weight saving's vs reliability

[bigred455]

weight saving vs reliability

I am starting to see the bike industry beginning to take a downfall.I think reliability is being sacrificed. I have seen and heard a lot of cracked frames and motors down especially on the CRFs(HORROR STORIES). Radiators and subframes trashed when they shouldn't have. I have seen 3 cracked frames on the 03 CRF(not the sub frame) at the local track. What I have seen lately is the bikes being parted out. This weight saving craze, I believe, is going in the wrong direction. The manufactures love it, they are making the bikes lighter, sure with performance gains, and their parts are picking up a big business. But is it really worth it to the average consumer? I say no. The 4 strokes are so on the edge of performance vs reliability it is scary. How riders are saying the MX 4 strokes are less maintenance I don't see. Oil capacity in the tranny side and oil capacity in the motor side are both pretty lame if you ask me. That means a lot of oil changes and more frequent, plus the filter has to be changed or cleaned. You have to keep a eye out on the valves, automatic decompression, accelerator pump - just more things to consider when trying to diagnose a problem. Look, I am not trying to offend thumper owners,and I am sorry if I did, but the industry is going in the wrong direction, favoring them. They are starting to make these bikes disposable and making a killing off of parts. This weight shaving s**t is really getting old. They are trying to compete with the 2 strokes in agility, but doesn't any one see the big picture!!!! Now if you take a fast A rider who has the leisure of buying a new bike every year and decent sponsors and parts supply (good discount) these bikes are perfect for them, or a casual rider who isn't hard on the gas or real aggressive. But what about an aggressive B rider who is on his own and doesn't like or doesn't have the leisure of buying parts or motors or getting cracked frames fixed. Honda started this weight saving's s**t and went too far with the CR and CRF. I am going to piss off a lot of people but here it goes. I "BLED RED" back in the early to mid 90's, but Honda does not have the best quality built bikes anymore with the CR and CRF. Hopefully the other 4 don't follow. With the YZF, all they have to do is get that motor down in the the frame a little more and stay away from the weight saving crap.

Screw the popular opinion...I'm staying with 2-strokes

 

[Camstyn]

Good post, that is why I switched to a european bike. My last KX was a nightmare just to keep it in decent operating condition, there was always something that needed to be fixed on it.

 

[490Dave]

I agree with ya Bigred for the most part, but i see the whole 4 strk thing as another evolution era for the dirtbike. Japan is trying to build bikes for the masses and win championships at the same time (on the same machines)
I think in another few years the 4 strk's will emerge as very solid and dependable class of machine much like the awesome 2 strk's of today.

long live the reed valve!

 

[James]

I agree completely. Even on the two-strokes, I can see a difference in Quality/Reliability between the 2002 and 2000 CRs. I'd rather have the extra 6 pounds and know my plastic, radiators, airbox, and rear brake were going to hold up.

 

[kbud]

Wow. This post really makes me think. Hondas have long been know as the most reliable brand, but if hondas are having problems, where does that put other brands. How's the TMs? As a small company, I would suspect that they would be more reliable, for word of mouth. A bigger company can afford advertising rather that word of mouth. Championships can sell bikes better than any advertisment, and small companies don't have that luxury. So, I would have to agree that bikes are getting less and less reliable. Sad, really.

 

[MX2_motorex]

This post brings to mind about the RM I have now. Bfore I started racing on RM's I was on a '02YZ250F. I raced the bike for an entire season with out having a single problem ever. I think my average parts replacement was about less than a $100 a month and thats on all the things you normaly replace if you race every weekend. I never had a single problem with the motor, frame everything. I never even had to replace the fork seals. Now on my RM125 I cant rely on this thing. I spend more time working on it then I ever even get to ride it. I have to dissagree with you, four bangers are moving in the right direction. I'll take a four strokes reliability over a two strokes any day. I deffinetly plan on buying a new four stroke when the new bikes come out.

 

[nephron]

What broke on your RM?

 

[atc3434`]

I'd have to say a lot of how you bike holds up is just plain luck. My '01 YZ125 has been amazing. Only have had to repleace the chain and sprokets. Meanwhile, a friends '00 YZ125 has been a nightmare. And this guy doesn't ride a tenth the amount I do. Every time he brings out the bike, something else goes wrong. The point, I think some times you get a well built one, some times you get one that got the short end of the stick. I would have to agree that they really are pushing the envelope on reliability vs. preformance on the new 4-strokes. Those things are on the EDGE!

 

[kelsorat]

Technology brings on it's own problems. If you have ever taken apart an older bike or remember taking apart an older bike- you know how easy things used to be.
I love working on my older bikes-it's so easy. However, my DRZ is a mechanical nighmare.
Technology is a double-edge sword. It's made our bikes more powerful, and I think a lot more reliable, but then again when something on your modern bike breaks, it's gonna cost you time and money to replace. Japanese bikes especially. It seems that these manufacturers skimp on the small stuff-- fastening hardware,no powdercoated frames,radiator construction, and bearings.
For the money, I'd buy a Euro bike next time.

 

[Y2Z]

I totally agree with you, i would sacrifice 20 pounds for a more reliable bike anyday, as far as i know the YZF's havent had any problems with flames or anything like that, like you said, i also hope they keep it that way.

 

[marcusgunby]

Heres my take on the 4 stroke revolution, they are overweight so they make them lighter(read more expensive) they are hard to start, hard to maintain and cost a fortune when they something in the engine breaks.Now add to that they are way way tooo loud, and all our tracks will be closed due to this before 2010.We havnt gone forwards with this IMO.

 

[Dirtvet]

James, I'm with you. When I look close at the 2003 Honda CR's on the showroom floor and compare them to my 2001, I feel Honda has sacrificed too much for weight savings. I may be wrong, by my engineering degree tells me the safety margin in the design has been reduced alarmingly. The bolts are small, the wheels/spokes don't look as strong, etc. I love Honda's (I own 3), love the sturdy feel. But they've taken it too far for the "expert" and shortchanged the "average" rider. Shouldn't they lower the price because of less material in their bikes? Just kidding. Reliability IS extremely important of course and why we buy Hondas.

 

[James]

I have thoroughly tested all of the bolts and spokes and even ate a few more cheeseburgers so as to do a through test. I think it is structurally sound for us average riders. Just don't let it fall over in a curve or push on your airbox too hard (you might break the seal)...oh, and don't ride the rear brake.

 

[Roost165]

ON the other hand I have my 03 RM. I've only replaced a ring on it that didn't need to be replaced yet, changed oil, and cleaned the air filter. Plus i ride this thing like no ones business. I rev it to the moon, I crash hard, and i ride for long periods of time. Now the only things that have gone wrong are bent handlebars, tweaked radiator, and tweaked subframe. All were simple fixes that cost me no money well except for those renthals.

 

[XRpredator]

so, there's a reason I shouldn't go on a diet, I may lose some reliability . . .

hey, I'll take any excuse to get me that second sausage biscuit in the morning ;)

 

[James]

I look at it this way, we must be supposed to eat sausage biscuits or there would be no such thing as stiffer springs.

 

[flynbryan]

Hmm.....interesting. I haven't had any problems with my Crf.... :think: No cracked frames, no valve issues, I resealed the airbox(which is listed as a good precautionary mod on ANY bike, and come to think of it.... My top-end is a cake walk to work on. :silly: And as for the Yzf's, take a look back in the archives about all the FIXES for the Yzfs. The mysterious clutch problems, the faulty ignitions that Yamaha wants to take NO responsibility for, or read the Post on Crf top-end rebuilds and read Eric Gorrs opinion of the Yzfs. Its not just the Hondas. I didn't think I would have to make this statement, but I guess I will anyway. If you want a COMPETITION MOTORCYCLE your going to replace parts like its on a COMPETITION MOTORCYCLE. If you want something thats bulletproof, has piston,rings,clutches and valves that last forever go buy an old Xr, Dr(not Z), Klx, or TT. If you want a fourstroke motorcycle that can run with the quick reving/high hp design of a two stroke. By one of the new generation strokers, just quit crying when you realize that the parts don't last as long as your 1986 Xr600 did.

 

[Dirtvet]

Sorry Flynbryan, but we want it ALL because we're the customer. When companies respond to what we want (reliability AND good handling/power), we will beat a path to their door. I want XR reliability but not pig-fat handling.

 

[flynbryan]

It just gets old Tommygun listening to everyone cry and moan about how they have to replace parts just like they do in their 2-strokes. Its really kind of silly. In a way its like saying that I want the same gas mileage from my Corvette as my Corsica. :silly: Its just not going to happen. In my opinion(and of course it is just that) If you want a High performance Four Stroke be ready to pay the piper. If you want a realiable/less maintinance involved stroker, go buy an Xr. Personally I understand what kind of motorcycle I own and understand what is required to maintain it. If I didn't want to have this up keep adjustment ritual, I'D go buy a Xr, but I think that the difference in Hp is worth the trade off. Just my .02 Take it for what its worth. :)

 

[Rich Rohrich]

Originally posted by Tommygun
When companies respond to what we want (reliability AND good handling/power), we will beat a path to their door.

Wake up. People already are beating a path to the doors of Honda and Yamaha dealers. :silly:

Originally posted by Tommygun

I want XR reliability but not pig-fat handling.

Most riders (myself included) who have owned the first generation YZFs feel they have come pretty close. The original YZF was overbuilt in comparison to a pure race bike, and only requires nominal maintenance when it isn't raced regularly. Racers who think they will get state of the art performance levels without a race level maintenance program while still maintaining the cost structure they are used to are just showing their ignorance and are unlikely to ever be satisfied. Reliability is inversely proportional to rpm and specific output. XRs are reliable because they rev to a low rpm ceiling and don't make any real horsepower. In this case it's fairly easy for the parts to be overbuilt with an eye towards reliability. Basic engineering principles, no mystery there.

 

[flynbryan]

Wake up. People already are beating a path to the doors of Honda and Yamaha dealers

:laugh: Don't hold back Rich......Tell us how you really feel. Jeez if you keep it pent up all the time you know its unhealthy.... :laugh:

 

[Green Horn]

Originally posted by Rich Rohrich


Racers who think they will get state of the art performance levels without a race level maintenance program while still maintaining the cost structure they are used to are just showing their ignorance and are unlikely to ever be satisfied.

I totally agree. That's why I enjoy driving my Pontiac sunfire back and forth to work. Sure it would be fun to haul past rush hour traffic in a blown/ alcohol burning '66 Nova SS but I wouldn't want to deal with the up keep. I've never hear of any kind of high performance machine that didn't require alot of preventative maint.

**Note - The '66 Nova story was based on a true story. A cousin of mine went to take his Dad's '66 Nova SS that was set up for bracket racing and tried to drive it around town. He made it to the end of the driveway and promptly fouled out the plugs because he didn't realize it had to be kept idling at 6k RPM's just to run right. :scream:

 

[Dirtvet]

I think the original question raised in this thread was, are bikes becoming disposable because manufacturers have gone too far with weight savings? Some have responded, including me, that the answer is yes. While Honda CR MX bikes push the envelope with weight savings, some questionable in my mind, the trail bikes at Honda get heavier. The CRF-150 weighs nearly as much as my CR 250R, so I won’t consider it for my younger son. Other manufacturers follow suit. Examples? Smaller engine oil capacity. Rear brake reservoirs too small. Thin wall handlebars. Too thin plastic. Weak radiators. I would hope not the frame.

I know the CR’s are race bikes. I like to get on the track and go as fast as I can, just like everyone else here (I race a vintage bike – now THAT hurts). However, I believe through innovative engineering practice, improved performance and/or weight savings can be obtained while maintaining reliability and durability. It takes time to find those gems. I just see the manufacturer’s engineers shortcutting good practice to market the lightest bike possible. Higher maintenance or broken parts result. Sorry Honda, but that’s just not my ultimate hot button that makes me buy a bike.

 

[JTT]

I think maybe the question should be "are we too spoiled by the ability to purchase TRUE race bikes off the showroom floor at very low costs (relative to technology and R&D)?"

Funny, I never hear roadracers whining that their TZ250 pistons "just don't last long enough" :p

 

[crustydirt]

Who wants to trade their un-reliable CRF for my bulletproof '95 DR250se?????

Ya, I didn't think so.

PS The DR has been on the stand more this year then on the dirt.