing ".
Isn't that kind of like the old saying...." I'll just take my ball and go home! "
Side note : I haven't seen anything negative or positive from Suzuki or Kawasaki on this subject. Honda was the only one I have heard so fair that was totally against it.
Obviously the OEM's make more money with selling 4 strokes , as they cost a little more and repairs cost quite a bit more. I can see why Honda would be against it since they would lose revenue. But as far as them saying " It's not fair to put up a 2 stroke 250 against 250F's ".....??? I don't think that's the case any more.
If that's the case now , then why would KTM , Husky and Yamaha be ok with it? They would lose out on some 4 stroke sales and the revenue that goes along with it too.
I think Honda is saying it isn't fair , based on that they don't make a 2 stroke 250 any more. NOT that they think racing them together is unfair.
And " IF " they did produce one....what do you think their thoughts on the matter would be? My belief is , they would say " Pick a bike , and lets go racing ".
Isn't that kind of like the old saying...." I'll just take my ball and go home! "
Side note : I haven't seen anything negative or positive from Suzuki or Kawasaki on this subject. Honda was the only one I have heard so fair that was totally against it.
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.
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...
The Shop
isnt that exaclty what happened with the 250 displacement for the fourstroke??
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.
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.
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.
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.
Pit Row
"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/
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.
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.
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
OEM's change their minds all the damn time about what they produce or not...let alone their view on rules.
Post a reply to: The difference between Husky / KTM....and Honda. ( allowed machines )