End of the last race in Vegas. You see Doug Henry celebrating his win and the 4-strokes first race and first win. That is very historic, (Maybe the most historic since the sports introduction into the USA), but we don't understand how the 4-stroke took over the sport, or how it damaged the sport. We just accept the damage. 12 grand for a bike is a lot of damage, that nobody seems to be able to measure.
Damage? Maybe in your opinion. 2 strokes will allways be epic, And thats the end of that. But to say 4 strokes did damage to the sport is just plain stupid. I've also owned many, Many 4 strokes over the years and i can tell you one thing. They blow my mind away. The rev and snappy power of a Yz426f. The brutal force and just pure evil power of a 525sx. It's rude and really just blind speech from a guy like you saying 4 strokes did ''damage''. Think again.
@@swemx7403 You are talking about the performance the manufactures have been able to get out of them. I am talking about the economics and decline of the sport because of cost and complexity, and I see you need a accurate history lesson of the sport. Good thing my CNC mill is running, I have time. Take notes. Where the different bikes come from make all the difference in the world. The sport was first big 4-strokes when the sport started in Europe after WW2,, (We made Harley and the hells angels started here instead,--thnk the affordable For Model T), and then people developed the 2-stroke engine. But it was free people with businesses that wanted to make the engine, and proved it worked better, so the sport went all 2-strokes with free people in competition with each other. That was "free market" business that you and I could have been involved in, (if we had the right skills at the right time). Now 2 things happened in this sport that were the direct cause of reduced market, because of rapidly rising cost of bikes, (get it, less people could buy. I started out buying 3 brand new bikes making $1.00hr part time starting in 76 to 1980. The first thing that happened came from the FIM, (who is the boss of the AMA, but had little involvement in our racing until about 15 years ago), and that was the 1986 production rule that ended "works bikes" in the USA ONLY, (did you get that "only" part?). That was because the FIM hated the USA winning the MXofN since 81, (that is 5 years straight so far. keeping up? Good), and still do. The production rule in 1986, by the time I was 24 and making $4.00/hr, racing a bit with a old mini truck, (1967 87hp Datsan, went 65mph with big rear tires,--lol), and paying for some part time college, (machining), and the bikes TRIPLED in cost in 5 years, (and leveled out at abut 5 grand several years before the 4-stroke). Did you get that? Tripled in cost in 5 years since the production rule? Now---a kid could not buy his own bike,--and the market started shrinking, (but the racing was great). So times goes on, parents who rode bought their kids bikes, more than once. Bikes had leveled out to about 5 grand,---until the 4-stroke. Now this is different, because this was a much bigger intrusion on the industry than the production rule. This is not a bit of force, (with the help of Yamaha), from the FIM to make us race production based bikes. This damn near brute force from the EPA organizations that forced the 4-stroke on the industry to get rid of the "dirty" 2-strokes, (which was hog was excuse, as china production has no epa like regulations,--only the USA again, and Europe this time,---all for china/communism.). Yamaha was again the manufacture spear head kicking off a 4-stroke, (funny how they are the only Jap brand making a big bore 2-stroke. They play the crappy game well. Under 7 grand, so I bought a 2019 250. My only affordable choice). So outside forces on the industry that free people built---has the price up to 12 grand, with a lot of complexity where unless your family makes a pretty healthy 6 figures,---no kid will buy one more than once. Yes, they do hook up to the ground better, and that is the only plus. It that was not the case, it never would have flown. Believe me, the factories really did not want to price their bikes out of 90% of the market share it once had. It was force. You should have been around buying your own bikes before 1986 as a kid. It was a wonderful era of free market competition that made the development of the bikes a race in itself. The moral of the history I hope you can understand, and I know the schools don't explain this. The free market was created by free people, and although we need laws to keep people from screwing each other, we did not need government telling us what to make and buy. It kills competition (from us, but companies will get government tax money for Triumph to make an electric bike they want us to ride,--if we can afford one), and raised the cost of production every time. If it were not for the 1986 rule and the 4-stroke forced on the industry, the bike wold still be a 2-stroke, and it would cost between 4 and 5 grand. That would sell a lot more bikes, and I bet the FIM could actually fill the starting gate in their outdoor GP's,---like in places like Turkey that buy no bikes. It is the same with cars. The price of a new car is out of reach for a lot of working people today, and that is because of government regulations of about 80% of the increase. Yea,---it is easier to ride. It is that about 10 times more people used to ride. Did you learn anything here? I would like to know.
@@swemx7403 By the way, for a true race story of a big KTM 4-stroke. Just when the 4-stroeks took off Kelly Smith was riding the big 520 at the red Bud fall classic 4-stroke race at the end of the season. He missed a gear and came up short on Laracco's Leap and cased the third jump. The third jump was pretty mellow to come up short on that day, and he didn't crash, but he broke the motor mounts, allowing the engine to shift enough to pull the carb off the air box rubber intake boot. That is a big bike to push. :)
@@EarthSurferUSA Yes I've learned couple of things thx to you. It was alot but i got most of it. 4 strokes was not that populair tho in the late 90's and early 2000. In the 80's they were nearly non existing in the motocross sport, Infact they bullied them. But yeah i could understand why people were angry, Taking over the sport completely. But i mean, They still live on. They are making new ones and old 2 strokes are still out there. I mean, My friend happend to randomly come across an old Yamaha yz125 from 1981. We never seen such a weird and "rad" looking bike. With the radiator on the front handle bar. Or when i bought a 1994 Honda CR250r. Really good power, Snappy bike. But there is just something with a big 4 stroke motocross bike that is more fun (In my opinion). Sure when things starts to break in the engine i will have more parts to fix. But it can be fixed. Timing the valves is fun if you ask me. Changing the timing chain is chalenging but interesting. Changing a piston on a 4 stroke is no different then a 2 stroke. And when 2 stroke lovers say "4 strokes are so easy to ride" Have they really tried anything else rather then a tired 90's 4 stroke bike? Have they tried a yz426f? 525sx? 2004 yz450f? Those bikes are not that expensive on the market either.
@@travisdelafuente1150 every interview he gave props to other riders win or lose Jeremy always acted like everyone should just pull over for him … arrogant d bag
More like the start of the state occupation of some of our last free enterprise. When government tell an industry what to make and us what to buy,---that is past economic fascism, (favors). That is actually entering communism as we let government take over all the industries free people built. I don't know why that is hard to see. I guess we think communism started free enterprise and it belongs to communism. Now who would teach us that? :)
Have you noticed since bikes got so expensive with the 4-stroke, they never mention how many fans are at the races anymore?
This was beautiful long-live 1997
End of the last race in Vegas. You see Doug Henry celebrating his win and the 4-strokes first race and first win. That is very historic, (Maybe the most historic since the sports introduction into the USA), but we don't understand how the 4-stroke took over the sport, or how it damaged the sport. We just accept the damage. 12 grand for a bike is a lot of damage, that nobody seems to be able to measure.
Damage? Maybe in your opinion.
2 strokes will allways be epic, And thats the end of that. But to say 4 strokes did damage to the sport is just plain stupid. I've also owned many, Many 4 strokes over the years and i can tell you one thing. They blow my mind away. The rev and snappy power of a Yz426f. The brutal force and just pure evil power of a 525sx.
It's rude and really just blind speech from a guy like you saying 4 strokes did ''damage''.
Think again.
@@swemx7403 You are talking about the performance the manufactures have been able to get out of them. I am talking about the economics and decline of the sport because of cost and complexity, and I see you need a accurate history lesson of the sport. Good thing my CNC mill is running, I have time. Take notes. Where the different bikes come from make all the difference in the world. The sport was first big 4-strokes when the sport started in Europe after WW2,, (We made Harley and the hells angels started here instead,--thnk the affordable For Model T), and then people developed the 2-stroke engine. But it was free people with businesses that wanted to make the engine, and proved it worked better, so the sport went all 2-strokes with free people in competition with each other. That was "free market" business that you and I could have been involved in, (if we had the right skills at the right time). Now 2 things happened in this sport that were the direct cause of reduced market, because of rapidly rising cost of bikes, (get it, less people could buy. I started out buying 3 brand new bikes making $1.00hr part time starting in 76 to 1980. The first thing that happened came from the FIM, (who is the boss of the AMA, but had little involvement in our racing until about 15 years ago), and that was the 1986 production rule that ended "works bikes" in the USA ONLY, (did you get that "only" part?). That was because the FIM hated the USA winning the MXofN since 81, (that is 5 years straight so far. keeping up? Good), and still do. The production rule in 1986, by the time I was 24 and making $4.00/hr, racing a bit with a old mini truck, (1967 87hp Datsan, went 65mph with big rear tires,--lol), and paying for some part time college, (machining), and the bikes TRIPLED in cost in 5 years, (and leveled out at abut 5 grand several years before the 4-stroke). Did you get that? Tripled in cost in 5 years since the production rule? Now---a kid could not buy his own bike,--and the market started shrinking, (but the racing was great). So times goes on, parents who rode bought their kids bikes, more than once. Bikes had leveled out to about 5 grand,---until the 4-stroke. Now this is different, because this was a much bigger intrusion on the industry than the production rule. This is not a bit of force, (with the help of Yamaha), from the FIM to make us race production based bikes. This damn near brute force from the EPA organizations that forced the 4-stroke on the industry to get rid of the "dirty" 2-strokes, (which was hog was excuse, as china production has no epa like regulations,--only the USA again, and Europe this time,---all for china/communism.). Yamaha was again the manufacture spear head kicking off a 4-stroke, (funny how they are the only Jap brand making a big bore 2-stroke. They play the crappy game well. Under 7 grand, so I bought a 2019 250. My only affordable choice). So outside forces on the industry that free people built---has the price up to 12 grand, with a lot of complexity where unless your family makes a pretty healthy 6 figures,---no kid will buy one more than once.
Yes, they do hook up to the ground better, and that is the only plus. It that was not the case, it never would have flown. Believe me, the factories really did not want to price their bikes out of 90% of the market share it once had. It was force. You should have been around buying your own bikes before 1986 as a kid. It was a wonderful era of free market competition that made the development of the bikes a race in itself. The moral of the history I hope you can understand, and I know the schools don't explain this. The free market was created by free people, and although we need laws to keep people from screwing each other, we did not need government telling us what to make and buy. It kills competition (from us, but companies will get government tax money for Triumph to make an electric bike they want us to ride,--if we can afford one), and raised the cost of production every time. If it were not for the 1986 rule and the 4-stroke forced on the industry, the bike wold still be a 2-stroke, and it would cost between 4 and 5 grand. That would sell a lot more bikes, and I bet the FIM could actually fill the starting gate in their outdoor GP's,---like in places like Turkey that buy no bikes. It is the same with cars. The price of a new car is out of reach for a lot of working people today, and that is because of government regulations of about 80% of the increase.
Yea,---it is easier to ride. It is that about 10 times more people used to ride. Did you learn anything here? I would like to know.
Also---nobody under 5'10" tall can get on the damn things. I had to lower my YZ250 to a normal and rational height.
@@swemx7403 By the way, for a true race story of a big KTM 4-stroke. Just when the 4-stroeks took off Kelly Smith was riding the big 520 at the red Bud fall classic 4-stroke race at the end of the season. He missed a gear and came up short on Laracco's Leap and cased the third jump. The third jump was pretty mellow to come up short on that day, and he didn't crash, but he broke the motor mounts, allowing the engine to shift enough to pull the carb off the air box rubber intake boot.
That is a big bike to push. :)
@@EarthSurferUSA Yes I've learned couple of things thx to you. It was alot but i got most of it.
4 strokes was not that populair tho in the late 90's and early 2000. In the 80's they were nearly non existing in the motocross sport, Infact they bullied them.
But yeah i could understand why people were angry, Taking over the sport completely. But i mean, They still live on. They are making new ones and old 2 strokes are still out there.
I mean, My friend happend to randomly come across an old Yamaha yz125 from 1981. We never seen such a weird and "rad" looking bike. With the radiator on the front handle bar. Or when i bought a 1994 Honda CR250r. Really good power, Snappy bike.
But there is just something with a big 4 stroke motocross bike that is more fun (In my opinion). Sure when things starts to break in the engine i will have more parts to fix. But it can be fixed. Timing the valves is fun if you ask me. Changing the timing chain is chalenging but interesting. Changing a piston on a 4 stroke is no different then a 2 stroke.
And when 2 stroke lovers say "4 strokes are so easy to ride"
Have they really tried anything else rather then a tired 90's 4 stroke bike? Have they tried a yz426f? 525sx? 2004 yz450f? Those bikes are not that expensive on the market either.
Thank you for sharing this. Right on. This was a great season of racing 🏁
Great upload, thanks!
ese año por lo que he visto introdujeron el cubre manos . gran video buenos tiempos sobre todo el sonido de las 2t
Thank you for sharing
Interesting how the top 5 names are put up in all lower case.
It was great watching Emig win the championship and take down crybaby Jeremy
Yeah I hated McGrath and Carmichael. Emig was truly the best.
@@travisdelafuente1150 every interview he gave props to other riders win or lose Jeremy always acted like everyone should just pull over for him … arrogant d bag
2 strokes raced so much better
Emig wasnt better than mcgrath honda handed that tittle away
YZ F arrives
More like the start of the state occupation of some of our last free enterprise. When government tell an industry what to make and us what to buy,---that is past economic fascism, (favors). That is actually entering communism as we let government take over all the industries free people built. I don't know why that is hard to see. I guess we think communism started free enterprise and it belongs to communism. Now who would teach us that? :)