Two Stroke Motocross » Guest Editorial

Why Are Used 4-Strokes Cheaper Than 2-Strokes?

MXHideout — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 09:56:59 +0000

You may or may not have noticed, but in my area, as well as many others in the United States, you can buy a used 4-stroke dirt bike of the same year as a 2-stroke for same price if not cheaper. Why is this, you may ask? There are many factors as to why this is happening. First of all, you have to realize that an “Asking price” is NOT the same as a “Selling price” on almost every occasion. While there are many people asking “X” amount of dollars for a their 2007 KX250F, they are almost always selling it for less, even if their price is “Firm”.

4-Strokes Still Dominate The Racing Realm

2005 YZ250F - $1500

While most racers in the U.S. are still buying new four-strokes because of their few advantages, many are going back to the ol’ faithful two-smoker. Why would they do that? For one, they are tired of dealing with 4-strokes. The maintenance, the breaking, the rebuilding, the billing, and more maintenance. Now, I’m not a hater of 4-strokes, and what I just said isn’t always the case, because some of them last a long time with just a little maintenance. It’s just that in the long run they will almost always cost more to operate because of more moving parts. Yes, a 4-stroke engine has almost twice as many moving parts as a 2-stroke. 4-strokes are like ticking time bombs, because when something breaks, it usually takes out many more parts with it, resulting in a “blown-up” engine.

Why Buy A Loaf of Bread When You “Know” It’s Stale…

If the owners aren’t sick of their 4-stroke after the first rebuild, they usually are after a second time. Not only do the parts add up to a large sum, but if you have the work done by a shop, it’s nearly doubled. You have a piston and rings, valves, timing chain, chain tensioner, valve springs, shims, maybe the cylinder head ($400+ alone for most bikes) and cam(s) if it was run out of oil, possibly the crankshaft, bearings (they add up quickly), and cylinder re-sleeved or plated if it got scored. Although not every part needs to be replaced after every engine failure, but you can still see why it adds up to a much bigger bill compared to a 2-stroke engine rebuild. Some people put so much money into an engine rebuild that they could have almost bought another good bike for back-up instead….

2004 CR125R - $2000

Now you know why there are so many 4-stroke motocross bikes in the classifieds that need to be rebuilt; riders on a budget buy them, haul the bike to the track only for it to take a dump on them, then they often don’t have money to fix them. To add to the fact, most riders don’t know how to or are not confident enough to work on a 4-stroke engine themselves because of their complexity, which is why they bring it to a shop to have it done (greatly increasing the rebuild cost).

I could give you a list of prices for new parts on a four-stroke engine rebuild, but it just feels redundant. You can look it up if you really feel compelled to (Let’s just say you could probably buy a used bike for the amount, especially after you include the cost of labor). It’s for this very reason that riders are switching to a 2-stroke. Racing is expensive, and if you are on a budget to start with, why dig a deeper hole?

It’s A Buyers Market

Back to the “Asking” and “Selling” price, most people post their bikes for more than they are actually worth. It’s because they see the same bike for a certain amount, so they think theirs is worth at least that much too because that’s what they are “Going for”. This is far from the truth. In fact, a lot of people never even sell their bikes because they are asking too much. Smart sellers, or someone that want a quick sale, will either take at least a couple hundred off of their price initially when posting it, or they negotiate when someone comes to look at it. The only time you will be able to sell your bike in a reasonable amount of time when you are “Firm” on the price is when it’s already much cheaper than any other bike like it on the market. Even then, a lot of people go down another hundred or so, just to get rid of it.

In the end, it’s all about supply and demand, and the demand for cheap 2-strokes is exponentially increasing because of how cheap it is to operate them over a long period of time.

Mint 2007 CRF250R - $2100

-Tom Stark – Motocrosshideout.com

Note: this article is not to sway you to buy a 2-stroke. It is merely news and information on what the off-road motorcycle market is doing, and what people are currently buying. Although, it does make 2-strokes just that much more appealing!

Direct Injection and the Two Stroke

JohnNicholas — Mon, 06 Jun 2011 13:58:40 +0000

Oh no! Not another article about direct injection!

Of all the subjects talked about on the TSM forums, DI is the one that brings out the most emotion.

On one side you have the traditionalists that demand carburetors and on the other those who think DI will save two-strokes. Some even think DI as a technology will destroy the two-stroke.

How could DI create such an uproar?

Ossa DI 2 Stroke

First it would be helpful to understand why DI was talked about in the first place. Plain and simple because of upcoming emission regulations.

Regardless of your political leanings on the subject of emission controls, it’s here to stay and will affect our future. Regardless of the reasons for these regulations to be instituted, they will have an effect on new manufacturing of two-strokes (and four-strokes) in the future. This is how the world works.

Polaris 1200 Direct Injection 2 Stroke

So why is DI so high on the list when it comes to lowering emissions on two-strokes? Due to the inherent design of the current two-stroke, which allows a charge of raw fuel to escape through the exhaust pipe. This aspect alone creates the lions share of the emissions measured at the exhaust pipe.

The use of DI eliminates this one aspect of the “dirty” two-stroke. Resulting in greatly reduced emissions on two-strokes. Instead of re-hashing the reasons here, take a few moments to read this article;

http://twostrokemotocross.com/2009/04/the-epa-vs-motocross/

The EPA regulations state that vehicles manufactured for closed course racing do not have to adhere to these regulations. At first glance this is great news for two-strokes in motocross. That is until you discover that nearly 60% of the motocross bikes sold in the USA are used for recreation and not competition.

When this was brought up during EPA meetings with the manufacturers, there was no easy way to limit sales for competition use only. The move to four-strokes made this task easier in the short term, so that’s what the Big 4 manufacturers chose.

Is DI the savior of two-strokes? It’s difficult to tell the future without a crystal ball. Although from the information presented over the past few years, indicates the addition of DI could extend the life of two-strokes for a few decades. Unfortunately using the carburetor configuration, only a limited number of machines from select small manufacturers or used machines will be available.

Arctic Cat 900 EFI Two Stroke

If it’s a choice between a DI two-stroke and no two-stroke, I’ll choose the DI every time.

DI kit for the Yamaha Banshee

The Lost Decade, Part 4: The Aftermath.

Larry VanZandt — Thu, 02 Jun 2011 16:28:22 +0000

Murphy Nichols was (as in past tense) a charming, three-year-old, one of six children of the Nichols clan in Caldwell, Idaho. His parents owned several ATV’s, and a Polaris 700 Sportsman. At one point, Polaris was a company that built only 2-stroke-powered machines (powering both their snowmobiles and ATV’s, and one or two three-wheelers, wow, now I have dated myself), but this company jumped the simplicity-and-light-weight ship in favor of machines utilizing leviathan, underpowered, overweight four-stroke powerplants, and have had to also go big on the surrounding chassis in order to support the weight of the engine, with operating weights on some of their newest ATV offerings pushing nine hundred pounds…and up.

Those vehicles are no longer ATV’s; they’re now Jeeps with handlebars, with a stupidly-high center of gravity matching their steering-wheel and roll-bar-equipped off-road brethren.

If you roll a Jeep CJ over out on the trail, and you’re wearing a seat belt (oddly missing from the Sportsman), you say something that sounds suspiciously a lot like swear words, three cases of Bud Light fall out of the back of the Jeep, and your sunburned girlfriend slaps you and calls you an idiot.

If you roll a 700 (or larger) Sportsman over….or anything else in the ‘Galaxy Star Cruiser’ ATV class….you’re dead.

Murphy was (stupidly) allowed to ride with his dad on the 700-pound Polaris Sportsman. Having ridden one….it’s a freaking tank. It’s almost like trying to ride an elephant, but you don’t have to stop for water and peanuts, the Polaris won’t trample patrons at a circus and require the Sheriff’s Department to put it down with an elephant gun (although the mental imagery of a 700 Sportsman going berserk at a circus does produce a laugh or two), and the Polaris doesn’t leave giant piles of stinky elephant poop for you to scoop up afterward. It’s slow, it’s heavy, it’s ponderous, and it’s incredibly tippy; this coming from a guy who thinks three-wheelers are amazingly safe.

Murphy and his father were just going up the road, following a stream, to see if they could find any fish swimming nearby their campsite. Murphy’s father lost control of the Polaris/Jeep, both were thrown from the Sportsman 700 (how convenient a name, huh? 700cc, 700 pounds, 700 Sportsman), and the bloated, overweight, tippy mechanical hippopotamus rolled over on Murphy, killing him instantly. Something was mentioned about ‘blunt force trauma’. Murphy only weighed 37 pounds.

As in ‘not going to grow up, get married, have children of his own, live a long life, leave his five brothers and sisters emotionally scarred for the rest of their lives, not to mention what horrors it will visit on his parents for as long as they both shall live, the incredibly saddening glances at the calendar for both their birthday and day they died as they agonizingly roll around, as they were the ones who made the decision to buy bloated, truck-sized, all-terrain vehicles’ dead.

I have four children of my own. My first-born halfwit posts in the message board of this site, under the name ‘FactoryX’. While I’ve attempted to keep bikes of some sort in the garage for all of them to ride, I haven’t done as well in procuring equipment as I would have liked, so I’ve been forced at times to just let them ride whatever I dug up at the time, and to be honest, I was a bit stupid as to what my kids should and shouldn’t be riding, culminating in my bringing home a 500-pound, 1986 Kawasaki KLF300 Bayou 2×4 in 2007.

I sold the bike, after teaching my younger three how to ride it, as I didn’t realize just how dangerous these gargantuan machines were until after a close call with the oldest of those three (the first son already knew how to ride) doing something stupid and rolling it over. Nobody was injured, the kids had a laugh about it at the time….but once I finally put two and two together….I sold the bike immediately afterwards, got more than a little angry, which led to a few years of researching just how we got down this road to begin with, as to why there are so many overweight, underpowered, overpriced, and over-engineered piles of four-stroke powered garbage out on the horizon….and why light-weight two-stroke-powered machines are hardly nowhere to be found on dealer lots, unless it’s something used, and wayyyy marked up.

Getting back to Murphy….the deceased three-year-old….to those of you who don’t have children, while I normally have absolutely zero difficulty describing something to mere, non-writing mortals, for some reason, I’m a bit unable to explain what we feel for our children….and even more so if you’re a female, and gave birth to them. Moms could give birth to a dozen Charles Mansons, and still run to protect them from the slings and arrows of a (perceived) outside cruel world….that’s my wife. I’ve had difficulties with a couple of my kids as they were growing up, and there were times where I felt that my wife was standing in the way of disciplining our children….however, she did turn out to be completely correct in how she wanted them raised; I was the idiot Cro-Magnon male who thought making the wayward children do the ‘dead cockroach’ for six hours after disobeying me or their mother, or exploring the outer limits of ‘volume therapy’ for children who couldn’t comprehend that there was something that I needed them to understand….right now….I was the idiot who ended up being wrong about (almost) all of it….but even then, I truly love my half-wit idiot children.

To lose one….I don’t even want to think about what I would do. You just don’t go there.

You’re not supposed to bury your children.

To know that producers of all-terrain vehicles are perfectly okay with uneducated families buying oversized, large-profit-generating, four-stroke behemoths, ignoring the fact that most of these buyers have families who will more than likely allow smaller children to ride them….and get crushed underneath them….I’m more than a little, uh, displeased. And it’s not just the children dying under these things….adults are being killed as well by these roll-bar-less Jeeps with handlebars, or at least extremely maimed….but hey, thar’s a sticker on them thar’ gas tanks and fendarrs, tellin’ folks not to let thar’ kids ride on Daddy’s 9-hunnert-pound Pole Larriss King Giant 1000 Special Cupholder Tippy Canoe Edition (Helmets Optional!), so hey, we’re covered!!!

Am I the only one who sees a problem here?

I suppose at this point that you, the reader, is probably just a bit curious as to where I’m going with all of this….

The Four Stroke Hysteria has gone on for the last decade or so now, with manufacturers, knowing that any idiot out there can (or used to be able to, anyway, now that the Chinese have stopped buying our debt) get a loan for an overpriced, overweight, over-blinged, over-engineered two-or-four-wheeled, 4-cycle-powered atrocity, why, the sky was the limit for what primarily the Big Four (Honda, Kawasaki, Yamaha, Spewzuki) and other, less famous marques foisted upon their customers in what amounts to one of the largest social-engineering experiments of all time; namely, these manufacturers sought to become a Nanny-state benevolent dictator and dictate what you will and won’t buy.

In comparison to how much money can be made from four-stroke ‘technology’, with the potential for warranty-free repair work completely obliterating what service departments made repairing two-stroke bikes, and customers having to spend more and more to buy and maintain these engineering disasters, of course, usually through the stealerships….the fix was in before you could say ‘$2500 repair bill?!?’.

The motocross bikes switched to four-stroke ‘technology’, anyone riding a two-stroke motocrosser was ridiculed, and outright written out of competition, at least in Motocross channels, anyway, with rules and track design being rewritten to keep the Big Four’s cash kickbacks/’Advertising’ coming in and social engineering experiments running full steam. This has gone on, for all intents and purposes, for the last decade. An entire decade….lost….to what could-have-been with the much-simpler, lighter, more-efficient-and-much-less-costly-to-maintain two-stroke engine, with tens of thousands of gullible idiots falling prey to the faux sophistication offered up by buying a ‘technologically-advanced’ four-stroke-powered machine. An entire decade gone with the fart-can-4-stroke-exhaust wind, because the Big Four, along with other manufacturers, decided that short-term financial gain, and selling out to the ‘Green’ lobby (the publicly-disclosed reason for why they ditched the two-stroke), was much more important than ensuring long-term survival, fleecing customers out of millions of dollars for flawed, over-engineered, Formula-1-derived, pointless ‘technology’ that no Joe Six-Pack ever asked for.

Ask anyone who rides a dirt bike today. Seriously. Pull a gun if you have to, to get their attention (of course, don’t forget to mention that your waving a pistol around was only for scientific, data-gathering purposes), do what you have to (within legal bounds), but do indeed ask them if they were pleading incessantly, to their local dealer, for more expensive motorcycles.

“Did you write to your congressman, or picket with a large group of protestors in front of Yamaha America to get them to produce an overpriced motocrosser? Did you enact a letter-writing campaign, through various media sources, to get the Big Four to build bikes that are hideously more complex, and have gotten to the point where almost nobody but stealership service departments and businesses who spent thousands, and even millions to gear up for the 4-stroke Revolution can work on them?”

Um, gee, I don’t have anyone in my contact list that can recall doing any such thing, begging for overweight, overpriced motorcycles and ATV’s, threatening to throw themselves off of really short stepladders and toss themselves in front of parked school buses (they have to leave sometime, right?), nor did they threaten a nationwide boycott if Honda didn’t run out there and build an extremely unreliable CR250F for the motocrossing masses….can anyone out there explain to me where this massive, worldwide demand was for these garbage motorcycles, in which their broken, destroyed carcasses litter the landscape, in garages and barns, behind houses, or even unceremoniously dumped in fields, since nobody in their right mind wants to buy one used, unless they’re hideously stupid, or have been lied to by desperate ‘friends’ who are trying to make a ‘screaming deal’ for their (stupid/gullible) best bud….

The motorcycle-buying public has been fleeced for at least ten freaking years. It’s an even bigger slap in the face than discovering what unique kinds of bikes that were only sold outside of the USA, that would have been marvelous rides to own, yet Nanny State motorcycle manufacturers think we’re too stupid to have the good stuff….but the main problem here is that in addition to all of the imbecilic problems that accompany modern 4-stroke ownership, due to 4-stroke ATV’s having to be built larger and larger exponentially to accommodate larger-dimensionally (both inside and out), and increasingly-inefficient engines from a power-to-weight ratio standpoint, riders are being crushed to death when these increasingly-tippy machines roll over on top of them, when in comparison, if you’re out being stupid on a stupidly-fun Yamaha Blaster….if it rolls over on you, you push the bike off, laugh about it, and flip it back over….Houston, we have a problem.

And now….nobody has the money to buy a new four-stroke bike. Both 4-stroke motocrossers and ATV’s have eclipsed the $10,000 barrier….and dealers have row upon rows of two-and-three-year-old inventory (and four years old, whoops, I forgot about a couple of 2006-2007 bikes here that have gone unsold)….sitting and collecting dust. The much-vaunted 2010 Yamaha YZ450F came out with ‘revolutionary’ new reverse-head technology, fuel injection, and glowing reviews….other than an initial sales burst early on, nobody cared, once the public saw the MSRP, and it was discovered that they weren’t any faster than anything else out there….

I’ve not heard anywhere where these things are flying off of lots….however, no dealer I know of can keep a 2011 YZ250 two-stroke in stock….with the exception of my Yamaha dealer locally, who is a part of a greaseball dealership chain (horrible employees, horrible service, nobody I know locally goes there unless it’s an emergency) and refuses to sell the 250 two-stroke. In fact, he calls anyone asking for one an idiot, pointing at his rows of (dusty) ‘Superior’ technology that, golly gee, must be too awe-inspiring for local buyers, because not a whole lot of people are rushing down to give them new homes….

Now that we know what’s happened (via’ my opinion, anyway)….what is there to do?

I vote Panic.

No, wait, don’t panic. Go buy a two-stroke. Oh yeah, and buy from our advertisers here. And spread the word. I feel that there is a revolution happening, as more people realize how they have been screwed….

If at first you don’t succeed….call it the ‘Four-stroke motorcycle’.

The Lost Decade: Part III

Larry VanZandt — Mon, 09 May 2011 01:18:18 +0000

Hello again, gang.

Allow me to begin this installment by saying that four-stroke motocross bikes are just like attempting to use Miss Piggy in an adult movie; she’s going to make a lot of noise, and generate a lot of attention, but deep down inside we know that it’s all just a foam pig in a clown costume….it’s really hilarious to watch for a few minutes, at least until you realize that some guy’s sweaty arm is in there.

Now that I’ve offended most anyone reading this, it’s time to get back to this discussion, concerning how an entire decade has been lost in respect to the vast motorcycle/ATV/whatever buying public out there.

The Cobra Phenomenon.

When you ask most car guys as to which automobile, in the last 50 years, is quite possibly the most insane car ever built, unless they’re Toyota drivers….the common response is the Shelby A/C 427 Cobra. There simply isn’t anything else that quite says ‘manly’ like a Cobra. Having ridden shotgun in a real 427 car….Dear God, it wasn’t meant for human hands. I’ve driven quicker cars, but there’s something very ‘pissed-off-roller-skate’ about this vehicular monstrosity, that also inspires men everywhere to want to own one, never mind that most mere mortals would die attempting to extract even 50% of the car’s capabilities. Considering the original car is pretty much a flimsy aluminum body over a pair of round main frame rails, and the doors are wimpy aluminum skins that act more as paper mache’ decorations than providing any sort of protection….unless you’re a moron, this car, unlike any other vehicle built before and since then, makes one think strenuously about their own mortality; if not before you thread yourself into either seat, you’ll definitely be considering the current legal status of your last will and testament once you let out the clutch and attempt to hit the loud pedal.

Be patient, there’s a reason why I’m talking about a car on a motorcycle website.

Now that we’ve all been reintroduced to the Cobra….just in case you’ve been watching Martha Stewart’s ‘Home’ show for the last 10 years, Lawrence Welk for the twenty to thirty year span before that…and been driving a Toyota….the dirt bike world has their own Cobra of sorts….the 500cc two-stroke motocrosser, built en-masse’ by Honda and Kawasaki, in the form of a CR500 and KX500….and to a lesser degree, the Yamaha IT and YZ 490. Yes, there are other 500cc (and larger) Open-class two-stroke bikes, but these two main Japanese terrors from Honda and Kawasaki get most of the press….both positive and negative.

Everyone has a story involving either the CR500 or the KX500. Both have storied careers, however, both finally limped to a less-than-ceremonious ending early in the first decade of the 21^st Century, due to lack of interest both from customers, and the manufacturers….but in my opinion, this was due more to lack of simple updates to the chassis housing the 500cc engines….and the engines themselves. Service Honda (and Kawasaki) does a bumper crop of business tossing ancient 500cc engines into modern frames….creating some of the most evil bikes ever built; power everywhere in a light chassis = an almost sinful weekend ride….yet nobody picked up on this idea at the corporate level, at least with the Japanese big four….hmmmm….grassy knoll alert!!!

2001 Honda CR 500

Originally, the open-class dirt bikes were not the greatest machines on tighter, USA-style, supercross tracks, as they were good for not much more than digging giant trenches out of corners and on the straight sections, well, now that you mention it, they dug trenches pretty much everywhere, even in the pits. On the open ourdoor tracks of Europe and in the USA, however….these bikes (along with other manufacturers’s offerings) were lord and master out there, and were openly worshiped.

2000 Kawasaki KX 500

Now that we’ve covered, somewhat, the history of the 500cc two-stroke motocrosser, I’m going to discuss the ‘aura’ of these machines.

These bikes frighten most anyone out there who’s ever swung a leg over a motorcycle seat. In my opinion, they were a man’s bike, and became a legend (almost) everywhere. You either rode a monster like the KX or CR (or if you were truly insane, an old Husqvarna), or you respectfully declined, claiming old war wounds, threats of divorce from the wife, religious intolerance, pulled muscles, fear of enclosed places (and ducks), or if you were especially ballsy, you’d loudly proclaim (even more loudly if there were several biker gang members present) that the 500cc bikes were too slow for you, hoping no one would notice that your daily driver was an old, worn-out, 1970’s Honda Civic and laugh you out of your time zone.

Having ridden both the CR and KX….and a YZ490….the reputation is deserved, however, since I weigh more than an average apartment building, it wasn’t so much a violent pull as it was freaking power anywhere, anyplace in the power band, even down low where most 250cc two-stroke motocrossers don’t have a lot of grunt. The YZ 490, however, got old really fast, and from what I can remember of the CR and KX….’primitive’ was a word I recalled concerning how they handled.

There was a definite problem; these bikes weren’t for just any rider. They weren’t for even most experienced riders. It took a large level of outright stupidity to want to ride of these machines in anger, as speed + dirt = clean, in that the hospital bill, if you crash one of these bikes at speed, will definitely clean out your bank account.

I am now about to enter another phase of motorcycle riding history, as it applies to what went wrong with the 500’s:

The Three-Wheeler Hysteria.

There never has been, and possibly never will be, a phenomenon quite like the Three-Wheeler ‘scandal’ of the 1980’s. Having lived through this time, and having both owned and ridden a lot of trikes, by almost every manufacturer, even the top three sport three-wheelers; The Honda ATC250R, the Kawasaki Tecate 250, and the Yamaha Tri-Z 250R (all two-strokes, by the way)….this is the first time the motorcycle industry had ever witnessed an attack on such a large scale, by well-meaning (and not-so-well-meaning) idiots who had no idea as to whether or not there were any actual ‘safety defects’ with three-wheelers in general, the press simply wanted headlines, and even manufactured stories (translation: made up a bunch of crap) as to how ‘deadly’ these machines were….(When Three Wheelers Attack!) never mind a lot more people were being killed or maimed on two-wheeled motorcycles at the time. They had no proof, other than ‘accident’ films by one guy in particular who made a considerable amount of money staging bogus ‘crash’ footage purportedly showing how ‘dangerous’ trikes were, never mind if you look at the footage in question, the guy is deliberately riding the bikes in an unsafe manner, causing crashes….and then blaming the ‘accidents’ on poor product design. It’s funny, really….I’ve never wrecked a trike, and I ride like I’m trying to catch someone who owes me $50.

1985 Honda ATC 250R

The product-liability lawsuits were many.

Three wheelers never recovered. 1987 was the last year for trike production in the USA, although some 1988 models can be located outside of the U.S.

My opinion?

It’s a bogus argument. You simply either have the ability to ride one of these trikes….or you don’t. It’s a Darwin machine, just like the 500cc two-strokes. The design ‘defect’ is that these bikes will indeed snuff out a drunken moron, or inept idiot, in no time flat, eliminating from the gene pool the half-wits with too much money and too little common sense and/or riding ability with much more ease than either smaller bikes or four-wheeled ATV’s. This travesty was more revealing, from a psychological perspective, of just how far individuals will go to cover their own rears, to avoid admitting they can’t ride worth a damn and have no business being within 20 yards of a three-wheeler, motorcycle, or ATV (which has become much more dangerous….more on that later, hopefully). In other words, it’s a lot simpler to blame the machine for your getting maimed instead of pointing the finger back at yourself.

Enter the motorcycling Walter Mitty.

Query: You have tens of thousands of potential motorcycling customers out there who would like to own ‘big’, powerful motorcycles, yet not be killed or maimed in the process, or expose a lack of riding skill or education to their friends. You also now have an abundance of easy credit, where almost any idiot with a job and a crummy credit score of at least 100 or more can plunk down a stupid amount of money, via’ easy, low monthly payments, and buy a bike that’s wayyyy beyond their financial means to buy outright, allowing you to hike up the price of a bike, with reckless abandon. You also would like to increase the business of dealer service departments, because while the repair bays of car dealers are usually full to overflowing with repair work, motorcycle stealerships don’t make a ton of money on motocross bikes, since two-stroke motorcycles are so cheap to maintain, and make up the bulk of the motocrosser fleet (as of 2001), they don’t do a whole lot of business….what do you do, if you’re a big-four Japanese motorcycle manufacturer?

Answer: You step backwards, using the newest, ‘latest and greatest’ 4-stroke technology, and over-engineer your corporation’s way to a brighter, more profitable tomorrow…for the short term, anyway.

You also design bikes that carry familiar, larger engine displacements, yet are simple and slow enough for almost any moron to ride, so effectively, anybody can look like Jeremy McGrath out on the trail. Following the Harley-Davidson formula, where louder exhaust = cooler, the bigger the 4-stroke displacement, the louder the bike, the more coveted it will be by idiots who don’t quite understand that there are other people near the trails and tracks who don’t ride motorcycles who were only mildly annoyed when a shrilly, mostly-quiet 2-stroke bike shot past, these people are apoplectic now that they can hear you coming from twenty freaking miles away….so loud, in fact, that riding areas and tracks, world-wide, will close as a result.

Since you’ve now designed and marketed bikes that follow, almost to the letter, engine displacements that were, according to corporate marketing departments and focus groups, considered to the ‘the most manly-sounding’, borrowing heavily from the mystique of the true man’s bike, the 500cc two-stroke open classers, which were out of the skill level of many potential customers….these ‘big’ bikes will be an instant hit with those who couldn’t handle the midrange hit of even the smaller 250 two-stroke motorcycles.

To borrow a line from the Pixar movie, ‘The Incredibles’:

“When everyone is super…..no one is”.

Up next: Part 4 of the Lost Decade….(curses, I was hoping to wrap this up in three parts, oh well, Douglas Adams got away with it in the ‘Hitchhiker Trilogy’)…The Aftermath.

The Lost Decade: Part II

Larry VanZandt — Mon, 02 May 2011 02:58:37 +0000

Hello again. Sorry about the delay after leaving you, the reading public, on a bit of a cliffhanger at the end of part I, but a bit of tragedy descended upon my household a couple of days after submitting it, and I got sidetracked. And I mean sidetracked.

Well, all is now well again, the dead have been mourned and buried, the in-laws have been thoroughly insulted, my wife finally returned home, I’ve yet again wondered how it is that family often puts you together with people you’d normally be pointing and laughing at during an episode of “World’s Dumbest Criminals”, and I finally found time to wash all of my work shirts.

Oh yeah, I also found ten extra minutes to make fun of, I mean have a meaningful discussion about four-stroke owners again.

Now we return to the thrilling days of yesteryear, and I believe it was the race at Las Vegas during the 1997 season, where a factory works Yamaha YMZ400 (or something like that, anyway, details are kind of fuzzy) somehow managed to win a Supercross race. I’m hearing some rumors that everyone else riding a two-stroke during that event crashed during the main, and/or passed out from oxygen deprivation due to uncontrollable laughter, which allowed the Yamaha to sail to an easy win….but somehow, I think it’s just a bit more complicated.

Historians like to be able to point to a specific time when great societies began their downward spiral; Rome, I’d like to think that it was when the Roman empire transcended from Republic to Empire, and possibly when it became divided between two capitals (Rome and Constantinople); Greece began its fall when the populace figured out it could loot the treasury for its own personal gain; The Beatles began their descent into Hell when Yoko showed up.

This win by a four-stroke was the beginning of the end for two-stroke motocross bikes, and coupled with socialist, environmental idiots laying siege to motorcycle manufacturers worldwide, was part of a far-larger trend moving us, the two-stroke-bike-enjoying public, away from the simplistic joys offered by the two-cycle engine.

Enter the YZ400.

This bike was, entirely, the solution to the engineering problem absolutely nobody was seeking a solution to: how to make a motocross-style bike heavier, more expensive to purchase initially AND more costly to maintain, less reliable, stupidly more complex, oh yeah, don’t let me forget, how to make it slower.

Query: How does one torture a mechanical engineer?

Answer: Tie him up in a chair, and fold a road map incorrectly in front of him.

While I don’t have the inside scoop as to how the YMZ400 was developed, the fact of the matter is that engineers were the blood and guts of the operation. Why do I bring up this group of people, and begin with a joke?

Engineers were once tasked with making a brick fly, and go into combat flight operations.

They succeeded, and thus the old, famous McDonnell-Douglas F4 Phantom was born, proof that you could indeed shove a giant engine (in the case of the F4 Phantom, two engines) into almost anything, and make it go Mach 2. The problem with this plane, however, in speaking to several pilots who actually flew this aircraft….is that while it went in a straight line amazingly well, however, the moment you had to turn against a Mig….for more details about how this scenario worked out during actual combat situations, please visit my website:

www.nevergonnahappen.com

In other words, engineers routinely make engineering ‘Hail Mary’ passes, and somehow make them stick, kind of like Brett Favre hurling a long-bomb nude photo of himself to….oh wait, this is a family site….make that pinning the gas in a corner, and hoping that the tires somehow don’t wash out from under you….and hopefully, you win. This is essentially what happened when the YMZ400 was unleashed on Supercross tracks; on paper, it’s a horrific turd, but somehow or another, they made it good enough to win a race or three, even though it was a gutless wonder down low in the rpm range, more so than the 250cc bikes that represented the competition, and had to be revved to some ungodly redline to make any power.

Basically, left to their own devices, and this comes from decades of experience working on motorcycles, cars, trucks, ATV’s, three-wheelers, and God can only remember what else….the term ‘over-engineered’ comes to mind repeatedly in that you’d swear that these idiots never actually had to repair the garbage that they designed, or hundreds of vehicles would be a hell of a lot easier to work on; they would over-engineer a piece of paper if they thought it presented enough of a challenge to them.

And with the creation of, and marketing thereafter of the modern-era Four-Stroke motocross/woods bike, springs into being the Lost Decade, which pinpoints the beginning of the fall of the modern Big Four (how ironic, huh? Four-strokes, The Big Four) Japanese motorcycle manufacturers.

Before I go any further, on a side note; I noticed a comment or two about me getting to the point of what I’m trying to say here, all I can suggest is to be patient, I’m getting there, and if you’re worried that I’m merely preaching to the choir here, repeating old information, while I might be parroting some old info, the issue here is that there are those reading this who ignored Yoda and went down the Dark 4-Stroke Path of the Force, and I’m proselytizing to that group, attempting to gently herd them back into God’s Chosen 2-cycle flock. I’m also letting them know that God does indeed forgive the sins of wayward souls, even though buying a four-stroke motocrosser is considered more evil than committing Geneva-Convention violations, owning a Toyota, voting Democrat….or even worse, watching “Dancing with the Stars”.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch….

Whether it was deliberate, or by accident….the big Four discovered something both interesting, and possibly world-changing about the new, larger-displacement-but-less-powerful four-cycle machines they were developing for the unsuspecting bike-riding public.

And with that bombshell, I move onto part III….to be continued.

The Lost Decade

Larry VanZandt — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 14:40:43 +0000

Article written by: L. Van Zandt

The Lost Decade: Part I

A recent article in Motocross Action magazine, where the writer of that particular story, colorfully and beautifully summarizing what is wrong with four-stroke motorcycles in general….and what is right with 2-strokes….ended the article by suggesting the following:

The 2011 Yamaha YZ250 two-stroke is like an IQ test for the motorcycle buying public. How stupid are you?

As a writer, I can come up with some rather outrageous (and original) insults for people (or large groups thereof) and/or race sanctioning bodies, idiot politicians, or even soulless, mentally-retarded people who drive Toyotas….as I often do for my primary reading audience, in NASCAR circles. In addition, an oddball (and usually witty) observation or three that comes out of nowhere might be printed in an editorial of mine, most of the time going in a direction that nobody was expecting….and often afterward, hilarity ensues.

While I’d like to think I might be the next Oscar Wilde, Anton Chekov, or (insert name of any other famous dead white guy author here), the fact of the matter is that I, nor any other writer out there, can think of everything. We do our best, but quite often, when I’m reading someone else’s work, I occasionally read something so moving, so intelligent, that I feel somewhat-lessened for not having come up with it myself.

I’ve been searching around a decade now, for the shortest explanation possible to explain why soooo many idiots buy four-stroke-powered motorcycles, ATV’s, UTV’s, and…whatever else has these dated, stupidly-complicated, incredibly-overweight, and woefully-underpowered engines providing forward….and in the case of the French….rearward propulsion.

I think I may have stumbled onto something.

My last motorcycle/ATV/whatever was a 1993 Honda TRX300EX, which was an improvement over the ATV that this replaced, which was a 2002 Honda TRX400EX.

Yes, you read that correctly.

An improvement. More on this later.

When I sold that last Honda 300, an overweight, unstable, fart-can of a machine, that represented bike number seventy-two that I’ve owned, over a span of thirty-three years, my first bike being an ancient Yamaha YZ-80, which probably wasn’t the greatest bike to start out on, however, as I am writing this today, I obviously somehow wasn’t killed, and I was hooked on motorcycles.

While I’ve owned a fair number of motorcycles, both street and dirt oriented, and a pile of three-wheelers/ATV’s, and have ridden scores of others (the most frightening being a race-modified Kawasaki 750 triple oil burner), the bikes I have fun on are the two-strokes, unless we’re talking about superbikes….and I don’t ride those.

The wife insists.

The four-strokes? Well, they’re okay….if you don’t mind a heavy bike.

Now that you know a bit more about me….on with the show.

While I haven’t written much about the 4-stroke motorcycle frenzy in my NASCAR rants, there are an amazing amount of parallels between modern motocross, and Sprint Cup stock car racing; both sports suffer from racing costs spiraling out of control, and sanctioning bodies of both NASCAR and the AMA not really giving a tinker’s damn about controlling them. Both use overpriced 4-stroke technology, and both are developing into a racing series that increasing amounts of fans are abandoning as these two series mirror each other in that clueless executives from both sanctioning bodies are more worried about lining their own pockets instead of being concerned about whether or not the fans are packing the stands.

There’s a difference between the two series, however; in the case of NASCAR, ‘what races on Sunday sells on Monday’ used to apply, but for the most part, the cars you see competing in the top echelon of stock car racing are cars you see primarily in rental fleets, with the sole exception being Toyota, which scores of people own, simply because their designs are just as soulless and boring as the people who drive them. On a side note, I’m not even sure why Toyota is in NASCAR; they don’t sell anything that shouts “Hey, look, I’m fast!” anywhere in their vehicle lineup.

However, in Motocross….what wins on Sunday is the only thing that sells on Monday….just as it used to be in NASCAR, say, around 135,000 years ago. When Jeremy McGrath won on a Honda, scores of impressionable young skulls full of mush begged, pleaded, and often pulled guns on their parents to get them to, early on in McGrath’s career anyway, to the local Honda dealership, and with a slight, year-long (?), disastrous blip on a Spewzuki RM out of the way, afterward, parents were coerced (usually with kids threatening their parents with claims of child abuse to local authorities) into signing contractual agreements on the latest Yamaha motocrosser for their darling little (snot-nosed) Johnny.

Something changed, however, when a certain Yamaha YZ400 4-stroke won a certain Supercross race.

The end of Part I….to be continued in Part II.

Cleaning and the Pressure Washer

Charles Owens — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 13:10:44 +0000

Once upon a time the only cleaning method for motorcycles was a bucket of suds, sponge, garden hose and lots of elbow grease. While simple, it required quite a time commitment. In this day and age, everyone wants tough tasks to take less time and effort. I don’t blame them.

Over the years many ideas and products have been introduced to make cleaning easier. One of the most revolutionary was invented by Alfred Karcher in 1950. After repairing many unreliable steam cleaning units, Alfred designed and patented the first hot-water high-pressure cleaner.

Karcher KW-350 one of the first pressure washers.

These large bulky machines were first used to clean Armed Forces vehicles, Jeeps, Tanks, Planes, etc. Later they were adopted for industrial settings for large, tough cleaning jobs.

Pressure washers today are smaller and lighter. Now considered appliances, they are sold at big box stores. Fast and easy to use, many people have embraced them as the cleaning tool of choice. What’s not to like?

Unfortunately, there are side effects to pressure washer use on a motorcycle. A motorcycle’s inherent design results in many moving parts being out in the open, exposed. The high-pressure water easily pushes past rubber seals lodging itself in bearings, bushings and other moving parts. Water alone might not so bad, but this pressurized water carries dirt, sand and other debris into delicate regions of your bike.

While outward appearances show the bike to be squeaky clean, not all is as it appears. There is trouble brewing just below the surface.

Performance

One of the reasons we enjoy motorcycling is because of the performance of our machines. Some of us spend a great deal of money to improve performance or add horsepower to increase the thrill factor. But what if our cleaning ritual is creating the opposite effect?

Wheel-bearings, swing-arm bearings, steering head bearings, shock bushings, spoke nipples and drive chains receive the brunt of this damaging assault. The longer this water/dirt mixture is allowed to remain in these sensitive areas, the more damage will result. This mixture turns into a lapping compound which wears bearings and bushings prematurely. The lubricant is displaced, causing rust to form, which accelerates the damage. An expensive proposition.

While the labor and replacement cost is quite high for these moving parts, there’s more bad stuff happening to your machine. It’s losing precious horsepower! This is due to additional friction caused by the introduction of dirt and water into bearings and bushings.

This is not the only issue that can affect the performance of your motorcycle. Is your bike water-cooled using a radiator? High pressure water can bend radiator fins creating a dangerous high temperature condition. In extreme cases, this damage could lead to heat-related engine failure.

Motorized vehicles require a clean, dry flow of oxygen to perform at their best. Water from pressure washers can drive water and dirt past air filters or rubber air boots, introducing water and dirt into the intake side of your engine. As above, dirt that gets to the internal parts of your engine causes extreme wear. And don’t even get me started about water in the fuel system.

The Rubber Meets The Road

Now if all that weren’t reason enough to avoid pressure washing your ride, some pressure washers can cause damage to your tires. The high pressure stream of water can penetrate and blister the rubber compound compromising the tire’s structural integrity.

Have you ever observed brown stains on your tires after washing them? There’s your sign that the rubber compound is beginning to break down. Worst case is you could experience a blow out at an inopportune time. Best case, you will have to replace your tires sooner than you expected.

“German safety group DEKRA has discovered that if a washer nozzle is held close to a tyre at very high pressure, serious damage can occur in just five seconds! Even tyres that appear normal after being subjected to a pressure washer may have microscopic perforations, which can weaken the sidewall and cause a possible blow-out.” Carpages.co.uk

Lights Out

Ever find yourself with mysterious and intermittent electrical issues?

Highly pressurized water forced into electrical components and wiring causes corrosion which leads to many of these issues. The cost of troubleshooting these problems can be very expensive. Not to mention the cost of the replacing the components themselves.

Does A Pressure Washer Really Clean?

Honestly, they do initially clean pretty well, maybe too well. When a coating of dirt, mud or debris is present on your machine, the impact of pressure washing results in these particles turning into dangerous projectiles. These particles propelled at high speed at paint, chrome, plastic, anodizing and other surfaces of your machine create scratches and/or dents on all finishes. This process is nearly identical to sand blasting. Not sure this is what you had in mind to clean your expensive motorcycle.

Is There A Safe Way to Clean Your Motorcycle?

Yes. Pro Clean.

Pro Clean has been created specifically for cleaning motorcycles. Pro Clean is specially formulated to gently penetrate and lift dirt off the surfaces of your machine.

Pro Clean is easy to use. Simply spray it on and wait 5 minutes while it loosens the adhesion of the grime from the surface of your machine. Once the Pro Clean has worked it’s magic, a gentle stream of water from a garden hose is all that’s required to rinse the dirt, dust and debris from your machine.

Safe for all surfaces of your motorcycle, Pro Clean will not harm or fade any part of your bike, including paint work, carbon fiber, anodizing, polished plastic, tires, chrome, titanium, brake pads, brushed aluminum and more.

Happily, Pro Clean is non-toxic and biodegradable so it’s not only safe for your machine, but safe for you, your children, your pets, your lawn and the environment in general.

We are so confident that Pro Clean works as advertised that we’re willing to stand behind it 100%. That’s right, should Pro Clean not live up to our claims, please return it for a full refund.

Special Offer Pack

We’re offering an exciting limited time offer. Purchase 2 Bottles of Pro Clean Cleaner and a bottle of Pro Clean ProTection (water displacement agent and corrosion inhibitor) for $36.97 and get FREE shipping in the continental USA. That’s right, we’ll pay the shipping!

Order yours today!

Click here to visit Pro Clean's site

MXA’s 2011 YZ 250 vs. YZ 250F

Charles Owens — Thu, 13 Jan 2011 17:17:00 +0000

This is a great article from Motocross Action Magazine!

Here is the question that everyone wants to know the answer to, but certain people don’t want to hear: Which 250 motocrosser is better? Smoker or thumper?

The two-stroke versus four-stroke question comes up at regular intervals—so, we are rerunning our shootout to add clarity to the arguments.

Let’s cut through the effluvia! Rules changes made the four-stroke what it is today. It didn’t get there by virtue of its power per cubic centimeter, power per pound or power per dollar. Nope! Without the AMA four-stroke exemption rule of 1998, the modern four-stroke would still be defined by the Honda XR600. Forget about EPA rules (they don’t affect closed-course racing machines), fleet fuel averages (they don’t apply to offroad bikes), cost savings (four-strokes cost more to produce) or any of the other hokey reasons that the nattering nabobs of negativity credit the rise of the four-stroke on. None of those things are players. Engine for engine, cc for cc, ounce for ounce, the two-stroke motocross engine is a vastly superior piece of equipment. If the two-stroke was invented today, it would sweep the four-stroke motocross engine off the face of the earth (which is exactly what it did 43 years ago—when the displacement rules were equal). The only way a four-stroke can compete with a two-stroke is if the displacement is larger. The AMA four-stroke rule change was the impetus for the switch (followed by significant bike sales for the 1998 Yamaha YZ400–which led every other manufacturer to jump into building four-stroke motocross bikes).

Sign the AMA Rule Change Petition Here.

No four-stroke displacement rule, no four-stroke motocross sales. No sales, no four-strokes.

A YZ250F four-stroke makes 20.1 foot-pounds of torque. Are you ready? A YZ250 two-stroke pumps out 30.6 ft-pounds.

The AMA rule forced 250cc two-strokes to compete against 450cc four-strokes. On paper it’s not that good a match, with both horsepower, torque and powerbands falling on the side of the thumper. Eventually, the factory race teams came to the realization, egged on the sales departments, that they needed to go all four-stroke, all the time.

The last competitive two-stroke 250cc rider on the AMA circuit was James Stewart. He was still winning motos, as late as 2006 on a KX250, but by the middle of the season he made the switch to four-strokes.

"On tracks where horsepower paid big dividends, the fastest single lap time came on the YZ250 two-stroke."

As it stands right now, only Yamaha and KTM still produce two-strokes for the masses (of the Big Five—although Husqvarna, TM and other boutique brands are still players). It is a little shocking that the AMA powers-that-be sat on their hands while the two-stroke died on the vine. Luckily, at amateur races, a 250cc stroke is legal to race in the same class as a 250cc four-stroke, but the two-stroke is not allowed to race against 250 four-strokes at the AMA Pro level. Most two-stroke fans would love to see a 250 class that was a true 250cc class (with four-strokes, two-strokes, diesels and Wankels on the line). It won’t happen because few in power want it to happen (even if they say that they do). Why not? Honda, Suzuki and Kawasaki don’t want it to happen. They don’t manufacture two-strokes for the American market and they don’t want Yamaha and KTM to show up at the 250 Nationals with YZ250 and 250SX bikes. When the subject was up for discussion a few years ago, it was reported that KTM said that if 250 two-strokes were made legal in the 250 class they promised not to put Tommy Searle on one. That butter didn’t lube the toast. And a 250cc displacement limit (regardless of engine type) has very little chance of ever being passed for AMA Pro racing. Thankfully, the amateur side has been more open-minded.

The MXA wrecking crew has tons of two- and four-stroke experience, so it was only natural that we would answer the question that every AMA Amateur is asking. What’s better? A YZ250 or YZ250F? We chose a Yamaha-versus-Yamaha comparison because that was the best way to eliminate any handling, suspension or component issues.
Q: WHICH BIKE COSTS LESS?

A: In 2011 prices, the Yamaha YZ250 retails for $7450 and the YZ250F clicks into the cash register at $7150. Surprised? You shouldn’t be. Yamaha feels that they have a captive audience when it comes to two-strokes—thus they have no need to run bargain prices.

Q: WHICH BIKE MAKES THE MOST NOISE?

A: No contest. If you are looking for irritating sound that carries a long way, the four-stroke is the winner.

Q: WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE YZ250 AND THE YZ250F?

A: The key difference between the YZ250 two-stroke and the YZ250F is the engine. The remainder of the changes are small set-up differences in spring rates, chassis strength and geometry. These changes stem from the fact that power output has a huge effect on how a bike handles, how the suspension works and what techniques the rider uses. The chassis must be compatible with the engine and the rider must synchronize with the capabilities of the bike.

Q: WHICH BIKE MAKES THE MOST HORSEPOWER?

A: No comparison. A Yamaha YZ250F produces approximately 36 horsepower at 11,300 rpm, while a YZ250 two-stroke makes on average 46 horsepower at 8500 rpm. That is a ten horsepower advantage at peak for the two-stroke.

Q: WHICH BIKE MAKES THE MOST TORQUE?

A: Pit pundits will always tell you that horsepower doesn’t matter as much as torque. They wax on about the torque advantage that a four-stroke engine has over a two-stroke. Guess what? A Yamaha YZ250F four-stroke makes 20.1 foot-pounds of torque. Are you ready? A YZ250 two-stroke pumps out 30.6 ft-pounds. For comparison purposes a 450 four-strokes produces approximately 34 foot-pounds.

A Yamaha YZ250F produces approximately 36 horsepower at 11,300 rpm, while a YZ250 two-stroke makes on average 46.4 horsepower at 8500 rpm.

Q: WHICH BIKE HAS THE BEST POWERBAND?

A: Although the displacement of the two blue 250s is the same, the powerbands are apples and oranges. Here is a quick fruit pickers thumbnail of both bike’s powerbands:

YZ250 two-stroke: For a two-stroke the YZ250 has a very broad and usable powerband. But, by four-stroke standards, the power is peaky. The snappy throttle response and explosive hit allows a YZ250 racer to make cuts and take lines that a four-stroke could never get to. In some conditions the YZ250 two-stroke powerband is phenomenal. In others it has a tendency to spin the rear tire, wheelie out of corners and wiggle on the exit.

YZ250F four-stroke: In back-to-back races with the YZ250, the YZ250F engine feels slow. The hit is less pronounced (than the two-stroke), there is no wheelspin and the wiggle is reduced to a quiver. But, the feel of the YZ250F in comparison to the YZ250 is misleading. The lack of sensations of speed isn’t naturally followed up by a lack of speed. The powerband may be down ten horsepower, but it puts everything its got into the ground. It can be chugged. It can be lugged. And it can be revved until the cows comes home. The 13,000 rpm rev limiter and 11,300 rpm peak are about 3500 rpm higher and wider than the two-strokes working spread.

The choice: There is no doubt that the slower feeling, but broader and higher revving powerband of the YZ250F is easier to work with than the gun-and-run hit of the YZ250 two-stroke. It is easier to ride a four-stroke than a two-stroke—not more fun.

Q: WHICH ONE IS FASTER?

A: Going fast may not always be about sheer horsepower, but in perfect conditions horsepower will win out. In a straight line, the YZ250 two-stroke gets from one end of the line to the other end quicker. Much quicker.

But, all is not lost for the YZ250F. Motocross is not drag racing. It doesn’t take place on asphalt. There is no rubber-soaked launch pad at the start of every straight. There are certain conditions when the slower, but higher revving, YZ250F can actually go faster over a given distance than its two-stroke competitor.

Q: WHICH BIKE PRODUCES THE BEST LAP TIMES?

A: Although MXA had a wide range of test riders spend time on both bikes, we left all lap time testing to a single test rider. We picked a 20-something Intermediate test rider because he was old enough to have raced a 250cc two-stroke and yet not immune to the charms of a four-stroke.

When we examined his lap times, taken from actual races not hot laps, we weren’t surprised to discover that his laps times on both the two-stroke and four-stroke were almost identical. Read that again. His lap times were identical regardless of which bike he was on. Depending on the track layout (hills, sand, whoops, jumps and hard pack) there were some deviations–but not enough to write home about.

On tracks where horsepower paid big dividends, the fastest single lap time came on the YZ250 two-stroke. But, on long tracks with harder dirt, the slowest lap time were also produced by the YZ250 two-stroke. Why? In the test rider’s opinion, the YZ250 two-stroke was more of a crap shoot to ride in that sometimes it was so brilliant out of berms and across rough ground that it seemed effortless—yet, the YZ250 two-stroke was also a lot easier to make mistakes on and those mistakes produced erratic lap times.

The YZ250F four-stroke never set the fastest time, but then it never set the slowest time either.

Across the board, if an MXA test rider could turn in a 2:35 on the YZ250, he could back it up with a 2:35 on the YZ250F in the next moto.

Q: WHAT CONDITIONS FAVOR EACH BIKE?

A: Slick conditions, where traction is limited and throttle control optimized, gives the YZ250F four-stroke the upper hand. The same held true in off-cambers and whoop sections with smallish humps. Every test rider believed that the steady throttle approach of the YZ250F four-stroke made the bike hook up better in tricky situations. Equally important for riders at tracks with concrete starting pads, the YZ250F could get off the line quicker. Unfortunately, the YZ250 two-stroke could uses its extra ponies to run it down if the start was long enough.

When the dirt was good, there was a lot of sand, the hills were steep and the whoops were big, the YZ250 two-stroke shined. The two-stroke literally exploded out of the soft corners that the YZ250F labored through. The tighter the turns and the deeper the dirt, the better the YZ250 was.

Q: WHICH ONE IS EASIER TO RIDE?

A: The YZ250F four-stroke was easier to ride. When the rider twisted the throttle of the YZ250F the power built smoothly. Four-stroke power is broad and forgiving, and since the bike can rev forever, the rider doesn’t have to worry as much about shift points.

A corollary to this is that a bike with less horsepower can be ridden closer to its full potential, while a powerful bike doesn’t always get taken to the limit—thus the extra horses often go to waste.

Q: WHICH ONE IS EASIER TO RACE?

A: We aren’t talking about riding in a field, cow trailing, practice riding or pretending to be racing—we are talking about actual racing against an angry pack of competitors. In these situations the YZ250 two-stroke can be put to full use. A YZ250 rider, especially if he is in the midst of a pack of 250cc four-strokes, has many options available to him (not to mention more power). He can go places where the four-strokes can’t. A two-stroke rider can dive bomb the inside, without fear of the long spool up that a four-stroke rider has to worry about. A two-stroke rider can bury the front into a berm and still break off at an extremely sharp angle.

Not so for the YZ250F rider. The YZ250F is at it’s best when the rider carries speed through the turns and flows around the track. This is fine for talented Intermediate and Pro riders, but Beginners and Novices tend to race to the corners more than through them. If the YZ250F gets its momentum broken, it takes time to get it steaming again. One truth about a conga line of four-strokes is that everyone is going to the exact same place—-there is an optimum four-stroke line and no one wants to get off it.

A two-stroke isn’t as tightly bound to the good line as a four-stroke. It can make cuts and with just a touch of the clutch be back up to speed. The explosive 250 two-stroke’s ability to make sharp turns and quick line changes make it a much more creative race bike. One caveat: If you don’t respect the explosive power of the two-stroke you’ll soon find yourself tumbling down the track like a monkey in a dryer.

Q: WHICH BIKE IS EASIER TO START?

A: The YZ250 wins this category. The YZ250F four-stroke requires a little less leg strength to turn the engine over. It likes a smooth kick of the full stroke of the kick lever. On a four-stroke you need to get the throttle setting just right. The YZ250 two-stroke doesn’t need a full kick and the moon and the stars don’t need to be properly aligned for it to fire. Hot or cold, whiskey throttle, after a crash, the two-stroke will almost always reignite. Not so with a four-stroke.

"The complexity of the four-stroke engine makes it an expensive proposition to live with."

Q: WHICH BIKE HAS THE BEST HANDLING?

A: Both machines have their own distinct handling advantages—here is a quick snapshot of each:

YZ250 two-stroke: The snappy power of the two-stroke has more of a tendency to lift the front wheel, break traction and spin the rear tire. As a result, the bike turns from the rear. It likes to power slide and explode out of turns. In soft dirt and loam the two-stroke gets on top of the dirt much quicker than the YZ250F. It’s more willing make quick direction changes and switch lines on a whim. YZ250 two-stroke riders are rewarded for seeking out good dirt and taking the bull by the horns. Although the weight of the bikes is the same, the power delivery of the two-stroke makes it feel lighter.

YZ250F four-stroke: The YZ250F mill only produces power every other revolution. This produces a smooth torque curve that drives the bike forward with much more weight on the front wheel. The YZ250F is a front-wheel handler that likes to be steered around turns. The power doesn’t come on quickly, it builds over time. It’s more prone to coming out of corners like a road racer. YZ250F riders are rewarded by planning ahead, making nice arcing turns and carrying speed. The YZ250F is much more planted to the ground and when the rider makes mistakes things happen a bit slower.

Q: WHICH BIKE HAS THE BEST SUSPENSION?

A: The YZ250. The suspension components of each bike are identical—-except for their differing setups. However, the different powerbands work the suspension a bit differently. The quicker power of the two-stroke is more likely to put a spiking load on the rear suspension under acceleration and the lack of engine compression allows it to enter bumpy corners without a lot of wheel hop. Logic dictates that the setup for the same rider would have a bit more high-speed compression and a bit quicker rebound in the rear of the two-stroke.

Q: WHICH BIKE IS EASIER TO MAINTAIN?

A: The YZ250 two-stroke naturally goes through tires, brakes pads, chains and sprockets a bit faster because it makes more power. But the complexity of the YZ250F four-stroke engine makes it an expensive proposition to live with also. And, even a mechanic with four thumbs can work on and rebuild a two-stroke at home (in the kitchen)—not so with a four-stroke. The ability to do your own engine work is one of the highlights of a two-stroke. It is a simple machine, with very few moving parts, and that fact makes it cheaper in the long run than a complex four-stroke with ten times the number of moving parts.

Q: WHAT ABOUT ENGINE REBUILDS?

A: Puhleeze! Two-stroke engines are a easier to rebuild, have less parts and the parts cost less. That recipe means that you could rebuild a YZ250 three or four times for the cost of one rebuild on the YZ250F. It should be noted that a four-stroke is very much like a maintenance-free battery—it cost absolutely nothing as long as it keeps running. In this fashion, a YZ250F four-stroke may be cheaper when it comes to pistons, rings and rebuilds—as long as it doesn’t blow. However, don’t even think about the cost of a catastrophic failure on a four-stroke engine.

For a racer, starting on a typical dirt starting line, the YZ250 two-stroke should always get the holeshot.

Q: WHAT’S THE FINAL WORD?

A: The MXA wrecking crew doesn’t want you to run out and buy a bike just because we think it is the winner. We want you to look at the strengths and weaknesses of the YZ250 and YZ250F (or any two-versus-four match-up) and add that to your personal strengths and weaknesses.

Logic says that since lap times are virtually identical for the same rider on both bikes, that the real difference comes down to the battle of ten horsepower over an easier-to-ride chassis. For a racer, starting on a typical dirt starting line, the YZ250 two-stroke should always get the holeshot. If the 250cc two-stroke doesn’t beat a 250cc four-stroke to the first turn, the rider should retire and take up mushroom farming. The YZ250F four-stroke should never be able to overcome the ten horsepower disadvantage in the first 200 feet. From that point on, it’s a matter of whether the track has the kind of conditions that will force the two-stroke rider into making a mistake. If he doesn’t, he will keep the lead to the checkered flag.

Does that means that the starting gates are going to fill up with YZ250 two-stroke riders? No. The average 250 Novice or Intermediate has no 250cc two-stroke experience and it will cost him the price of a YZ250 two-stroke to gain that know-how. For most riders, with average talent, the difference won’t be worth the extra cost. The 250 two-stroke is a superior machine in most ways, but that superiority has to be perceived and acted on in a crowd full of valve-and-cam sheep.

MXA doesn’t believe at the AMA Pro level that changing the rule that currently bans 250 two-strokes from racing in the 250 West and 250 Nationals would lead to a flood of two-strokes running away from the 250 four-strokes. The modern racing four-stroke has a five-year development advantage over the older two-strokes. Additionally, Pro Circuit, Geico, Honda, Yamaha, Suzuki and Kawasaki would keep their high-paid riders on their racing four-strokes. The real advantage of allowing 250 two-strokes in the 250 four-stroke class, would be fourfold:

(1) Privateers could compete at a higher level for a lower cost. Even at the National level, engine mods on a two-stroke top out at around $1000—you can’t buy the top-end parts for a four-stroke for that amount.

(2) When you mix two-strokes with four-strokes on a race track you get an interesting mix of lines, sounds and styles. The fans could, and would, root for various riders based solely on the rider’s choice of engine type. The mix would add another dimension to the races that isn’t there now.

(3) If AMA Pros raced two-strokes then local racers would be more willing to race them also. Why? Because sales are the only reason that factories even race motorcycles. Pro racers are a sales tool—thus having Pros on two-strokes would get them credibility. The number of manufacturers who might enter AMA racing, who don’t because of the might of the Japanese four-stroke development programs, would hopefully increase. Not counting KTM and Yamaha, Husqvarna and TM are potential factories that might be willing to race in the 250 class if two-strokes were legalized.

(4) Since the AMA handed the four-stroke a major displacement advantage with the stroke of a pen (an advantage so major that it made the two-stroke uncompetitive), it is only right that the advantage be taken away with the stroke of a pen. Of course the sanctioning bodies are afraid of what the Big Four will say if they change this rule, but if something isn’t done to increase the excitement level, lower the start-up costs, decrease the maintenance and produce simple machines that the next generation can work on in the garage—there may not be a next generation or a Big Four. Two-strokes cannot fix the American motocross market, but the death of them (or was it actually a murder) did a lot to get it in its current doldrums.

Yamaha RMAX, a YZ 250 in the sky

Charles Owens — Fri, 31 Dec 2010 15:15:10 +0000

It’s A Bird, It’s A Plane, It’s a Spy Plane; And the Chinese Tried To Steal It

This article was posted by one of our readers, found on the MXA Mag website.

What will Yamaha do with all of its two-stroke engines in the future? This RMAX uses a 250cc two-stroke engine.

What is a UAV? It is an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) and ever since the strife in the Middle East started you have been hearing a lot about them. In the past, UAV’s were the sole domain of the U.S. Military, but now Yamaha has unveiled a range of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles that brings the cost of UAVs down, and make it possible for corporations and universities to perform tasks which were previously too expensive. Volcanic eruptions, flood control, river bank maintenance and even crop dusting have joined spying as major uses of UAVs.

Yamaha’s development of unmanned helicopters began in 1983 when the Japanese Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries wanted an unmanned helicopter for crop dusting. Yamaha completed its first utility-use unmanned helicopter, the R-50 in 1987. It had 20 kg (44 pound) payload.

The absolute base-model airframe (suitable for agriculture), with a single GPS and the ability to fly only within sight, and no more than five yards above the ground costs $86,000. The Aerial Photography version can fly up to 100 yards above the ground and costs between $150,000 and $230,000.

The fully autonomous Yamaha R-Max with ground station, antennas, computers, monitors and two complete autonomous airframes and a four camera system runs $1,000,000.00. With the million dollar helicopter the pilot can watch what’s happening from all four cameras at once while the RMAX goes about the flight plan it has been programmed with from the controlling computer. If the operator sees something they want to look at closely, they can override the plan to get closer and then resume the original flight plan or program a new one.

It Is fast sleek and small. Well, it Is not that small.

The Yamaha RMAX helicopter powered by a liquid-cooled, two-stroke, 246cc engine rated at 21hp. It is capable of covering a distance of about 10 kilometers or a flight time of 90 minutes (with a 30 kg effective load capacity). Mounted on the helicopter itself are an altitude sensor, a GPS (Global Positioning System) sensor and a communications modem. Observation equipment, consisting of a digital camera and a digital still camera, are mounted along with three miniature video cameras for navigation purposes. Images from these cameras are sent from the helicopter to the ground station on a real time basis, where they are viewed on a four-window split screen monitor.

The Yamaha RMAX Autonomous Helicopter flies in accordance with a flight plan that has been programmed in the YACS (Yamaha Attitude Control System) and the RTK-DGPS (real-time kinematic differential GPS) system. Thus, an operator can fly the RMAX to places beyond the line of sight, and control its position by making intricate movements in a precise manner. The GPS enables the operator to monitor the flying speed and ensure that the RMAX flies precisely at the controlled speed. The RMAX can accommodate a still camera or video camera for observation purposes, or a compact camera for navigation purposes onboard. Thus, the operator will be able to obtain information on a real-time basis. The images captured by a camera can be transmitted, so that they can be monitored simultaneously on land.

It has been rumored that the Chinese stole the technology of the RMAX to build their own spy UAV.

The Yanks Messed Up Motocross!

JohnNicholas — Mon, 22 Nov 2010 19:55:59 +0000

One of our readers from Sweden sent in his opinion of the state of motocross. This may upset some folks but it’s an interesting point of view.

Read your diatribe about the state of mx whilst chugging a top class Swedish beer.

The beer was good.

I’ve been mulling over the state of events since I quit mx 30 years ago …and my conclusions ain’t nice.

What went wrong was that the Japanese got involved. They are in the business of making money and don’t care how they do that, what the product is. They simply railroaded the European industry out of the way – after copying their ideas – and the Yank way of doing things did the rest.

Sorry, but you guys are into big-name-big-bucks-hey look at me! – and this slotted ‘just neat’ into the Japanese business way of thinking.

We Europeans were never into that. We rode and raced bikes for the love of it, the passion.

It was never the money, and, believe it or not, the glory, the ‘hey, look at me!’

Robert, Decoster, use what name you will, ALL would have raced mx even if they never made a cent, or won a race.

They raced for the passion.

The rest was a bonus.

The same went for the factories. Heck, that’s obvious even to a dumb Yank, ALL of the European factories went bust under the onslaught of the Japs.

The result was mx collapsed in Europe and you Yanks, and the Japs, took over.

Producing the circus we are forced to watch on the tv today.

I mean, only in the States can you become a national hero and make a million bucks by crashing more spectacularly in front of the cameras than the others!

I saw a youtube clip from the Uddevalla GP, a girl interviewing Hakan Andersson:

(Not ad-verbatum, but close).

“You were a world champion.”
(then she looked into the camera with ‘the look’, that said, ‘really, this old geezer actually rode mx? What on, an old springer Harley?’)

Then a short reply from Hakan.
(Hakan is shy and does tend to give terse replies when stressed, his English isn’t very good, he’s not used to speaking it for 30 years anyway).

The girl: “Well, it was a loooong time ago”,
(again looking at the camera with ‘that’ look, this time wrinkling her pert nose just right).

Despite his wonky English Hakan got it. I know him well, I can read his body language – he BRISTLED in anger at this pompose upstart of a Yank-kid-bitch who didn’t know ANYTHING about mx, or him, pinching his nose in public, her only interest being in upgrading her ratings back in the USA.

His comment that ‘it’s fast today’, was misunderstood, he wasn’t able to communicate that he ment the tracks were American freeways today, not real mx-tracks. ‘They must train more’, was glossed over as she didn’t understand.
(‘but practice is finished’, she thought). He ment todays riders aren’t very fit or even very good riders, technically!

Hakan was getting rather wound-up. I’ll tell you this, the look in HIS eyes was, ‘Shit, let me turn the clock back 30 years and gimme my Montesa and I’ll SMOKE the buggers into the dust!’

And I’ve no doubt that the 70′s Hakan would have won that GP.

And on a 250. A 30 year old one. A vintage one.

And despite the American freeway his beloved home track had been turned into.

I can absolutely guarantee you this, NONE of the riders in that GP would have lasted a GP in the old Uddevalla track. In fact, many would not have been able to race there. That old track was the roughest, toughest track in Sweden. I preferred racing at Ulricehamn, even better Huskvarna, the hilliest and fastest track in Sweden – and even DeCoster went white in the face at the sight of THAT place – to racing at Uddevalla. Uddevalla was not only mental, but the most PHYSICAL track I ever raced on. It always took me 2 weeks to recover after a race there. Assuming your mates didn’t have to stop you falling off the bike after the flag they would have to pull you off the bars, your hands welded to the grips, so much the strain of holding-on.

Then you fell-off anyway.

Frankly, if I was fit enough (I’m a pensioner with a bad back and one lung) even I could race Uddevalla today. Well, ride.

The old track I wouldn’t last the first 4 bends.

No, it was better before, they were the best days.

An aside: all this crap about 2-strokes needing complete top-end rebuilds every race: UTTER CRAP. Yes, it applies to you Yanks who don’t know what you’re doing.

We oldies did.

I raced my Hallman 4-speed 250 for 3 years on the same crank and bore, ditto the 6-speed ’76 CR250 (the best mx’er ever made, in my opinion).

Yes, to keep an engine really sharp you must change the piston and rings sometimes, I changed about 4 a year, 2 rings per piston, but the level of competition in Sweden was such that club-riders were equated with a professional in the USA and I’ve calculated I rode about 7-8,000kms per year. In the USA a rider could easily halve that. I did know hobby-riders who ran their bikes all year on the same piston. Not the ring, though.

It takes work and understanding, hours looking, feeling, and spannering in the workshop to gain the insight to maintain a racer to the point you know when and where to check or change something …and otherwise to leave it alone.

Properly maintained a 2-stroke will mature like a fine wine.

And be a pleasure to ride.