Moto-cross 4 stroke VS 2 stroke
Moderator: General Moderators
-
alex.barylski
- DevNet Evangelist
- Posts: 6267
- Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 5:00 pm
- Location: Winnipeg
Moto-cross 4 stroke VS 2 stroke
I haven't followed racing in at least a decade, but I used to be right into moto-x, etc...
Back in the day, all the hottest bikes were two stroke....my very own beloved RM80 is most certainly a two stroke. The sound or should I say buzz of that little engine always pushed me ahead of my friends who otherwise had four strokes.
Today I have friend who bought himself a Kawasaki (125/250 or similar) and it's 4 stroke. I laughed at him and called him a wussy and he explained that 4 stroke had come such a long way they now equalled 2 strokes in almost everyway. He then proofed his claim by hilighting most bikes in his category were indeed four stroke.
He proved his point but I am at a loss as to how this can be, having a basic understanding of the principles behind the two different types of engines, a 4 stroke out-performing a 2-stroke seems to almost defy logic. I searched Google.
It sounds as though, 2 strokes are slowly being replaced by the heavier, more complicated, albeit more efficient 4 strokes, but not nessecarily due to equalled performance. More like, regulations, environmental concerns, etc.
I had a similar argument with another friend a while back about his crotch rocket - he had told me it was 4 stroke and indeed it is. I was shocked and still am shocked.
Anyone know why and when these bikes started turning to 4 stroke technology?
Back in the day, all the hottest bikes were two stroke....my very own beloved RM80 is most certainly a two stroke. The sound or should I say buzz of that little engine always pushed me ahead of my friends who otherwise had four strokes.
Today I have friend who bought himself a Kawasaki (125/250 or similar) and it's 4 stroke. I laughed at him and called him a wussy and he explained that 4 stroke had come such a long way they now equalled 2 strokes in almost everyway. He then proofed his claim by hilighting most bikes in his category were indeed four stroke.
He proved his point but I am at a loss as to how this can be, having a basic understanding of the principles behind the two different types of engines, a 4 stroke out-performing a 2-stroke seems to almost defy logic. I searched Google.
It sounds as though, 2 strokes are slowly being replaced by the heavier, more complicated, albeit more efficient 4 strokes, but not nessecarily due to equalled performance. More like, regulations, environmental concerns, etc.
I had a similar argument with another friend a while back about his crotch rocket - he had told me it was 4 stroke and indeed it is. I was shocked and still am shocked.
Anyone know why and when these bikes started turning to 4 stroke technology?
- iknownothing
- Forum Contributor
- Posts: 337
- Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 11:53 pm
- Location: Sunshine Coast, Australia
- ReverendDexter
- Forum Contributor
- Posts: 193
- Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 1:26 pm
- Location: Chico, CA
For power to displacment, you're not going to beat a two-stroke. In a two stroke motor, you're getting a combustion on every downstroke of the piston. Contrast that with a 4 stroke, where you're only getting a combustion every other downstroke.
However, by the way they work, 2-strokes don't burn the entire air-fuel mixture, and they burn oil. Both of these lead to a lot higher hydrocarbon content of the exhaust, and lower fuel economy (also, you have to run premix).
However, by the way they work, 2-strokes don't burn the entire air-fuel mixture, and they burn oil. Both of these lead to a lot higher hydrocarbon content of the exhaust, and lower fuel economy (also, you have to run premix).
- RobertGonzalez
- Site Administrator
- Posts: 14293
- Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 6:04 pm
- Location: Fremont, CA, USA
- ReverendDexter
- Forum Contributor
- Posts: 193
- Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 1:26 pm
- Location: Chico, CA
I wanted to ad this earlier, but for all you car-driving types, if you're a fan of the 2-stroke, try a rotary engine. Again, where your normal 4-stroke engine gets 1 combustion for every 2 revolutions per piston, a rotary engine gets 3 combustions per every single rev! Which is why you can get 200+ hp from a naturally aspirated 1.3L engine. Of course, they suffer from all of the usual 2-stroke faults, and you have to learn to drive them correctly (i.e., keep the rpms up), or they become horrendously unreliable.
- RobertGonzalez
- Site Administrator
- Posts: 14293
- Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 6:04 pm
- Location: Fremont, CA, USA
- Christopher
- Site Administrator
- Posts: 13596
- Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 7:54 pm
- Location: New York, NY, US
It should be noted that this is where the four-strokes have closed the gap. Because two-strokes do not burn the air-fuel mixture as completely as four-strokes the gap in actual power produced is narrowed. Continued improvements in four-strokes have shrunk that gap. I recall reading that there are some thermal reasons why multi-cylinder two-strokes are less efficient than multi-cylinder four-strokes -- further closing the gap.ReverendDexter wrote:However, by the way they work, 2-strokes don't burn the entire air-fuel mixture, and they burn oil. Both of these lead to a lot higher hydrocarbon content of the exhaust, and lower fuel economy (also, you have to run premix).
(#10850)
-
alex.barylski
- DevNet Evangelist
- Posts: 6267
- Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 5:00 pm
- Location: Winnipeg
Interesting.arborint wrote:It should be noted that this is where the four-strokes have closed the gap. Because two-strokes do not burn the air-fuel mixture as completely as four-strokes the gap in actual power produced is narrowed. Continued improvements in four-strokes have shrunk that gap. I recall reading that there are some thermal reasons why multi-cylinder two-strokes are less efficient than multi-cylinder four-strokes -- further closing the gap.ReverendDexter wrote:However, by the way they work, 2-strokes don't burn the entire air-fuel mixture, and they burn oil. Both of these lead to a lot higher hydrocarbon content of the exhaust, and lower fuel economy (also, you have to run premix).