Modern four stokes?

[Crisis management]

Thanks for all the feedback guys (and apologies for hijacking this thread), I'm a couple of weeks away from being allowed to ride it so will have to just polish the bloody thing and look at it in anticipation. Watch out for a 6 days upside down at Woodhill!

[brp]

Don't think that is necessarly due to the weight, more the way 4Ts are more effective at turning power into traction. My old RM would spit the rear out sideways in a heartbeat, which meant I'd pretty much have to be through the corner and upright before I put any real throttle in. With the KTM (weighs about the same as the RM), I can wind on a big handful of the throttle mid-corner, it just tends to dig in and and the power pulls the bike upright for me.

I lent the KTM to a guy with a 300EXC a couple of months ago at Woodhill and he was astounded at the difference in the corners. He was doing the same as the RM out of the corners, because getting on the gas too early on his 300 just kicked the back out, whereas he had been watching me power through corners on my bike and was surprised at how easy it was to do on the 4T.

The thing with the eternal 4T vs 2T arguement is that you can argue cost, power delivery, traction and all sorts of technical details until the cows come home, but rider preference is as much to play in it as any other factor. I do still miss the raw snot of my RM and the fact I could loft the front wheel over anything before my brain even registered I needed to, but I am ultimately a lot faster on the KTM. That is because the power is so much more smooth and controllable, I get way less arm pump and the KTM doesn't suddenly decide that it wants to kill me because I've looked at the throttle wrong, which was always an issue with the RM.

Reading the last paragraph ya old RM 2 stroker sounds like hell of a lot more fun ? It can be eternal the argument but 2 stroker getting fresh oil all the time (apart from the box of course) less moving parts, more powerful per cc with firing twice as quick, highly tune-able, lighter, cheaper to maintain and rebuild (DYI) - KaBoooM Factor - is hard to overlook - still doesn't stop me from being interested in a modern four stroke though

[ktm84mxc]

If you love a modern 4 banger buy one, if you love 2 smokes ride one ,it's all about choice.
some like the hit and scare\fun of a 2 smoke, or a 4 bangers power slides each to their own.
Me I prefer a smooth torquey ride with the hit a clutch flick away, compare a 2 smoke\4 banger by pushing them around a field or onto a trailer the weights may be close but the 2 smoke just feels lighter as the weights lower to the ground making it feel lighter.

[yokel]

For me pound for pound the 2 strokes has it over 4 strokes, The only way a 4 stroke gets one over a 2 stroke is in the power delivery and spread witch of cause is a big chunk of it for a lot of people, but for me the 4 stroke power makes me sleepy

2 strokes like the old (any) RM 250 were tuned to run against other 2 strokes not 4 strokes so people's ego for more power and fast revving seat of the paints speed takes over, you cant do this with a 4 stroke.

The things stopping me from ever getting a 4 stroke again is the weight, cost, engine braking, starting and the yuck handling ! like sex on a water bed on a boat on high seas going 40 knots

[Jay GTI]

Reading the last paragraph ya old RM 2 stroker sounds like hell of a lot more fun ? It can be eternal the argument but 2 stroker getting fresh oil all the time (apart from the box of course) less moving parts, more powerful per cc with firing twice as quick, highly tune-able, lighter, cheaper to maintain and rebuild (DYI) - KaBoooM Factor - is hard to overlook - still doesn't stop me from being interested in a modern four stroke though

Errrrr..... nope

There's elements to it I miss, but it was for the most part angry, cantankerous and hard to ride fast. I got used to it in the end, but spent the first 18 months of ownership scared of the bloody thing. A hell of a lot more fun for me is being able to consistently ride faster, for longer and without the bike biting me when I get it wrong (I get it wrong all the time). The RM put me in hospital twice, that about sums that bike up.

But that's the point I was badly making. You can give me any stat in the book, wave the running costs in my face all you like, I enjoy riding MX 4Ts more, because they suit my skills and riding style way more than a 2T.

[motor_mayhem]

For me pound for pound the 2 strokes has it over 4 strokes, The only way a 4 stroke gets one over a 2 stroke is in the power delivery and spread witch of cause is a big chunk of it for a lot of people, but for me the 4 stroke power makes me sleepy

2 strokes like the old (any) RM 250 were tuned to run against other 2 strokes not 4 strokes so people's ego for more power and fast revving seat of the paints speed takes over, you cant do this with a 4 stroke.

The things stopping me from ever getting a 4 stroke again is the weight, cost, engine braking, starting and the yuck handling ! like sex on a water bed on a boat on high seas going 40 knots

One man's meat is another man's poison.

The light switch effect of the 250 was plenty enough to put me off if I had somehow missed other riders spinning the wheels of their 2 strokes trying to get up hills or the handful who had managed to loop their bikes in bogs.
I don't think anyone would disagree with the cost factor but if it means I spend more time riding and less time pushing (which I find infinitely more tiring) then I am willing to spend the $$.

If you find four strokes boring, stop being so timid and wring the throttle a bit more, it's still an option on them, you just have to choose it rather than it being chosen for you.

In my mind sex on a water bed on a boat on high seas going 40 knots beats a lot of wrist action and sweating just to get your bike to climb 5 metres up a muddy hill

[warewolf]

If you find four strokes boring, stop being so timid and wring the throttle a bit more, it's still an option on them

It's not the wringing that's the problem, but the waiting. On my 2T, wring the throttle and sh!t happens. On the 4Ts, wring the throttle and it's wait, wait, wait, ok NOW we start making that smooth tractable power. There's no power when the throttle is cracked, just more valve clatter until it eventually revs up.

Light-switch effect of the 250? My 200 doesn't have a light-switch delivery and the 250s are supposed to be gruntier.

I do think I'd be faster on a 250F, but I don't think it'd be funner.

[scott411]

For me pound for pound the 2 strokes has it over 4 strokes, The only way a 4 stroke gets one over a 2 stroke is in the power delivery and spread witch of cause is a big chunk of it for a lot of people, but for me the 4 stroke power makes me sleepy

2 strokes like the old (any) RM 250 were tuned to run against other 2 strokes not 4 strokes so people's ego for more power and fast revving seat of the paints speed takes over, you cant do this with a 4 stroke.

The things stopping me from ever getting a 4 stroke again is the weight, cost, engine braking, starting and the yuck handling ! like sex on a water bed on a boat on high seas going 40 knots

if you think a fuel injected 450 mxer is sleepy, your doing it wrong, the accellerate quicker than anything made out of corners,

i enjoy riding most stuff, = quick revving modern four strokes , 125's 250 2t's are fun to ride, but way slower around a MX track,

what most people said, its horses for courses,

[brp]

Errrrr..... nope

There's elements to it I miss, but it was for the most part angry, cantankerous and hard to ride fast. I got used to it in the end, but spent the first 18 months of ownership scared of the bloody thing. A hell of a lot more fun for me is being able to consistently ride faster, for longer and without the bike biting me when I get it wrong (I get it wrong all the time). The RM put me in hospital twice, that about sums that bike up.

But that's the point I was badly making. You can give me any stat in the book, wave the running costs in my face all you like, I enjoy riding MX 4Ts more, because they suit my skills and riding style way more than a 2T.

Guess the nope is for the RM personally not being as fun for you and not my points on the pluses for two strokes ?

1990 KX 500 - 65 HP Rear Wheel Horsepower and weighs 99 KG's - how many modern four strokes have those stats and its a 22 YEAR OLD bike - "Yeah yeah there's this modern four stroke model that puts out 67 HP" well there should be its 22 years later but less than 22 years later there's guys over in the states where 85 Rear Wheel HP on their old 22 year old bikes is common place and didn't have to take out a 2nd mortgage to do so.

2 stroke slower round an MX track ? - And thats why they stopped 2 strokes from racing against 4 strokes - bit hard to start marketing modern four strokes so the spare parts side of the business can be the real golden cash cow when 2 strokes are whipping your ass. As for a two stroke having no poke up hill - not a problem for a dirty 5.

Put likes of Shane King in his day on a 2 stroke and no doubt he would be much quicker round the track than if he were on a four stoke. Its only the crème de la crème that can ride a 2 stroke at the max - many years in the saddle.

[scott411]

Guess the nope is for the RM personally not being as fun for you and not my points on the pluses for two strokes ?

1990 KX 500 - 65 HP Rear Wheel Horsepower and weighs 99 KG's - how many modern four strokes have those stats and its a 22 YEAR OLD bike - "Yeah yeah there's this modern four stroke model that puts out 67 HP" well there should be its 22 years later but less than 22 years later there's guys over in the states where 85 Rear Wheel HP on their old 22 year old bikes is common place and didn't have to take out a 2nd mortgage to do so.

2 stroke slower round an MX track ? - And thats why they stopped 2 strokes from racing against 4 strokes - bit hard to start marketing modern four strokes so the spare parts side of the business can be the real golden cash cow when 2 strokes are whipping your ass. As for a two stroke having no poke up hill - not a problem for a dirty 5.

Put likes of Shane King in his day on a 2 stroke and no doubt he would be much quicker round the track than if he were on a four stoke. Its only the crème de la crème that can ride a 2 stroke at the max - many years in the saddle.

having raced, and won on a KX500, they are not as fast around a MX track as a 450, and putting them in a modern frame does not change it, the rules were screwed up which allowed the 250F's in with the 125, but in NZ (since 07) and Aussie you can race like for like on cc's and 4 strokes still dominate the top 10's,

Shayne King was the last winner of the 500cc class on a 2 stroke, and he changed to a 4 stroke the year after

you are right, a 500cc 2 stroke is the fastest thing in a straight line, motocross tracks are more than straights tho,

and KX500 were even more hp in 1986 than they were in 1990, but they had to make them more rideable, Horsepower does not win MX races,

[Jay GTI]

Guess the nope is for the RM personally not being as fun for you and not my points on the pluses for two strokes ?

Yeah, my point. For me, no the RM was not more fun, but it sounds like it ticks all your boxes. So I like 4Ts, you like 2Ts, personal preference.

I was waiting for the stats arguement to start in this thread though. As Scott says, horsepower does not win races, so it's academic to quote peak output power and say that it is proof a 2T is faster than a 4T around an MX track.

The last few years have seen some of the manufacturers put a lot of effort into taming 450s, because all but the top guys were finding them too hard to ride. More effort was spent on making the power usable, rather than chasing the peak HP figure. Not to mention I've read numerous articles from MX engine builders for the factory and pro teams saying they generally don't try and increase power on the big spec 450s, just work on power delivery. 85hp is not going to make you faster.

DK has also said that his 250 2T, which he races against 250 4Ts in his class, is definitely slower than the 4Ts around some tracks, but he wins because he has the experience and race craft that the younger guys don't have. So he wins, not the bike.

I always like to post this vid of a reasonably well ridden 250 2T, the comments at the end pretty much sum it all up:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nmmh...eature=related

But at the end of the day, this is all pointless really. If you like 2Ts, buy a 2T, if you're like me and prefere 4Ts, buy one of them instead.

[eelracing]

DK has also said that his 250 2T, which he races against 250 4Ts in his class, is definitely slower than the 4Ts around some tracks, but he wins because he has the experience and race craft that the younger guys don't have. So he wins, not the bike.

Haha,peel away the bullshit and you're left with the fact that you don't send a boy out to do a mans job.DK is no dummy...but he thinks some of you are.

I always like to post this vid of a reasonably well ridden 250 2T, the comments at the end pretty much sum it all up:

Reasonably??? jesus that was awesome,and if 250 2T's were allowed to compete against 250 4 strokes in the AMA he'd be the first to swap over.
The comment "if you get passed by one of these things and your on a 450,you should quit" sums it up nicely.

But at the end of the day, this is all pointless really. If you like 2Ts, buy a 2T, if you're like me and prefere 4Ts, buy one of them instead.

I don't agree at all,a 2T is by far and wide the best application for offroad riding and racing...lightweight,instant snap,and cheap and simple to work on for the common man.You just have to choose your CC realistically to your riding ability,not your ego.
If 2 Strokes had the same developmant as 4 $trokes over the last ten years,chassis wise and FI/DI wise,we would'nt be having this conversation.

[Jay GTI]

I don't agree at all,a 2T is by far and wide the best application for offroad riding and racing...lightweight,instant snap,and cheap and simple to work on for the common man.You just have to choose your CC realistically to your riding ability,not your ego.
If 2 Strokes had the same developmant as 4 $trokes over the last ten years,chassis wise and FI/DI wise,we would'nt be having this conversation.

Good for you, you prefer 2Ts. I don't.

And the "if 2Ts had the same development..." arguement doesn't stack up. They have, the main Euro manufacturers have all spent plenty developing their 2Ts, KTM have been working on FI/DI for ages and Ossa have made it a reality. We should also be seeing the return of Maico next year, which will produce 2Ts only, designed in conjunction with a F1 team. It's only the Japanese that turned their backs on 2T.

[motor_mayhem]

Guess the nope is for the RM personally not being as fun for you and not my points on the pluses for two strokes ?

1990 KX 500 - 65 HP Rear Wheel Horsepower and weighs 99 KG's - how many modern four strokes have those stats and its a 22 YEAR OLD bike - "Yeah yeah there's this modern four stroke model that puts out 67 HP" well there should be its 22 years later but less than 22 years later there's guys over in the states where 85 Rear Wheel HP on their old 22 year old bikes is common place and didn't have to take out a 2nd mortgage to do so.

2 stroke slower round an MX track ? - And thats why they stopped 2 strokes from racing against 4 strokes - bit hard to start marketing modern four strokes so the spare parts side of the business can be the real golden cash cow when 2 strokes are whipping your ass. As for a two stroke having no poke up hill - not a problem for a dirty 5.

Put likes of Shane King in his day on a 2 stroke and no doubt he would be much quicker round the track than if he were on a four stoke. Its only the crème de la crème that can ride a 2 stroke at the max - many years in the saddle.

I don't agree at all,a 2T is by far and wide the best application for offroad riding and racing...lightweight,instant snap,and cheap and simple to work on for the common man.You just have to choose your CC realistically to your riding ability,not your ego.
If 2 Strokes had the same developmant as 4 $trokes over the last ten years,chassis wise and FI/DI wise,we would'nt be having this conversation.

1. Modern four stroke bikes are more plentiful so to get one versus a modern two stroke is actually cheaper.

2. Four strokes have experienced more development in the 200X decade. However they had a fair bit to catch up considering the previously existing four strokes (XRs,DRs,TTs,KLXs) experienced very little if not no engine development in the 199X and 198X years. Maybe not for Yamaha, but for KTM, GG etc chassis development in one type actually benefits all round - 2012+ 125sx's now have the linkage that was "tested" on the 2011 350sxf

3. Why do 2T fanatics constantly bitch that they must go cc for cc to help prove their bike is better? If the weight difference (rotating and stationary) that you crap on about so much is so important why is it still not enough to beat a 450 4T? And depite that "huge" weight and power advantage you have over 250 4T why did MXA's comparison say you will do your fastest AND slowest laps on the yz250 when against yz250f?

4. The instant snap you refer to on the 2T is the biggest reason the 4T's are better. The control of the power means that you can realistically have much more power than you need and not have to worry about accidentally tapping into it.

5. What authority decided that the 2T powerband is the only way fun can be had on a bike? Personally I find winning to be fun particularly if it's only one of your mates who you will get to exchange banter with afterwards (which is really the only winning I do). And I do more of that winning on a 4T.

FTR I am not opposed to 2T's at all and I am more than happy to acknowledge that there are some indisputable advantages (I'm actually looking at one, probably 125, to add to my garage as I think their strengths and weaknesses are virtually opposite to my current machine). But I get sick of some of the ridiculously biased and unbalanced dribble that gets written in the name of bettering the 2T cause.

[bogan]

If 2 Strokes had the same developmant as 4 $trokes over the last ten years,chassis wise and FI/DI wise,we would'nt be having this conversation.

Take a look at the skidoo FI/DI tech, there has been a lot of development there. It hasn't made it to MX because DI is far more suited to slow to rev engines at the moment. It obviously isn't an easy job to get em to rev quicker. Most chassis development would be easily transferable if the engines were competitive.

Don't get me wrong, I think 2Ts are at least as fun to ride as 4Ts, but they aren't as quick.