MELK-MAN, on 13 February 2012 - 08:10 PM, said:

the reason the rpms are rising slower is because of the heavier flywheel weight. the hp is simply the out put of the engine and its ability to gain speed. in order to gain speed you have to climb in rpms. there for it is making less horse power at specific rpms. say your bike was putting out 30 hp at 8000rpms. with a fww it puts out 29hp at 8000rpms and at 8200rpms it puts out 30 hp. this is just a possible example. do any of you know how an engine works? i wish i could find a way to explain to you how this works.

as for the auto clutch. everyone i have seen run them has had problems with them. like i said maybe its the way they are setting them up but if thats the case its a design flaw. they should be made simpler to set up for those DIY weekend warriors out there

MELK-MAN, on 15 February 2012 - 07:53 AM, said:

for the millionth time i dont think that the rekluse clutch is a bad idea im just saying that they are the expensive and unless you have 1000 burning a whole in your pocket and all the extra time to adjust and check your clutch befor every race i wouldnt reccomend the,.

as for the FWW you guys saying that they dont decrease engine performance are completely wrong. it does decrease your performance. this is why i dont recomend them on a four stroke. cc to cc the 2 stroke motors out perform a 4 stroke(on a DYNO) but they are much harder to control. that why i recomend them on the two stroke. a four stroke however is easily controled as is and i see no need to decrease the performance of the engine.

and as for those of you trying to tear apart that drag racing statement  no kidding there are other factors involved here. take all those variables out take two identicle bikes with absolute traction and absolutely the same in every way. then throw a heavier fly wheel on one. the weighted flywheel would decrease you hp and torque where it would be very evident.

for the "millionth time" this is a WOODS bike thread. Heavier flywheels CAN and DO enhance the engine characteristics desireable too woods riding and racing, harescrambles racing, enduro, etc. Like auto clutches, some racers/riders like the effect the hfww has, some don't. Some like heavy fww like +17oz, some like a little more like +9oz.

Edited by MELK-MAN, 15 February 2012 - 11:46 AM.

rpxtreme03, on 15 February 2012 - 10:45 AM, said:

Edited by MELK-MAN, 15 February 2012 - 12:00 PM.

To answer the OPs question. I have a 05 RM 250 set up for woods and have both a 10oz FWW and rekluse exp and love it. My 07 crf450r (also with rekluse) sits in the garage collecting dust now. So yes I would recommend both.

Im running a 13oz FWW and rekluze exp 2.0 on my 06 yz250f , bike is a lugger !!

scottiesbe, on 12 February 2012 - 11:45 AM, said:

A friend of mine bought that very same bike.  He and eveyone who rode it hated the auto clutch.   He took the auto clutch and FWW off and I like it a lot more now.  Not saying everyone would but the point is that there is no right or wrong answer.  Some real fast guys want basically a stock MX bike, some want lots of FWW and an auto clutch.

I put an auto clutch on my bike once and took it off after one ride.  It just did not work well for me.  I also switched from the woods to the MX ignition because I like less weight.  All I ride is technical woods but this just works for me.  Others may have different results.

If I ever got a four stroke I would want the MX model for weight reasons and then I might get an auto because those things are hard to start and they don't need as much clutch input.

NWetRider, on 15 February 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:

yes, different strokes for different folks. I will tell you, pulling the clutch for a couple hours in the woods may be what it takes to persuade to to at least try an auto clutch again. Not the z-start pro, hate the feel, but the exp or core give a stock "feel" lever.

rpxtreme03, on 15 February 2012 - 11:00 AM, said:

and as for your last statement regarding the drag race, you again are not speaking facts .your statement is wrong.nice of you to spread dis- information on here .way to go.

Edited by cj_wai, 15 February 2012 - 07:03 PM.

Flywheels do not decrease HP or torque.  They do slow the rev rate some to help maintain traction and momentum. They smooth the power output of the engine and keep the engine from stalling at low rpm and help maintain the engines torque at climbing due the engine being slower at losing RPM in a climb or technical situations. I have drag raced bikes with and without flywheels.  On pavement the No flywheel engine will usually win due to quicker revs.  On loose dirt the flywheel model will stay with or win.  In technical situations the flywheeled bike is much easier to ride.  I have even seen MXers use a light FWW to their advantage.  Horsepower is a result of RPM and Torque. Has nothing to do with how fast the engine revs up. So at a given RPM the non flywheel bike and the  bike with a flywheel will register the exact same HP.

Edited by Dwight_Rudder, 15 February 2012 - 07:16 PM.

Dwight_Rudder, on 15 February 2012 - 07:13 PM, said:

i hope HE reads your post.maybe it,ll sink in.or he could start" hanging around racers " that actually know something.

Dwight_Rudder, on 15 February 2012 - 07:13 PM, said:

95% of this statement is correct.
Your fww does decrease your hp and torque. everything else is 100% true. like i said befor i think FWW are a good idea on a 2 stroke. i simply dnt like them on the four strokes.

the reason the bike is reving slower is because the extra wieght is absorbing some of that torque. torque is pressure that the motor is applying to twist. when it has to spin the extra FWW it doesnt have as much pressure(torque) to put else where (to the wheels).
does this make sense to you guys now??
the difference on a dyno may not be significant but the slower reving is very notable when riding the bike and that slow rev is a great thing to take advantage of in many cases. i dont like it on a four stroke but i love them on the 2 strokes where the power band hits much harder.

cj_wai, on 15 February 2012 - 07:16 PM, said:

i hate to tell you this but you seriously underestimate who i am. you have no idea my level of  knowledge of motors nor do i of yours, but if i were in your shoes i would seriously reconsider this comment.

i have letteraly rebuilt thousands of performance motors. and given my age i would say im a little ahead of the game.

rpxtreme03, on 16 February 2012 - 07:11 AM, said:

bro, the ONLY thing any of us have underestimated about you..  is the level of your EGO - with all due respect

Edited by MELK-MAN, 16 February 2012 - 08:05 AM.

Wont be long he will be telling us that the purple powerband is better then the red one...haha

I have had the Rekluse Pro on my 08 YZF250, and its been trouble free for me since installation.  I love it under all conditions, and would say its by far the best mod I have done to my bike, probably one of the few that really make riding more fun.

Well here's my thoughts from A class woods racing an 03 RM250.
Get as heavy a FWW weight as you can, I think 10 oz is max.
Retard the ignition a mm or so. This is the best free mod you can do for smoothing out your power.
Play with the powervalve preload.
Some exhaust spacers are a good idea for more bottom, I run 3mm.

My 03 had a lighter crank than your 06, so when rebuilding this year I threw an 04 crank in (heavier). Good improvement    The more mass you can run on the crank/ flywheel of these bikes the better in the woods. I also run a 10oz FWW.
The bike will still light up the back tire in the nasty's real easy so I went for a Vortex ignition. Second traction map on the fly, retards the ignition heaps on the bottom/ mid giving great hookup. Too bad this option isn't available for the 06...

The RM is my favorite woods racer of all time, can't believe it took me so long to try one, now that they're discontinued... The handling and  nimbleness are second to none, lines and line changes you just can't do on another bike. My results show it too, went from mid pack to 5th to consistent podiums last year. Now I have the RM built up even better....

Rekluse, I would try to ride someones bike that has one and see what you think. You either love em or hate em, I'm personally not a fan.

I have a 13oz and a rekluse pro on my yz that I race harescrambles on.  So that equals 18oz of extra flywheel weight.  I feel like it has made me a better, faster rider, as the bike is so much easier to ride.  Really tames the hit of a 2t.  Best way I can describe it, is my bike feels like a really torquey 250 4t down low, and somewhere b/t a 250 and 450 4t on top, all the while 25 lbs lighter.

tribalbc, on 16 February 2012 - 11:00 AM, said:

never tried an rm but after that review... haha

MELK-MAN, on 16 February 2012 - 07:35 AM, said:

you and cj are so clueless when it comes to the FWW.
Yes they are amazing on the 2T. i dont like them on 4T, because on a 250 4T i feel you are then sacrificing too much power for control trying to compete with a 250 2T im not sure how your series run but mine is cc to cc. everything in this form is completey preference. i dont like the feel of the rekluse and have just seen too many probs with them. they would have to come a long ways befor i bought one. or i would have to see miracles happen with them.
you are preaching about how its rider preference but it seems like your telling everybody that they are wrong if they disapprove of them.

as far as my EGO goes. its not my ego. simply my opinion and the fact that you DO loose power(torque) with a heavier FW. especially lowend torque!!