fair class rule

[mx12boy]

Four strokes are only "dominating" because of their displacement advantage. This new rule if it passes will equillize the classes again and help keep the two stroke alive.

[oneFIVEeight]

People who can ride two strokes fast are generally better riders because they demand skill and thought. For those of you who say "four strokes handle great" you obviously havnt ridden a two stroke recently. If you want an eye opening experience find a 125 to ride go to a wide open track like riverfront and try to keep up with all of youre buddies on 450s, its doable(I make words when i want to) but you will find yourself using lines you have never thought of before and youre right wrist will be in shock because of how mush you were wide open because they handle so efing good you can just pin them everywhere. Then get on youre 250f or 450 you wont even want to ride it for the few laps it takes you to get used to it it will feel like youre riding a freight train. Yes i speak from experience.

Originally Posted by Prozach

And unless they start making a 160 two-stroke or something, not many of the little teeny-boppers that ride the "lites" class are going to be able to handle the 250 2stroke and its abrupt power.

I totally disagree. Any descent novice level 125 rider should be able to handle a 250 two stroke just fine. In fact, riding a 250 two stroke helps 125 riders develop throttle control & smoothness.

It'll be great, just like it was before all the classes got messed up with these wierd configuartions.

[Prozach]

Some of you 2 stroke guys are becoming cultish like the husaburg and husky guys of the past. Your tell yourself what you like to her to make your arguement make sense.

The Facts: (talking about modern bikes)
1.) People choose 4 strokes when they came out because the power is smoother. There is no argueing that.

2.) A 2 stroke 250 is much more demanding to ride than a 250f.

3.) If you make a 2 stroke with the same amount of hp as a 4 stroke it will hit harder and still have less torque, making it more demanding to ride. (it is the difference in phsyics between the motors)

4.) Not just slow people are better on 4 strokes. All top pros ride them also.

5.) 2 strokes might get better again someday. But hold off on the 4 stroke bagging until that day comes again.

6.) Sure 4 strokes can cost a lot, so can 2 strokes! But neither of them have to.

7.) Who cares what the displacement is. It is about the what bike gets you around the track the fastest with the least amount of energy while having the most fun. Right now, for most people that is the 4 stroke.

8.) Yes, 4 strokes are loud, so are 2 stokes. Neither of them have to be though. The market decides that. And we as consumers have choosen to keep bikes loud.

9.) Who really cares? I just ride to have fun. I don't care the discplacement or the stroke. I just know that I have fun riding bikes that are powerful yet easy to ride, handle good, are reliable, and have good resale. And fortunitly there are bikes like that available in stock trim right now!!!!!

[TomMason1968]

Originally Posted by Prozach

Some of you 2 stroke guys are becoming cultish like the husaburg and husky guys of the past. Your tell yourself what you like to her to make your arguement make sense.

The Facts: (talking about modern bikes)
1.) People choose 4 strokes when they came out because the power is smoother. There is no argueing that.

2.) A 2 stroke 250 is much more demanding to ride than a 250f.

3.) If you make a 2 stroke with the same amount of hp as a 4 stroke it will hit harder and still have less torque, making it more demanding to ride. (it is the difference in phsyics between the motors)

4.) Not just slow people are better on 4 strokes. All top pros ride them also.

5.) 2 strokes might get better again someday. But hold off on the 4 stroke bagging until that day comes again.

6.) Sure 4 strokes can cost a lot, so can 2 strokes! But neither of them have to.

7.) Who cares what the displacement is. It is about the what bike gets you around the track the fastest with the least amount of energy while having the most fun. Right now, for most people that is the 4 stroke.

8.) Yes, 4 strokes are loud, so are 2 stokes. Neither of them have to be though. The market decides that. And we as consumers have choosen to keep bikes loud.

9.) Who really cares? I just ride to have fun. I don't care the discplacement or the stroke. I just know that I have fun riding bikes that are powerful yet easy to ride, handle good, are reliable, and have good resale. And fortunitly there are bikes like that available in stock trim right now!!!!!

I like the last point you made. The comment about the top pro's, They are contracted to ride them. If the conforming public see's a top pro ride a 4 stroke,a good amount will buy one because the pro's ride it. But back to what you said. Ride to have fun, on whatever machine makes it that way.

[Larry63r]

I like the vet and OT classes because it's "run what you brung". I have passed many open 4-strokes. I love to pass 450s on the up-hill at Honey Lake. I loved passing 450s on the up-hill at Mammoth. I really love to pass 450s on the freeway at Fernley.
On the other hand. At the last race at Fernley. I was beaten by a guy on a 125.
It doesn't matter what you ride. What matters is how hard you twist the right hand!

[oneFIVEeight]

I get a kick out of when people say "maybe some day two strokes will be as good as four strokes" cc for cc two stokes will beat four strokes everyday up and down twice on sundays for the rest of the millenium. Yamaha saw a flaw in the rulebook and they decided to take advantage of it, the ama did nothing to correct their error so now we have a bunch of loud heavy expensive bikes that dont turn very well. Sounds like a good deal to me. Dont get me wrong two strokes arnt for everyone but neither are fourstrokes, the thing that makes me mad is that two strokes wont be available to the people that do want them.

[Matt Fisher]

Originally Posted by Prozach

Some of you 2 stroke guys are becoming cultish like the husaburg and husky guys of the past. Your tell yourself what you like to her to make your arguement make sense.

The Facts: (talking about modern bikes)
1.) People choose 4 strokes when they came out because the power is smoother. There is no argueing that.

BTW- RF stands for "real facts"
RF1) The power is smoother not just because it's a 4-stroke, but also because they were given a displacement advantage. A full-race 125F might be smoother than a 125 2-stroke, but would you want to race it against a YZ125?

Originally Posted by Prozach

2.) A 2 stroke 250 is much more demanding to ride than a 250f.

RF2) If you take only the power hit that a 250 makes compared to a 250F, then yes, a 250 is a little more demanding to ride than a 250F. However, if smoothness is your priority, it's easy enough to de-tune a 250 2st to 250F levels and have an even smoother power delievery. Ever checked out a trials bike?

Originally Posted by Prozach

3.) If you make a 2 stroke with the same amount of hp as a 4 stroke it will hit harder and still have less torque, making it more demanding to ride. (it is the difference in phsyics between the motors)

RF3) Wrong. See the above mention of a trials bike.

Originally Posted by Prozach

4.) Not just slow people are better on 4 strokes. All top pros ride them also.

RF4) The top pro's ride them for 2 reasons: 1- The factories are pushing the 4-strokes as it makes them much more money. 2- The 4-strokes were given an insurmountable displacement advantage. Do you really believe K-dub would have been on a CRF250F, or that Bubba would have chosen a KXF250 to compete with RC on a RM250?

Originally Posted by Prozach

5.) 2 strokes might get better again someday. But hold off on the 4 stroke bagging until that day comes again.

RF5) It's not about 4 stroke bagging (unless you're talking lawn mowers). In the end, it'll be politics that dictate what we're riding, and that most likely means that Honda will be overjoyed with $12,000 dirtbikes in their showrooms.

Originally Posted by Prozach

6.) Sure 4 strokes can cost a lot, so can 2 strokes! But neither of them have to.

RF6) The more hours you put on a bike, the more expensive the 4-stroke gets compared to a 2-stroke. It's a simple matter of adding up the cost of all the parts, and in many cases, the labor cost. So while it costs a lot to rebuild a thumper for $2000 in parts, and it also costs a lot to rebuild a pinger for $200 in parts, I'm personally thinking the $200 is A LOT less.

Originally Posted by Prozach

7.) Who cares what the displacement is. It is about the what bike gets you around the track the fastest with the least amount of energy while having the most fun. Right now, for most people that is the 4 stroke.

RF7) Everyone cares what the displacement is, otherwise this would not be such a hot topic on every single dirtbike forum in existance. And as for what it's about- a 250 gets you around the track faster and with waaayyy more fun than a 250F. Enjoy the energy you've saved riding the 250F, it'll come in handy when you're adjusting the valves and changing the oil at midnight trying to get ready for a race the next day.

Originally Posted by Prozach

8.) Yes, 4 strokes are loud, so are 2 stokes. Neither of them have to be though. The market decides that. And we as consumers have choosen to keep bikes loud.

RF8) Yes, some 2-strokes are loud, too loud. But the percentage of obnoxiously loud 4-strokes is silly. I'm not sure you could get a CR500 to be anywhere near as loud as many of the CRF450's I've heard on the track, and from a mile away, the hikers and homeowners are certain to hear the thumper, while the 2-strokes are not nearly the issue.

Originally Posted by Prozach

9.) Who really cares? I just ride to have fun. I don't care the discplacement or the stroke. I just know that I have fun riding bikes that are powerful yet easy to ride, handle good, are reliable, and have good resale. And fortunitly there are bikes like that available in stock trim right now!!!!!

RF9) I have say, you're right on this fact. Fun comes first. For me, the 2-strokes are much more fun and exciting, handle better, are more reliable, are cheaper initially and over the long haul, and make less noise. The best part is that there are still both 2 and 4 strokes available right now, depending on what suits your fancy.

[MX_563]

No disrespect but to suggest that horsepower is the only fair comparison is, for lack of a better term, callow.

By putting a restriction on displacement (not horsepower), we force the OEMs to continue improving the performance of their engines. Just about every major advancement in ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) technology has its roots in some form of displacement controlled motorsports racing.

Until we start seeing electric vehicles in competition, displacement will continue to be the most logical limitation by which motorsports are controlled.

And by the way,
a 450f has more hp AND more cc's than a 250 2-stroke
a 250f has more hp AND more cc's than a 125 2-stroke
Surely anyone with any sense at all would see how that is unfair.

I'm not sayinig thumpers suck or that they are old technology. But if the point here is to discuss rulebook fairness, then we should at least be able to agree that the playing field has not been level in recent years.

[matte]

Originally Posted by MX_563

No disrespect but to suggest that horsepower is the only fair comparison is, for lack of a better term, callow.

I don't agree, IMHO horsepower is the best way (not the ideal way, but the best way) to ensure fairness because it's independent of engine technology. Displacement is an arbitrary way to constrain design that favors one particular technology (2 stroke), you might as well use "heat output" as a measurement. The goal should be to have bikes of similar capabilities (weight & power) compete against each other.

By putting a restriction on displacement (not horsepower), we force the OEMs to continue improving the performance of their engines. Just about every major advancement in ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) technology has its roots in some form of displacement controlled motorsports racing.

If we were to limit peak horsepower for a given class there would still be plenty of room for competition/improvement in terms of power throughout the rest of the rpm range, weight, etc. There's a lot more to going fast on a motocross track than just peak horsepower, even if you're only talking about the motor.

Until we start seeing electric vehicles in competition, displacement will continue to be the most logical limitation by which motorsports are controlled.

Limiting peak horsepower would be a valid measurement for electric vehicles as well.

And by the way,
a 450f has more hp AND more cc's than a 250 2-stroke
a 250f has more hp AND more cc's than a 125 2-stroke
Surely anyone with any sense at all would see how that is unfair.

I'm not sayinig thumpers suck or that they are old technology. But if the point here is to discuss rulebook fairness, then we should at least be able to agree that the playing field has not been level in recent years.

True, but the proposed change, basing classes on displacement irrespective of engine type is a *wild* swing in the opposite direction, resulting in rules that are even more imbalanced in favor of one particular technology.

Personally, I don't really care which way it goes, I rode smokers for many years and would be perfectly happy going back to them, but I'd like to see the rules settled and sensible, and I only see this "fair class" thing creating even more chaos.

BTW, I'm amazed at how emotional some people get over this topic, I think it's fun and interesting to discuss it but ultimately, it comes down to what Prozach said in his last point about riding to have fun, and as MX_563 alluded to, it probably won't be that long before we're all ripping around on zero-emissions electric bikes