Crazy stuff

[Marc.com]

Yes bikes haven't changed a lot over the last 20 years, the first YZ400F is 16 years old now.
[/quote]

That's nuts the YZ400F being 16 years old, funny how the technology hasn't significantly changed in that time. ... give or take the odd alloy frame and putting the cylinder at a funny angle

[Nathan S]

That's nuts the YZ400F being 16 years old, funny how the technology hasn't significantly changed in that time. ... give or take the odd alloy frame and putting the cylinder at a funny angle

One of the things that makes this forum great is it's ability to ignore reality.

Remembering that the YZF400 was a huge leap forward in 1998, let's compare it to the "almost identical" 2015 YZF450:

5 valves vs 4 valves;
Carb vs EFI;
Switchable mapping;
Steel vs alloy frame;
46mm open chamber vs 48mm closed chamber forks;
Late 90s ergos vs mid '10 ergos.
Not to mention the numerous revisions to geometry, brakes, fork set up, the whole generation of alloy frame between the 98 and '10 models, the cylinder at a funny angle (with all the re-engineering g that came with it) etc etc.

But hey: I'm sure any of the current pros would be happy to race a 98 model because it wouldn't hurt their results at all...

[KTM47]

But hey: I'm sure any of the current pros would be happy to race a 98 model because it wouldn't hurt their results at all...

You are kidding aren't you.

There is a difference from 1999 to 2015 and the current Pro would be able to tell.  Even back in my day 1972 to 1980 we brought a new bike every year.  Mainly so we had a new bike.  Really the big changes were from 1973 to about 1984/5.

[Marc.com]

One of the things that makes this forum great is it's ability to ignore reality.

Remembering that the YZF400 was a huge leap forward in 1998, let's compare it to the "almost identical" 2015 YZF450:

5 valves vs 4 valves;
Carb vs EFI;
Switchable mapping;
Steel vs alloy frame;
46mm open chamber vs 48mm closed chamber forks;
Late 90s ergos vs mid '10 ergos.
Not to mention the numerous revisions to geometry, brakes, fork set up, the whole generation of alloy frame between the 98 and '10 models, the cylinder at a funny angle (with all the re-engineering g that came with it) etc etc.

But hey: I'm sure any of the current pros would be happy to race a 98 model because it wouldn't hurt their results at all...

The YZF is probably been developed more than the rest of them, I guess EFI was the next big step during its development, but serious 46-48mm forks in 16 years, hell there was a time when fork travel went up a couple of inches a year.

Not saying the new stuff is not good to ride.... just that riding the YZ400 F compared to the YZ450 is probably not as bigger difference as riding the YZ250A against the YZ250U or whatever model was 16 years later.

[Nathan S]

Kev, I was being entirely sarcastic. Of course there's big differences between a 98 and a '15 model. The only place you'll hear otherwise is on this forum (and sometimes even from otherwise sensible people like Marc).

Walt, I am a little disturbed that a man who makes a living from suspension doesn't know the difference between CC and OC forks, but here goes:
The closed (or twin chamber) fork keeps the dampening oil in a separate, sealed chamber to prevent it aerating under hard use.
The CC fork still has an oil bath in the main leg for seal/bush lubrication and bottoming control.

Did I pass? You never gave me my results when you tested me on progressive springs.

Marc, 1980 to 1986 was an unprecedented time for technological improvement: water cooling, disc brakes, power valves, linkage rear ends, safety seats, cartridge forks, 43mm forks, mainstream flat slides, flat slides that work, USD forks. Even the suspension revolution of the mid 70s paled in the depth and breadth of changes.
You'd be an idiot to dismiss the importance of the suspension revolution, but it's the only era that even dreams of matching the first seven years of the 1980s for technological changes...

The period 98-15 matches the vast majority of MX history for technology changes.

[Tim754]

Fact is Graeme, that 20 years since Terrafirma 3 has many of us here realising we are most definitely not as indestructible as we once believed we were .....




fknn bowel cancer,benign, but still not overly excited...

[80-85 husky]

considering all the technological breakthroughs weve had, I would like to see how far behind the current WEC champ would be after riding a round on an 84 twin shock watercooled 400 husky.....the arguable best pick of that old technology

[Nathan S]

Nathan , I should have phrased it a bit better .  My question is : What difference does one or the other fork make A) to you  and B ) to a dyno?

I prefer OC forks. I prefer the smoother action in the initial stroke, and am incapable of riding hard enough to aerate the oil.
Like so many things, a lot of people (including those slower than me) get caught up in the hype and swear blind that they can feel the difference, but it is only a clear improvement for the properly fast guys.

Cold, on the dyno, the two should be very close. But like engine dynos, shock dynos are a very useful tool that don't always tell the full story.

[Marc.com]

considering all the technological breakthroughs weve had, I would like to see how far behind the current WEC champ would be after riding a round on an 84 twin shock watercooled 400 husky.....the arguable best pick of that old technology

I think anything twin shock would be hammered by the current technology ..... I think my point was... if I had one is that once you come too far forward to the mid 90s you could build a VMX or Vinduro that is more or less a current bike..... KTM300 for example could be updated to current suspension and away you go

[80-85 husky]

im not so sure that hammered would be the case.... I find the older bikes are a no where near as twichy and jumpy and give a smoother ride in the rough stuff (mainly due to slower steering). brakes would be the major difference over a long ride.

what im sort of getting at apart from brakes, im not sure the design has improved all that much as the manufacturers chase annual "improvements", they may have lost sight of the main game and taken some backward steps. you only have to watch utube to see the never ending staxs caused by too steep steering on the modern bikes. slightest mistake and its a "slapper" and down they go....

dunno maybe time has passed me by....again!

im going to run my 300 and wr 400 around a few tracks and get some times just for a general comparison... see just how fast the 300 is over the old girl..

[FourstrokeForever]

I'd be very surprised if you are faster on the WR compared to the 300. The 300 has such a brilliant motor, excellent brakes that only fade if they are abused until the oil boils and suspension that works all the way through it's stroke.
Still, sounds like a great day out 

[Nathan S]

Modern bikes freak out a lot of people used to riding older bikes because they demand a different riding style.

Where most 80s enduro bikes are perfectly happy with a 'floppy arms, sit down' style, moderns reward a much more aggressive style - and can punish a lazy rider.
Add to that, that most modern bikes come with suspension that's set up to suit a rider that is lighter and faster than most of us, and its easy to see why the 1980s bikes can appear superior, at least some of the time.

But day-in, day-out, if you want to go fast, you put yourself on a well set up modern bike. There are times when an old bike (even short travel ones) can be well in the hunt, but the moderns just have so many less chinks in their armour.

[Graeme M]

I think I'm with Nathan here. I reckon the older bikes work just fine - if you want to go for a bash around. And I'm sure with effort most of us could probably punt an older bike around quite well. But you'd do the same for less effort on a modern bike.

My point earlier was just that the difference in look, style and feel is vastly different between 1975 and 1995 than it is between 1995 and 2015. But I'd ride a 2015 model seriously over any old bike. I am not a fast rider by any means although can get up a bit of speed on dirt track so that's where I can make a reasonable comparison. The difference between my YZ250F and my RM250T is huge.

But the first time you ride a modern, if all you've ever ridden is a pre 85 bike, you feel completely out of your depth. My first modern was my 05 YZ125 bought in 2007. At that time, the most recent dirtbike I'd owned was a 1985 TT600. I'd been riding nothing but vintage since 1998 after a 10 year break from dirtbikes, and that 125 scared me - it was twitchy, hard, and way fast with REALLY strong brakes. But once I adapted, I loved it. I could ride better with less effort and enjoy the whole experience way more than I ever did on some old twin shock clunker.

But back to strange or crazy stuff - while bikes have evolved, haven't riding styles changed? Watching any old video of riders in the 80s and then look at the same thing on today's tracks, it's a whole different ballgame. I accept that in the 80s there were some tough tracks with quads and triples and so on, but they were really badly designed and people crashed their brains out all over the place trying to master them. I tried a double only once in my life - quads, no way!!!

The thing is, I reckon the average riding ability in today's motocross fields is way ahead of that in the 70s/80s. That's not to say that those guys couldn't have done the same if they were young guys now, but at the time, the whole level was way lower than today.

[Kane Mcguire]

I race a 2013 kxf250 and a 1982 husky 250cr on modern tracks on the same day.

The big difference for me is the modern bike is so much safer and more forgiving if you get the bikes crossed up or out of line. Down a rough straight or ruts or on a jump, if you mess up the kxf is brilliant, whereas with the husky it will throw you off. You have to hold tight and be more accurate with the husky. When things go wrong on the husky you shit yourself hoping to survive.

Also it is amazing how you can actually think coming into a set of whoops or a rough straight that I can hold the kxf wide open and it will go through it safe and fast even though im only a top ten rider.

[KTM47]

It's funny Graeme the big change in riding style was the introduction of Supercross.  Also Gally started doing schools and teaching the attack position (elbows up).  The later stuff is scrubbing jumps etc.  Some riders scrub so early that they have hit their foot peg on the up ramp.

Enduro riders probably haven't changed as much, they still sit down too much.

Even though I raced seriously in the seventies and early eighties I now recon that if I could time travel back and be younger ie (know what I know now back then) I would be faster than I was back then.  But we will never know.  I know one thing I wish I had of bought a Maico 490 in 1981.  They were are still are the best.

Of course the main thing I like about some modern bikes is electric start.