Originally posted by: 1986atc250r
Ahh, more insults from the YFZ crowd...

I'm in the same boat as you - my TRX is my ride for racing only. However, unlike yourself, I am not an MX racer.

That being the case, the best quad for the purpose, numerous things considered - is the one that ends up in my garage. In this case I analyzed the YFZ, I decided I could afford to wait for the TRX (given it's advantages for me). After the TRX came out I made my final decision that it WAS indeed close enough to the YFZ that winning races would NOT depend on which one I was riding -whether I was going to be riding MX, TT, XC, or any of a number of other events I attend.

That being the case, the decision came down to more which had the most advantages for *me* -- not necessarily what you consider to be best for everyone. In my case, that was the TRX.

Your statement of a TRX being no advantage over an LTZ shows your serious lack of real world experience with the two & is an incredibly ignorant statement from someone who professes to be such an expert on the two.

If you had any real experience with the two you'd also know the two issues that were addressed with the TRX's rear suspension vs the 400EX that make it better. You'd also know the functional differences in it and the LTZ. You'd also know about the YFZ's rear quirk that caused an A class GNCC racer in the last event in TX to end up in the hospital with a broken back & claiming that he'll never ride a YFZ again due to this problem that he *and others* have run into.

I guess it also doesn't matter that the YFZ's swinger has to be replaced by everyone but the mildest trailrider due to it's serious breakage/twisting rate?

I'm not saying that either rear suspension is "better" than the other -but if you look at all the facts (leverage ratio's included), you'll realize that the YFZ, while good, is not the Holy Grail you make it out to be & the TRX is not simply a copy of a 400EX that can be expected to perform the same. Both are good designs that work well stock & work better modified.

I have no idea what you're talking about on singarm length - please explain in detail why the TRX's swinger length is wrong - please include real data in your response like individual tire weight, axle to peg relationships, etc. Also what type of racing it's wrong for & why that makes it wrong for everyone.

I also don't see what you're talking about with "permanent detuning"... Stock vs stock they develop the same power if you look at dyno's done by the same people & don't randomly pick dynos out of the air or ones run by someone that hasn't confirmed the throttle was opening fully on the TRX. Modified vs Modified, you will have to replace the carb on the EX - but HP potential is the same, if not slightly leaning toward the TRX.

Do you know that the TRX valve configuration flows better than the YFZ? It develops the same power with less compression (just like these engines do in the dirtbike world), and it develops more useable power than the YFZ (if we're splitting hairs), just like in the dirtbike world. This is due in part to it's head design. In the real world, the TRX is also lighter weight & doesn't suffer from the issues the YFZ does if you convert it to kick.


If you want to talk YFZ vs TRX details - a couple other issues I don't hear you guys talk about at all is front suspension leverage ratios & rake angle.

Riding position also makes a difference. For someone like myself at 6' - the TRX has a better riding position than a YFZ - that also factors in to which I chose.

As I said before - neither quad is right for everyone, neither is a bad choice for anyone wanting to go fast in their intended use. Arguments can be made both ways for either quad, but in the end, neither is a bad choice & these two are your two top choices if you want the best of the OEMs.