Weigh it up for your self
With an encouraging overall response to the new Maico M.M.X. from around the globe, some opinions are still very much divided on the look of the bike, with the continued use of the traditional chrome molly frame being the subject causing the most debate. Some people claim that the geometry has not changed since the 80’s. These claims could easily be termed as accurate given the small changes made over the years.
But “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” as many magazine articles from back in the day will confirm, including this quote from dirt bike journalist Rick Sieman “the Maicos would turn under anything else on the track, go straighter than a tossed spear and accelerate like the Hounds of Hell were after it”. Now granted that was back in the 80’s and things have changed, but across the world there are vintage/twinshock clubs running regular motocross events and their start grid is 80 percent Maico, 30 years on and compared like for like, it is still the best bike on the dirt. Yes, but this is 2010 so surely an aluminum frame would be lighter………………
In an editorial published on this site a few weeks ago the credibility of the substantial weight savings made by an aluminium frame were put to question by somebody who clearly has the credentials to do so and has spent more than a fleeting glance through the internet to provide the research and relevant information to support his claims.
Not wishing to get into the “is it or isn’t it” argument over the advantages and disadvantages of using aluminium to make frames, Maico International can confirm that the new 250 M.M.X has been weighed on a calibrated machine at the U.K. headquarters of Wessex Petroleum and strolls off the scales weighing one kilo less than the 2010 YZ 250 Yamaha 2 stroke as listed on Yamaha U.K’s web site. Although officially unconfirmed at the moment it is also likely that the 320 will weigh in under the YZ250, with the mighty 500 being approximately 5 grams heavier, but hey what a power to weight ratio!
Facebook
Twitter
Youtube
Comments
By irace2tmotos on February 5th, 2010 at 11:33 am
Better take a look around Gas Gas and others are using Chromo!
The average guy doesn’t need super stiff supercross handling! Lot’s of tracks are going back to old school from the high flying, get the helicopter ride off the property, closing down your fav track! So, chromo and more friendly outdoor type handling will benefit the average guy more.
My 1976 Maico AW 400 was and is a good handler.
Long like 2strokes and chromo frames!
By Sachsgs250 on February 5th, 2010 at 6:18 pm
One of the main reasons many manufacturers switched to aluminum frames was not because of some perceived performance advantage,but rather because of a global shortage of chrome-moly steel.The construction boom, primarily in China,has driven the price of high strength steel sky high.TM is the only one who will admit to this.As far as handling goes,when Honda hired Roger Decoster to re-engineer the CR line,he readily admits to having used Maico as his design basis.Then KTM copied Honda with their left drive bikes and everyone else followed.So it may be argued that the basic geometry of any modern dirt bike is descended from Maico.I find Maicos to be the most neutral,safest handling bikes on the market.
By Vincent Page on February 6th, 2010 at 3:45 am
Hi Sachsgs250,
Thanks for the information,we were already aware of the situation with Decoster, but as I am sure you can appreciate using it to our advantage in terms of promoting the bikes may have been frowned upon by the media bearing in mind the credibility decoster carries.
Many younger riders seem to think of the ally frames as the latest high tech material and regard it as a must have for any M.X. bike, but back in the 1960′s B.S.A. were already investigating titanium frames.Foloow the link below.
Vincent Page
Maico International
http://www.motorcycle-USA.com/290/1686/Motorcycle-Article/Memorable-Motorcyles-BSA-Titanium.aspx
By bearorso on February 6th, 2010 at 3:48 am
Over the years, when I’ve stated, each time I’ve seen a new Maico, that it was essentially the same bike as my 89 320. And indeed, my 86 500 And some people have thought that was a criticism. It definitely is not. I have no problem with the old line, “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. The company has enough on its hands to stay in production , without making unnecessary changes. And I think Real prospective owners would have no problem with the main frame being steel, instead of aluminium.
Perhaps public perception of the Maico frame will eventually make it necessary, much as how I see KTM, perhaps, finally giving into demand for a linkage rear end that I think the new 350 is heralding – but for the limited market, I don’t think it will loose / gain any sales. The rear linkage looks the same, and I did feel back in 89 that needed an update, but , that could have been done by subtle placement of pivot points, whilst using the same basic casting / forging / billet before final machining.
Something that I think should be done, as I can’t see a change, is to box in the swingarm pivot point – it would be an improvement over what still appears to be the ancient, quite flexy, ‘inner plate’ construction used.
Where Are the Maicos being made now? Development, at the least, appears to be Brit based / led
By bearorso on February 6th, 2010 at 3:55 am
Sorry guys, my first two lines in the previous comment were not grammatically correct, I put a full stop instead of a couple of commas, and a capital A instead of lower case a.I should have checked more thoroughly, as I can’t seem to edit it to make it more comprehensible.
Bear
By MMS on February 6th, 2010 at 4:37 am
The one thing that has improved immensely is suspension, but the boom in classic motocross has meant that people are now restoring 30 year old bikes to “as new” standard and then in some cases fitting them with the best shocks that the market now can offer. This I think is a more fair comparison of bike development rather than comparing a new bike with some old worn out nail that’s knackered and bears no resemblence to it’s former self.
When we do get this mix of old design and new/modern componentry it’s as good as anything out there so I see no problem with what Maico are doing. I like improvement and development as much as anyone but don’t confuse it with change for change sake. Personally I’d love to see them have the nerve to build an air-cooled version of it as the 500′s never needed water-cooling anyway.
Now that would be REALLY impressive!
By JohnNicholas on February 6th, 2010 at 6:58 am
Bear,
You should be able to edit your comments now. The first one has to be approved by me before it gets published.
By bearorso on February 6th, 2010 at 9:29 am
MMS,
I couldn’t agree with you more – a Finner would be a wonderful thing! In 89, ORI, where I worked, brought in only 3 Maicos, 1 was my 320, another was a water-cooled 500, and the other was a Air Cooled 500. It was brought in for a fellow by the name of Keith Stacker, one of OZ’s veteran tuners and a real Maico devotee. The manufacturer at the time, provided it as a blue bike, with a red tank – they had no blue air cooler tanks, and weren’t about to make any.
I wish I had done the same, as I doubt I would have ever sold it.
John : I’m a bit of a dummy, can’t seem to find a way to edit it, but, not to worry.
To those behind the Maicos, thank you for doing a great job.
Something I would like to see on a finner, if they are ever made, is the fitting of the power valve – the diaphragm power valve, that is still being used, is a wonderfully simple and highly tunable thing. On my 320, I used an 86 alloy PV top cap, to which I added a threaded preload adjuster for the spring behind the diaphragm. It was very easy to work with. And it would not ‘violate’ the finners simplicity too much.
With the water-cooled bikes, have you thought of doing a drop tank for at least the Enduro version? I’m making an alloy drop tank that reaches nearly all the way to the ignition cover on my CRE 500, and as low as possible on the RH side. Prototypes I have made, have made the 500 feel like a 200 – as it is, I can carry 7.5 litres below the cylinder/ head junction ( for example, an CRF450x based AF 500 carries that much , about 2 to 6 inches (more with a accessory tank) above the spark plug. And the full 12 litre capacity of my tank will still be lower than an AFs std fuel level. A tiny fuel pump, be it electric, or vacuum pulse actuated, weighs next to nothing. Hell, put a low tank on the MXer, to even further push the advantage a 2t has over a 4t, with regards to weight being carried too high.
By Sachsgs250 on February 6th, 2010 at 12:31 pm
There have been subtle changes (improvements?)to the Maico frame geometry over the years.My 92 500 was identical (I believe)to the last of the Maisch built bikes.I was told my 94 Lorenz Merkle 500 had the rake pulled in and other refinements.My dutch designed Koestler 380 was definately a different handling bike then the 94 500.It would actually “shake it’s head” in certain situations.I put a steering damper on the 380 and moved the footpegs to the same location as a 1983 Maico MC250 I have.I found the results quite dramatic,the 380 now has that “magic” feel,similar to an 81 Wheelsmith Maico 250 I have in my collection of old dirtbikes.
By ITBubba on February 22nd, 2010 at 1:20 am
Funny you guys bring up the argument of alum. frames vs chromo. Heard an interview with Jeremy McGrath some years ago. About his days with Honda. He insisted on using a certain frame for like three seasons until Honda came out with their first alum. frame. He didn`t want to switch,but Honda insisted. Hard to sell to the public what your reigning champ wont ride!
And I`m no engineer,but doesnt it take about three times as much aluminum to achieve the same rigidity as chromoly ?
I believe there is definitely a market for simpler and cheaper bikes. I recently got back into dirt bikes after near twenty years off,not by choice.
My wife and oldest son bought me an 83 IT250 I had been eyeing , like one i had new years ago. NO , the old bikes do not have the power or suspension of the new bikes,my son rides an 04 YZ250 2T,(traded his 250F for it) and it has a lot more power than my 83. Although I will be getting more out of it,it will never match his bike. The suspension can be helped quit a bit, have already upgraded to USD forks and disc,big improvement.And the rear is next on the list.
My point is this.
I have no intention of racing mx on the thing,never will. I do not need the ability to cross 3ft tall whoops wide open.And I dont see myself jumping any hundred footers either. But I do trail ride at a pretty good clip still. And i do plan to ride some enduros with my son. For that type of riding, I believe this bike is and can be made more than adequate for this type of use.
It`s no heavier than his 04,it`s rock solid,it`s simple and most of all it meets my needs.
I believe there are probably plenty of guys out there that would go for a simpler and cheaper 2stroke ,my age and younger,for the same kind of use.
Ok , I`ll get off my soap box now !
BTW,,,love this site. Found it from a link posted on my favorite forum, any of you guys into old IT Yamahas, give it a look, http://www.yamahait.com.au