Conspiracy

[miedosoracing]

Something you guys can ask the guys who say we are conspiracy theorists about the 2 strokes being killed out on purpose.  Here's a question you can ask them.  Do they believe that the OEM's had a goal of producing 2 sets of motorcycles? 125 and 250f, and a 250 and 450f? Ask them if they really believe that the OEM's wanted two sets of each class bike.  I was asked this question today from someone in the know.  They said, we are so stuck on the after math, not the intention from the first 400f that was tested with Doug Henry.  Their goal with that bike, look at it first, I was told.  If they weren't intending to kill off the 2 stroke with that first bike, then they would have planned on producing both sets. We all know that would never be the case. So we can conclude, it's one or the other....

[Dirtsaw]

The motorcycle industry, just like ALL industries now a days, have succumbed to the environmental maggots who have taken control of everything.  They think an oil burning 4 stroke is better for the environment then an oil burning two stroke.  It's just a disgusting sign of these idiotic times we live in.  Honda has said as much.  They are dedicated to the environment and this lie called global warming so they are not making two strokes any longer.

I plated my 200 EXC just so I can ride around at 10:1 and piss these people off.. 

[JETZcorp]

I think it's a mistake to say point-blank that people are trying to kill the two-stroke for the environment, so to hell with them and the environment.  I think the proper approach is to say that, yes, two-strokes do for the most part create higher emissions than four-strokes on average and when using the 1970s technology that all motocross engines seem to be frozen in.  Then at that point, you can easily transition into talking about how 21st-century two-stroke technology is, indeed, as clean as or cleaner than modern four-stroke technology.  If Honda says they stick with the four-strokes for the environment, the proper rebuttal is to point out the two-strokes that THEY INVENTED which were cleaner than their own four-strokes, and which they quickly swept under the rug.  That's where the real juicy rhetoric is.

You'll never get anywhere with environmental Nazis by making the dichotomy between two-strokes and the environment seem stronger.  Even if you think global climate change is a "lie" or whatever, it's in your best interest to point out the fact that a modern two-stroke is not a highly-polluting machine.

[snook620]

I think 4 strokes took over because the technology (or interest) was finally available to make them better. They have been around forever but were always slow heavy pieces of shit.

Everybody was freaking out when Doug Henry won the 1998 motocross title on that $100k yamaha 400 because 4 strokes were still believed to be junk compared to the faster and lighter 2 stroke. The AMA displacement rules (unfair probably because they still underestemated the 4 stroke) influenced the factorys to start developing newer, faster, lighter, easier to ride 4 strokes. It was probably a win-win for them because 4 strokes cost more.

[Dirtsaw]

I don't have to make a case to the mentally defective enviro crowd.  They are incapable of thinking in reality.  They live in some kind of socialist green wonderland.  I've got friends and relatives that buy into that crap and that's fine.  Just don't make me give up my two stroke weedwacker and non green products that actually work in favor of some worthless garbage that doesn't but that will supposedly "save the planet."  The big question is.  Save it from what?  Are we so polluted that everything is dying?  Hardly.

The reasons are always money.  With 4 stroke repair costs it only makes sense to quit making affordable 2 strokes...  Best thing is to just not buy any 4 strokes and to discourage your friends from buying them.

[pontiac252]

I don't think it's that hard to to understand why the big four went down the four stroke road. It probably wasn't all that difficult to see, or believe at the time that the envi'ros would crack the s@#$ts at the two stroke hydrocarbon problem sooner or later.

Given the other machines they were producing at the time, the crossover between road and off road wasn't that far apart and with improving technology getting closer all the time.
Once it could be seen that the future was multi valve per cylinder the investment dollars and R&D dollars made it bad economics to run two parrallel programs for two engine types.
So to help there business model along a little the major offroad sanctioning bodies were convinced that the two stroke was going to die and you might as well set up the rules so that the gov's and envi'ros could see they were at least trying to be responsable/green.

Problem was racing being what it is the thirst for more power from light weight got expensive and noisier and racing machines are'nt that clean anyway,
and as we know the two stroke didn't die, and of course some manufacturers didnt completely follow the Honda mantra, and they know the consumer will enevitably dictate the direction they go.

So now technolgy has caught up to the two stroke, and the big four are still resisting, probably because they have'nt got full return from there investment.
The air assist direct injected two stroke has the ability to decimate the four stroke world and they are hanging on by there fingertips, because it's all about money.

[miedosoracing]

I was told it never got to the point of being a choice to see if either was more popular etc. People speaking with their wallets like everyone claims.  It was the day they decided in the board room to make 4 strokes, they knew it was one or the other, and they would not let it fail since they knew how much R&D was gonna be in making the 4 stroke. Said had nothing to do with the emmissions. Just a good rumor that helped it along.  But never got as far as what many claim, and that the people spoke with wallets.  It was well before that...

[SachsGS]

I forget the name of the native American leader who stood up in U.S. congress 150 years ago and told them what their actions would eventually do to the environment but he was "bang on the money".The Environmentalists have legitimate concerns and we are fooling ourselves if we do not pay attention.There are radicals in any group or organization and the Enviros have their share.

I was thinking about this entire fourstroke thing lately and I believe it started off innocently enough but when the whole thing took off the conartists and sharks jumped aboard and started fleecing the general public.More profit was to be made off of more complicated fourstrokes and the less scrupulous saw dollar signs. While the radical element of the Environmental movement (SUV driving hypocrites that they are) have done considerable damage to those who live for the great outdoors the industry itself should bear most of the blame for they "took the ball" and started running, to the detriment of our wallets.

[factoryX]

Look at this way, Honda has always been anti 2 stroke, and always pushed for a 4 stroke handicap. It wasn't the fact that there was interest in 4 strokes, they saw it as a potential money maker, and what they did or didn't realize was that it was simply a short term gain. Honda doesn't look at it as a group of people racing, they look at it as a group of people with deep pockets.

[Shawn36]

Look at this way, Honda has always been anti 2 stroke, and always pushed for a 4 stroke handicap. It wasn't the fact that there was interest in 4 strokes, they saw it as a potential money maker, and what they did or didn't realize was that it was simply a short term gain. Honda doesn't look at it as a group of people racing, they look at it as a group of people with deep pockets.

The handicap was there from the AMA, not the wishes of Honda.  That 400 and the 426 were a spring board, Yamaha sold a ton of those bikes and the other OEMs didn't lose sight of that.  If you listen to Matthes' podcast, he has mentioned people within Yamaha (who at the time were his employers) were saying the 4-strokes were outselling the 2-strokes 3 to 1.  With a business model like that you can't help follow suit.  What the OEMs didn't expect was the bottom to fall out of the economy.  If things were still strong we wouldn't be complaining so much about 8k bikes. 

So did the OEMs intend on phasing out the 2-stroke?  Sure, 4-strokes were outselling them and the technology was in-line with what they wanted to develop.  2-strokes had pretty much peaked, 4-strokes offered room to improve and a distinct advantage.  Just like the push to 2-strokes 40 years ago.  Back then they the lighter and more powerful alternative to what was being produced and sold like hot cakes.  It's just the mood of the American market.  Quit buying 4-strokes, order a shit ton of 2-stroke parts from your dealer and eventually they'll switch again.  Will we be having threads about how the OEMs had backdoor meetings on how to kill off the 4-strokes then?  This conspiracy stuff gives me tired head. 

[factoryX]

Who pushed AMA for the handicap? The Big Red White And Blue.

[miedosoracing]

Gee, I'm surprised.     Newbies arrive to dispell something that I post about info I have received.  LMFAO
Again, before anyone else posts about 4 strokes outselling 2 strokes.  It was decided before that day even arrived. Just think in this terms and it's my last post about it.  Do any of you really think Honda for instance would continue producing and selling a competing item? 2 for that matter???

[snook620]

I think Honda would continue producing and selling 10 competing models if they were all still selling.

[factoryX]

Do any of you really think Honda for instance would continue producing and selling a competing item? 2 for that matter???

Exactly.

[miedosoracing]

I think Honda would continue producing and selling 10 competing models if they were all still selling.

Name some from Honda?  They've been doing offroad for a long enough time, for you to list current models that compete directly with another bike.  I'm interested...  I'll make it easier for you, since that may be a hard one. List even cars that they produce that compete with eachother, toe to toe in price and compete model wise.

Ever heard the term: "Rob peter to pay paul."