Coming Soon
Home > Forum


Author Topic: 86 CR 500  (Read 12197 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline JimmyMoto832

  • Novice
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Fail to Prepare - Prepare to Fail
    • View Profile
    • Monday...
Re: 86 CR 500
« Reply #30 on: January 21, 2011, 08:01:31 PM »
Come on... :P

Offline burn1986

  • Professional
  • *****
  • Posts: 559
  • 1986 best year for CRs
    • View Profile
Re: 86 CR 500
« Reply #31 on: February 15, 2011, 08:32:06 AM »
I think we're confusing a bike that is somewhat tuned down in potential (86 CR500) vs one that is maxed out (CRF or current 4-stroke). These 500 two strokes had tons of inherent performance potential. If these bikes were researched and modified to the hilt like the current 4-strokes are then you would have close to a 500GP bike on dirt. These bikes would far outperform the 4-strokes today. Its kind of funny to listen to someone try and argue that the 4-stroke is faster than the 2-stroke on this point.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2011, 11:46:03 AM by burn1986 »

Offline Hondacrrider

  • Professional
  • *****
  • Posts: 433
    • View Profile
Re: 86 CR 500
« Reply #32 on: February 15, 2011, 03:38:05 PM »
I think we're confusing a bike that is somewhat tuned down in potential (86 CR500) vs one that is maxed out (CRF or current 4-stroke). These 500 two strokes had tons of inherent performance potential. If these bikes were researched and modified to the hilt like the current 4-strokes are then you would have close to a 500GP bike on dirt. These bikes would far outperform the 4-strokes today. Its kind of funny to listen to someone try and argue that the 4-stroke is faster than the 2-stroke on this point.
I don't think he is trying to, I think he is saying that even though he rides a 450, and in his opinion it has more torque and a stronger powerband, he still enjoys riding his two strokes.
I'd rather be riding...

Offline SachsGS

  • Professional
  • *****
  • Posts: 1235
    • View Profile
Re: 86 CR 500
« Reply #33 on: February 15, 2011, 03:58:47 PM »
Any Honda CR500 produces significantly more torque then modern 450 4T's.

Offline ford832

  • Professional
  • *****
  • Posts: 1532
  • I PITY THE FOOL THAT RIDES A FOURSTROKE
    • View Profile
Re: 86 CR 500
« Reply #34 on: February 16, 2011, 05:46:50 AM »
I'm not sure of the torque figures of a CR500 as compared to my old 550 Berg but I'd be willing to bet they aren't too far off as I know the Berg had significantly more than my buddies CRF450.That said,I think some people confuse power characteristics with torque.The fact that a 4t's every other firing cycle produces a more manageable power delivery,all other things being equal of course,doesn't mean it has more torque,it just means it's easier to control,is more linear,and therefore gives the illusion of having more torque.
I'd rather a full bottle in front of me than a full frontal lobotomy.

Offline JETZcorp

  • Professional
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
  • Life, Liberty, and Horsepower
    • View Profile
Re: 86 CR 500
« Reply #35 on: February 16, 2011, 04:30:29 PM »
Right, people are confusing torque for low-end power.  Four-stroke dyno charts typically show torque peaks that are quite low in the RPM range, and therefore a high peak torque generally makes for a lot of power at that RPM, leading to the connection with torque and low-end power.  Two-strokes tend to have a torque peak much later in the range, meaning that torque gets multiplied by the large number of revs to produce a phenomenal peak horsepower, but a less impressive low-end.  But then you have to consider that a same-displacement two-stroke makes more peak torque to begin with, and then you add that to the fact that the torque is being multiplied by the revs and you get an engine that really lays down the law when you're in the powerband.  This situation makes the two-stroke great for racing (as we all know), but I suspect they'd have to do some significant tweaking to make it work in, say, a minivan where you actually want an early torque peak.


Is this Maico a 440 or only a 400?  Well in all the confusion, I forgot myself.
But considering this is a 1978 Magnum, the best-handling bike in the world, you have to ask yourself one question.
Do you feel lucky, punk?