Blaster

[griff]

Blasters are good rigs. Versatile and reliable, easy to hop up. The short wheelbase, and light-weight make them excellent in rough terrain (like technical trail crawl'n). I've seen quite a few Blasters whoop Warriors in drags. 2-stroke power and less weight only needs a rider who knows how to ride it.

I have seen Blasters and even Banshees lose to Warriors before though, and it is the riders fault. The trick with 2-strokes is to do a 2nd gear start and feather the clutch so it hooks up well and controlled, otherwise you spend all your time throw'n up roost and go'n nowhere... 4-strokes naturally hook up better due to the long interval between complete combustion cycles.... So, theyre make'n for the finish line while your 2-stroke in 1st gear is immitating a roto-tiller.

2-strokes by their very nature are more reliable than 4-strokes. If you maintain them, and operate them correctly, they will require less long-term maintenance.

The problem with many 2-strokes is the owners being retards, especially people who get told to run gas/oil ratio way too thin to get more power. Cant even count how many times I've seen that, especially with Banshee owners engines I've torn down.

 

[jwalk1818]

Well considering my warrior had painted plastic, the stock headlights were busted, no rear brakes, and Yamaha told me the oil pump was going out! Said it would only cost 100-140 in parts but labor would be up toward 250-400......sounds outragous to me!

 

[deadaim]

do it your self... its not that hard and a manual makes all the diffrence.

 

[yamarider]

[quote:yx5pcfqt]

HA! I gotta disagree on that one. I'm trying to think of a reliable 2 stroke. Any. And nothing comes to mind. Maybe it's just my location (I doubt it), but most of the 2 stroke quads around here spend most of their time sitting in the back of the garage, in non-running condition. My cousin had a suzuki quadracer for 2 years now. I bet that thing might have been ridable about 1/8th of that time. The rest of the time was spent trying to locate parts that haven't been in production for 20 years. At any given time, about half of the quads sitting at the local shop for repairs are 2 strokes, and only about 1 in 6 quads in the area are 2 smokes. Doesn't really scream reliability to me.

But you arent looking at facts, 70% of the people who ride quads dont know an airfilter from a spark plug, and 2 strokes require someone with skill and experience.

They have way less moving parts, and are way simpler to navigate through.

And another fact is a quad racer is 20 years old, and that way too long for technology, new 2 strokes are far beyond the 2 strokes of old. The new motors are way more reliable and pump way more horsepower compared to the old ones.

nonetheless four strokes will never match the revs or power of a of an equal cc 2 stroke, its 100% impossible. I dont care what you say or think its completely and totally impossible. If you think you can proove me wrong go for it but you wont.

But thats all beside the point. Nobody actually knows why the man traded, his warrior may have been junk, who knows.

The man wants sites for information. So give them to him[/quote:yx5pcfqt]

First, what do you mean that new 2 strokes are far beyond the 2 strokes of old? The last 2 stroke sport quad that was actually a good racer went out of production in 1992. You may say the banshee and even blaster are still in production, but they're not what I would call a racer to begin with, and even their designs date way back. The blaster is the most basic engine design out of any quad, and the banshee's engine dates back to the early-mid 70's. So how is the quadracer's 20 year old design is way too old for technology? And the blaster isn't? Because the last time I rode a quadracer, and then jumped on a blaster, that blaster sure did feel like ****. So what modern 2 stroke quad are you talking about, that has this far better design vs the old technology? Oh yeah, I guess that POS gas gas is a 2 stroke, but who really gives a rat's ass about a gas-gas?

I'm not sure where you're getting your facts about 2 strokes vs 4 strokes making the most power, but if 2 strokes are SO far ahead of 4 strokes in power:cc ratio, then why don't we see 2 strokes powering race cars and other large, high horsepower vehicles that are exempt from emissions? The last time I checked, nobody was premixing their race fuel at the drag strip.

 

[dswwarrior350]

[quote:cy3yfmru]


But you arent looking at facts, 70% of the people who ride quads dont know an airfilter from a spark plug, and 2 strokes require someone with skill and experience.

They have way less moving parts, and are way simpler to navigate through.

And another fact is a quad racer is 20 years old, and that way too long for technology, new 2 strokes are far beyond the 2 strokes of old. The new motors are way more reliable and pump way more horsepower compared to the old ones.

nonetheless four strokes will never match the revs or power of a of an equal cc 2 stroke, its 100% impossible. I dont care what you say or think its completely and totally impossible. If you think you can proove me wrong go for it but you wont.

But thats all beside the point. Nobody actually knows why the man traded, his warrior may have been junk, who knows.

The man wants sites for information. So give them to him

First, what do you mean that new 2 strokes are far beyond the 2 strokes of old? The last 2 stroke sport quad that was actually a good racer went out of production in 1992. You may say the banshee and even blaster are still in production, but they're not what I would call a racer to begin with, and even their designs date way back. The blaster is the most basic engine design out of any quad, and the banshee's engine dates back to the early-mid 70's. So how is the quadracer's 20 year old design is way too old for technology? And the blaster isn't? Because the last time I rode a quadracer, and then jumped on a blaster, that blaster sure did feel like ****. So what modern 2 stroke quad are you talking about, that has this far better design vs the old technology? Oh yeah, I guess that POS gas gas is a 2 stroke, but who really gives a rat's ass about a gas-gas?

I'm not sure where you're getting your facts about 2 strokes vs 4 strokes making the most power, but if 2 strokes are SO far ahead of 4 strokes in power:cc ratio, then why don't we see 2 strokes powering race cars and other large, high horsepower vehicles that are exempt from emissions? The last time I checked, nobody was premixing their race fuel at the drag strip.[/quote:cy3yfmru]


Im talking about modern race bikes such as the 250's. for example, most of the newer 250's will run with if not beat many of the older 500's.

Its simple why 4 strokes are so much slower than 2 strokes, 2 strokes only have to work 1/2 as hard. A four stroke is firing every other revolution when a 2 stroke is firing every revolution. No matter what you do to the four stroke its still going to have to move twice as much to do the same work the 2 stroke does.

This is also the reason why they need to double the cc's to compete with 2 strokes, for example the 450's race against 250's in supercross and etc.


Everything about a modern 2 stroke engine is better, since the 80's technology has allowed to diffrent port designs, carb designs etc. Tear a newer(99+) yz 250 down and then tear yz250 in the 80's down and set the cylinders next to eachother, you will see the diffrence right away in port size, piston design, and etc.

And i cant really give you a reason why they dont put 2 strokes in race cars, 1 reason might be because an 8 cylinder 2 stroke would be uncontrollable. Think about kicking the powerband in on it.

Yes the blaster is old technology and so is the banshee but the 250R/quadracer is competely and totally outdated in every aspect as far as racing is concerned also.


Another thing, some modern 2 stroke motors are burning cleaner and more efficient than fourstrokes and are lasting way longer, look at evinrude boat motors.

And even race cars arent completely out of the emmisions, the government has rammed their foot up the ass of most racing bodies also. Just look at nascar and its fuels.

2 Stroke motors have a purpose just like 4 strokes but you just cant beat the power, they are getting pretty close but they are also making 4 strokes completely unreliable to do so, the moderns 450's need rebuilt more than 2 strokes.

 

[griff]

cc to cc, 2 strokes are far more efficient at making power.

If you take a 500cc 4-stroke, and the same displacement 2-stroke, and build them both to spec, the 2-stroke will eat the 4-stroke alive as far as raw power production. No contest, no how, no way.

One of the reasons manufacturers are getting away from 2-strokes is because of legislation, 4-strokes can be made to burn cleaner than 2-strokes. 2-strokes are dirtier by nature.

2-strokes engines arent tunable like 4-strokes. 2-strokes all have a single-minded powerband, they ramp-up slowly on power, and then take off like hell when they hit optimum flow (on the pipe).

4-strokes powerband is infinitely more tunable. via the cam(s) you can alter the torque/hp band almost anyway you want.

4-stroke are torque kings, 2-strokes are high HP kings.

They both have their pro & cons....