6/07
I wish I could somehow fathom how much further humanity would be along if the majority of our population, were not such blind followers of the direction of the masses around them. How not difficult is it to look into even recent history to see people persuaded by the popular perspective to find that they just foolishly drank the “Kool-Aid” that will take them all away from the troubled world. How many lives would have been spared if Russia would have recognized Stalin for the fraud he was? How many of Germany’s citizens would have stock piled fellow countrymen into the slaughter of concentration camps if they didn’t believe so faithfully and personally in Hitler’s vision? How many Americans would have killed themselves under the guise of redemption signaled by a passing comet?? Not to make light of any personal situation connecting any readers of this to these events, but looking back with hindsight, doesn’t it seem odd, even embarrassing? It’s hard to acknowledge the blindness once you’ve been part of it and looked back with 20/20. It’s obviously hard to swallow the reality that about all of us can fall pray to ignorance. Why is hard to swallow? Because modern humans, “in today’s day and age” just can’t stop doing it over and over and over. Can we not be aware and learn from the fact that too many people can be as easily lead in some direction as a herd of cattle? Too many of us don’t bother to connect the dots that lay outside the box and that failure to think can for example leave you broke, and in the worst case scenario be fatal.
2strokes and 4strokes. If you’ve read through this site and the links that lead to 3rd party sources of information and not come to some sort of question in your head that 4strokes are not displacing 2strokes for performance reasons, then you’re lost. You need to learn to read and more importantly, you need to learn that you’re sitting lower on the world’s thinking men’s totem pole than you should admit. Be willing to elevate yourself. I say willing, because it’s not a hard concept I’m talking about here and it’s certainly not hard to pick up references that describes it. If you don’t realize that the latest 450cc racing 4stroke motor has 200 more cc’s than a 250R because 4strokes can’t compete at an equal displacement level and still think that 4strokes are better power makers then you deserve a little being laughed at. Both of these motors are normally aspirated meaning they both draw in an amount of fuel and air exactly relative to their displacement (cc’s). Math has never been easier “4strokes rule” fans. If you ride a 450 and beat me in a drag race on my 250R, I say to you, not very impressive. Knock 200cc’s off and even come close to my roost and I’ll consider respecting that 4stroke as a potential replacement for 2strokes – I’ll just have to make a leap to get over all the expensive extra moving parts that are nice for meeting epa standards to make the rest of the journey… The 4stroke revolution… ehh… I definitely like some 4strokes, don’t get me wrong, but not better than 2strokes and especially with the blind consumerism surrounding them.
1/07
Here are a couple more replies to the incessant belief that 4strokes are better
power makers than 2strokes - more 2strokes are outdated thinking. Someone's quote:
"But, the amount of effort put into the 2 stroke - even including KTM has diminished. My opinion is that it is not so much a matter of profit potential as it is power potential". It amazes
me how
much convinving is required sometimes to let a little light shine in about something
that isn't even a matter of opinion. It seems from my view marketing can really
take hold of people! Is a stock 450 faster than a stock 250R? Sure, but not
by a whole lot and certainly not without alot of mechanical penalties associated.
Don't forget about the fact that there is 200 more cc's in it.
Plus, the manufacturer's probably at
least considered the 250R as a benchmark to beat in power
- realizing that to unseat something winning races and drawing aftermarket money
for so many years, they'd better do a good job if they were to make money on 4strokes.
It seems that if the media/internet and of course the mechanical engineer's choice
reading Dirt Wheels says it, it must be true! 4strokes are obviously the best way
to make power! It may actually not be that people think that 4strokes are faster
than 2strokes, it's just that they haven't thought though to the next step enough
to realize that they're absolutely not! This my response to someone who repeatedly
is sure that 4strokes have more power potential. He says, if you make a 4stroke
250 twin, that essentially doubles its power, like a 2stroke. This is my last attempt
with some actual numbers. Amazing!
---
Here is the Honda GP racer I was talking about. I think [name] posted this somewhere actually: Honda's very own modern 2stroke GP racer...
Supposedly if you convert 67.7kw/12500rpm to hp you wind up with 91hp or something.
Of course, I don't agree with you about power potential (in 4strokes). That is the fundamental issue I have with 4strokes actually.
I think given their overhead, their power potential compared to a 2t is atrocious. True, 4strokes have a broader torque range and I can see how people would like that, but I don't think a 450 4stroke would have a broader torque band than a modern well-tuned 450 2stroke - maybe flatter of a curve. My buddies 400ex has a MUCH more even torque curve than I do. Which is more fun for my girlfriend to put around? The ex. Me on a dune face? The spastic 2t.
By the way, of the two bikes you posted, here are the comparable power numbers:
4stroke:
cc: 990
power: 240
cc/hp: 4.125:1
2stroke:
cc: 250
power: 90
cc/hp: 2.78:1
If my figures are right, the 2stroke is putting out 33% more power per cubic centimeter of combustion volume. I DO NOT see how there is more power potential in a 4stroke.
By the way I have a book that says that Honda developed the late coming CR250 as a response to yamaha and Suzuki's 2strokes because they COULD NOT make a 250 4stroke that could win against the 2stroke. They tried various experimental designs, but finally conceded like 3 years after they said they'd never make a 2stroke.
---
A previous reply made to the SAME person who had asserted that the 250R had just
topped out...
The 250R has not topped out... It was last developed in 89 as you say. This means it has not benefitted from the advantages of newer developments such as a powervalve for example. By the way, the CR of the same era put out more hp than the TRX version. The TRX came detuned by design. Again, a 250 2stroke being put out by Honda themselves today is putting out over 90hp. The platform is NOT out of date. Remember this is a mcrocosm of applications we're discussing (ATV's). Either way, it's a smaller displacement engine than a 450. So my point is the same. Think of it this way too. If you were Honda, and you wanted to make a successful successor to the 250R, wouldn't you make it faster? So I'll give you the road that stock for stock the 450 is faster than a 250R (and yes, some random people think that even if track times are faster on a 450, the 250R is still a better handling quad). I don't think that is saying much for the 450 though. My argument is not about the specific application because size wise, this is an apples and oranges discussion. My argument is the basic platform itself. As a platform, 2strokes are not outdated and yes the 450 is here because of EPA legalities.
If the 250rR itself is considered outdated when compared against the basically more powerful 450R, then I say, yes, but my "outdated" R is cheaper to fix, easier to upgrade and less of a worry to diagnose and get running normally again. So, if you were to look at the two side by side, which would you be inclinded to say is "outdated"? If I weren't aware of the timeline of these engines, I'd say the one that has to get the job done with a bigger engine, and more complicated design is the "outdated" platform. I'm a software engineer and I have to design functional things to be used in the real world as well. In my experience, the solution that does the intended job with less work, less complication and less maintenance is the better design. Any layman should be able to agree with that I think. The bigger picture in ATV's and racing though is a political and money making one. I'm not an expert here, but I think it stands to reason that Honda is not going to promote 2strokes on the track on Sunday with sponsored riders and marketing, only to have to sell the consumers a registerable 4stroke on Monday. They put their money into making the 4stroke a consumer ready alternative instead - a larger, more complicated engine that in stock form, by the way, just edges out an 80's detuned 2stroke setup. I think my point is clear here by now. Now, I'm not saying that you shouldn't be proud of your 450. It's fast and has a broader hp range than my R. I'm glad you love it and I hope you continue to. Again though, it's not where my dollars for ME are going.
12/06
This is a reply that
touches on an annoying aspect of the new breed of high performance atv – the fact
that there is the idea that the 4strokes are new technology because 2strokes are
outdated. I just think it’s hilarious and this is a response I had to it:
---
Anyway, you're about
as passionate about the 450 as I am the 250R. So I get you on that level. Chalk
up difference of opinions about which is more fun up to preference. But the day
that massive rotating pile of metal of a top end can beat my 250R in any way shape
or form with 250cc's is the day I'll concede that 4strokes are somehow any different
than they always have been for many, many, before we were born years. My point is,
that 450 is not new technology "as much as you want it to be". It's just a highly
strung 4stroke which friend, is not a new idea. What IS new are EPA deadlines that
discourage manufacturing of the simple, small, light 2stroke engine. By the way,
the banshee is not out of production. It's just not legal to register the 07 in
the US. Since your statement is not correct and I assume you believed it before you typed
it, and since it's not your words that are ignorant, should I say then that you
are? Just kidding. Slimy, if you like 2strokes
and want a tunable engine for duning, I personally don't think the banshee is all
that bad. Porting doesn't involve moving parts and in the hands of a good tuner,
can make you an engine that's got plenty of what you'd want. I personally think
2strokes are best at duning. I ride a 250R though because of the awesome engine
and chassis combo, and I am also considering buying a banshee for longer cross country
duning trips... These things are riding preference. Personally I wouldn't worry
about your 05 being out of date by 08. A lot of people like those 450s; and the
introduction of Fuel Injection is going to be mandatory by EPA standards. It's not
necessarily because it increases performance. It's just more smog equipment, cost
passed on to you. This also means that it won't be legal to sell the 450 setup you
own today (sound familiar?). Riding is about having fun. So pick what is FUN for
you and stop worrying about keeping with the ky'd asses of the dirt wheels jones's!
11/27/06
Here's what can be done to a bone stock TRX to beat modified 450's
in a peak power race, and still be far cheaper to maintain, and most importantly
a more fun engine than the heavy rotational weight 4stroke. Superiority through
simplicity.
Porting (midrange) by
a good porter $200
Chambered head $250
Midrange pipe $250
PWK 38mm carb $190
V-force2 reeds $120
Skat Trak Haulers $180
The math adds up.