Good rant....2 vs 4 strokes.

[andrzej]

The Lost Decade: Part II

?

[jonrya91]

Even though I'm a two stroke fan, this is an excellent read:

http://motocrossactionmag.com/Yamaha/News/Designer-Yoshhiharu-Nakayama-3937.aspx

BTW, he didn't throw a "Hail Mary". This was something he thought up and pushed at the Yamaha execs by himself. He worked on the 250F drawings at home because no one thought it would work.

[Kenpo1]

Even though I'm a two stroke fan, this is an excellent read:

http://motocrossactionmag.com/Yamaha/News/Designer-Yoshhiharu-Nakayama-3937.aspx

BTW, he didn't throw a "Hail Mary". This was something he thought up and pushed at the Yamaha execs by himself. He worked on the 250F drawings at home because no one thought it would work.

I appreciate the mans ingenuity and his devotion to his project. It's cool that he went after it based on his own desire.... but the point in the article posted by the OP is that it didn't really work, did it? It was buoyed up by arbitrary rules designed to give a failed machine a fighting chance, essentially artificially propping up a heavier, slower, less maneuverable and more expensive machine.

Those artificial and arbitrary rule changes coupled with a marketing campaign designed to play on mankind's, (Americans in particular) propensity for falling for bandwagon oriented hype, and we have one of the greatest hoodwinks perpetrated by corporations on average the average Joe ever!

Only now, with land closures, dramatic reductions in race entry fees, and an ever shrink market base (due largely to an ever increasing barrier to entry created by the initial cost and maintenance cost of the 4's) etc are the corporations realizing they may have shot themselves in the foot.

Sadly, the average rider is slower to realize they've been sold beachfront property in Arizona than the corporations are in realizing they may have misstepped.

[singletrkstar]

That's an excellent story. The man was determined to make the 4t work and by all means was successful. But just because it works doesn't mean it's the right solution. Interesting in the article that what actually fueled the official production was the N.A. representatives' confirmation that the bikes would sell well over here. We were in a booming economy then, and the silicon valley area in particular. Things have certainly changed. It will be interesting to see what transpires over the next year or two.

[adam728]

Pointing blame at the engineers doesn't really hold water though, they were likely taking marching orders pushed by marketing. "This will sell, build it any way possible" is typically how it goes. Even if you know it's crap you kind of need to do your job.

I don't know how many times I've seen a project that is destined to make a worse product, but it's pushed though because "this is what the consumer thinks they want".

[RCannon]

I enjoy reading abotu how smart everyone is now, but where they so smart in 96-98 when something could have changed? Did anyone say, "Hey..wait a minute"....when an exhaust pipe change on the 2001 yz250f gave it an additional 3hp? No. But 10-15 years later we have no shortage of wack-a-doos who KNEW it all along.

So, they start building high-tech four strokes and people bought them. Is that a crime?

I love my yz250 because its a good bike. I dont especially care how the engine functions.

[BRM]

The lost decade, very well written.

[andrzej]

I enjoy reading abotu how smart everyone is now, but where they so smart in 96-98 when something could have changed? Did anyone say, "Hey..wait a minute"....when an exhaust pipe change on the 2001 yz250f gave it an additional 3hp? No. But 10-15 years later we have no shortage of wack-a-doos who KNEW it all along.

True enough....hindsight is 20/20 most of the time. But now we know better and people seem to be getting wise to the tradeoffs that were made back then and are coming to bite them now.

So, they start building high-tech four strokes and people bought them. Is that a crime?

Human stupidity is not a crime. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be. Robert Heinlein (one of my favourite writers) had some interesting things to say about that.

I love my yz250 because its a good bike. I dont especially care how the engine functions.

I do care how the engine functions, primarily for three reasons:

1) The behaviour and performance characteristics of a bike are greatly affected by how the engine delivers power, which is very much dependent on how it functions. I like having no engine braking, and the adrenaline rush when the power band hits on a 2-stroke, which are both due to how it functions, and why you don't get the same feel off a 4-stroke, which functions differently.

2) How the engine functions is related to complexity of the engine which then dramatically changes the cost, effort and knowledge required to do maintenance of the engine. So I like 2-strokes better because they are simpler, cheaper and easier to work on and fix.

3) If you know how it functions, you can understand it better, tune it better and if you are really keen (and an engineer) improve the design/operation even more. The latter is beyond my knowledge, capabilities or interest, but I sure am interested in what a new generation 2 stroke might be capable of!

So I do care how an engine functions and we thus differ on that point.

However, despite me having started this thread (more tongue in cheek than not ?), I'm cool with all bikes. 2 vs 4 stroke, dirt vs street, blue vs red vs green vs yellow vs orange (and purple if you are moi!), Jap vs Harley, curiser vs sport, etc.

If you are on two wheels then you are OK by me, and I'll gladly share a beer with ya!

If all you drive is a cage, then not so much.

[Kenpo1]

But 10-15 years later we have no shortage of wack-a-doos who KNEW it all along.

Surely you recognize that there were plenty of people (on TT as well as other sites) who were in fact taking such stances way back when... right?

I don't care how the engine functions in terms of acute comparisons, but in the aggregate, when something pretty "unnecessary" is pushed on the public, and that something has a negative impact on the sport I love, then yes I care. I think at this point it has been pretty well established that the limited options and propped up popularity of the 450's are hurting this sport. Am I wrong?

Land closures, increased barrier to entry, increased cost etc causes me concern. When its done in the name of something that really isn't any better, it's frustrating.

Anyhow, I thought it was a good read, with some clever writing.

[andrzej]

The Lost Decade: Part 3