Hey Guys,
A while ago, on 2 Stroke Motocross's front page, some guys where were leaving comments in response to one of the articles, I think it was Jody's "Two Stroke Manifesto" in MXA. In the course of those comments, I thought one guy noted the renegade pro 2 stroke stance maintaned by some guys like Jody W, and another guy said something about being so glad to have some voices like Jody's out there to counter the conformist pro 4 stroke, vanilla whitewash of certain "Kool Aid Pusher Fan Boys". When I read that, I thought for SURE that the main "Kool Aid Pusher Fan Boys" must be Transworld Motocross.
Just about everything in that magazine seems to be written to serve it's advertising patrons. A lot of times their point of view on bikes reads sort of like the glossy brochures you can pick up at a dealership. Therefore, Corporately Formulated Kool Aid Buzz-Words like "Technology", "Technologically Advanced", "Advanced Technology", and "New 4 Strokes" are splashed accross it's pages like the costume jewels of some big gay Vegas stage.
I saw that they reviewed the 150 SX and they do say some nice things about it. I take issue with the POSTURE of the article, however. When you read the review of the 2010 RM-Z250, it sounds like an MX magazine reviewing a race bike, with lots of toe-tapping terms like "More Powerul", "Instantaneous Throttle Response", and "Better Handling". I think their review of the 150 SX should have the same kind of beat, but it doesn't. When I read that article, it sound's like they are reviewing something other than a race bike. They say some nice things, "The 150 SX is, without a doubt, incredibly powerful -" but almost every favorable thing they say is immediately followed by some kind of shrugging, negative conterbalance "- for a little two-stroke." And on top of that I wonder how they can even mention saccarine, like the electronically solicited, imitation, sort-of throttle response of the 250 four stroke while never uttering the words "Instantaneous Throttle Response" in describing the KTM 2 stoke.
Also interestingly enough I noticed that in each of the 2 reviews I mention here, there is a reference to the reviewed machine's bigger bother. While talking about the RM-Z 250, they mention that it's EFI system is derived directly from the "Tried and true 450". On the other hand, when talking about the 150 SX, they insinuate it's relationship to "The heavier, light-switchy 250cc".
Let's see now... "Tried and true" = Suzuki 450 four stroke? / "Heavier, light-switchy 250cc" = 250 two stroke? Huh? Seriously???
I have a question, how come everyone seems so reluctant to mention the words heavy, bulky, heavier, or heaviest anywhere near four storkes??? In the dancing puppet show that is motocross media these days, a four stroke's bump-flattening weight is only refferenced indireclty, and favorably as "Stability"...
What kind of backward bizzarro world are we living in when magazines are associating terms like "Instantaneous Throttle Response" with 250 Four Stroke lug-buggies and terms like "Heavier" with 250 Two Strokes???
I mean jesus man are these guys kidding?
Thanks,
Jim
Check out this comparison. THE BIKE DOES IT'S OWN TALKING HERE!!!!
KTM 144 at Chatteris 
