Suzuki HP 450 vs. 250 2s vs. 250f
Posted April 25, 2008 - 10:14 AM
They even charted the HP of all 3 on one graph. Which was pretty cool!
Anyways, now I can't find the article. It could have even been in a street bike magazine... I don't remember, and now I can't find it! Does anyone out there know what magazine it was?
Mega thanks to anyone that knows what magazine (and month) it was in.
Posted April 25, 2008 - 10:19 AM
Posted April 25, 2008 - 02:08 PM
Posted April 25, 2008 - 06:10 PM
TWMX ~ April 08.
Now, because I forgot to buy it, does anyone want to sell their old copy. Or how about a scanned copy of just that article?
Posted April 25, 2008 - 09:26 PM
Posted April 25, 2008 - 11:04 PM
Posted April 26, 2008 - 09:47 AM
Or whether or not its measured at the back wheel or crank! GRRR
On the rare occasion you might come across a factory or high end engine builder's press release where dyno results were acheived on the bench, but otherwise it's pretty much always at the rear wheel. Crank dyno's are more expensive and harder to come by and the time and effort involved with the whole affair is just kinda silly when you can test on a standard dyno in a couple minutes. And results from crank dynos can often be drasticly different, especialy on smaller engines, and are usualy mathematicly corrected to account for the theoretical mechanical advantage of the final drive...... in the attempt to give "real world" numbers.
But, I still have no idea why manufacturer's don't just put these numbers, either way, in thier spec info. It'd be way cooler if they did.
Posted April 27, 2008 - 03:35 AM
Posted April 27, 2008 - 11:13 PM
Posted April 28, 2008 - 05:39 AM
But for those of you that have to know right now, here's how it played out:
The real deal is that the thumpers have a very wide power range. The latest 250 2 stroke really isn't that bad, but the 450 beats the 250 2 stroke by about 3 or more hp through out the entire range.
The real deal is the lap times. All three test riders were with a second or 2 for all 3 bikes. Which really shows that the rider counts way more than the bike that they are riding.
Posted April 28, 2008 - 02:18 PM
A new RM250 vs. a 450 really doesn't seem to be that far off...
Posted April 29, 2008 - 07:50 AM
Posted April 29, 2008 - 08:28 AM
Man the 250F is behind a lot in every aspect.
I have to admit that it's farther behind than what I thought it would be. At the same time, this is why I orginally agreed with giving the thumpers a cc break to make them competitive with the 2 strokes.
Even so, I have to believe that the factory thumpers (ie the YZ-400) had even more power than a current production 450. And that's why they never should have given them so much of an advantage.