I prefer a two-stroke over a four stroke, I have both and both have there strong points. When I just want to play around for a few minutes I get out the 230 quadrunner, when I want to go fast and ride for a while I get on th e 250 quadracer.

 

No truer words were ever writen.

 

...................retracted apology...............

 

But you did say that I haven't done my homework, which just isn't true. I never said that 2 strokes didn't produce torque, only that 4 strokes produce a lot more at low end, so no, it isn't nonsense.

I said I brought out a BIG deer, and my hunting partner, and me, all at the same time ON A BIKE, up a mountain trail. (the deer was on a cart we were pulling). Being from Louisiana you may not know what I mean by a mountain trail, but we needed that low end torque to make it up a couple thousand feet, and no, I don't think there are any 2 stroke bikes that could have done the same without burning up their clutch, if they could have done it at all.

Now elk is an entirely different matter. You are talking about an animal roughly the size of a horse, and we hunt them in steep terrain. This is the reason I bought a quad, and I wouldn't have even thought about a 2 stroke because they just wouldn't get the job done. If you are going to go play around the track, then a 2 stroke is fine, but when you need to get a big job done a 4 stroke is the only way to go.

 

The Scrambler 400 4x4 would do it all and did. No clutch problems whatsoever as it was a cvt. Know what that is? No problems from any quads I've listed as a matter of fact...........not opinion. Only the largest big bore 4 strokes will make any torque of measureable significance. And that is only because of giant displacements.
If you're hauling elk in a trailer, a hunting partner, and whatever else, I'd suggest a truck or jeep.

 

OK, I'll say this one more time. WE WERE ON A MOTORCYCLE!!!! Your scrambler wouldn't work because it was a MOTORCYCLE TRAIL. Get it? You wouldn't even fit, so your continously variable transmission (yes, I know what that is, so save your insults) doesn't mean squat since I don't think there are any 2 stroke bikes that have one.

It's not just a matter of how much torque, it's where the torque is in your power band. 4 strokes typically have a much lower power band than 2 strokes, so pulling a heavy load up a steep incline is much easier with a 4 stroke since your power band is much closer to your shift points. A 2 strokes power is a function of rpm, so you have to get your rpms up before you hit the power band, which doesn't work well for overcoming the inertia of a heavy load, especially on a hill. All engines create torque, otherwise you wouldn't move, it's how they create it that differs. Have you ever ridden anything other than a quad?

As for a truck or a jeep, sure it would be great if the elk decided to walk a couple of miles to the nearest road. Unfortunately they don't usually cooperate like that and we have to either pack them out on our backs, or if we are lucky they are in a spot that we can get a bike or a quad. You really don't what it's like being in the mountains, do you?

 

Well YOU need to state that the trail is too narrow for a quad(which I doubt). Yes, I've ridden a lot of different vehicles. You mentioned both quads and bikes in your first post. Then you made a blanket statement about two strokes in general. I don't think you understand the mechanics of the combustion engine from your previous posts. Hauling elk out on a motorbike sounds goofy, anyway. Try a pack animal. Maybe an *** so there'd be two of ya.

 

Not all 2- strokes have to be reved to the moon to make power. Sure a banshee doesn't have much low end power, but it wasn't made to produce low end power. You can make a 2-stroke motor produce as much low end power as a 4-stroke. On a 2-stroke the pipe determines where in the rpm range the power band will hit. If a 2-stroke has a pipe that wont let it rev beyond say 7000 rpm, and has a smaller carb, it will produce ALOT of low end torque and a smooth powerband {not much top end power}. If a 2-stroke has a pipe that lets the motor rev to 12000 rpm, and has a large carb, it will make ALOT of top end power {not much low end power} and have a violent hit in the powerband. It all comes down to where the motor was designed to make power. And whats with this "burning up clutches" thing. It either is engaged, or disengaged, just like a 4-stroke.

 

Now with all that said, 2-strokes have only 2 areas where where 4-strokes are better. 1-emissions 2-fuel consumption. If it wasn't for these 2 factors the 2-stroke would be alive today.

 

Most powerful piston engine

My LT250R may not produce the torque of a Raptor 660, but this two stroke certainly does make some torque.