There is quite some arguement that 2ts will go to more oversquare engines, especially with such techs as DFI, as the fuel component of the charge, will be less dependent on the 'whole engine' concept.
I disagree with the idea that a DFI two stroke would require an over-square engine configuration. Its still a two stroke, it still relies on crank case induction and exhaust scavenging, just like almost all other DFI two strokes (with boats being the exception).
However a DFI trapping valve two stroke would probably make good use of a short stroke as it does not need the long stroke for additional exhaust time area.
Disagree all you want young fellow.
As I wrote "There is quite some arguement that 2ts will go to more oversquare engines, especially with such techs as DFI". Therefore, there will be disagreements.
I don't believe there is a need for 2ts in Motorcycles to go that route - chasing revs to get HP, as naturally aspirated 4ts do. That's through my own, perhaps 'old timers' viewpoint, on what I want from a 2t.
2ts can keep relatively long strokes, whilst doing battle with 4ts. Simple maths / time calculations show that 4ts "big bang advantage", so to speak, is gradually being negated by the revs they must go for, for power to compete against a 2t, at least for now. Though, Moto 3 rules (well, the max. bore rule of 81mm - shared with Moto 3 - is a somewhat of a 'control' in Moto GP) , are keeping a cap on revs.
But, as I wrote, there have been, and will remain to be, quite a varied opinion on what bore / stroke ratio is 'optimum'.
One Engineers "Optimum", will be anothers "Dud".
I gave the Evinrude dimensions as an example of what has been done, with a certain, pretty successful application of DFI 2 strokes.
I'll have to have a squizz at what the 2t Snowmobiles tend to use. It may be comparable to the
Outboards, as they may be more of a 'steady state' engine than a Motorcycle Engine ( but, I'd think, less so than an Outboard) would be. It, of course, may not be comparable, at all.
