InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 12
Posts 189
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/22/2014

Re: None

Tuesday, 05/13/2014 9:21:30 PM

Tuesday, May 13, 2014 9:21:30 PM

Post# of 163725
The text below is cut and pasted from this link:

http://www.dirt-bike-tips-and-pics.com/the-experimental-motorcycle-association.html


3rd December 2009:

There is another side to this two-stroke vs four-stroke debate. I have been telling you about a lot of two-stroke research and development that few people hear about - and there is much more to tell. But I could also paint a bleak picture of the four-stroke engine by telling you, once again, what the manufacturers of these engines don't want you to know. Of course, some people have seen the light. KTM, Gas Gas, TM, Husky, et al., have been selling lots of two-strokes. And the AMA and FIM are under a lot of pressure to 'fix' the race rules, to support the riders, rather than the Japanese manufacturers.

However all this may play out, I want to wrap up this question as to the viability, practicality, and advisability of using two-stroke engines in dirt bikes, road bikes, cars, or what-have-you. I can do no better than to repeat what the engineers at GM said: "A state-of-the-art two-stroke engine is simply the best thing that we know how to make." After about 130 years of work on internal combustion engines (and alternatives), this is where we are. If this surprises, if the common man cannot understand it, if corporate giants wish it were not so, the facts remain. That no motorcycles are being produced with these engines is THE problem! However imperfect the latest two-strokes may be, everything else that has been tried is worse. If, as it turns out, all the big players invested in the wrong technology, well, that's the way it goes. As Kierkegaard said: "He who fights the future has a dangerous enemy. The future is not; it borrows its strength from the man himself and when it has tricked him out of this, then it appears outside of him as the enemy he must meet."