<< I'm not saying smaller is better, actually for some thing it is (revs out quicker) >>



My 500R revs faster than any bike ive been on. (This includes an 86 250R, an 88 250R, an 86 LT250R, The two 400EX's Ive owned, including the current one with a 440 kit, and the YZ426 I have ridden. That thing was easily the fastest revving 4 stroke Ive ever had the pleasure of riding/watching. The Zilla is instantly at high RPM when you nail it.

-Matt

 

I enjoy my 01 Raptor, but all the hype that was made when it made it's debut was a lie. Faster than a YZF426!!! Remember that edition. Well, I've come to learn at least with sportbikes they're all what they claim to be. What a rush...with a Rocket!!!! I'm tried of getting these watered down atvs, would someone step-up to the plate an give the consumer something awesome like the Zilla or Tecate-4...please!!!!!!!!!

 

I've come to understand that 2 strokes are polically incorrect due to some silly misguided studies done by overzealous enviromentalist. Note I didn't use the term tree-hugger as I am in favor of pro enviroment, within reason, but this crap is crazy.

1. pollution, it has been determined that current two-strokes pollute about 60-80% more than a comparable 4-stroke engine. Now taken into the big scheme of things, an averge city transit bus releases more pollution in 1 minute of operation than 4 hours of conitinous use on an average two-stroke motorcycle engine. Why attack the two-stroke bikes? Because they are easier targets. Also figure that a recreational two-stroke off-road bike is ridden an average of 5 hours per month, enthusiest on this board will say they ride more but we are talking the average.

2. Wheelspin, eviromentalist claim the quick reving 2-strokes produce alot of wheelspin and rip up the terrain. Maybe they do but with the mega cc 4 stroke engines out today on 400+ lbs quads I don't know if this is valid anymore. First of all most two-strokes are ridden in the wide open, dunes and tracks where is isn't very important. They may dig up some dirt but is mostly superficial compared to the deep gouges let behind by the big 500lbs+ 4x4 quads. Some are so big and deep that no sport machine axle could clear the ruts.

3. Danger, alot of the atv accident and deaths in the 80s were associated with two-strokes. In actuallity I rather have an R or a quadracer flip over on me than a DS650 or raptor. The reason sport machines are coming back is due to the 10 year/lawsuite manufactures agreed to back in the 80s has expired. But another reason is that with the boom in extreme sports of the 90s ATV riding doesn't look all that dangerous anymore in comparision to what kids do now a days on bicycles and skateboards.

 

Ok I have a question do you think a bone stock 89 250R would be any faster straight line acceleration, top speed, or on a track, than a Bone Stock Canondale Speed. I'm not talking about a done up 250R just stock for stock. I would bet money that they would be pretty damn close. So how can you say the 4 strokes are not catching up? They just started building high performance quads again in 1999. And look what we have now with a couple of other rides in the wings. Get the hell out of the good old days syndrome. My Raptor does everything better than my Zilla except straight line speed and if they end up sticking a YZ 426 or a CRF450 motor in a quad I bet it will be pretty damn close in speed. The worst thing about the 4 strokes is they just don't feel as fast as the 2 strokes. My Raptor is a little slower than my old Zilla but feels a ton slower, there is no comparison in the feel of the two speed wise. By the way what the hell does it matter what size motor you use to get the HP.

 

<< Ok I have a question do you think a bone stock 89 250R would be any faster straight line acceleration, top speed, or on a track, than a Bone Stock Canondale Speed. I'm not talking about a done up 250R just stock for stock. I would bet money that they would be pretty damn close. So how can you say the 4 strokes are not catching up? They just started building high performance quads again in 1999. And look what we have now with a couple of other rides in the wings. Get the hell out of the good old days syndrome. My Raptor does everything better than my Zilla except straight line speed and if they end up sticking a YZ 426 or a CRF450 motor in a quad I bet it will be pretty damn close in speed. The worst thing about the 4 strokes is they just don't feel as fast as the 2 strokes. My Raptor is a little slower than my old Zilla but feels a ton slower, there is no comparison in the feel of the two speed wise. By the way what the hell does it matter what size motor you use to get the HP. >>



Some things you are not taking into consideration are:
The motor on a stock 250R is not as highly tuned as a stock Cannondale.
The 250R was EXTREMELY de-tuned as stock. There is a LOT more potential for a 2-stroke when modified as opposed to a 4-stroke.

You also say &quot;what difference does engine size make&quot;?
If we want to compare two quads based on power, you must try eliminate other variables.
If the thing you are trying to judge is power/performance from a 2-stroke vs a 4-stroke, you can't compare a 440cc quad to a 250cc quad. That is not a fair comparison when talking about the power that an engine is capable of producing.

I think we ALL know that you will (for the most part) get more power out of a larger engine. This is why they have 250 classes etc. for racing.

Would you compare a 4-cylinder car to one with a V-8?? NO. Why? Because it is not a fair comparison. THAT is why you need to look at the engine sizes of the two quads being tested in order to get a &quot;true perspective&quot; on things.

Lets see how close of a race the Cannondale would have up against a well tuned 400-440cc 2-stroke?
The 2-stroke would literally rip your arms out of their sockets!

Or for that matter, if engine size doesn't matter, why don't we put up a 2002 250EX against a Banshee? If engine size doesn't matter, then that would be a fair race right? I mean they are both BRAND NEW machines! Plus the 250EX has WAY newer technology than the Banshee (which is still basically the 87' design with a few changes) right?

I think you see where I am going with this.
THIS is why you must also compare cc for cc between a 2-stroke and a 4-stroke.

Now, with this said, I DO like 4-strokes, and enjoy them for certain riding conditions. However, for the type of riding I do currently (dune riding/hill shooting), I need POWER. And the best way to get this power is from a 2-stroke hands down.

 

Im not opposed to the 4 strokes a bit. There is no way possible to make an engine that fires half as many times produce the same amount of power per cc. Period. There is also nothing wrong with a 400cc engine that only produces hp in the 35 range. That is your base, now its time to buy the go fast goodies. My Mustang stock made 225hp, it wasnt a lot but it made enough to have fun with. People are making 600hp daily drivers all the time now. Its no different for the quads, who wants something thats all ready at its max potential? I want to buy a killer pipe, a nice new carb, some porting and polishing, higher compression ratio etc. This is what seperates your machine from somebody elses, gives you the pride to know you have tweaked it to the max. When is enough enough? Where can you even use the power a zilla makes stock? The dunes, open desert maybe? Surely not the track or wooded areas. I'm confident that any 4 stroke of the day could make 60+hp, the power to weight ratio is incredible.

I love two strokes as well, the ease of maintance is very welcome but they are a pain in the a$$ too. Top ends frequently and mixing fuel, come on, this part sucks. I think we have a very nice balance right now for the engines. If and when the 426/450 make there way into quads it will be fine. We are a small fraction of the ATV market, most people arent Evil Kneevil (sp?) jumping, dune screaming, flat out madmen like we are. People still like to put around and have fun too. Im sure you wouldnt produce a line of whatever to cater to a small market when there was bigger market available and more people to please, its just smart econically. Thats what the aftermarkets for, and they are working on it. IMO we are going in the right direction, what we need to worry about is the dang tree huggers. I'm tired of seeing my dunes disapear for no reason other than the fact somebody doesnt enjoy a sport that I do. Lets redirect our fire and unite against the blasted Sierra Club!

 

Amen!!! Off with their heads! (Sierra Club that is!)

If we did have a good balance, there would be 2 stroke and 4 stroke machines in production (Something besides the Banshee)
Hat's off to Yami for at least thumbing their nose at the Enviro-****'s!
(At least they have some intestinal fortitude!)

 

RaptorDude, stock for stock the R and the Cdale are pretty close but again the engine is almost twice the size. In addition to that the Cdale is so well tuned to the point that you are not going to get more than 5 more hp out of it no matter what you do short of boring and stroking it. The thing also costs an arm and a leg and still weight 50 lbs more with an aluminum frame. The point is you could buy a bone stock (or close to it) 250r, for $3800 put a good pipe and air filter on it ($350) and smoke most 4 stroke machine out today in a straight line, lets not even talk about taking them out to a track. As for the size mattering, well if you race your raptor will be in the open class with its 660 engine, now how many raptors and DS650s are winning motocross races. I personally don't race professionally but I love how I can throw my r around without the extra weight, but the best feeling is lining up with my little old 14 year old 250cc r against these brand new, huge, expensive, monster machines and beating them.

&quot;By the way what the hell does it matter what size motor you use to get the HP&quot; They are heavy, look at the raptor, to come in under 400 lbs they had to use aluminum a-arms to save some weight. If you could build a 320 lbs 4-stroke with 50 rwhp I would be there in a second regardless of the engine size but they don't.

Out of curiousity what does the Speed sell for?

 

<< Some things you are not taking into consideration are:
The motor on a stock 250R is not as highly tuned as a stock Cannondale.
The 250R was EXTREMELY de-tuned as stock. There is a LOT more potential for a 2-stroke when modified as opposed to a 4-stroke. >>



I don't know about that, How about a ramap of the fuel injection (Computer controlled no jetting for altitude changes new technology) and then add a pipe, That is like from what I hear 8 HP or so for the price of a pipe. Plus all those 2 srokes have been around for years give the new breed a little time



<< You also say &quot;what difference does engine size make&quot;?
If we want to compare two quads based on power, you must try eliminate other variables.
If the thing you are trying to judge is power/performance from a 2-stroke vs a 4-stroke, you can't compare a 440cc quad to a 250cc quad. That is not a fair comparison when talking about the power that an engine is capable of producing. >>



Obviously it is fair because they are in the same class are they not?




<< I think we ALL know that you will (for the most part) get more power out of a larger engine. This is why they have 250 classes etc. for racing. >>



And in that 250 class just like the Motocross Bikes four strokes are allowed up to 400+ CC's correct.



<< Would you compare a 4-cylinder car to one with a V-8?? NO. Why? Because it is not a fair comparison. THAT is why you need to look at the engine sizes of the two quads being tested in order to get a &quot;true perspective&quot; on things. >>



Now would I compare a 4 cyl turbo to an 8 cyl....Maybe The point is the engines are different.



<< Lets see how close of a race the Cannondale would have up against a well tuned 400-440cc 2-stroke?
The 2-stroke would literally rip your arms out of their sockets! >>



If that was fair that would be the way it is, it is not fair firing twice as much gives the motor an atvantage so they compensate to even the field with displacement!



<< Or for that matter, if engine size doesn't matter, why don't we put up a 2002 250EX against a Banshee? If engine size doesn't matter, then that would be a fair race right? I mean they are both BRAND NEW machines! Plus the 250EX has WAY newer technology than the Banshee (which is still basically the 87' design with a few changes) right? >>



I also would not compare a sportsman 700 to a Banshee, they are different class of machine.



<< I think you see where I am going with this.
THIS is why you must also compare cc for cc between a 2-stroke and a 4-stroke. >>



I think you see where I am going with this that is why you cannot compare a 2 stroke to a 4 stroke CC for CC.



<< Now, with this said, I DO like 4-strokes, and enjoy them for certain riding conditions. However, for the type of riding I do currently (dune riding/hill shooting), I need POWER. And the best way to get this power is from a 2-stroke hands down. >>



Now that said I like 2 strokes also, I have a 88 250R ( my sons) but I do mostly trail riding I like and I prefer my Raptor For the type of riding I do.

My friend and I were going out for a ride this past Sunday he on his banshee and I on my Raptor. Before the ride he was getting ready, changing his plugs, Bringing an extra set of plugs, mixing his gas, getting his tools together...I joked now I am going to get ready, I reached in my pocket grabbed my key and said all set...

All jokes aside I like both 2 strokes and 4 strokes but to say the new 4 strokes are way behind the old 2 strokes is crazy they are getting there even though it has taken some time.

 

hold on let me go get some popcorn and i'll be right back to post to this soap opera!!!!!