Did you even bother to read the whole article cctman? Or did you just read the captions to the pictures? I think its the latter. You want an explanation? Here it is. This is a direct quote from the article:

"There was also an extremely rough whoop section that gave the single line motorcycle a distinct edge as well. The Dirt Bike guys agreed to eliminate this one section of whoops for our comparison (hey, they're either fair or overly confident, we don't care which). We also instructed Barry to do full speed laps on the motorcycle but to keep the wheels on the ground instead of jumping the doubles. Ditto for the quad."

"Sure, we had to have him not double jump the bike, but that was only because the track conditions prevented a fair comparison in this instance." Sorry, but life isn't fair. The bike could do 2 things the quad could not so they eliminated them to give the quad the advantage so it would win the test. That doesn't seem to "unbiased" to me.

Theres your "logical explanation and supported reasoning." Next time, read the whole article.

 

Oh, and in case you haven't noticed, this thread is already on its 2nd page and all I see is people disagreeing with you cctman. I guess you are smarter then everyone else huh?

EXACTLY!!

 

cctman yes quads are getting a lot better. But a yfz450 is not faster on a track then a yz450f dirtbike. Ive raced my friend who has a kfx250 and he kills me. The 450 would only be that much faster.

 

How about this for your logical supported debunk. First off you state that "The bike could do 2 things the quad could not so they eliminated them to give the quad the advantage ". Lets start here since there appears to be several things wrong with your logic. And since you are judging me by my own words its only fair to also judge you by the same. so...

1. These are not things the ATV can not do. There is no supported evidence this anywhere in the article. These are advantages to a dirtbike and do not make it "things the quad could not" do.

2. The course was set-up for dirtbikes, not ATV's which means the whoops were higher and can be tackled easier with 12" of travel instead of only 9.1".

3. Because the course was also set-up for dirtbikes this means the advantage goes to the dirtbike and not the quad. So to even the course they had to either bring down the whoops and take out the doubles. Now can a ATV jump doubles of course, but I also believe in that article they also mentioned why which you apprently decided to leave out.

4. Which leads me to my last point here. The jumps were off cambered, which again means the course gave the dirtbike a further advantage. Had the doubles been level they might have left them in, and still I believe the ATV would have given the dirtbike for its money.

If yo uknew anything about MX courses, you would know that there are set-up usually differently for dirtbikes than they are for ATV's. Is harder to tackle some obstacles on an ATV than a dirtbike of course, but the ATV can handle the corners alot easier. And in this instance the quad had the quickest times.

Hows that for logic?

 

Sorry, no logic there. Logic has no place in reality. heh[img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img] They left out those parts of the track cause the bike was so much better in those sections, that making the quad go through them would have caused the quad to lose the comaprison. And what does that mean? It means the bike excels in places the quad does not.

You don't see either of the magazines telling Barry Hawk to slow down on the quad.

 

Yes and you don't see either magazine telling Barry to slow down on the ATV either whats your point?

OK let me try and identify this as clearly as I can here. They did NOT leave the parts of the track out because the bike was so much better in those areas in general. They left those parts of the track out because THAT particular track was made for dirtbikes and not ATV's.
There is a VERY big difference. So what if the whoops were smaller and set-up for ATV's and the doubles were perfect and not offcambered like any naitional level ATV mx course? Are you saying that then the dirtbike would have still beaten the ATV? Regardless that was not the case.

The difference here is that you seem to think that because they eliminated the sections of the course they were giving the ATV the advantage .Thats not true, they even said in the article that they took away the sections that were biased towards the ditrbike to make the playing field more even to both ATV and bike.

Now I have given evidence for this reasoning and yet you have not. Now logic = valid reasoning. SO if your going to try and use logic to support your conjecture then you have to provide a logical supported exaplanation for your opinion and not just I think the track was made to suit the ATV.

The track was made to be unbiased towards the dirtbike, and I gave my logical explanation.

Your turn.

 

Two things wrong here..
A. You nor your friend are Barry Hawk
B. You'r track was either biased towards the dirtbike or towards the ATV since both ATV and dirtbike require completely different types of MX tracks. If you claim it was neutral then you have to identify why and have a supported non-partial third party to record the event, which obviously is almost impossible as seen with the dirtwheels article.

 

You are delusional. And in denial. Seriously. They told Barry to not jump the doubles on the bike cause he could not jump them on the quad. That is telling him to slow down. The whoop section was eliminated cause it was too rough for the quad. Mt. Morris is a national level motocross track. So what? Dirtwheels chose that track. Thats their problem.

You want logic? Read everyone's post in this thread and count how many agree with you not counting yourself. And the funny thing is, we are all quad riders here. We are at least a little biased towards quads yet we still agree that the test gives the quad the advantage it needed to win while handicapping the bike.

 

OK, its time to stop replying to you since you have abandon a good logical argument and above have just started inserting random opinions everywhere with no logical support.

You can not assume things without giving evidence as to why. It's called guessing when you do. You have no right to say that "They told Barry to not jump the doubles on the bike cause he could not jump them on the quad" and then assume that it is because they quad can't do those things as good as a dirtbike on an MX course. The test was as you stated yourself on a dirtbike only track. So how can you say that the test was biased more towards the ATV? They did what they thought was bringing the dirtbike course closer to the level of an ATV MX course and I agree with them. What should they have done? Left the track alone which would have been clearly an advantage to the dirtbike? Think for a moment what your saying. OK, maybe they should have just ran both bikes on a ATV mx course. Then maybe you would stop complaining about this.

 

Here is my post from last weekend from another board. Believe what you will speculators.

"I watched some 40 year old guy on a YFZ racing MX today, passing bike after bike after bike. Man this guy could ride. I never saw one single bike or quad pass him. My jaw was on the floor. I never would have through it was possible. I thought this months Dirt Wheels shootout where the paired the YFZ against the YZ was another one of their tall tales. With a great rider, the YFZ can do great things.

Also, drag raced my YFZ against everything and anything. No quads really showed up except my friend on his Z400 (434).
I beat them 4-5 at a pack, never lost once. Must have beat 50 bikes up through 4th gear. All makes and models. There was a KTM 250 there that was super fast and gave me a real good race, big guy too.
All of this racing was on the take-off area for starting the MX track. Kinda loamy, but showed what the YFZ can do on an MX start. First into turn one every time. "

As an added note, this track only had 2 whoops that basically didn't slow anyone down. I will repost this in a new thread so it will be heard.