More Fuel for the "Which Is Faster" Debate!
#1
03-21-2005 | 02:08 AM
Thread Starter
|
Red Rider
Honda, accept nothing less!
Honda, accept nothing less!
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 12,733
Likes: 1
More Fuel for the "Which Is Faster" Debate!
April issue of ATV Sport. The never ending debate about whether the Yamaha or Honda 450 is fastest: Well, they clocked the Honda just slightly faster at 62.10 mph and the Yamaha at 61.96. But, there is a catch.........it takes the Honda longer to get to top speed than it takes the Yamaha. So, the Yamaha is a better sprinter (good trait for an MX bike to have), and the Honda is faster in a very long race. Take a long desert race like Baja. Say it takes 40 hrs. to reach the finish line. A bike that is just 1 mph faster, will finish 40 miles ahead of the competition.
Of course, these are bone stock bikes with no mods.
Of course, these are bone stock bikes with no mods.
#3
03-21-2005 | 12:46 PM
Elite Pro Rider
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,380
Likes: 1
More Fuel for the "Which Is Faster" Debate!
Originally posted by: blindside350
60mph is unbelieveable, and for a race quad no way that they are going to go only 60mph. But its a common fact that the TRX is "faster"
60mph is unbelieveable, and for a race quad no way that they are going to go only 60mph. But its a common fact that the TRX is "faster"
And Recon, Somehow I really dont believe that magazine article was with 2 stock quads. Gearing, tire choice, or something must have been very different. For reference, DW tested the YFZ at 78.3mph with stock gearing and tires, 78.9 for the trx. Now I'm not saying that DW is right and that magazine isnt, but there has to be an explanation for the difference of 15+mph difference between them. And just because the trx is a little over a half mile an hour faster, I really dont think you can call that a "common fact" that the trx is always faster.
And in the grand scheme if things, if we are talking about less than one mph, whether its at 62 or 78, who really cares?
#4
03-21-2005 | 01:19 PM
Pro Rider
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
More Fuel for the "Which Is Faster" Debate!
dang, i thought they were in the 70's at least. a lot of new commers are going to look at the top speed comparing quads and maybe they will pick 400ex's and ltz's because they top out at around 67-68!
but probably not [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-disgusted.gif[/img]
but probably not [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-disgusted.gif[/img]
#5
03-21-2005 | 01:38 PM
Range Rover
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
More Fuel for the "Which Is Faster" Debate!
Didn't the 250r in 85' top out @ 68-69mph bone stock?
C'mon..
As for the 40 hour race - you're nuts man.
I have done plenty of desert riding to know that you hardly ever get to top speed. (If ever).
Its all about the rider. (Unlike drag racing).
C'mon..
As for the 40 hour race - you're nuts man.
I have done plenty of desert riding to know that you hardly ever get to top speed. (If ever).
Its all about the rider. (Unlike drag racing).
#6
03-21-2005 | 02:36 PM
Shed Knocker Rider
Harley Punk!
Harley Punk!
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 35,876
Likes: 2
More Fuel for the "Which Is Faster" Debate!
Im not the most knowledgable on desert racing but I wouldn't think you would be at "exact" top speed even a lot of the time. A another thing to consider is I doubt a completely stock quad is even going to be raced if someone is looking to win at a competitive level. So really even if the info is true, it is completely irrelavent.
#7
03-21-2005 | 09:06 PM
Pro Rider
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,287
Likes: 0
More Fuel for the "Which Is Faster" Debate!
Originally posted by: maddog56
A magazine tests them and the trx is less than 2 tenths of a mph faster. Now you are telling me that the trx being faster is common knowledge? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?
And in the grand scheme if things, if we are talking about less than one mph, whether its at 62 or 78, who really cares?
Originally posted by: blindside350
60mph is unbelieveable, and for a race quad no way that they are going to go only 60mph. But its a common fact that the TRX is "faster"
60mph is unbelieveable, and for a race quad no way that they are going to go only 60mph. But its a common fact that the TRX is "faster"
And in the grand scheme if things, if we are talking about less than one mph, whether its at 62 or 78, who really cares?
But i agree with the rest of you, i doubt desert racers hit top speed much at all (can't tell you from personal experience)
Trending Topics
#8
03-21-2005 | 11:23 PM
Thread Starter
|
Red Rider
Honda, accept nothing less!
Honda, accept nothing less!
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 12,733
Likes: 1
More Fuel for the "Which Is Faster" Debate!
The big desert endurance races are done mostly 5th gear pinned. In fact, they gear up for even more speed. Now keep in mid that these bikes are widened and have the ultimate in suspesnion. If your personal experience is riding a 15 year old 3 wheeler, well I can see why you might think that is impossible!
The DW aritcle was about a desert race team that was trying out different gearing combinations. These are race prepped bikes, and are hardly stock. I don't have it in front of me, but as I recall the bikes topped out in the low 70's??? Anybody got the article??? And, as I recall the Honda had a top speed that was also just a smidge faster.
The DW aritcle was about a desert race team that was trying out different gearing combinations. These are race prepped bikes, and are hardly stock. I don't have it in front of me, but as I recall the bikes topped out in the low 70's??? Anybody got the article??? And, as I recall the Honda had a top speed that was also just a smidge faster.
#9
03-21-2005 | 11:48 PM
T Rex Rider
What irritates me is!
Those 6-packs work pretty good.
What irritates me is!
Those 6-packs work pretty good.
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,801
Likes: 1
From: Oeste Del Tejas
More Fuel for the "Which Is Faster" Debate!
Originally posted by: waynerod
Didn't the 250r in 85' top out @ 68-69mph bone stock?
C'mon..
As for the 40 hour race - you're nuts man.
I have done plenty of desert riding to know that you hardly ever get to top speed. (If ever).
Its all about the rider. (Unlike drag racing).
Didn't the 250r in 85' top out @ 68-69mph bone stock?
C'mon..
As for the 40 hour race - you're nuts man.
I have done plenty of desert riding to know that you hardly ever get to top speed. (If ever).
Its all about the rider. (Unlike drag racing).
Tecate was over 70mph. Course that was with 3 wheels. Amazes me that 20 years later with today's technology we still can't create an atv as affordable, fun and fast. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-sad.gif[/img]
#10
03-21-2005 | 11:56 PM
Pro Rider
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
More Fuel for the "Which Is Faster" Debate!
Originally posted by: Raptorlegs
Tecate was over 70mph. Course that was with 3 wheels. Amazes me that 20 years later with today's technology we still can't create an atv as affordable, fun and fast. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-sad.gif[/img]
Originally posted by: waynerod
Didn't the 250r in 85' top out @ 68-69mph bone stock?
C'mon..
As for the 40 hour race - you're nuts man.
I have done plenty of desert riding to know that you hardly ever get to top speed. (If ever).
Its all about the rider. (Unlike drag racing).
Didn't the 250r in 85' top out @ 68-69mph bone stock?
C'mon..
As for the 40 hour race - you're nuts man.
I have done plenty of desert riding to know that you hardly ever get to top speed. (If ever).
Its all about the rider. (Unlike drag racing).
Tecate was over 70mph. Course that was with 3 wheels. Amazes me that 20 years later with today's technology we still can't create an atv as affordable, fun and fast. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-sad.gif[/img]
i dont think it matters how fast DW says they are. it seems obvious they dont have too much to write about. at least its something interesting and involves atv's. just take the info for what its worth and if the info is not perfectly accurate then at least the magazine helps our sport grow...