Yeah, I know the mags. suck and that's too bad.

I know I'm gonna get hit for this, but my friend has a stock '02 Raptor and my other buddy has a '00 400EX. The EX has a FMF powercoreIV, K&N, and Dyno Jet kit. The EX has more low end power than the Raptor does. Granted the Raptor will beat it, but for low end power the Raptor does not have what this EX does. We all agree on that as well. I can't explain it, but when comparing these 2 particular machines, this is the result.

 

I think the raptor is higher gearing than the 400ex and the Z400. This is probably why it has less bottom end feel.

 

I find that magazine reviews/tests of boats, cars, motorcycles, whatever, often suffer from poor editing or writing precision. So, when an article contradicts itself, it's because the writing is sloppy. Compared to my 400EX, the Z400 is easier to stall when starting out, so a little more clutch-feathering is required. This also equates to inferior off-idle grunt -- like in 2d-gear trail-riding.

Now, I define the powerband (in accordance with the dyno curves)as 3-10k rpm. The zone between idle and 3000 rpm is the 'grunt-zone'. Standard parlance divides a powerband into 'bottom-end', 'mid-range', and 'top-end'. So, I describe my Z400 as having good bottom-end, and terrific mid-range and top-end.

Probably, some test terminology is based on an assumed definitions, so it occasionally implies a contradiction, where none actually exists.

 

My Z also takes more clutch feathering off idle than a 400EX but it does not suffer from a weak bottom end.

 

Lets just wait 6 mo to 1 year and see how everything else holds up on the z400. Trannys ?? Clutches ?? Hell maybe a supplier shipped parts from defective castings, no one can tell till some wear and tear is put on these bikes. Remember how giddy everyone was over the raptor ?? The '02 raptor is much improved over the '01. What will we see in '04 from team yellow ? Then thats when z400's can be judged against the 'ex's solid rep and the raptor. Until then I'll keep my raptor and gladly race either bike (had to throw that in [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img] )


Michael

 

Back to the torque thing....

Gary, you are absolutely correct. The problem is that when people hear "torque" they automatically think of low-end pulling power; which is a misnomer.

Anyway, you did a good job explaining it even if hardly anybody understands the concept.

Oh, one more thing. 2 strokes can and do make lots of low-end torque; it's all in port timing, compression, pipe design etc.. Ride a trials bike sometime and you'll see what I mean.