syko did you ever bother to think that ppl buy four strokes bc they are wicked fast on starts and will haul outta turns like a mofo? i mean lets face it no one wants 2 strokes to go, but like the 4 stroke they have flaws too. we should leave it up to the person and how he/she rides to decide which one is better for them. please stop whinning about how 4st are cheater bikes and shouldnt be allowed in the races, its annoying and not to mention unreasonable, who are the 3 fastest guys in MX right now? carmicheal, reed and stewart, and what do they ride? 2 strokes. happy?
Time for a name change?
- Thread starter bclapham
- Start date
Okiewan said:
'To save the environment'
Are you serious or just simple?
if you honestly think that (as already stated in my previous post) that 2 strokes have a massive influence on our environment and that the government truly believe this then you are scrapping the barrel my friend.
On a world scale the 2 stroke engine is not used enough to make a big enough difference to our o-zone.
the point, which you have somehow missed, is that if the choice isn't there how can anyone CHOOSE four strokes over 2 strokes.
the answer is...They didn't.
- Aug 2, 2000
- 13,504
- 19
I could give a rip about how a 2 stroke or 4 stroke affects the environment. I ride a 4 stroke because not only am I old and fat, it's a better machine.
And two strokes suck, they're ugly, and they smell funny.
And two strokes suck, they're ugly, and they smell funny.
I still ride a 2S, but if I could afford it I would buy a new CRF250 and a new RM250. As I'm now older and not so fit as I was I would probably use the CRF to try and get fit enough to do the RM justice, but I'm pretty sure that wouldn't happen and the CRF would be most used. Most people I speak to who have gone 4S have done so simply because they are so much easier to ride and have fun on, and those that race have chosen 4S because of the unfair capacity advantage presently enjoyed as a result of the rule makers desire to promote 4S over 2S. As for "which is best" its clearly a matter of personal preference, but its obviously true that given a level playing field 2S would win all the races, and none of the racers would ride anything else.
One other point worthy of mention is that many people who had given up MX are now being attracted back by the easy to ride 4S, and of course now they are older and richer they can afford to buy a new one, and so it could be said that 4S are making the sport more popular for participants. As has been said before, the reverse is true for those not involved, and dirt riding is very unpopular amongst non-participants, largely because of the increase in perceived noise, and also because there are just more dirt bikes.
The arguments will continue for a while as yet, but it cannot be called a fair debate until the capacities are equal. As for the wonderful technology, it is interesting to observe the fruitless efforts of 4S designers to attempt to overcome the basic technological advantage of an engine which produces a power stroke for every revolution rather than employing a complex arrangement of valves and reciprocating mass to produce half as many, thus meaning that the engine has to be spun faster to produce the same result. F1 cars are currently revving to 18-19000 rpm and have to employ all sorts of truly expensive materials, air operated valve opening etc., the point being that it is much more expensive to get power from a 4S due to its inherent disadvantages, and dirtbikes will need to employ similar systems in order to advance once the current advances in electronics have matured.
FWIW I remember being very upset when the "fart-box" 2S started to dominate "scrambling" and the marvellous noise of 500 BSA with a megaphone exhaust slowly dwindled. If only they had thought back then of limiting the 2S to say two thirds of the capacity of "proper" bikes, we'd have much less to talk about now. :clue:
One other point worthy of mention is that many people who had given up MX are now being attracted back by the easy to ride 4S, and of course now they are older and richer they can afford to buy a new one, and so it could be said that 4S are making the sport more popular for participants. As has been said before, the reverse is true for those not involved, and dirt riding is very unpopular amongst non-participants, largely because of the increase in perceived noise, and also because there are just more dirt bikes.
The arguments will continue for a while as yet, but it cannot be called a fair debate until the capacities are equal. As for the wonderful technology, it is interesting to observe the fruitless efforts of 4S designers to attempt to overcome the basic technological advantage of an engine which produces a power stroke for every revolution rather than employing a complex arrangement of valves and reciprocating mass to produce half as many, thus meaning that the engine has to be spun faster to produce the same result. F1 cars are currently revving to 18-19000 rpm and have to employ all sorts of truly expensive materials, air operated valve opening etc., the point being that it is much more expensive to get power from a 4S due to its inherent disadvantages, and dirtbikes will need to employ similar systems in order to advance once the current advances in electronics have matured.
FWIW I remember being very upset when the "fart-box" 2S started to dominate "scrambling" and the marvellous noise of 500 BSA with a megaphone exhaust slowly dwindled. If only they had thought back then of limiting the 2S to say two thirds of the capacity of "proper" bikes, we'd have much less to talk about now. :clue:
Wow... interesting thread. What I find most interesting is that when the 4 stroke revolution began, all I read about was how they would take over the woods because of their smooth power and torque. But the opposite happened, they took over MX/SX and haven't really made much of a dent in the woods (at least not in Ohio/Indiana/Michigan where I race). I race a harescramble or enduro just about every weekend and 2-strokes rule the woods. I would guess the ratio of 2 stroke to 4 stroke is 5 to 1 (with 3/5 of the 2 strokes being KTM). Even in the GNCC's, most all of the top pros run 2 strokes. I would guess one factor is the 4 stroke displacement advantage is nullified in woods racing. A 250 is a 250 regardless of engine type. A 450 has to either run an open class or 4st class. Other thing is that most of the 4st guys I know prefer the 250 class thumpers to the 450's. They say the 450's are hard to go fast on in the woods.
I prefer a 2 stroke and will ride one until they are banned, but ever the eternal optimist, I think that they will be around for quite a while yet. But hey, ride what you like. I admit though, I do get a little peaved by the small group of 4 stroke elites that act like they are somehow superior to the 2 stroke guys. Get a grip, you're still on a freaking dirt bike and the greenies hate you just as much as they hate me. As soon as they do away with the 2 strokers, they are coming after you too.
I prefer a 2 stroke and will ride one until they are banned, but ever the eternal optimist, I think that they will be around for quite a while yet. But hey, ride what you like. I admit though, I do get a little peaved by the small group of 4 stroke elites that act like they are somehow superior to the 2 stroke guys. Get a grip, you're still on a freaking dirt bike and the greenies hate you just as much as they hate me. As soon as they do away with the 2 strokers, they are coming after you too.
