Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-09-2007, 05:46 PM   #21
mscuddy
MODERATOR X

 
mscuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Next to my still checkin the temp.
Posts: 5,448
Default A 300cc open class? Choke, gasp....

listen to the new MX formula the FIM/AMA wants to foist on us:

1: 300cc four Stroke open class.

2: 125cc two stroke, uh, 125 class.

What a crock. Betcha it's a French idea...
__________________
A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that.
mscuddy is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 10-09-2007, 06:11 PM   #22
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default What?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mscuddy View Post
listen to the new MX formula the FIM/AMA wants to foist on us:

1: 300cc four Stroke open class.

2: 125cc two stroke, uh, 125 class.

What a crock. Betcha it's a French idea...
They must be mad. Do they think all the manufacturers are going to design all new lines of 300cc bikes?
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2007, 07:49 PM   #23
pplassm
Founding Member
 
pplassm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,875
Default

The manufacturers want to keep "50" at the end of the displacement for, get this, marketing reasons. It's looking like the new displacement for MX is going to be 350cc. At least, acording to Steve Whitelock.

I say bring back the open class. Anything goes. Let those who ride decide. Then make the tracks tight, technical and rediculously ignorant. Big fun.

Last edited by pplassm : 10-09-2007 at 07:53 PM.
pplassm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2007, 07:34 AM   #24
Kenneth_Moore
Registered Member
 
Kenneth_Moore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: VIsiting the GIft Shop in the Pit of DIspair
Posts: 7,118
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pplassm View Post
I say bring back the open class. Anything goes. Let those who ride decide. Then make the tracks tight, technical and rediculously ignorant. Big fun.
+1. I'd love to see the same thing on a road course series too!
__________________
www.kennethmoore.org
Kenneth_Moore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2007, 08:51 AM   #25
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default Yeah but...

Quote:
Originally Posted by pplassm View Post
The manufacturers want to keep "50" at the end of the displacement for, get this, marketing reasons. It's looking like the new displacement for MX is going to be 350cc. At least, acording to Steve Whitelock.

I say bring back the open class. Anything goes. Let those who ride decide. Then make the tracks tight, technical and rediculously ignorant. Big fun.
.. once again I ask, "Are the manufacturers expected to design and build all new lines of bikes at the demands of racing associations instead of customers?" The customers are obviously not demanding 350s any more since no one is selling any. Who made the FIM/AMA king?
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2007, 08:58 AM   #26
mscuddy
MODERATOR X

 
mscuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Next to my still checkin the temp.
Posts: 5,448
Default Yeah, whata bunch of wimps...

Quote:
Originally Posted by pplassm View Post
The manufacturers want to keep "50" at the end of the displacement for, get this, marketing reasons. It's looking like the new displacement for MX is going to be 350cc. At least, acording to Steve Whitelock.

I say bring back the open class. Anything goes. Let those who ride decide. Then make the tracks tight, technical and rediculously ignorant. Big fun.
Saw that too, in my searchings for the proposed 2009 rule. Looks like they're gonna bore out 250's to get the required 350 cee cee bike. The wimpopotamuses are saying the new 450's are too fast, and too hard to ride, oh boo hoo! One FIM/AMA twit said something akin to "Just like when we discovered the CR & KX500's were too dangerous, we're discovering the same thing with the 450's."

Sheesh, maybe competition bikes will be limited to 150cc 4 strokes, with 11 horsepower, run on slick-tracks.

As someone who's owned an open class dirt bike SINCE 1973, this doesn't bode well for the sport.
__________________
A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that.
mscuddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2007, 09:34 AM   #27
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default You're kidding me!

Quote:
Originally Posted by mscuddy View Post
Saw that too, in my searchings for the proposed 2009 rule. Looks like they're gonna bore out 250's to get the required 350 cee cee bike. The wimpopotamuses are saying the new 450's are too fast, and too hard to ride, oh boo hoo! One FIM/AMA twit said something akin to "Just like when we discovered the CR & KX500's were too dangerous, we're discovering the same thing with the 450's."

Sheesh, maybe competition bikes will be limited to 150cc 4 strokes, with 11 horsepower, run on slick-tracks.

As someone who's owned an open class dirt bike SINCE 1973, this doesn't bode well for the sport.
MX racing is *gasp* DANGEROUS?

LOL! When did the Nannystaterfascists take over motorcycle racing? How did people ever survive the 60's and 70's racing on Triumph650TTs and XLCHs?

I'm waiting to see how well the lower ends survive on these bored out 250s.
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2007, 09:48 AM   #28
mscuddy
MODERATOR X

 
mscuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Next to my still checkin the temp.
Posts: 5,448
Default Exploding 4 strokes, at a track near you, soon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seruzawa View Post
MX racing is *gasp* DANGEROUS?

LOL! When did the Nannystaterfascists take over motorcycle racing? How did people ever survive the 60's and 70's racing on Triumph650TTs and XLCHs?

I'm waiting to see how well the lower ends survive on these bored out 250s.
Ha, that's a good one. The motorcycle industry foisted works-type 4 strokes on the dirt riding public, under the guise of "getting rid of those dirty two strokes"...and we end up with complex, over stressed motorcycle engines with the lifespan of about 30 hours, before a TOTAL rebuild is needed, costing around three thousand bucks.

Heaven forbid we have a true 500cc two stroke that lasts for years and years, puts out fantastic power, everywhere in the powerband, and goes like stink. I purchased a CR500R in 1987 (the best year if you ask me) and it never wore out. Or sure, I put a few clutches in it, and a few rings, only one .60 over bore, but it lasted 4 ever, and was fast. The lower end was stock, with the exception of one set of crank seals.

This is just like when Chrysler got rid of the slant 6. Was it beacuse the slant 6 never broke down, and MOPAR wasn't selling any parts for 'em? Nah, couldn't be...
__________________
A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that.
mscuddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2007, 10:20 AM   #29
The_AirHawk
Founding Member
 
The_AirHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Leanin' Tower O' P-P-P-P-POWAAAAAAAAA!!!!
Posts: 11,491
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mscuddy View Post
This is just like when Chrysler got rid of the slant 6. Was it beacuse the slant 6 never broke down, and MOPAR wasn't selling any parts for 'em? Nah, couldn't be...
Emissions. Same reason the LA/Magnum's are gone now, too. The only reason they kept the Jeep 4.0L inline-6 was because AMC had already completed most of the work toward injecting it by the time they bought 'em out.
__________________
Parfois, on fait pas semblant
Sometimes, it's not pretend
Oderint Dum Metuant
Let them hate so long as they fear
политики предпочитают безоружных крестьян
Politicians Prefer Unarmed Peasants
Nothing to see here, Citizen. Move along now...
The_AirHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2007, 11:17 AM   #30
mscuddy
MODERATOR X

 
mscuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Next to my still checkin the temp.
Posts: 5,448
Default The '51 Nash Ambassador

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_AirHawk View Post
Emissions. Same reason the LA/Magnum's are gone now, too. The only reason they kept the Jeep 4.0L inline-6 was because AMC had already completed most of the work toward injecting it by the time they bought 'em out.
That's when the OHV 4.1 liter inline six came out btw. Fantastic motor.

I thought Jeep got rid of it last year, and opted for the Mercedes sourced 3.7 liter V6?
__________________
A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that.
mscuddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off