well be honest with you i like them both, but if it come down to it i would take a two-stroke b/c they are snappy as hell and you can do a lot with them but a four is nice b/c you dont have o rev the shit out of it all the time you can just putt on a four-stroke then when you feel like rippin the shit out off it the power is there..i have a 2006 YFZ 450 and i would have to say its the best quad that i have ever riden. and i road just about everything out there so yeah me i would say a four-stroke is better..
four strokes are better to ride because they have a heap more torque and are smother, meaning u dont have to be asagressave and u last longer, but 2 strokes are a lot more fun and cheaper to keep running and lighter.. its up 2 the rider
I like both too. But ill be buying a ktm250 or yz250 next simply because im a 2 stroke man in tracks i love the sound of a reving 2 stroke and simply how snapy they are i can ride them better. But i just love the sound of a mighty 4 stroke when it is screming across a woods and even better if u lay of the trottle for a sec drop the gear and then hammer it my god its a nice sound xD
not to burst your bubble but two-strokes are high mantaince machines, i know i raced them for five years, yes they are funner to run but not cheaper. wait untill you blow the seals out because you got the fuel ratio wrong, or burn the bearing out of the crank from reving it to much, or worst off break the sleve off the piston and blow a hole through you cylinder wall from over reving it on the track from trying to keep up with the compition, this would make you cry b/c it happened to me and i easiely spent $3500 to fix it, i could go on for hour on what can go wrong in a blink of an eye that will easiely cost you 200-300 dallors. now tell me that their cheaper.
yeah there are a lot of things that can go wrong with two strokes but for racing ect, they are cheaper to repair and more resiliant to extream conditions. this is why enduro riders are starting to turn back to two strokes. a two stroke can have a full rebuild for around $1300 but a four stroke can cost $5000 or more if it decides to go bang and throw a rod. i was wrong in saying that 2 strokes are cheaper to RUN, but this is not what i meant. what i ment is that there is not much in the running costs. yes two strokes are a pain in the ass and generaly need more mantaince( expes top end rebuilds), but this is still not as costly as a four stroke with valve issues. if u maintain them properly then yes, the four stroke will be cheaper, but most riders dont. and fours cost on average 2 grand more to buy, thats a lot of parts. all bikes will cost you unless you buy a ttr, drz or xr these are pretty much the only bikes that will go for years with almost no coin spent on them.
both
well be honest with you i like them both, but if it come down to it i would take a two-stroke b/c they are snappy as hell and you can do a lot with them but a four is nice b/c you dont have o rev the shit out of it all the time you can just putt on a four-stroke then when you feel like rippin the shit out off it the power is there..i have a 2006 YFZ 450 and i would have to say its the best quad that i have ever riden. and i road just about everything out there so yeah me i would say a four-stroke is better..
four strokes are better to ri
four strokes are better to ride because they have a heap more torque and are smother, meaning u dont have to be asagressave and u last longer, but 2 strokes are a lot more fun and cheaper to keep running and lighter.. its up 2 the rider
I like both too. But ill be b
I like both too. But ill be buying a ktm250 or yz250 next simply because im a 2 stroke man in tracks i love the sound of a reving 2 stroke and simply how snapy they are i can ride them better. But i just love the sound of a mighty 4 stroke when it is screming across a woods and even better if u lay of the trottle for a sec drop the gear and then hammer it my god its a nice sound xD
cheaper
not to burst your bubble but two-strokes are high mantaince machines, i know i raced them for five years, yes they are funner to run but not cheaper. wait untill you blow the seals out because you got the fuel ratio wrong, or burn the bearing out of the crank from reving it to much, or worst off break the sleve off the piston and blow a hole through you cylinder wall from over reving it on the track from trying to keep up with the compition, this would make you cry b/c it happened to me and i easiely spent $3500 to fix it, i could go on for hour on what can go wrong in a blink of an eye that will easiely cost you 200-300 dallors. now tell me that their cheaper.
i see were your coming from
yeah there are a lot of things that can go wrong with two strokes but for racing ect, they are cheaper to repair and more resiliant to extream conditions. this is why enduro riders are starting to turn back to two strokes. a two stroke can have a full rebuild for around $1300 but a four stroke can cost $5000 or more if it decides to go bang and throw a rod. i was wrong in saying that 2 strokes are cheaper to RUN, but this is not what i meant. what i ment is that there is not much in the running costs. yes two strokes are a pain in the ass and generaly need more mantaince( expes top end rebuilds), but this is still not as costly as a four stroke with valve issues. if u maintain them properly then yes, the four stroke will be cheaper, but most riders dont. and fours cost on average 2 grand more to buy, thats a lot of parts. all bikes will cost you unless you buy a ttr, drz or xr these are pretty much the only bikes that will go for years with almost no coin spent on them.
and between the 2 i would tak
and between the 2 i would take the four stroke.. they are much less tempremental and tiring. there power is smoother and this makes you much faster..