Was changing the seat ergonomics beneficial?

easier to slide way forward and way back again?

Haha watch the style change back. In a few years there will be a pocket in the seat at the front old school style - who needs a seat bump!

Like bell bottoms...oh wait...

Look at the difference in the pipes too.

Very.

I have both extremes. 92 KX 500 and a 2017 KTM 250sx. One of my first things I noticed on the 500, very small area to move it, its the biggest negative to me. The front will hit you in the nuts and the rear will slap that ass.

Big difference in look and feel between these two. Hopping off one and onto the other took some getting used to.

2002 YZ250F



2003 YZ250F

You really don’t have to move around that much and it’s very easy to slide backwards when the bike is accelerating out of a turn. So I don’t feel it was necessary to flatten the seat out.

kkawboy14 wrote:

You really don’t have to move around that much and it’s very easy to slide backwards when the bike is accelerating out of a turn. So I don’t feel it was necessary to flatten the seat out.

I hated the change. It made me feel taller on the bike, or at least more upright and flat which I didn't like. I never really understood why the manufactures went to a flat board seat style. Surely there has to be a reason.

I loved my 87 cr 250, braking hard into a corner slid me to the front of the seat where I was stopped and in the right position to get hard on the gas coming out.
It felt right to me !

kkawboy14 wrote:

You really don’t have to move around that much and it’s very easy to slide backwards when the bike is accelerating out of a turn. So I don’t feel it was necessary to flatten the seat out.

TXDirt wrote:

I hated the change. It made me feel taller on the bike, or at least more upright and flat which I didn't like. I never really understood why the manufactures went to a flat board seat style. Surely there has to be a reason.

So I’ll go with what you said about feeling taller on the bike. It does seem to help that you don’t have as far to stand up. As in it’s harder to do a squat with weights if you go all the way down as apposed to going half way down and then standing up. And I would say when sitting down it is easier to have your head further over the bars.

You old bros actually liked the old style seat setups? The new flat seats are so much easier to move around, and actually position yourself correctly on the bike. I put tall seats on both of my older Kawi two strokes to flatten the cockpit out. Even had plans to cut and weld the subframe if the seat did not work.

The goal of the 80's seats was to keep you in the saddle.



And the goal now is to allow you to move front and back very easily.



IMO, the best seat ergo's of any bike that I have ridden, which allowed the best of both worlds was the 96-00 RM's

and then you have guys like Travis who is tall and moves all over the bike

My '86 RM had a really deep pocket. The first time I rode a flatter seat I was stoked. I prefer seats that draw a straight line from the rear fender to the gas cap!

started with HRC Hondas 82-85. I always wondered why it took so long for the production bikes to adopt that. and yes, the 1999 KX250 had that, and what a sweet bike it was when we first saw it.

Yes, i loved how my 93 yz 80 had the dip in the seat and ACTUAL foam in it. The dumbass who decided to put a 2x4 in the seat should be fired.

TXDirt wrote:

I hated the change. It made me feel taller on the bike, or at least more upright and flat which I didn't like. I never really understood why the manufactures went to a flat board seat style. Surely there has to be a reason.

Those of us with long legs appreciate the extra seat to peg clearance. One of the best things about modern bikes IMO.

Husqvarna in 1970s the tank and seat don't meet and had a bolt to sit on if you moved forward on the seat

Husqvarna

I can't believe this is a thread

dat saddle tho...

I remember really noticing this trend in the early 2000s; walking into MX shops and seeing the new lineup of CRs etc, and how they resembled ironing boards... It'd been going on for a while - flatter and flatter over the entire 90s. I'm currently restoring an 87 YZ 125 (my first bike) and of course the ergos are something else.

I get the point about being able to move around a lot easier but it also seems to be a common remark from riders that have gone back, for whatever reason, that the older bikes corner extremely well due to the lower centre of gravity. Very much looking forward to seeing this for myself once my YZ is done.

Motocross83 wrote:

I remember really noticing this trend in the early 2000s; walking into MX shops and seeing the new lineup of CRs etc, and how they resembled ironing boards... It'd been going on for a while - flatter and flatter over the entire 90s. I'm currently restoring an 87 YZ 125 (my first bike) and of course the ergos are something else.

I get the point about being able to move around a lot easier but it also seems to be a common remark from riders that have gone back, for whatever reason, that the older bikes corner extremely well due to the lower centre of gravity. Very much looking forward to seeing this for myself once my YZ is done.

They didn't raise the seat, they lowered the tank. The newer bikes are not taller and they certainly don't have a higher center of gravity. lol

Yep of course, poor choice of words there.

I was wondering about this while wAtching my son and nephew. Pw50 has the pocket and they stay in a better position. Before that the cheap electric Razor had a flat seat and they kept winding up too far back on the bike with less control.

Made me question my tall flat seats. As I get tired I find myself too far back, losing control, and burning energy. Of course my lack of fitness and technique don't help after one lap.

GrapeApe wrote:

I can't believe this is a thread

Why? Legit question and several responses of interest.

Cheers.