Post by beaupre716 on Mar 27, 2014 0:36:18 GMT -5
It's been about 17 years since the Yamaha YZ400F appeared and signaled the beginning of a second era of four-stroke dominance in motocross. (The first era of four-stroke dominance, of course, comprised every year from the sport's inception until the early 1970s.) There's no doubting that today's 450cc and 250cc thumpers are works of art that perform amazingly well, yet there's still a question that deserves to be asked: What has the sport of motocross gained by moving to four-strokes?
I'm not sure how to answer that question. It's difficult to say that the racing is any better with four-strokes. Great racing has always been a part of motocross (except perhaps for periods during the reigns of Jeremy McGrath and Ricky Carmichael). The sport isn't really any safer either. In fact, one could argue that the additional power and weight of four-strokes has brought a marginal increase in risk.
One could claim that the efficiency and potency of today's four-strokes makes riding and racing more enjoyable, but I'm pretty certain that every generation has thoroughly enjoyed the cutting-edge-for-the-time performance of their machines -- even the guys who had nothing but the heavy and fragile four-strokes of the 1960s or the pipey and otherwise temperamental two-strokes of the 1970s.
There are, however, some things I think we've lost in moving away from two-strokes as a sport. Here are five that come to mind:
I'm not sure how to answer that question. It's difficult to say that the racing is any better with four-strokes. Great racing has always been a part of motocross (except perhaps for periods during the reigns of Jeremy McGrath and Ricky Carmichael). The sport isn't really any safer either. In fact, one could argue that the additional power and weight of four-strokes has brought a marginal increase in risk.
One could claim that the efficiency and potency of today's four-strokes makes riding and racing more enjoyable, but I'm pretty certain that every generation has thoroughly enjoyed the cutting-edge-for-the-time performance of their machines -- even the guys who had nothing but the heavy and fragile four-strokes of the 1960s or the pipey and otherwise temperamental two-strokes of the 1970s.
There are, however, some things I think we've lost in moving away from two-strokes as a sport. Here are five that come to mind:
- Lower costs. Because of its abundance of moving parts, a new four-stroke will always costs a little more than a comparable two-stroke. And while it's debatable whether general upkeep costs more with a two-stroke or four-stroke, there's no question that a serious engine failure will always cost more with a four-stroke.
To read more, check out the home page, and please leave your thoughts on two-strokes below.