Motorcycle Forum

Motorcycle Forum (http://www.motorcycle.com/forum/)
-   Motorcycle General Discussion (http://www.motorcycle.com/forum/motorcycle-general-discussion/)
-   -   2010 Yamaha YZ450F Review (http://www.motorcycle.com/forum/motorcycle-general-discussion/13264-2010-yamaha-yz450f-review.html)

Administrator 09-30-2009 02:16 PM

2010 Yamaha YZ450F Review
 

Original Article:
2010 Yamaha YZ450F Review

Please discuss the Motorcycle.com article 2010 Yamaha YZ450F Review in our Motorcycle Forums below. Use the reply button to let others know your comments or feedback on the article. Constructive criticism is always appreciated, along with your thoughts and personal opinions on the bikes and products we have tested.

mscuddy 09-30-2009 04:49 PM

Great test there Fonz, Keep On Truckin'....

Too bad you couldn't take your 650 for a few hot laps, now that would be arm-pump.

Bet Joey had fun. You know the drinking age is 18 in Maryland I believe...

pplassm 10-01-2009 03:51 AM

Don't believe everything Cuddy says. LOL

Wish I knew they were at Bud's Creek, I'd have showed up to watch. Thanks for the review. Sounds like a great bike, but not the game changer some were expecting.

mscuddy 10-01-2009 08:56 AM

Was speaking with Rick Sieman this morning, he had Marty Tripes on a conference call, and reported that the new Yamaha weighs 247 lbs. DRY!

So that means that topped off with all the necessary fluids, fork oil, gas (race gas btw because of the high compression) beer, scrambled eggs, etc...the bike tips the scales at a portly 260+ lbs?!?!

And if anyone should know about all things portly, it's Marty. Or Eddie from Zachrey All.

Yamaha takes a giant lurch sideways once again.

Kevin_Duke 10-01-2009 09:09 AM

Just because a bike is heavier than previous doesn't necessarily mean it is not as good. Excessive weight usually reveals itself in poor or heavy handling, and Joey says the YZ450 nearly feels like a 250. Might require some back-to-back testing...

mscuddy 10-01-2009 10:53 AM

KD, I could have put a plastic tank and fenders on my '70 CL350 and got it down to 260 lbs. For a modern MX bike to weigh in excess of 260-270 lbs is ludicrous. And with all the talk of aluminum frames, see-through this and that, a Buell-like airbox, etc. it astounds me how weight isn't an issue anymore.

I hate to keep using the CR500 as a benchmark, but one fully loaded with all the fluids weighed 258 lbs. Stock. And any year CR500 from 1995 to 2007 could eat one of these new four strikers alive. I know, I did it on a regular basis.

Rick Sieman, Tripes and I all agreed that the so-called Earth moving new big YZ has a long way to go, before it can surpass a 20 year old open calss two stroke, in handling, power and weight. Marty's last factory RC500 in 1981 weighed 220 lbs. btw, so the technology is there.

And isn't that what it's all about? Designing/releasing an improved machine vs. forcing portly impossible to maintain stuff on the riding public, and calling it "fantastic"?

It's shrinking the sport. I million dirt bikes sold in 1973. Two hundred thousand sold in 2008, with ATVs out selling dirt bikes for the first time in history.

Kevin_Duke 10-01-2009 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mscuddy (Post 225132)
KD, I could have put a plastic tank and fenders on my '70 CL350 and got it down to 260 lbs. For a modern MX bike to weigh in excess of 260-270 lbs is ludicrous. And with all the talk of aluminum frames, see-through this and that, a Buell-like airbox, etc. it astounds me how weight isn't an issue anymore.

I hate to keep using the CR500 as a benchmark, but one fully loaded with all the fluids weighed 258 lbs. Stock. And any year CR500 from 1995 to 2007 could eat one of these new four strikers alive. I know, I did it on a regular basis.

Rick Sieman, Tripes and I all agreed that the so-called Earth moving new big YZ has a long way to go, before it can surpass a 20 year old open calss two stroke, in handling, power and weight. Marty's last factory RC500 in 1981 weighed 220 lbs. btw, so the technology is there.

And isn't that what it's all about? Designing/releasing an improved machine vs. forcing portly impossible to maintain stuff on the riding public, and calling it "fantastic"?

It's shrinking the sport. I million dirt bikes sold in 1973. Two hundred thousand sold in 2008, with ATVs out selling dirt bikes for the first time in history.

And how would that CL350 hold up over a triple jump, assuming you could actually get it to weigh (full of fuel) what you claim, which I think is unlikely? Even Marty's RC500 would be blown apart by the punishment of modern MX tracks.

Do you honestly think "weight isn't an issue" for OEMs? That's silly. Otherwise they wouldn't add costly titanium, magnesium and aluminum bits that add considerably to the MSRP.

Yes, it is all about "designing/releasing an improved machine," and by all accounts the 2010 YZ is better than the '09. Throwing in how a two-stroker might compare is a red herring, as several factors have made them nearly non-existent.

The decrease in dirtbike sales from the early '70s till now has much more to do with demographics than what kind of bikes are currently on the market. A huge group of baby boomers and unrestricted riding area made the 1970s perfect for off-road sales. This has all changed, including restrictive emissions regs.

These conspiracy theories about OEMs somehow adding weight that isn't needed are tiresome. If you want a durable product, it can't be made flimsy. And if an OEM has to be competitive on weight (like sportbikes and MXers), it will cost more money. There is a direct relationship between lightness and money, which is why most bikes aren't as light as they possibly could be.

Duken4evr 10-01-2009 06:13 PM

If you ride a modern 450 anything, it will blow your mind, period. These bikes are amazing.

I owned a CR500. It was brutal and fun, but there is no comparo. The new stuff blows it away.

pplassm 10-02-2009 05:27 AM

This month's Dirt Rider has an article about a KTM 250SX based 300 two-stroke that weighs 199 lbs and makes 55 HP. All they did was replace a few components and swap cylinders.

No doubt, the big four-strokes are the kings of hook up. For tight trails, though, can't beat a two-stroke.

If the four strokes are that great, let's all admit that it is time to end the displacement advantage at all levels.

Looks like the FIM will move to 350cc limit in MX1, anyway.

mscuddy 10-02-2009 08:15 AM

?!?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Duken4evr (Post 225172)
If you ride a modern 450 anything, it will blow your mind, period. These bikes are amazing.

I owned a CR500. It was brutal and fun, but there is no comparo. The new stuff blows it away.

I only can talk from experience. In 2006 we had a drag race on El Mirage dry lake between my 19 year old CR500, a new KTM EXC525, a CRF450 Honda and a 450 Yamaha.

My ancient two stroke pulled all the bikes by at least 10-15 bikes lengths. When I shut off, the GPS in my pocket said 94 mph. 15-45 gears, clean 'n match port job & FMF fatty pipe.

I got to ride the "other" bikes, and while they were nice, when you stood up you were staring straight down the forks. They were also not all that fast.

That's the last you'll hear from me on the subject of four strokes vs. two strokes. It's all moot for me now anyway.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:43 PM.