Post by: ford832 on April 10, 2013, 12:50:00 AM
Oh and invite racerx, I want to have some fun with this.
I have a ten yr old YZ and I want in on this.
To answer your question,how about because I'm riding my old YZ and you're riding your new KTM and there's not enough to pick and choose between the machinery to make up for the lesser rider-regardless of which bike he was mounted on.
Jeram was likely just annoyed for having to listen to one more person spewing how KTM continues to develop 2t technology-apparently by changing plastic style and graphics.It does get a little old really.
KTM makes a good bike but I didn't think anyone actually swallowed that "KTM Family" hokey sales pitch.
Post by: gpnewhouse7 on April 10, 2013, 01:08:14 AM
Suggested title: Why my 10 year old YZ will kick your 2013 Ktm 300's butt.
Oh and invite racerx, I want to have some fun with this.
I have a ten yr old YZ and I want in on this.
To answer your question,how about because I'm riding my old YZ and you're riding your new KTM and there's not enough to pick and choose between the machinery to make up for the lesser rider-regardless of which bike he was mounted on.
Jeram was likely just annoyed for having to listen to one more person spewing how KTM continues to develop 2t technology-apparently by changing plastic style and graphics.It does get a little old really.
KTM makes a good bike but I didn't think anyone actually swallowed that "KTM Family" hokey sales pitch.
I was hoping someone would make this a post.
For starters Ford you saying that the difference between the two bikes isnt enough to make up for a talent difference between the two riders aboard them is like saying that an xr100 is as fast as a 2013 crf450 because if James Stewart was on the xr and me on the crf he could make up for the difference by being a better rider.
Also for the sake of the board could you all please state if you have rode both bikes or not and what years they were and the cc etc.
I have rode a 06 yz125,02 sx 125, 03 sx125, 08 exc 200 and an 11 150 sx and while the yz was easily more reliable and better handling than the 02 and the 03, the 08 and 11 bikes proved to be more reliable and both me and my mate think they handle better aswell.
Also if you've ever rode a KTM for a day or more's worth of riding and then jumped back on the Yamaha then you'd soon wish you had a hydraulic clutch on the YZ.
Post by: cnrcpla on April 10, 2013, 01:34:31 AM
) And now to the frame. Lets see if I can add to this sh*t stirring contest... Which is better, ALU or STEEL?
Post by: gpnewhouse7 on April 10, 2013, 01:45:21 AM
Also for the sake of the 250's I'd rather be on the bike with the extra few ponies just in case rather than the one thats a few short.
And I did my best to stop people using the 'it all comes down to the rider' idea by using that xr crf analogy.
Post by: cnrcpla on April 10, 2013, 01:52:34 AM
In that case, most of what was said above applies still. I definitely agree that over powered is better than underpowered, and I didn't take 125's into consideration because of what I though this was about. But still, the 10 y/o YZ puts out 48HP stock and the KTM 250sx made 50. Would you REALLY notice the extra 2? I'm not impartial on either brand, just saying that the engines have not changed much.
Post by: gpnewhouse7 on April 10, 2013, 02:05:07 AM
And of course you would notice 2hp! its like when people put induction kits on their 1l cars its an instant feeling of extra power!
On a serious note I think you'd probably be just as quick on either bike but you'd be faster for longer on the KTM. Besides orange is a better colour.
Post by: ford832 on April 10, 2013, 02:16:48 AM
I was hoping someone would make this a post.
For starters Ford you saying that the difference between the two bikes isnt enough to make up for a talent difference between the two riders aboard them is like saying that an xr100 is as fast as a 2013 crf450 because if James Stewart was on the xr and me on the crf he could make up for the difference by being a better rider.
Also for the sake of the board could you all please state if you have rode both bikes or not and what years they were and the cc etc.
I have rode a 06 yz125,02 sx 125, 03 sx125, 08 exc 200 and an 11 150 sx and while the yz was easily more reliable and better handling than the 02 and the 03, the 08 and 11 bikes proved to be more reliable and both me and my mate think they handle better aswell.
Also if you've ever rode a KTM for a day or more's worth of riding and then jumped back on the Yamaha then you'd soon wish you had a hydraulic clutch on the YZ.
I don't know your abilities gpnewhouse put if you're putting yourself in with JS7, you are a true talent indeed.
It's a lot of a reach to compare average riders and 450's and Pro riders and XR 100's-especially when we're talking about similar displacement MX 2t's and average TSM forum member riders.I really don't see how you come up with that.
My YZ clutch works just fine.I've got a long lever,cable and pivot well lubed and the perch is moved in towards the centre of the bar for max leverage.I can two finger it easily.That said,a hydro clutch is the cat's arse-but not a deal breaker-and also has nothing to do with "KTM's continuous development of 2t technolgy"
I don't know Evo's abilities but I'd be willing to bet whoever was faster,would be faster on either machine.
My main riding buddy beats me almost all the time-regardless of what bikes we own.He just happens to be a better rider than me.
By the same token,the people I beat-and those who beat me have remained pretty constant over the years-regardless of machinery-though none of us are James Stewart and none of us ride XR100's.
I'm too old to remember everything as around here we all like to trade off whenever someone gets a new steed or just try them out after the race around the track a bit.I'll take a crack it it though....
KTM's I've owned from new:
'00 125 EXC
'02 125 SX
'05 Husaberg FE550e(still a Katoom-so there)
KTM's I've ridden-some extensively,others one or two rides.
02 200 EXC
03 250 SX
05 250 EXC
06 450 EXC
What year was the 400? Two of those and a 525
I rode an MXC something but forget which-200 maybe?
08 200
10 300
11 300
Husaberg 470
Husaberg 650 (yah-freakin-hoo)
Husaberg 450 x 3
Husaberg 550 x 2 (other than my own)
Something like that and a few others-I may have some of the years off by one or two.
Other Euro's
Husky 125's-2 one older,one newer but neither of the "new" look.I forget the years.
Gasgas 125
Gasgas 250
Gasgas300
Jap I've owned
99 RM 125-I bought new
01 YZ 125
02 YZ250
XR250
Jap ridden:
CR125-few of these
CR250-and these
CR500-just one
RM125 and 250 (some)
KX125/250 (some)
YZ's-some of both
KDX220 and 200
CRF 250R
CRF 450R
CRF 450X
KXF250
RMZ250
Cripes,I don't know-some other stuff of whatever years.
I assume you want to make sure someone has ridden the "new tech KTM's" and the "old tech japs"
In my case,yes.
Update....
KLX300
Honda trials-SL I think?
Yamaha trials -TY?
Montessa Cota 315r..sweeeeeetttt.
Couple of IT's and DT's-only 1 490
Another update
XL250
XR400
XR600
XRL 650
DRZ 400
KLX400
Can AM 250
Can Am 400
XL175
Oo,wait,gotta couple more...
Z50's
XL80
RM80
CR80
YZ80
KX80
PW50
JR50
TTR 125
RT 100
LEM 50
CRF 100
Yeah,ok,bottom feeding a little now
so I'll call that close enough.How'd I do gpnewhouse?Do I qualify? 
Post by: ford832 on April 10, 2013, 02:20:43 AM
Where do you possibly get the idea that a KTM puts it's power to the ground better than anything else.I can honestly say,in all my years around bikes-I've never heard that from anyone-or experienced it.
Post by: Jeram on April 10, 2013, 02:40:45 AM
I will say though that if KTMs development was so extensive, then why could I take a YZ, apply some mild porting, reeds and a pipe and have a motor capable of taking on an 250SX?
1 evening with a dremel and a few hundred dollars in parts can bridge the gap that 10 years of KTM R&D provided, a bit odd isnt it?
Yes, I know the KTM250 is a cracker of a motor, but to me it should be a whole lot more after 10 years. Im talking about trying new things which are truely inovative like Yamaha with the YPVS, Kawasaki with the KIPS KX500, Honda with the 250AR ignition, Fantic with the adjustable chassis geometry, Ossa with the rearward exhaust engine, Honda with the first Ally Framed mass production MX bike.
There is alot more development out there to be taken advantage of, their just choosing not to do it.
The superkart racers are building what should be a 70rwhp CR250 motor by copying an aprilia GP cylinder.
Take on of these, lower all the ports back down to OEM levels and you'd probably have a beast of a 55hp 250MX motor with power everywhere.
The superkart racers and others also have experimented with two stage powervalves which I beleive allows the exhuast valve to have a longer actuation range while staying aligned with the piston face for good sealing. that equates to more bottom end OR more top end (take your pick) depending on whether you choose to use the extra movement to open it further or close it further..
Sure a 6 speed box is nice and so is a hydraulic clutch, but there are ways to get closer to matching the 450's but it requires inovation.
Post by: ford832 on April 10, 2013, 02:52:47 AM
I dont want to get involved in this thread haha.
Lol
Post by: factoryX on April 10, 2013, 04:49:35 AM
All kidding aside with available modern two stroke tech(Not even including EFI) the bikes currently on the market are embarrassing. KTM is on top, but the reason the yz excels is due to that SSS suspension. Its really that good.
The joke about the yz is that they can made to do anything, its freaking hilarious. I can make it into the worlds best mx bike, or an insane off roader, but the main issue is that you have to spend more money to do so while you could have bought a purpose built bike to begin with. The yz isn't bad, its just not that good.
Post by: TMKIWI on April 10, 2013, 08:54:28 AM
You have riden lots of bikes, but you still havn't riden the best yet.
Shame on you.
Get back to me once you have tried a TM.
Carry on.
Post by: Jeram on April 10, 2013, 09:01:14 AM
Post by: metal_miracle on April 10, 2013, 11:12:47 AM
the only thing i feel is better on the yz is the front forks..
the rest of the package seems more of a preference ..
Post by: ford832 on April 10, 2013, 11:20:40 AM
Now I see your problem ford.
You have riden lots of bikes, but you still havn't riden the best yet.
Shame on you.
Get back to me once you have tried a TM.
Carry on.
I can't really argue that as it is a glaring omission in my repertoire that does bother me.
You need to bring yours over so I can take a crack at it.I'll supply fuel,food,parts and all the beer and rum you can drink.
Post by: ford832 on April 10, 2013, 11:22:24 AM
the reason the yz excels is due to that SSS suspension. Its really that good. The yz isn't bad, its just not that good.
I'm sorry,say what now?Explain please.
Post by: factoryX on April 10, 2013, 12:41:05 PM
Post by: motox11 on April 10, 2013, 08:05:52 PM
Post by: Camstyn on April 10, 2013, 08:45:48 PM
Take away the SSS suspension and you have a basic bike that is straight from the 90's, especially at 44-46hp which is garbage(99 rm250 had 50hp!). If the 2012/13 250sx had the same suspension, it wouldn't even be a comparison.
No way the 99 RM250 had anywhere close to 50hp, that generation RM250 was a complete turd.
Post by: rlaj1004 on April 10, 2013, 09:32:12 PM
I think we need a MXA type bike test shootout. Everyone switch out and grade them.
Ford is suppling the rum ( spiced ?? ) so I am good. I will bring my new KTM and my old uh (Jap stuff ) that just not politically correct Ford. LOL
Post by: ford832 on April 10, 2013, 10:21:50 PM
Take away the SSS suspension and you have a basic bike that is straight from the 90's, especially at 44-46hp which is garbage(99 rm250 had 50hp!). If the 2012/13 250sx had the same suspension, it wouldn't even be a comparison.
You're just making this stuff up as you go along aren't you? My buddy had a 99 RM250 when I had my 125 and it was a roach.It's odd Suzuki hit 50hp in 99 but hung out with everyone else up to modern day at about 44-46.It's a shame they couldn't have figured what they did in '99.
I guess I really need to defer to your studliness.I can't use all the "garbage" power my YZ makes.For that matter,I couldn't use all the power any of my 125's made.If anyone else on the planet can ride the same bike as me faster than me,then I'm not using what the bike has.
Kudo's to you for being one of the rare few who both need and can truly use a couple extra horsies and are terribly held back by something with a few less.The extra must come in handy when you're chasing down Knighter and Taddy at the WEC or when trying to reel in RV or JS in the sand at Soutwick.My hat's off to you.
Good post motox11.That's a good, honest, sensible evaluation.That's sadly lacking on some here.Keep it up.
Post by: cnrcpla on April 10, 2013, 10:24:01 PM
Quote
No way the 99 RM250 had anywhere close to 50hp, that generation RM250 was a complete turd.Yeah they did. Even the '95 rm250 made 51 HP.
Specs for 1994-1995 Suzuki RM250
Overall Length: 2 167 mm (85.3 in)
Overall Width: 815 mm (32.1 in)
Overall Height: 1 250 mm (49.2 in)
Seat Height: 955 mm (37.6 in)
Ground Clearance: 360 mm (14.2 in)
Wheelbase: 1 467 mm (57.8 in)
Dry Weight: 98 kg (215 lbs)
Engine type: Water-cooled 249 cc single-cylinder 2-stroke, AETC.
Power: 51 hp (37,5 kW)/ 8,000 rpm, 47,5 Nm/ 7,000 rpm.
Transmission: 5-speed manual.
Front Suspension: 38mm Inverted
Rear Suspension: Full Float Single Gas Charged
Body Color: Yellow.
Frame Color: Gun Metal Grey.
Post by: ford832 on April 10, 2013, 10:24:42 PM
Well I just happen to have a 13 year old YZ and a 09 KTM both 250. Up till my recent upgrade to the KTM they both had similar upgrades, wheels, pipes, reeds. Power wasn't that different, they hit at different points but you ride them they way they need to be ridden. What I noticed was the KTM feels lighter. I know weird cus I don't think it is much.
I think we need a MXA type bike test shootout. Everyone switch out and grade them.
Ford is suppling the rum ( spiced ?? ) so I am good. I will bring my new KTM and my old uh (Jap stuff ) that just not politically correct Ford. LOL
Bring whichever you like.Normallly dark or black for me but spiced is no problem either.
Post by: ford832 on April 10, 2013, 10:27:31 PM
QuoteNo way the 99 RM250 had anywhere close to 50hp, that generation RM250 was a complete turd.Yeah they did. Even the '95 rm250 made 51 HP.
Specs for 1994-1995 Suzuki RM250
Overall Length: 2 167 mm (85.3 in)
Overall Width: 815 mm (32.1 in)
Overall Height: 1 250 mm (49.2 in)
Seat Height: 955 mm (37.6 in)
Ground Clearance: 360 mm (14.2 in)
Wheelbase: 1 467 mm (57.8 in)
Dry Weight: 98 kg (215 lbs)
Engine type: Water-cooled 249 cc single-cylinder 2-stroke, AETC.
Power: 51 hp (37,5 kW)/ 8,000 rpm, 47,5 Nm/ 7,000 rpm.
Transmission: 5-speed manual.
Front Suspension: 38mm Inverted
Rear Suspension: Full Float Single Gas Charged
Body Color: Yellow.
Frame Color: Gun Metal Grey.
Unfortunately,not even close.Those specs are taken at the brochure.36-40 is far more reasonable.
Post by: ford832 on April 10, 2013, 10:32:15 PM
but the main issue is that you have to spend more money to do so while you could have bought a purpose built bike to begin with.
I was about to go after this but then I clicked your username as I was curious what your background knowledge level was and if all your info was from experience or net surfing.Now I'm not going to bother with this argument anymore-'nuff said.
Cheers.
Post by: _X_ on April 10, 2013, 11:12:10 PM
Post by: gpnewhouse7 on April 10, 2013, 11:56:10 PM
In that case then my 90/91 yz 125 is the best bike ever made because when Ive fixed it I'll be able to get the same finish position on that as I could on my friends 2011 150sx.
Comparing bikes though and we soon realize that while KTM hasn't made any major advances with the two stroke (neither has anyone else since the late 80's for that matter) they have still tuned it each year to make the bike better and better and now after the yz's 6 year lack of development the KTM is now finally a better overall bike. So yes of course the yz can be made better and even get to the point where its better than the KTM why would you bother with this if you were buying a new bike?
but the main issue is that you have to spend more money to do so while you could have bought a purpose built bike to begin with.
I was about to go after this but then I clicked your username as I was curious what your background knowledge level was and if all your info was from experience or net surfing.Now I'm not going to bother with this argument anymore-'nuff said.
And what exactly are you meaning by this? Is it because of his age that his opinion is invalid or something? In which case I'll just start skipping past any comments made by you in future due to how your too old to know what your talking about.
I have a lot of respect for you and all the other members of this forum but I have no time for those that think they are somehow above others, especcially when its because of something as stupid as that.
Post by: _X_ on April 11, 2013, 12:05:55 AM
Post by: motoxr377 on April 11, 2013, 12:11:18 AM
Come on, guys.
Post by: _X_ on April 11, 2013, 12:12:45 AM
Post by: gpnewhouse7 on April 11, 2013, 12:13:32 AM
And without continuous annual development we'd all still ride fourstrokes and I dont mean the fuel injected 250fs and 450fs of today.
Are we done d*ck measuring yet?
Come on, guys.
No we cant decide whether to use imperial or metric measurements.
Post by: ford832 on April 11, 2013, 12:14:42 AM
Post by: gpnewhouse7 on April 11, 2013, 12:24:54 AM
Post by: ford832 on April 11, 2013, 12:46:45 AM
And what exactly are you meaning by this? Is it because of his age that his opinion is invalid or something? In which case I'll just start skipping past any comments made by you in future due to how your too old to know what your talking about.
You're more than welcome to do that gpnewhouse.If you think I'm too old to know what I'm talking about then don't read what I write-too easy.
Everyone's opinion is valid but how much value you would assign to each depends entirely on you.Wtffactory X may well ride a stable of KTM's and Jap bikes every day of life and have been doing so since a child.On the other hand,it's not that likely.It doesn't mean his opinions don't have merit-simply that they may not be backed up by years of experience.
If you're going to go on talking about how various two strokes were in the 90's that's great-I'm interested in what you have to say as I lived through them too.When I find out you were born in '92,I have my doubts you were cranking laps on RM250's in your diapers and to wax poetic on relative merits or lack thereof of machinery of the day would lead one to believe the info was drawn off the net.
This discussion keeps getting skewed all over the place in a bizarre effort to back up odd premises but the gist of it was a 10 yrold YZ vs a new KTM-not an XR100 or a Maico 490 or 90's RM250 or whatever.
The fact remains,between these two bikes,the KTM has more power,the YZ has better suspension.After 10 years,for the most part,the rest is a push.I've long said suspension is everything and that's why I'd buy the YZ if it was me.
I've long heard that hokey crap about buying a KTM and racing it while having to spend big bucks to mod a jap bike to do the same.I could never see it when I had my KTM's.I had to add hand guards,skidplates etc just the same as my jap bikes.
My EXC had a headlight I took off and a heavier flywheel I machined down.Other than that,it was an mx-er-except for the 18" rear wheel I never liked anyway.I much preferred my SX in the woods.
Around here,I can buy a new YZ250 with brilliant SSS suspension for $7299. I can buy a new 250 SX with the motor of doom for $8999 or the 250 XC for $9199.
Maybe I'd throw a flywheel weight on the YZ and all other mods would be needed for all of them.I don't think the fww costs two grand either.
Choose your poison,they're both good,but spare me the "KTM is the best bike in the world and the rest is junk crap" Some of us know better.
Post by: gpnewhouse7 on April 11, 2013, 12:54:29 AM
Around here,I can buy a new YZ250 with brilliant SSS suspension for $7299. I can buy a new 250 SX with the motor of doom for $8999 or the 250 XC for $9199.
Maybe I'd throw a flywheel weight on the YZ and all other mods would be needed for all of them.I don't think the fww costs two grand either.
The last time I checked round here the KTMs were nearly a £1000 cheaper than the yz in sx trim or around £500 cheaper in exc trim.
If the prices are like that around you then I'd get the yz and buy a hydraulic clutch and some engine mods. But prices as they are around here I'd get the KTM.
Post by: factoryX on April 11, 2013, 12:58:05 AM
Have fun old man..
Post by: ford832 on April 11, 2013, 01:04:06 AM
My local KTM dealers site is down for maintenance right now but you get the idea.Around here,the KTM's have always been priced higher-even back when I bought mine.I knew I'd have to add stuff but just thought they were cool and wanted something different at the time.If I was in the market for new and the price was the same the decision would be harder but regardless of brand,these days,I'd go for suspension.
Post by: ford832 on April 11, 2013, 01:13:25 AM
I own a freaking yz250. Imagine that, I'm bad mouthing the bike I take pride in owning. Sigh, if simply finding info online(Even from this forum!) isn't enough for you I guess you'll have to do with out replying to my posts. Oh no, not that!
When all else fails and you can't find a response on the net,resort to a little cursing and swearing.
And no,it's not enough for me to find it on the net-I can find anything to back up anything there myself.If your info states the fact that's fine but to draw it from there and represent it as your own experience isn't.
Btw,calling me an old man really doesn't hurt my feelings-nice try though.
I could choose not to respond to your posts but when someone says something completely wrong I have to respond just in case someone new to all this was reading it and might take it as truth.Silence is often seen as consensus.
Post by: _X_ on April 11, 2013, 01:15:26 AM
Post by: msambuco on April 11, 2013, 01:31:36 AM
Post by: Camstyn on April 11, 2013, 03:02:43 AM
Myself, I'll take a TM. It's not perfect either but it's as good of a starting point as any of the rest but it has one thing the others don't. It's hand built by some bad ass Italians who are downright passionate about what they do and it's as close to a works bike as you can buy for actually a very competitive price with the others. The biggest problem TM has is I can't decide if I want a 250 or a 300.
Post by: motoxr377 on April 11, 2013, 03:20:38 AM
Can't believe how far South this thread has gone. Take away the keyboards, load up all the bikes (old, new, KTM, Yamaha, TM, whatever) and meet up somewhere for some rides and comparisons. Then discuss with a beer (or whatever) in hand over a campfire. All the attitude would go away and we could agree to disagree meaning we are all on the same page. Bench racing 101.
You make sense! I bet you can even spell empirical correctly!
Post by: riffraff on April 11, 2013, 04:32:10 AM
we haven't measured you yet motoxr.HA!
Hang on I'll get the micrometer
Post by: TMKIWI on April 11, 2013, 09:24:07 AM
I am in.
I agree with msambuco, Ill bring the TM and the beers, ford can bring the rum and racerx can bring the girls.
Lets ride and talk shit after.
BTW, For the record it is 6 inches, on the slack.
Post by: Stusmoke on April 11, 2013, 12:35:10 PM
Can't believe how far South this thread has gone. Take away the keyboards, load up all the bikes (old, new, KTM, Yamaha, TM, whatever) and meet up somewhere for some rides and comparisons. Then discuss with a beer (or whatever) in hand over a campfire. All the attitude would go away and we could agree to disagree meaning we are all on the same page. Bench racing 101.
Ummm This?
Why all the insults guys? YZ250s a kick ass bike! Both are fantastic bits of machinery! The YZ250 doesn't NEED to go back to the drawing board, it just needs to have a few extra horses IMHO. Its all well and good for hte lites class but its getting a little sad when you're trying to run down 450s... My personal preference is the KTM for several reasons, atleast half of which are personal. For example, the seat height. I'm around 6 foot, i'm no stumpy arse. I often get hamstring cramps on my 2001 CR125 because my knees have to be quite bent to get my feet on the pegs.'
At the end of the day, who gives a f***? YZs an awesome bike, SX is an awesome bike, ride what you like man. If you value unbelievable front suspension that makes you feel like you're floating over a few extra horsepower (which can be corrected with the appropriate pipe, porting etc), run the YZ.
Pick your favourite colour.
Post by: ford832 on April 11, 2013, 09:21:01 PM
Did someone mention rum.?
I am in.
I agree with msambuco, Ill bring the TM and the beers, ford can bring the rum and racerx can bring the girls.
Lets ride and talk shit after.
BTW, For the record it is 6 inches, on the slack.
If that measurement is correct,when it comes time for the drunken slap them on the table competition,I'm going to have to fold.
You can bring the beer,just no Foster's this time eh?I know it's NZ's national brew and all but still,yuck.
Post by: _X_ on April 11, 2013, 09:40:03 PM
Post by: ford832 on April 11, 2013, 10:18:51 PM
Post by: vetman on April 11, 2013, 10:25:59 PM
So what my big rant is sure the new bike looks great,the old bike will still go great ,would be great if they pumped billions into development ,but ride what you like and go buy a TM
Post by: _X_ on April 11, 2013, 10:31:40 PM
There's another kind?HA!
Post by: vetman on April 11, 2013, 10:37:15 PM
Post by: Stusmoke on April 12, 2013, 12:45:00 AM
Post by: TMKIWI on April 12, 2013, 01:42:18 AM
Sorry ford i gotta jump in Fosters!!!!!!!! definitely wrong island that other one across the tasman full of crocs and kangaroos would love that stuff,
Don't worry about ford vetman, he only say's that for a bite.
And he got one.
Post by: ford832 on April 12, 2013, 02:51:28 AM
Post by: motoxr377 on April 12, 2013, 04:43:02 AM
Post by: ford832 on April 12, 2013, 10:41:16 AM
http://twostrokemotocross.com/2013/04/2013-ktm-two-stroke-throttle-housing-safety-recall-all-models/
Post by: Coop on April 13, 2013, 12:01:43 AM
.On topic, I like both the YZ and the KTM. I have ridden both (1988, 1992, 2000, 2003, 2005 YZ250's; 1984, 1986, 1995, 2003, 2006, 2011 KTM 250's). I seem to ride the KTM better in rough off-road but if I raced MX I think I would honestly prefer the YZ.
Post by: factoryX on April 13, 2013, 05:03:33 AM
Post by: TMKIWI on April 13, 2013, 06:57:29 AM
As usual you guys can't act respectfully and civilly. I will be editing this thread now. It's like being a teacher in study hall sometimes they way you all act like you're in high school again...
Oh come on teach, it's funny when the boys play.
Post by: Coop on April 13, 2013, 12:54:11 PM
Oh come on teach, it's funny when the boys play.
Haha
. Funny yes, until the curse words start flying of course. I like a good debate and don't mind a good argument either as long as they stay respectful. Which was John's main rule when he started the site and Charles wants to keep that a key as well. We don't need to become another Vital . Not that anybody believes me, but I much prefer to just read the forums and contribute than I like playing heavy handed moderator LOL.
Post by: scotty dog on April 13, 2013, 03:34:02 PM
Fosters... PFfft. Ford you can't whinge about bad beer until you've drunk XXXX Gold. That shit would kill a brown dog on a chain.
Ya got that right Stu, At least theres one good drop that comes outta Qld...........Bundaberg Rum!!
Post by: Stusmoke on April 15, 2013, 11:48:09 PM
Post by: ford832 on April 16, 2013, 01:19:09 AM
I'm a bourbon and scotch person.
Isn't that sort of like gin and tonic,vodka and orange,shirley temples,Mai tai's and various other umbrella type drinks?
...not that there's anything wrong with that.
Post by: Stusmoke on April 16, 2013, 01:23:02 AM
I'm a bourbon and scotch person.
Isn't that sort of like gin and tonic,vodka and orange,shirley temples,Mai tai's and various other umbrella type drinks?
...not that there's anything wrong with that.
Mai tais kick arse.
Post by: Foghorn on April 16, 2013, 02:49:14 AM
Now I see your problem ford.
You have riden lots of bikes, but you still havn't riden the best yet.
Shame on you.
Get back to me once you have tried a TM.
Carry on.
I can't really argue that as it is a glaring omission in my repertoire that does bother me.
You need to bring yours over so I can take a crack at it.I'll supply fuel,food,parts and all the beer and rum you can drink.
To a certain extent, I have to agree with TMKIWI. My wife absolutely loves that bike
You've ridden a CR500 once. Usually that's all it takes to bring back the memories.
Post by: ford832 on April 17, 2013, 10:28:15 PM
Did someone mention rum.?
Yeah,I did.Yer lookin' a little dry there 'kiwi.Haul yer arse up to the old YZ and put 'er to 'ya-then we'll take yer TM fer a rip.
Post by: _X_ on April 17, 2013, 11:00:57 PM
Post by: ford832 on April 17, 2013, 11:11:18 PM
Post by: evo550 on April 18, 2013, 12:44:58 PM
My 2004 yz 250, raced through till about '07
Then my KTM 250 sx, raced through till end 2012.
Don't have a "selfie" of the new KTM yet.
The KTM will outbrake the YZ in an instant.
The KTM has far better suspension...especially forks.
The KTM produces better power, that is adjustable...and yes it makes a difference.
The KTM handles awesome, although the YZ did nothing wrong, maybe the suspension let it down.
I have never had to wait more than 3 days for a KTM part, and I've owned a 50 mini adv, 2x 50 sx's, a 65, a 85, a 250 and now a 300.
I've waited 6 weeks for YZ gearbox bits (blew 3rd).
Reliability is the same, same.
As mentioned in Watsons thread, KTM offer a line up of 2x 50 models, a 65, a 85/105, a 125/150 and 250/300 2t line up, who else offers something that comprehensive.
Did I mention the Hard parts catalogue...better than porn.
I race....if I had my old YZ sitting beside my 300 in the garage and had to choose one for a race day this w/end.....the YZ would not get a look in. Sorry.
Oh, and KTM race and promote their 2t's AT A FACTORY LEVEL.. can't remember the last time Yamaha did that
Post by: _X_ on April 18, 2013, 10:00:43 PM
Post by: vetman on April 18, 2013, 10:15:54 PM
Post by: Stusmoke on April 19, 2013, 02:05:45 AM
Post by: cnrcpla on April 19, 2013, 02:53:56 AM
Quote
NAAAAAOOOOO!!!! HOTLINK IS BROKEN!*queue sad let down music*
Post by: evo550 on April 19, 2013, 04:02:34 AM
Post by: factoryX on April 19, 2013, 06:03:46 AM
The KTM will outbrake the YZ in an instant.
The KTM has far better suspension...especially forks.
The KTM produces better power, that is adjustable...and yes it makes a difference.
The KTM handles awesome, although the YZ did nothing wrong, maybe the suspension let it down.
I have never had to wait more than 3 days for a KTM part, and I've owned a 50 mini adv, 2x 50 sx's, a 65, a 85, a 250 and now a 300.
I've waited 6 weeks for YZ gearbox bits (blew 3rd).
Reliability is the same, same.
As mentioned in Watsons thread, KTM offer a line up of 2x 50 models, a 65, a 85/105, a 125/150 and 250/300 2t line up, who else offers something that comprehensive.
Did I mention the Hard parts catalogue...better than porn.
I race....if I had my old YZ sitting beside my 300 in the garage and had to choose one for a race day this w/end.....the YZ would not get a look in. Sorry.
Oh, and KTM race and promote their 2t's AT A FACTORY LEVEL.. can't remember the last time Yamaha did that
[/quote]
04 yz's were the last year of open chambered KYB's, and yes they do suck. 06 up yz250 came with SSS 48mm KYB's, and are considered one best set ups ever released stock on any dirt bike. They're that good.
Post by: bearorso on April 19, 2013, 07:40:44 AM
They (the engine modules) are pretty much the same vintage as the YZs. You can't regard a 250 /300 engine module that can have a 380 top end and crank, with little modification (crank end / one crank bearing?) required, a hugely different one to that of the 360 /380. Yes, they slimmed / shrunk it down, dropped some weight, and did detail changes, but nothing like what KTM did with their 4t engines. Count up how many 4t engine types, just in the Dirt bike side of things, that KTM have made (include the 2 'Berg engines - the 'all in', vertically split unit , and the sloper).
It's been a result of rules that favour 4ts - capacity- and the subsequent loss of "competition", for KTMs 2ts.
Things are changing, finally, with new 2ts being produced. Though, they are not earth shattering technical innovations - pretty much just slightly refined 2ts - if that. But, they Will provide some competition, so they will, I believe, start to push development further. KTM will have to stop sitting back and raking in the dollars so easily, with regards to their 2ts. Finally. A Good Thing for All 2t enthusiasts.
"Competition", does that. The Beta, and the Sherco, are a great re-start of competition, within 2t ranks. A heck of a lot more-so than the Ossa, as they have gone into the Enduro market, before Ossa, and, they are bigger /stronger companies. Though, quite small compared to KTM, of course.
The much, and justly, revered (and quite old aged) SSS suspension, deserves it's reputation - it works very, very well. Still above the std , latest model WP units - and that's coming from a bloke that uses WP CC front forks (though, much modified / set up for my uses).
Post by: factoryX on April 19, 2013, 07:46:31 AM
as soon as possible. Should be hilarious in that, with a little work my steel frame bike will be just as good as 2013 yz250, and this engine hasn't been detuned haha.
Post by: Stusmoke on April 19, 2013, 08:34:15 AM
That KTMs 2t are the 'high end' of (relatively) volume production 2ts, shows how stagnant 2ts have become.
They (the engine modules) are pretty much the same vintage as the YZs. You can't regard a 250 /300 engine module that can have a 380 top end and crank, with little modification (crank end / one crank bearing?) required, a hugely different one to that of the 360 /380. Yes, they slimmed / shrunk it down, dropped some weight, and did detail changes, but nothing like what KTM did with their 4t engines. Count up how many 4t engine types, just in the Dirt bike side of things, that KTM have made (include the 2 'Berg engines - the 'all in', vertically split unit , and the sloper).
It's been a result of rules that favour 4ts - capacity- and the subsequent loss of "competition", for KTMs 2ts.
Things are changing, finally, with new 2ts being produced. Though, they are not earth shattering technical innovations - pretty much just slightly refined 2ts - if that. But, they Will provide some competition, so they will, I believe, start to push development further. KTM will have to stop sitting back and raking in the dollars so easily, with regards to their 2ts. Finally. A Good Thing for All 2t enthusiasts.
"Competition", does that. The Beta, and the Sherco, are a great re-start of competition, within 2t ranks. A heck of a lot more-so than the Ossa, as they have gone into the Enduro market, before Ossa, and, they are bigger /stronger companies. Though, quite small compared to KTM, of course.
The much, and justly, revered (and quite old aged) SSS suspension, deserves it's reputation - it works very, very well. Still above the std , latest model WP units - and that's coming from a bloke that uses WP CC front forks (though, much modified / set up for my uses).
Good post. Like you said, almost all the competition is in the enduro range, so even if KTM only faces competition there, whatever the advance on the enduro models are bound to be applied to thge MX range too. I'm no engineer, and this is just an assumption, but I would estimate that if Yamaha threw into their YZ range the same stuff the KTM comes stock with and revised their expansion chamber, it would undoubtedly give the KTM a run for its money in terms of power.
It is interesting to muse on what might have been if the AMA had a spine from day one and left hte rules at equal displacement. 250Fs would have had no advantage over their 250 smokers (besides being easier to ride). No advantage, no sales, no sales, no foopers. The big five would have still hacked away at their two stroke development
I want a time machine.
Post by: evo550 on April 19, 2013, 09:46:21 AM
WTF does that mean ? It's a 2t motor- fuel comes into crank- goes to combustion chamber- fires-bike moves forward, seems to me the designers got it fairly well sorted out years ago.
You blokes seem to be obsessed with power and nothing else...go buy a 500. Suspension and chassis technology has lagged behind for years and now the factories have been focusing on that.
Bike and rider go faster when motor/chassis/suspension all work in unison, big horsepower will get you nowhere but pain.
Someone please explain what revolutionary/earth shattering technology you want?
Post by: factoryX on April 19, 2013, 10:02:17 AM
Suspension alone isn't going to save the two stroke or simply allow it to race fairly against 4 stroke handicaps. This is beyond that.
Things that will help
1. Modern Porting as mentioned here and other threads.
2. Fuel delivery be it DI or Smart carb.
3. Pistons, although square stroke is very reliable, For racing purposes its approaching useless. For instance [2013 yz250 bore x stroke: 66.4mm x 72mm] [2013 250f bore x stroke: 77mm x 53.6mm!!!]
3. Modern material, two strokes can be made so much lighter its insulting. It maybe expensive to do it yourself, but from a mass production stand point....
4. Modern suspension, SSS is currently the best suspension ever put on a two stroke, that was 2006...
5. Modern Geometry, 4 stroke chassis have been updated for modern track layouts, the 2013 yz250 is running the same frame geometry as my steel framed 2003(Sub frames will bolt over no issues).
Post by: Camstyn on April 19, 2013, 11:04:30 AM
Post by: bearorso on April 19, 2013, 12:22:37 PM
What we have currently, are Engines that have not been developed at all appreciably - it's as simple as that.
Or, engines that have disappeared completely -
.TMs Electronic PV - an innovation? Well, no; Electronic PVs have been around for a looooong time. I think Yamaha's YPVS - an electric servo motor driven PV, controlled through the CDI - first came out on the 1983 RZ350 on a production road going motorcycle. In some markets it retained the RD prefix. Of course, combining E-PVs with the current levels of Electricery, would be a very useful thing. And, we await that on the TMs, as they have yet to incorporate TPS with their E-PV. I think the new Shercos have an E-PV? - though, I think I may have that mixed up with the Jotagas engine (not a Bimota, just a red Jotagas with Bimota branding - that was a useful way for Jotagas to get a lot of extra attention at EICMA. They used Bimota's 'cache' very, very well, they did).
Efficiency and Cleanliness, is the biggest benefit that can come from "modern" 2ts - but the extra torque / power, and, far more useful: a broader spread of power, that can be obtained with that increased efficiency, is a great thing. It will show 4ts to be an 'expensive', in more ways than just cost of production and purchase, power plant.
Modern Porting - well there's porting appropriate to the design of the engine / it's intended use. Much like "modern Expansion Chambers", that are thrown around here.
Fuel delivery - yes, all sorts of designs can be used - then, of course there is the scavenging system - critically important on a 2t (well, any ICE)- and there are a lot of possibilities for that not used yet on 2t motorcycle engines.
Bore and stroke ratios - who knows what will happen? But, I'm bloody sure a 2t does not need to go anywhere near the extremes of Bore Vs Stroke that modern 4ts have gone to - as a 2t, of comparative capacity to a 4t, does not need to go in hunt of mega revs for power......... As I've written many a time - if you want to know about revs, and narrow power bands, just build a naturally aspirated 125cc single cylinder 4t to go up against a 125cc 2t. Go on Honda - 4ts are just so bloody good you can do it, can't you? I'm sure they could, but it would be a rather expensive and somewhat 'difficult' to ride bike.
Yes, if they can make a 250F, the same weight as a 2502t, well, think of the weight you could make a 250 2t. Though, in the interests of ever getting equivalency in AMA Pro Racing, or the MXGPs - we might just have to stick with the same minimum weight rules a 250 4t and 250 2t currently have - the same weight (212 / 212.5lbs, in AMA Pro?) as each other.
SSS, is no disadvantage to Anything else currently on a production bike.
Modern Geometry? There's Nothing wrong with the 2005 / 2013 YZ250 Frame geometry, nor a last model(s) RM, CR 250. KXs, well.... Though, with the YZ250 05/13, you can save a few lbs of ( a significant amount, but, of course, not all, being unsprung, which is an extra bonus) weight by fitting a 'near era' Yamaha 4ts swingarm, linkage and the rear wheel / hub. That just backs up the weight reduction efforts put into 4ts.......
Geezus, idiots wank on about last model (I think it covers about 11 model years, well, 13 if you count my 2003 compliance CRE500) steel frame CR500s having ancient geometry - the reality is, it has quicker geometry than last model aluminium 125 CRs, to my recollection. The crap written / spread about has No End, when it comes to "modern geometry". A mate of mine that put a YZ250 engine into the latest YZ250F chassis, summed it up as a waste of ****ing time, other than the "Ooo Ahh" factor. Or, if you had a worn out / trashed 05/13 YZ chassis. His words, not mine. Some bikes have pushed the shock down lower, to compensate for the height of the 4t engines, so it's a useful change, but, with a twin spar frame, as the vast majority of bikes now have, you tend to be stuck with the tank, above the engine - and in a 2ts case, with a AF conversion, the weight often well above the engine. Put a big tank on, and it can be a Lot of fuel well above the 2t engine. Great idea....... I think not.
Post by: evo550 on April 19, 2013, 12:57:37 PM
They aren't stagnating....they're going backwards.
Someone should let Charles know to forget running KTM's on his TSM race effort, a '82 YZ 250 J will do just fine.
Post by: factoryX on April 19, 2013, 12:58:50 PM
Post by: evo550 on April 19, 2013, 01:02:48 PM
Throttle assembly failure isn't what I would describe as a step backwards, its a $10-$20 part..
Not where I come from, last time I priced a domino throttle assembly, it was near 100 big ones...
"a yz250 piston bolts into a 1985-86 250r with a cylinder spacer boosting displacement to 265cc."
What did you mean by this? Was it a CR250R ?
Post by: 2T Institute on April 19, 2013, 01:36:12 PM
Things that will help
1. Modern Porting as mentioned here and other threads.
2. Fuel delivery be it DI or Smart carb.
3. Pistons, although square stroke is very reliable, For racing purposes its approaching useless. For instance [2013 yz250 bore x stroke: 66.4mm x 72mm] [2013 250f bore x stroke: 77mm x 53.6mm!!!]
3. Modern material, two strokes can be made so much lighter its insulting. It maybe expensive to do it yourself, but from a mass production stand point....
4. Modern suspension, SSS is currently the best suspension ever put on a two stroke, that was 2006...
5. Modern Geometry, 4 stroke chassis have been updated for modern track layouts, the 2013 yz250 is running the same frame geometry as my steel framed 2003(Sub frames will bolt over no issues).
A 50% power increase woul be impossible without a RPM ceiling increase.
1. Port layout is a small part of the equation the ducts have to be correct as well, no time for a cylinder reeds. Either case reeds or disc valves.
2. Apart from Uniflows bikes where are all the EFI bikes running round?
3. A 4T uses over square dimensions for a different reason and that is for rpm and to allow bigger valves for better breathing. The 68X68 YZ250 found more favour with kart racers than it did with MX riders. MX 250's are universaly 66.4 x 72mm which has proved the best combination of torque and rpm limits.
4, Without the use of magnesium there isn't much mass to be stripped from a 250. If you used magnesium hugs and cases saving a few kg's, they would be practicaly useless after a few years. No manufacturer could cope with that.
Post by: ford832 on April 19, 2013, 02:03:28 PM
It's certainly stagnation.
What we have currently, are Engines that have not been developed at all appreciably - it's as simple as that.
Or, engines that have disappeared completely -
TMs Electronic PV - an innovation? Well, no; Electronic PVs have been around for a looooong time. I think Yamaha's YPVS - an electric servo motor driven PV, controlled through the CDI - first came out on the 1983 RZ350 on a production road going motorcycle. In some markets it retained the RD prefix. Of course, combining E-PVs with the current levels of Electricery, would be a very useful thing. And, we await that on the TMs, as they have yet to incorporate TPS with their E-PV. I think the new Shercos have an E-PV? - though, I think I may have that mixed up with the Jotagas engine (not a Bimota, just a red Jotagas with Bimota branding - that was a useful way for Jotagas to get a lot of extra attention at EICMA. They used Bimota's 'cache' very, very well, they did).
Efficiency and Cleanliness, is the biggest benefit that can come from "modern" 2ts - but the extra torque / power, and, far more useful: a broader spread of power, that can be obtained with that increased efficiency, is a great thing. It will show 4ts to be an 'expensive', in more ways than just cost of production and purchase, power plant.
Modern Porting - well there's porting appropriate to the design of the engine / it's intended use. Much like "modern Expansion Chambers", that are thrown around here.
Fuel delivery - yes, all sorts of designs can be used - then, of course there is the scavenging system - critically important on a 2t (well, any ICE)- and there are a lot of possibilities for that not used yet on 2t motorcycle engines.
Bore and stroke ratios - who knows what will happen? But, I'm bloody sure a 2t does not need to go anywhere near the extremes of Bore Vs Stroke that modern 4ts have gone to - as a 2t, of comparative capacity to a 4t, does not need to go in hunt of mega revs for power......... As I've written many a time - if you want to know about revs, and narrow power bands, just build a naturally aspirated 125cc single cylinder 4t to go up against a 125cc 2t. Go on Honda - 4ts are just so bloody good you can do it, can't you? I'm sure they could, but it would be a rather expensive and somewhat 'difficult' to ride bike.
Yes, if they can make a 250F, the same weight as a 2502t, well, think of the weight you could make a 250 2t. Though, in the interests of ever getting equivalency in AMA Pro Racing, or the MXGPs - we might just have to stick with the same minimum weight rules a 250 4t and 250 2t currently have - the same weight (212 / 212.5lbs, in AMA Pro?) as each other.
SSS, is no disadvantage to Anything else currently on a production bike.
Modern Geometry? There's Nothing wrong with the 2005 / 2013 YZ250 Frame geometry, nor a last model(s) RM, CR 250. KXs, well.... Though, with the YZ250 05/13, you can save a few lbs of ( a significant amount, but, of course, not all, being unsprung, which is an extra bonus) weight by fitting a 'near era' Yamaha 4ts swingarm, linkage and the rear wheel / hub. That just backs up the weight reduction efforts put into 4ts.......
Geezus, idiots wank on about last model (I think it covers about 11 model years, well, 13 if you count my 2003 compliance CRE500) steel frame CR500s having ancient geometry - the reality is, it has quicker geometry than last model aluminium 125 CRs, to my recollection. The crap written / spread about has No End, when it comes to "modern geometry". A mate of mine that put a YZ250 engine into the latest YZ250F chassis, summed it up as a waste of ****ing time, other than the "Ooo Ahh" factor. Or, if you had a worn out / trashed 05/13 YZ chassis. His words, not mine. Some bikes have pushed the shock down lower, to compensate for the height of the 4t engines, so it's a useful change, but, with a twin spar frame, as the vast majority of bikes now have, you tend to be stuck with the tank, above the engine - and in a 2ts case, with a AF conversion, the weight often well above the engine. Put a big tank on, and it can be a Lot of fuel well above the 2t engine. Great idea....... I think not.
Great post bearorso,I couldn't have said it better myself-or near as well for that matter.
Some of you should read this carefully rather than just skimming it and going back to your original thoughts of equating new plastics with new 2t engine design.
In the end though,who cares about bikes at all when one has "dirty girls"
Bring them along racer x,I'll take the redhead-or any other as well.
BTW,the KTM throttle part is worth exactly $0.00.KTM is replacing them foc.
Many of us remember fondly some of the old 2t machinery.When you go back and ride them again you're reminded most do indeed have a great engine.The second thought is always to wonder how I ever rode one of these in the first place as the suspension is truly awful.Of course,at the time,it seemed pretty good relative to what was out there-by todays standards-it's grim.
If you want to talk off road bike development(4t engines aside) look at the suspension side of things,that's where it is.
Post by: factoryX on April 19, 2013, 11:35:58 PM
ATC/TRX250R Very similar motors to the 85-87 cr250 engines. I can't remember if you had to bore slightly or they simply bolted in, either way it works.Throttle assembly failure isn't what I would describe as a step backwards, its a $10-$20 part..
"a yz250 piston bolts into a 1985-86 250r with a cylinder spacer boosting displacement to 265cc."
What did you mean by this? Was it a CR250R ?
Post by: nom de guerre on April 20, 2013, 02:12:58 AM
Post by: evo550 on April 20, 2013, 02:47:43 AM
ATC/TRX250R Very similar motors to the 85-87 cr250 engines. I can't remember if you had to bore slightly or they simply bolted in, either way it works.Throttle assembly failure isn't what I would describe as a step backwards, its a $10-$20 part..
"a yz250 piston bolts into a 1985-86 250r with a cylinder spacer boosting displacement to 265cc."
What did you mean by this? Was it a CR250R ?
So where does the cylinder spacer go?
Post by: Jeram on April 20, 2013, 03:39:47 AM
Modern Porting - well there's porting appropriate to the design of the engine / it's intended use. Much like "modern Expansion Chambers", that are thrown around here.
Modern porting meaning modern ducting.
This takes alot more R&D than KTM has done to get it right. Very few two stroke companies have understood this topic well enough to get it right.
It takes a little bit of additional knowledge to begin and a lot of R&D to get to where you want to be.
Post by: factoryX on April 20, 2013, 04:19:09 AM
So where does the cylinder spacer go?
Under the cylinder kind of like 87-89 trx250r's had.
Post by: TMKIWI on April 20, 2013, 05:54:09 AM
Modern high tech 4 stroke development?
Peugeot came out with a twin cam 4 valve engine in 1912.
DeSoto had EFI in 1958.
And 2 strokes.
The Expansion chamber was designed for the V1 rocket and first used on a 2 stroke in 1938.
You want DI ?, First developed in 1902.
AR combustion, Trapping valves or CI have all been done.
Nothing earth shattering is coming for the ICE ( Internal combustion engine ).
Everything is just an improvment on an old design.
Everything "modern" has come about because of electronics ( in design and the use of computers ) and improvments in metallurgy.
The ONLY thing stopping more money being spent on 2 stroke development is the RULES.
Just be happy with what we have, as the 2 stroke we have is still a bloody good engine.
Even with 15 years of "development" on the 4 stroke, cc for cc it still can not match our "old tech" 2 stroke.
Carry on.
Post by: Stusmoke on April 20, 2013, 08:11:59 AM
This is funny.
Modern high tech 4 stroke development?
Peugeot came out with a twin cam 4 valve engine in 1912.
DeSoto had EFI in 1958.
And 2 strokes.
The Expansion chamber was designed for the V1 rocket and first used on a 2 stroke in 1938.
You want DI ?, First developed in 1902.
AR combustion, Trapping valves or CI have all been done.
Nothing earth shattering is coming for the ICE ( Internal combustion engine ).
Everything is just an improvment on an old design.
Everything "modern" has come about because of electronics ( in design and the use of computers ) and improvments in metallurgy.
The ONLY thing stopping more money being spent on 2 stroke development is the RULES.
Just be happy with what we have, as the 2 stroke we have is still a bloody good engine.
Even with 15 years of "development" on the 4 stroke, cc for cc it still can not match our "old tech" 2 stroke.
Carry on.
Shut down. Realistically, the only major thing that happened to the four stroke since whats-his-face fired the first one up in whenever, is the OHC design. Other than that, everything has been an improvement on an old design. Same with computers, its the exact same tech as the room sized computers from 1950s. Just smaller. My SGS2 out performs the computers from 1950 a thousand to one. and Its a pHone.
Post by: factoryX on April 20, 2013, 08:47:36 AM
Post by: evo550 on April 20, 2013, 10:33:30 AM
So where does the cylinder spacer go?
Under the cylinder kind of like 87-89 trx250r's had.
So if it requires a spacer under the cylinder, I'm assuming with no rebore the yz piston is taller from the gudeon pin to the crown ? How does that increase the capacity by 25cc?
Post by: ford832 on April 20, 2013, 11:07:25 AM
Ford, you are just as crazy as the Maico nuts.....
Omg,can it possibly be that bad?
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Post by: factoryX on April 20, 2013, 11:58:16 AM
Post by: evo550 on April 20, 2013, 12:22:42 PM
Ah its been awhile, they used an slightly older piston(90's) It relocates the wrist pin, and I believe runs a 68.5mm bore. Its a 3mm spacer for the short rod 85/86 atc250r, and 2.5mm spacer for the long rod 87-89 trx250r. Again its only a slight bore on the steel cylinders, and most aftermarket 265cc cylinders ran this set up. At the end of this thread someone actually bolts up a later 02-10 piston, no other details. I wish I still had all the info I had stock piled when I owned a trx250r back in 08-09.
But I still don't see how a 3mm spacer under the cylinder can increase capacity, only way to do that is bore or stroke increase.
Post by: ford832 on April 20, 2013, 12:28:27 PM
Post by: evo550 on April 20, 2013, 12:34:47 PM
If nothing else,it would lower the compression nicely.Compression Smeshion, I have E-Start...
Post by: evo550 on April 20, 2013, 12:40:42 PM
Please ensure, you have speakers at 100%, expand to full screen, and have a full frosty one ( in Fords case a Labatt's Lite
) sit back and enjoy.https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-cwImtQw3WA
Post by: factoryX on April 20, 2013, 12:45:24 PM
Think of it this way, an old yz250 trick in the eighties was using a 490 rod with a 250 piston and throwing a large spacer under the cylinder. By increasing stroke its increasing displacement.
Post by: ford832 on April 20, 2013, 01:26:25 PM
and so in rebuttal for the affirmative "KTM 300's are best" team, I present our closing argument (put it together this w/end with a couple of my mates)
Please ensure, you have speakers at 100%, expand to full screen, and have a full frosty one ( in Fords case a Labatt's Lite
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-cwImtQw3WA
That's a cool vid.The woods guy is ridiculously talented.In my case though,I avoid anything that is tagged "lite" like the plague-esp beer.
When I get even older and slower I may find it to be in my interests to track down a "YZ lite" I may be on a KTM 300 yet,you never know.
Post by: evo550 on April 20, 2013, 01:36:57 PM
By increasing deck height its stroking it. Also, its no longer using the 66mm bore, its going to a 68.5(250r cylinders can be punched out to 70+mm pistons on the stock liners). So you have increased stroke and bore. Pretty simple. However, in that thread it mentions the stock bore on modern yz's being the same in the 66mm area, it shows a atc/trx250r piston side by side with a 02-10 yz250 piston. At the end of the thread someone mentions throwing a modernd yz piston in. no other details. It would be a 250 still.
Think of it this way, an old yz250 trick in the eighties was using a 490 rod with a 250 piston and throwing a large spacer under the cylinder. By increasing stroke its increasing displacement.
That's what I was thinking you where thinking.. but increasing deck height or rod length doesn't increase stroke. Distance between big end pin and crank center x 2 does.
Post by: evo550 on April 20, 2013, 01:39:35 PM
Yeah, Damn you and your sharp Canadian wit, I'll get you next time gadget.and so in rebuttal for the affirmative "KTM 300's are best" team, I present our closing argument (put it together this w/end with a couple of my mates)
Please ensure, you have speakers at 100%, expand to full screen, and have a full frosty one ( in Fords case a Labatt's Lite
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-cwImtQw3WA
That's a cool vid.The woods guy is ridiculously talented.In my case though,I avoid anything that is tagged "lite" like the plague-esp beer.
When I get even older and slower I may find it to be in my interests to track down a "YZ lite" I may be on a KTM 300 yet,you never know.
Post by: ford832 on April 20, 2013, 03:53:30 PM
Post by: SachsGS on April 20, 2013, 04:14:21 PM