I think the hill shot was a good example of high RPM horsepower vs low RPM torque. (HP = Torque x RPM / 5282 [it's something close to that anyways.]) I have no clue what the power outputs of either engine are.

Those 2 strokes like to rev out and get up into the high RPMs where they make their good horsepower numbers. However, on that hill shot he probably started bogging down and didn't get into a lower gear.

The Warrior can be pretty much bogged down and will recover with a nice low end.

As I noted before with my friend on her Blaster, I really dislike following her up trails. She'll start to bog down and then you worry about it stalling out and me running into her. I always give myself plenty of room when following her. I hang back and just hit it and my Warrior (complately stock) just seems to go up with ease. It really has amazed me.

I bet the tires are what made a huge difference. It doesn't matter how much power you have at the end of the axles if the tires can't get it effectively to the ground. And in the hill climbing, the added weight of a full size truck on the stock tires (probably much skinnier and less agressive tread than those on the Ranger) made things really bad for your friend.

It's much the same type of thing if you go out to a dune area. At Pismo you see all kinds of trucks playing on the dunes, but it's usually the full size guys that get stuck somehow. The small compact trucks (Toyotas, Nissans, Rangers and S10s) are much lighter, yet are running probably close to the same size tires. They just float better.

It would be interesting to see what happens after your friend gets better tires. Depending on by how much that guy beat you, your friend may still lose to him again. Losing weight (or not having it to begin with) will get better results over just adding more power.

Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote

 

Thanks for responding.. Ill let you know how much better the truck gets after it gets its new suspension and tires. The tires will replaced in about a week and the suspension wont be done for a few months..too espensive..rancho is vey expensive..ill post after sunday when we go with the new tires..as for my bike ill be getting k&n in a few weeks so ill see if i can find that annoying dude again. peace

 

your friend got beat because dodge sucks i bet you could take a chevette and whoop his *** all the way up and down that hill lmfao

 

I don't know why you seem so suprised about a blaster staying with your warrior. I've blown away many of warriors on my blaster. Even once I pick up my raptor next week I will still take my blaster out with us to whoop on the smaller bikes just for fun.

 

The reason I was surprised is that Ive raced blasters before and Ive beat them pretty easily. This one seemed to be the weakest of the blasters -or sounded like the weakest-and it was actually the fastest ive seen.

Yeah Dodge sucks but we beat every truck out there except for the ranger. we raced an avalanche, suburban, tacoma w/k&n lift kit and off road tires, and an fx4. im hoping my friends dad will let us borrow his subaru sand rail so we can beat anything with tires on sunday.

 

The stock blaster will jump out in front of a stock warrior but then the warrior will pass and win by about 2 or 3 lengths(from what ive seen)>..The blaster must of not been thatngood of a rider because 2 strokes are awesome at climbing hills.....On the ranger since its an edge that means it has the 4.0 liter v-6 which puts out about 210 horspower i believe...Those thing haul a lot of *** my uncle has one....

 

The hemi lost to the ranger because of weight difference.

 

i have a 2001 blaster. I've made minor modifications such as a pod filter, tires, degree key, etc. and to tell you the truth i have murdered 300ex's 400ex's and even warriors. I think that u guys are over-rating the warrior as well as 4-strokes. Its not even that fast it hits maybe 50-55 mph. well my blaster hits that with 18 inch tires. as u can see i am not a fan of 4-strokes but i can't help it because of their lack in efficieny. You take a 350 cc 4 stroke (warrior) that makes 18hp and compare it to a 195cc 2-stroke (blaster) that makes 13hp. at that rate lets say you had a 350 cc 2-stroke blaster, with this comparison it would make 23 hp. Not to mention the fact that upgrading 4-strokes is WAY more expensive because of the amount of different moving parts in the motor. another warrior bites the dust

 

There already is a 350cc two stroke, its called a banshee and it has about 35+ hp. And a stock warrior does around 60 or so. Besides, my warrior has 30hp for 800 bucks on stock displacment. How many stock bore blasters do you see with 30hp?

 

Dodge Sucks eh. thats why ford use's the cheapest parts Chevy way too heavy and sh!tty relaiblity. My boss had a 2003 F 350 adn it started on fire in the parking lot POS! I'll tell ya one thing I'll take My Cuda and blow yer *** right off the road IF u know what that is. You guys prolly like ricers anyway