4thumper

Member
Nov 3, 2002
5
0
Scenario:

Two guys of equal riding abilty go to the track together, one is riding a new 2stroke 250, the other guy is riding a early to mid eighties 2stroke 250 (Maybe even a twin shock model:) .

Question:
Would the guy on the old bike keep up with the guy on the new bike?
 

Y2Z

~SPONSOR~
Apr 6, 2002
411
0
im young enough that ive never ridden an 80's or early 90's bike brand new, ive ridden many but they were all beat up so i honestly dont know, my guess is no way. simply because of the tracks now, they seem built WAY more rough compared to the 80's tracks, so the suspension would come into play alot.
 

4thumper

Member
Nov 3, 2002
5
0
I've seen pictures of what look like upside down rear suspension(twin shocks) on a 80ish model cr250.

With suspension upgrades front and rear, would it keep up? How about power output?
 

rbsdsu

Member
Mar 1, 2004
8
0
4thumper said:
I've seen pictures of what look like upside down rear suspension(twin shocks) on a 80ish model cr250.

With suspension upgrades front and rear, would it keep up? How about power output?


You can simply not compete with the ergonomic changes that have occured with the bikes allowing them to corner and perform better. I've been through a 83 YZ 125, 86 YZ 250 (greatest power), 88 YZ250, 91 YZ 250 ---break from riding (college)--- 99 YZF 400, back to a 2002 YZ 250, the older bikes while power isn't too much different I just never felt as comfortable as I do on theses newer bikes.... My bet is the guy on the older bike may be able to keep up for a while but in the end would be spending too much energy contorling it than the new bike!
 

elf

Member
Jun 7, 2003
695
0
Even an old bike with modded susp. would be at a disavantage. New bike will out acelerate, out brake, out handle,out turn, out jump the old bike. However a good rider on an old bike can still beat a less skilled rider on the new bike.
 

KX02

Member
Jan 19, 2004
781
0
No way! I had an RM 125 with twin shocks (Fox Airs actually). It was plenty fast on smooth ground, but compared to my 2002 KX 125 it's not even close. The brakes were junk, the handling was very scary at high speeds, I have soreness in my wrists occassionally to this day thanks to that bike. But hey that's progress! :yeehaw:
 

MXN4FUN

Member
Jul 7, 2000
168
0
Tracks roughter now? Let me think about that. Tilling grading turning soil over filling in ruts. I'd have to say tracks are highways now compared to yesteryear. With a caveat though, new tracks are rougher where the owners want them to be. In between there its cush compared to ruts left by the old watering trucks or the old blue groove bomb craters. 8 inch deep holes with asphalt like upper edges that flattened tubes and rims. Want proof look at any photo from Una 'freakin' Dilla from the 70's or 80's compared to the graded highway it was last year. I digress , equal skilled riders would not arrive at the finish together. Technology forbids it. The only scenario is if the guy has been riding the same bike since the 80's. 'Beware of the man with one gun, he probably knows how to use it.' Old hunters addage.
 

j_freak

Member
Feb 7, 2004
169
0
Someone asked Super Hunky (from http://off-road.com/dirtbike, used to be the editor Dirtbike Magazine) a similar question, and he said that an 82 RM250 engine is comparable to modern 250's. He didn't go into suspension, but I've read that the Full-Floater rear shock on the RM was a technological breakthrough that left the competition over a decade behind.
 

Micahdawg

Member
Feb 2, 2001
503
0
If they are both of equal riding ability then of course a newer and "improved" model will offer the advantage. I don't know anyone that has total equal riding abilities though. To a certain degree, I think riding ability can make up for some changes. If you have a good rider on a 1990 CR250 verse an ok rider on a 04 CR250 then I think the 1990 model could hang. Maybe even a late 80's MX bike. But you can't compare some of the vintage MX stuff to what is currently offered now.

I'm pretty sure McGrath on an Elsinore could whoop me on even a YZ450F though.

Micah
 

Reesknight

~SPONSOR~
Oct 31, 2002
942
0
I think maybe a late 80s model could hang, but before that no way cause of drum brakes and suspension. Suspension is the biggest advantage to the new bikes IMO. Speaking of tracks, watching some of the old supercrosses it looks like the tracks were much rougher back then. Now days its more about big jumps.
 

NO HAND

~SPONSOR~
Jun 21, 2000
1,198
0
Buckholz said:
Since rider is 95-100% of equation, I'd bet on the rider that was just "barely" better.
I think that 95% rider, 5% bike thing is exagerated. I just had my suspension revalved and resprung for my weight and now I'm a believer :p . I'd say 40% bike, 60% rider. I believe suspension makes up for so much, especially for the last few laps at the end of a race.
 

Moto Squid

~SPONSOR~
Jul 22, 2002
853
0
Two years ago at aztalan there was this old dude (gotta be at least 40) on an early 90's rm that entered 125C just to play with the kids. I can't remember exactly what he finished but I think it was in the top three. It was kinda funny because we were all like "dude that old guy's spankin us on an oldschool bike!" Same year at Denmark my best friend pulled a holeshot on his old pos rm125 in 125jr. He hung in there for awhile and ended up around 10th. Not bad!
 

Rcannon

~SPONSOR~
Nov 17, 2001
1,886
0
The new tracks have HUGE jumps that were not present way back when. Granted, the soil itself might be smoother, but there were no such thing as doubles or triples. Landing on your front wheel was a guarantee of a wreck. A bad one. The 82 Suzuki RM 250 was an incredible bike. It was way modern for its time. That was one of the first bikes to put the radiators in the correct place. Yamaha figured the front fork was the hot setup. I almost did not buy my current YZ 250 because I noticed it was a "J" model. My last "J" model from Yamaha was an 82 YZ 490. That bike, plus my 82 YZ 250, kept me off of Yamaha's for over 20 years. The 82 YZ's were steaming piles of overweight crap.

The area I ride in has a vintage track. It is a complete riot to ride on . The jumps are more like todays woops.

One thing the short suspension bikes would do is corner. You were so low to the ground it felt really confortable in turns.

The brakes and suspension makes the old bikes a real pain to ride. Sure, you can ride them, but they are not as much fun.
 

MXN4FUN

Member
Jul 7, 2000
168
0
Well I hate to disagree old tracks did have doubles. They were peaked mounds of dirt not really designed for landing the backside. Most of doubling was overjump and grit your teeth for impact or try to regain composure to jump the next set. Years back if you came up short you paid a price now the landings have mellowed. With 95 5 thing it seems that fast guys will step onto anything and go fast while slower riders fuss about everything. I mean if I can sneak out in mini practice and jump more than half the doubles on my TTR 125 they are more forgiving.(I go 240 lbs too) With the bad brakes...that could help a lot of guys go deeper into the corners ;)
 

Erick82

~SPONSOR~
Aug 30, 2002
443
0
I can say I am way faster on my 2002 Rm 250, than my 1982 Cr250. suspension, motor, ergonomics, brakes, brakes, and brakes.
 
Last edited:

Rcannon

~SPONSOR~
Nov 17, 2001
1,886
0
That is what I was thinking on the jumps back then. Sort of doubles, but generally the landings were flat.

Do you ever remember accidental front wheel landings????
 

MXN4FUN

Member
Jul 7, 2000
168
0
Of course only we had a name for them, the 'Flying W'. Try to explain to the young'uns that forks used to bend with regularity. Only thing to do was to spin them around in the clamps and hope the next landing bent them back. Frames regularly broke and gas welding with coat hangers was the norm......weird thing is I miss the good ole days.
 
Feb 20, 2004
241
0
The new tracks have HUGE jumps that were not present way back when. Granted, the soil itself might be smoother, but there were no such thing as doubles or triples. Landing on your front wheel was a guarantee of a wreck. A bad one. The 82 Suzuki RM 250 was an incredible bike. It was way modern for its time. That was one of the first bikes to put the radiators in the correct place. Yamaha figured the front fork was the hot setup. I almost did not buy my current YZ 250 because I noticed it was a "J" model. My last "J" model from Yamaha was an 82 YZ 490. That bike, plus my 82 YZ 250, kept me off of Yamaha's for over 20 years. The 82 YZ's were steaming piles of overweight crap.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would like to diss agree cause i have a 1982 IT 175 J and it beats the pants regularly off a 1988 xr 250 with a big bore kit lol
 

Enduro_Nut

~SPONSOR~
Feb 7, 2002
1,155
0
The terrain and suspension alone will leave the old bikes way behind. The last time I raced mx was in '80 and our bikes and tracks were no where near as radical!
 

COLEMANAPP

~SPONSOR~
Feb 19, 2002
304
0
What about in the woods/trails? Those areas are still the same. I've been using my 87 Husky 250 WR most of the good days in the winter. I ended up using it last weekend on a longer ride with a bunch of newer bikes after I broke a clutch cable on my newer bike. Wasn't really any slower than the newer bikes on our ride. I think my arms and hands were a little more beat but the larger seat saved my a$$. Like a couch compared to newer bikes. I rode my friends stock 00 yz 250 in the woods. I'd rather been on the older bike.
 
Top Bottom