Two-stroke website, worth a look

**cheese** · 26th September 2009, 21:36

Originally Posted by Rupe

I agree that they aren't as hard as people make out,

When 2t gears failed you help me pull it down and I rebuilt it on my own at home from split cases, sure I made a couple of phone calls but I followed a manual and it really wasn't that hard.

When I brought a 4t I rebuilt the top end, changed the cam chain, checked the valves, at home, all from a manual. And it took a litlle while, but it was easy. I also self taught myself to service forks, and I'm just teaching myself to re-valve them at the moment. If you have something to work from it's easy, and doesn't have to be expensive.

You shouldn't be scared of working on 4t's, or 2t's, just get some good info and take your time. Then neither of them are that expensive.

As for the 4t vs 2t, most people spout bullshit about both, and haven't ridden enough to comment. The fact is most moden quality bikes are very good, and once you get used to yours you like more than you mates cos his feels strange as it has different bars, or hard seat etc.

Personally if I had a 4 stroke i would DIY, but many people don't.

Just because you guys feel comfortable with it doesn't mean others do.

Anyway this is a retarded argument.

**charles23** · 27th September 2009, 09:17

Originally Posted by green machine

Funny how alot of 2 stroke riders constantly bag 4 strokes on here(it's like groundhog day),at the end of the day we all ride what we like and personally i don't give a monkeys what anyone else rides as long as i'm happy riding mine.

...ditto...

**kezzafish** · 27th September 2009, 10:10

this conspiracy theory stuff is mad. Reckless i don't get how you beleive that company's stopped dropped 2Ts for the money they could make on 4t parts. I know i say this taking the piss sometimes but I seriously think it's obvious that they dropped 2ts because the 4ts were faster on the track... simple as. If they hadn't got on board and put all the money into developing the 4, they would have been left behind by those that did

**B0000M** · 27th September 2009, 10:58

Originally Posted by kezzafish

because the 4ts were faster on the track... simple as. If they hadn't got on board and put all the money into developing the 4, they would have been left behind by those that did

are they though?

typically the first 4 stroke in racing down here is in 3rd place

a lot of the better riders around still prefer 2 strokes

**Pierce** · 27th September 2009, 12:19

Originally Posted by B0000M

are they though?

typically the first 4 stroke in racing down here is in 3rd place

a lot of the better riders around still prefer 2 strokes

Tell you what i'd like to see, James Stewart riding a YZ250 in the outdoors

Love to see him own all those 450's with vintage machinary haha.

**Armitage Shanks** · 27th September 2009, 18:09

Originally Posted by B0000M

are they though?

typically the first 4 stroke in racing down here is in 3rd place

a lot of the better riders around still prefer 2 strokes

Still does'nt answer the question; why not fit the 250 2t's in with the 4 stroker 250's ? If Four strokes were that clever, and that fast...and everyone raves about them, it should be horses for courses. Same with the 400's class where the 250 oil burners are bracketed against . Everyone knows a YZ250 makes double the hp of a 250 four stroke... , and sounds a lot better to boot. Seems the odds are stacked and a hint of favoritism toward the 4 strokes to boot ...mildly put....

**green machine** · 27th September 2009, 18:25

Oh bugger it,i'm gettin me a 2 stroke ASAP..................it seems my bike is a slow piece of crap!!!

**vr4king** · 27th September 2009, 18:32

I maybe wrong here but didnt they pit the 250 2t against the 2504t in last years national series

And if memorie serves me right a 2504t took it out in that class

Still remember watching one of the kings on the cr250 up local track..........looked and sounded like heaven

**B0000M** · 27th September 2009, 20:44

Originally Posted by Armitage Shanks

Still does'nt answer the question; why not fit the 250 2t's in with the 4 stroker 250's ? If Four strokes were that clever, and that fast...and everyone raves about them, it should be horses for courses. Same with the 400's class where the 250 oil burners are bracketed against . Everyone knows a YZ250 makes double the hp of a 250 four stroke... , and sounds a lot better to boot. Seems the odds are stacked and a hint of favoritism toward the 4 strokes to boot ...mildly put....

im quite happy to race 450s on my 250, let them think they have an 'advantage' racing 250 4t's is a waste of time except for the occaisonal exceptionally good rider

**scott411** · 28th September 2009, 07:53

Originally Posted by Armitage Shanks

Still does'nt answer the question; why not fit the 250 2t's in with the 4 stroker 250's ? If Four strokes were that clever, and that fast...and everyone raves about them, it should be horses for courses. Same with the 400's class where the 250 oil burners are bracketed against . Everyone knows a YZ250 makes double the hp of a 250 four stroke... , and sounds a lot better to boot. Seems the odds are stacked and a hint of favoritism toward the 4 strokes to boot ...mildly put....

In NZ the 250 2t's and 4t's run together, the first year 9 out of 10 were 250F's in the finish, (2 riders started out on 250's 2t's but swapeed to 250F's before the end, only Shayne King was in teh top 10 on a 2 smoker, in the second year it was the same deal, only Dk was in the top 10 on a 2 smoker,

in the US amatuer racing, a 250 2t can run in either the 250 class, or the 450 class, Malcolm Stewart (James's little brother) ran a 250 2t in the 450 class to some top 3 finishers in 08, and a couple of guys got top 10;s in the 250 classes this year,

a STD 250F puts out around 35 hp at the rear wheel, where a std 250 2t about 43-45, but the 250F has a much wider powerband and alot more torque off the bottom, very few people can ride a 250 2t quicker around a race track for 20 minutes than a 250F,

**B0000M** · 28th September 2009, 08:14

Originally Posted by scott411

a STD 250F puts out around 35 hp at the rear wheel, where a std 250 2t about 43-45, but the 250F has a much wider powerband and alot more torque off the bottom, very few people can ride a 250 2t quicker around a race track for 20 minutes than a 250F,

then to add more variables into the mix, on a more open track the bigger power will pull through, whilst on a tight track -eg supercross or a tighter mx track the extra 10hp wont make any difference.

**scott411** · 28th September 2009, 09:31

and condition matters as well, in muddy sonditions 2t's are easier to ride as they are lighter and do not have the engine breaking which weights the front wheel, also sand is good for 2t's.

but then hard pack is better for 4 strokes as the smoother power makes a difference,

**B0000M** · 28th September 2009, 09:46

maybe we should all just get 3 strokes...

**charles23** · 28th September 2009, 09:51

Originally Posted by scott411

In NZ the 250 2t's and 4t's run together, the first year 9 out of 10 were 250F's in the finish, (2 riders started out on 250's 2t's but swapeed to 250F's before the end, only Shayne King was in teh top 10 on a 2 smoker, in the second year it was the same deal, only Dk was in the top 10 on a 2 smoker,

in the US amatuer racing, a 250 2t can run in either the 250 class, or the 450 class, Malcolm Stewart (James's little brother) ran a 250 2t in the 450 class to some top 3 finishers in 08, and a couple of guys got top 10;s in the 250 classes this year,

a STD 250F puts out around 35 hp at the rear wheel, where a std 250 2t about 43-45, but the 250F has a much wider powerband and alot more torque off the bottom, very few people can ride a 250 2t quicker around a race track for 20 minutes than a 250F,

ha ha shot down 'boom', thanks for the expert information Scott.