Perhaps after a few years of DI, more work can be done developing them and tuning them when they emerge in racing for example.
Two strokes need something to start back on again, at least they will start again with something. Nothing happens overnight. Kaaden didn't stop developing chambers through all his difficulties, he could have flopped because it was difficult to start off.
The most highly tuned engines are rarely the smoothest. Imagine the potential in the future, after development wait till they get multi-cylinder designs rolling!
How will any development take place if people mention "It's D.I. it's not the same as it was" that is what will harm the two stroke much less a smooth powerband. Nothing's the same as it once was, at every moment in the world, things change, if we don't, we get left behind, so we may as well make the changes our way.
It's up to us, fans, designers, technicians, racers, to make it happen.
Generally, variable exhaust and intake geometry limit maximum flow of gas that would otherwise be attainable. For example, traditionally, Disc valves offered more maximum performance over reed valves. Two stroke engines of the future may well use variable geometry, but variable to different degrees...They need not be the same from scooter to sportsbike to enduro. The exact same throttle bodies and butterfly designs need not be fitted to every single D.I. two stroke. Mechanical limitations always apply regardless of "the evil/magic of the computers!!"
Even if sportsbikes were restricted, who's to say people could not develop components and systems to make the engines shine! People, especially over a certain age, fear the electronics and the advance of them (no pun intended), when you consider that the average person is likely to become more computer literate in the future, I see that in a small way, power can be given back to the average person/enthusiast as the cycle comes back and we understand what we are dealing with. It's up to us.
