Two Stroke Motocross
Two Stroke Motocross Forum => General Two Stroke Talk => Topic started by: TMKIWI on May 27, 2010, 07:44:49 PM
-
Found this.
http://motocrossactionmag.com/Main/News/WE-BUILD-A-FULLRACE-HUSQVARNA-WR300-MOTOCROSS-BIKE-6887.aspx (http://motocrossactionmag.com/Main/News/WE-BUILD-A-FULLRACE-HUSQVARNA-WR300-MOTOCROSS-BIKE-6887.aspx)
-
Hate to say it but these new Huskies are ugly >:D
-
Interesting idea but I was disappointed with the results as far as power goes. It's still way underpowered compared to the 450 thumpers at 47 hp. Project 250's machine has much more power and I was expecting more from a 300. Even the stock KTM 250 SX puts out better hp at just under 50. Yet they call this a "full-race" build? I personally wouldn't want to compete on a machine that is substantially underpowered compared to the 450 thumpers which are putting out over 50 hp and broader powerbands to boot. The KTM 450 puts out almost 54 hp stock. This Husky is an improvement over the stock machine, no doubt, but nowhere near ready to compete against the bigger thumpers yet until it starts putting out some serious hp. I dunno, maybe it's just me, but I felt they should have done far better.
-
I thought the same thing about the Hp figures. ???
It does matter what dyno you are useing so would like to know what power they are getting on a 450 on the same dyno.
Other reports have the Husky the fastest 300 around and most of them have over 50Hp ?.
I have heard reports the TM is 54-56Hp.But i am not sure.
A 10 Hp increase is pretty good though.
-
It seems like Husky puts out some weak engines. I've read 2 bike tests now, this one and their 250f mx model, and both conclusions was that the motors were far weaker than their competition. Husky needs to step it up.
-
Strange claims.
Tests I've read on the Husky claim them to be monsters, similar to early TM300's.
Most magazines now days talk sh#t, just regurgate the same phrases, lots of photo's and captions, no articles with substance.
-
as you all know its not all to do with HP its bottom end and smoothness .The best thing i can think of after suspension on my RM250 05 is the fact that it will pull me around in 3rd.that means after a corner im up to top speed pretty quick. :D
-
I like the new Husky ..Looks great in person.
-
;DUgly or not atleast its a 2smoker they due make a fairly good chain saw and thier rototillers are ok
-
Put some white plastic, a seat and front tire on the rototiller and take it to the mx track.
-
Interesting idea but I was disappointed with the results as far as power goes. It's still way underpowered compared to the 450 thumpers at 47 hp. Project 250's machine has much more power and I was expecting more from a 300. Even the stock KTM 250 SX puts out better hp at just under 50. Yet they call this a "full-race" build? I personally wouldn't want to compete on a machine that is substantially underpowered compared to the 450 thumpers which are putting out over 50 hp and broader powerbands to boot. The KTM 450 puts out almost 54 hp stock. This Husky is an improvement over the stock machine, no doubt, but nowhere near ready to compete against the bigger thumpers yet until it starts putting out some serious hp. I dunno, maybe it's just me, but I felt they should have done far better.
Every Dynos are different this is only a tuning tool... They gained a shitload of hp.
-
TMKIWI, I would like to believe that a different dyno is the reason the Bhp figures on the 300 Husky is so terribly low in comparison to the 450 thumpers, but I am afraid that probably is not the case. The figures I quoted were from MXA, just as the figures I quoted from the 300 Husky test. Do you honestly believe they use one dyno for 2strokes and a different one for their 4strokes? That is a bit of a stretch for me even though I despise the new thumpers and have noticed media bias in their favor nearly everywhere. Here are their dyno figures for two 2010 450 thumpers, the KTM, and the Kawasaki: "HOW DO THEY RUN ON THE DYNO?
(1) KTM. The KTM 450SXF makes its best power from 7500 rpm to 11,000 rpm. The 2010 KTM 450SXF makes 53.92 horsepower at 8500. That is slightly more horsepower than the KX450F, and it occurs about 400 rpm lower in the curve. On the dyno, the KTM starts mellow and builds power as it goes. Below 7500 rpm, the Kawasaki KX450F is much more powerful, but from this point on the KTM just keeps on climbing.
(2) Kawasaki. The 2010 Kawasaki KX450F makes its best power from 5000 rpm to 7500 rpm. It is an awesome low-to-mid engine. The 2010 KX450F makes 53.76 horsepower at 8900 rpm. The KX450Fâ??s peak horsepower is nothing to sniff at (although the KTM does pip it by a quarter horse), but it is below peak that the Kawasaki KX450F does its best work. At 6000 rpm, the KX450F makes two horses more than the KTM. At 7000 rpm, the KX-F is up 1.5 horses. Then, from 7500 rpm on, the dyno begins to favor the KTM. When it comes to over-rev and top-end power, the KTM is the winner."
My point here guys, is not to extol the virtues of the 450 thumpers but to point out what we're up against. Sorry, this hopped up 300 Husky is seriously outgunned against either of the above 450 thumpers. Be like throwing Sugar Ray Leonard into the ring against Muhammad Ali in his prime. Way I see it, a 300 2 stroke can reasonably be expected to put out 60 Bhp without in any way over-stressing it anywhere near the way the 450s are. Thus, I get disappointed when I read 2stroke hop up articles that do not take them well past where the 450 thumpers start at stock, as far as power goes. Especially when I know full well the 2stroke is capable at 300cc of being tuned to where it could easily smoke a 450 thumper. This is what I expect, not something that is an improvement over stock, but nevertheless woefully inferior, power-wise, to the 4stroke 450s it will be expected to face on the track. A 300cc 2stroke can and should be more powerful in both max horsepower and torque than a 450cc 4stroke. It has to be since it will be putting out that power over a narrower powerband placing it at a disadvantage to begin with given riders of relatively equal skill. Power is the main reason I prefer 2strokes over 4strokes. a 2stroke is simply a more powerful and superior engine design. We should not accept anything less. That's my view.
-
you also have to take into account that the WR250 engine that the 300 is based on has been around since forever. the WR250 is a woods bike and the 300 is just a kit engine put into production. i for one am hopeful that with the BMW money/ownership Husky will R&D a new 250/300 platform to compete more with KTM and spawn an updated line of 2T bikes that would hopefully include a CR250.
-
TMKIWI, I would like to believe that a different dyno is the reason the Bhp figures on the 300 Husky is so terribly low in comparison to the 450 thumpers, but I am afraid that probably is not the case. The figures I quoted were from MXA, just as the figures I quoted from the 300 Husky test. Do you honestly believe they use one dyno for 2strokes and a different one for their 4strokes? That is a bit of a stretch for me even though I despise the new thumpers and have noticed media bias in their favor nearly everywhere. Here are their dyno figures for two 2010 450 thumpers, the KTM, and the Kawasaki: "HOW DO THEY RUN ON THE DYNO?
(1) KTM. The KTM 450SXF makes its best power from 7500 rpm to 11,000 rpm. The 2010 KTM 450SXF makes 53.92 horsepower at 8500. That is slightly more horsepower than the KX450F, and it occurs about 400 rpm lower in the curve. On the dyno, the KTM starts mellow and builds power as it goes. Below 7500 rpm, the Kawasaki KX450F is much more powerful, but from this point on the KTM just keeps on climbing.
(2) Kawasaki. The 2010 Kawasaki KX450F makes its best power from 5000 rpm to 7500 rpm. It is an awesome low-to-mid engine. The 2010 KX450F makes 53.76 horsepower at 8900 rpm. The KX450Fâ??s peak horsepower is nothing to sniff at (although the KTM does pip it by a quarter horse), but it is below peak that the Kawasaki KX450F does its best work. At 6000 rpm, the KX450F makes two horses more than the KTM. At 7000 rpm, the KX-F is up 1.5 horses. Then, from 7500 rpm on, the dyno begins to favor the KTM. When it comes to over-rev and top-end power, the KTM is the winner."
My point here guys, is not to extol the virtues of the 450 thumpers but to point out what we're up against. Sorry, this hopped up 300 Husky is seriously outgunned against either of the above 450 thumpers. Be like throwing Sugar Ray Leonard into the ring against Muhammad Ali in his prime. Way I see it, a 300 2 stroke can reasonably be expected to put out 60 Bhp without in any way over-stressing it anywhere near the way the 450s are. Thus, I get disappointed when I read 2stroke hop up articles that do not take them well past where the 450 thumpers start at stock, as far as power goes. Especially when I know full well the 2stroke is capable at 300cc of being tuned to where it could easily smoke a 450 thumper. This is what I expect, not something that is an improvement over stock, but nevertheless woefully inferior, power-wise, to the 4stroke 450s it will be expected to face on the track. A 300cc 2stroke can and should be more powerful in both max horsepower and torque than a 450cc 4stroke. It has to be since it will be putting out that power over a narrower powerband placing it at a disadvantage to begin with given riders of relatively equal skill. Power is the main reason I prefer 2strokes over 4strokes. a 2stroke is simply a more powerful and superior engine design. We should not accept anything less. That's my view.
i know you are a desert racer but again i want to point out that it is enough horsepower on a racetrack.
Do we over here think racing a 250 2 stroke against a 250 4 stroke is ok? I heard that it is a not honest advantage for the 2 stroke. But can someone explain me then why laptimes of 250 4 strokes are often faster or the same as 450 4 strokes? First of all i think it is the guy that races the bike. It reminds me of vilopollo (not correct spelling i think) raced against 450 4 strokes with a 250 4 stroke and he won. Motocross of the nations. So if he is able to win on a four stroke why should a 250 2 stroke not be albe to win over 450 4 strokes?
I guess 99% of all here will be faster on the lighter bike then on a stronger bike no matter 4 or 2 strokes.
So i do not agree with not honest advantage just because of displacement.
Is cairoli insane to ride a 350 against 450"s. And he also wins on that bike. Is it not fair to race a 250 2 stroke against a 350 4 stroke? I do not know. Laptimes tell a different story.
So i think this husky has horsepower enough for anyone and under trackracing conditions it is not like a middle weight boxer having to fight a heavy weight.
For the rest i can say that my brother is classic car tuner and he always says horsepower is for clients and torque wins races. But for motox i found that too much torque (like 500 2 strokes) is just a pain in the ass.
My guess is when you put a fast rider on a 2 stroke he will win against whatever bike.
Then we have motogp where only 12 bikes are racing now because they banned 2 strokes there too. I guess for the same reason and this has no use at all because it went out of financial reach of lots of people so same thing will happen to motocross which is a shame. 4 stroke are good for in cars but my guess is that for motocross and racing 2 strokes are the better choice. This 4 stroke thing has no use at all for normal people.
-
Doesnt the 2010 KTM 250 SX put out 52 ponies??? Stock!!
-
To reply to your question, Scotty, I'll quote MXA directly here: ---> Q: HOW DOES THE 2010 KTM 250SX RUN ON THE DYNO?
A: Itâ??s a rocket ship! This is the most powerful 250cc motocross bike sold. On the dyno, the 2010 250SX made 49.05 horsepower at 8600 rpm and 30.95 foot pounds of torque at 8100 rpm.
For comparison purposes, here is how the 2010 KTM 250SX compares to the Honda CRF250, Honda CRF450 and Yamaha YZ250 two-stroke.
CRF250: The KTM 250SX makes 12.7 horsepower and 11 foot-pounds of torque more than the 2010 CRF250.
CRF450: The KTM 250SX makes 1.8 horsepower and 1.75 foot-pounds of torque less than the CRF450.
YZ250: The KTM 250SX makes 3.5 horsepower and two foot-pounds of torque more than the YZ250.
-
To reply to your question, Scotty, I'll quote MXA directly here: ---> Q: HOW DOES THE 2010 KTM 250SX RUN ON THE DYNO?
A: Itâ??s a rocket ship! This is the most powerful 250cc motocross bike sold. On the dyno, the 2010 250SX made 49.05 horsepower at 8600 rpm and 30.95 foot pounds of torque at 8100 rpm.
For comparison purposes, here is how the 2010 KTM 250SX compares to the Honda CRF250, Honda CRF450 and Yamaha YZ250 two-stroke.
CRF250: The KTM 250SX makes 12.7 horsepower and 11 foot-pounds of torque more than the 2010 CRF250.
CRF450: The KTM 250SX makes 1.8 horsepower and 1.75 foot-pounds of torque less than the CRF450.
YZ250: The KTM 250SX makes 3.5 horsepower and two foot-pounds of torque more than the YZ250.
Was the test done on the same dyno on the same day???
-
Hi Turquine. thanks for posting the 450 figures.
I was not in any way sugesting they used a different dyno, just what the figures were for a 450 on the same dyno.
You are right that the 300 figures are a bit disapointing, i would have thought they would have got more from it as well.