How old of a bike is competitive?

Z

Zmoney

Member

Oct 18, 2004

12

0

• Dec 18, 2005

• #1

My buddies and I recently had a "spirited" discussion. The topic was this: Assuming the bikes were all in the same condition, how many years old could a bike be before the average B/C/vet class rider be on and still be just as competitive (without more effort and/or more skill)? We were talking about only 2strokes to keep it an apples to apples comparison. Believe me, when there's a foot of snow on the ground and you can't ride you find all kinds of things to argue about. I'd like to hear some opinions.-Thanks

 

P

PAULRY

Member

Mar 17, 2004

50

0

• Dec 18, 2005

• #2

All I can add is that it come down to the rider. Here in South Africa we had a rider, Derrick Graham. He had been racing in Europe and came back for a holiday at the end of the season. At that time we had a summer supercross series, which he entered on an old clapped out 1989 CR125.

Racing against the best this country had to offer he was up in the top three. I think it comes down to the individual.

 

YZ165

YZabian

May 4, 2004

2,431

0

• Dec 19, 2005

• #3

'96 up. That's when the suspension and brakes started getting good. Given the same rider at the same track. I think any 2T from the big four would be competitive. KTM's sucked back then, so throw them out. In '97 when my buddy Brian got a '96 YZ250, and I was still on a '92 KX250, the diffrence was drastic, but given the performance of my current POS, I think the '96 YZ would be right there. My .02 YZ165

 

J

john3_16

Member

May 17, 2004

808

0

• Dec 19, 2005

• #4

Any bike from the mid 80's on up in good working condition should be competitive but it totally depends on 2 things..

1.Who's riding it.
2. Who you're riding against.


New bike against old bike....All things being equal (except for the bikes)...New bike will win.

 

Jamir

I come and go

Aug 7, 2001

1,937

0

• Dec 19, 2005

• #5

I was on my 02 426 and got smoked by a bike with a metal tank and drum brakes.

95% rider, 5% bike.

 

M

mattb348

Member

Aug 2, 2005

204

0

• Dec 19, 2005

• #6

Jamir said:

I was on my 02 426 and got smoked by a bike with a metal tank and drum brakes.

95% rider, 5% bike.

Click to expand...

LOL metal tank and drum brakes!

Thats ok man.... I was on my KX 500 once, and this jerk blew me away on a peddle bike from 1956!!

Well, not really, but that would of been pretty hilarious though LOL!

 

Z

Zmoney

Member

Oct 18, 2004

12

0

• Dec 19, 2005

• Thread starter
• #7

IMO the rider/bike ratio is not set, but rather a changing relationship. However, that's a whole different topic. We were talking about any given "average" rider in the bike area only. I'd like to see some sort of direct comparison between a few older 250's and newer/new ones (same brand). It would be fun to see a shootout between these. I would be really curious to see lap times and opinions when the bikes are ridden back to back by the same rider(s). I've been riding since the early '80's. The bikes used to grow leaps and bounds every year then. Now it seems the factories wrap an aluminum frame around a nearly 10yr old motor and charge $6000 for it.

 

D

duke

Member

Oct 9, 1999

484

0

• Dec 19, 2005

• #8

Back in the late nineties, Dirt Bike or Dirt Rider did a performance comparison between a vintage bike (CZ400 Falta or open bore Maico) an evo bike (79 CR250 if I recall), a water cooled Suzuki with drum brakes and a modern Suzuki. The water cooled Suzuki resulted in lap times that were close to its modern day counter part. The article discussed the competiveness of an older bike with at least a front disc brake as being a viable, low cost alternative to brand new bike. This is especially true in the aged classes with rider skill being within the C/B level.