Aluminum vs Chromoly

[cpt_Slow]

Nostalgia will always stand in the way of progress.

[JETZcorp]

I'm all for progress, but I simply haven't seen much of it. I'll grant that aluminum frames are a step forward in performance, but I don't think anyone is going to be able to match a 490 Spider unless some really major advancement comes, or they bring back the open-class bikes. The only modern machine I would trust to be truly and noticeably better than an old Maico, is either a new Maico (they use a refined version of the old engine) or one of those Service Honda/Kawasaki 500AF's (and even those would be out-matched in a drag.) The new Maicos are truly Biblical, as noted by this Maico Brothers review of the 1999 model. Even though it is, by most measures, a better bike, I'd take an older one for myself because I like its appearance.

After riding the 99 Maico 500, We were surprised people aren't lined up waiting to buy one. We tested the 99' against two very fast Maico's. A full blown desert racer, the one and only 1983 490 Sand Spider, and a 1992 Blue Maico 500. The 83 490 Sand Spider was built for one thing only and that one thing was flying across the desert at a high rate of speed while keeping the rider in the saddle and in control. We felt this bike would be good to test against because of it's 112-MPH top speed. The Sand Spider came with a 5 Speed Wide Ratio Transmission, 48 tooth Rear Sprocket and a 16 tooth Counter Shaft Sprocket. Compare that to the 99's Close Ratio 5 speed Transmission and 52 tooth Rear Sprocket and 15 tooth counter shaft sprocket and you start to understand just how fast the 99 500 is. In drag racing the Sand Spider, we had to start out with a rolling start in second gear to stop the "Trenching Effect". The new Maico has so much power that it was impossible to get a good race going from a standing still start. The Sand Spider would hook up at the start and lead the the way till the end. With a rolling start, the 99' would Smoke the Sand Spider until Fifth Gear when the 99' would be topping out at around 90 mph. Make no mistake about the Sand Spider being 16 years older then the 99'. In the history of Maico Brothers, no other Maico or Japanese bike has beaten the Sand Spider top end, making the Sand Spider our favorite ride. The 490 Sand Spider is in new original condition, and fast.

[cpt_Slow]

A good bike isn't all about out and out power. It's about how it puts that power down. (Suspension technology a major factor in this.) Hell I could go and put a 750 GSX-R engine in my bike but it wouldn't make me the fastest guy there. If you say there is no progress, I would try finding lap times of some old-school tracks and comparing them with modern times. (I don't know the result of this, I may be shooting myself in the foot here. I'm too lazy to find out.)

[JETZcorp]

I think that's a tall order, because tracks do change quite a lot as the nature of the sport changes. In, say, 1979, motocross was a lot more about a relatively level track with lots of roughness and such thrown in. It was quite a lot less common to actually see a big ol' launch jump thrown in. Even supercross was a lot more down-to-earth at first. A lot of this is because the sport started in short-travel, and that meant the status quo was a bike with 4" in the back being noted for its tall travel. In the space of less than five years, this went all the way up to 12 or even 13 inches in some cases (so to speak) and it took a while for the track designs to start reflecting this.

Also, the type of riding or racing is a gigantic factor in determining which bike will be faster. For example, a tight supercross track is going to highly favor a very light bike that can handle well, be easily controlled in the air and accelerate well at lower speeds. A more expansive, natural terrain outdoor course is probably going to merit more power that can be easily brought in and put to the ground without too much wheel spin. Then, if you do the kind of riding that I am more used to, you come to realize pretty fast that power means a lot more than it does at Anaheim. I've told the story before of the time that we had a family friend come along on a YZ426F, while my dad and uncle had an '86 500 Maico and '81 Husqvarna 430. The Yamaha rider (Kyle) is quite a skilled rider, and was in far better physical condition than the forty-somethings he was riding with. On the desert roads (which, I should add, are not straight or particularly smooth) the YZF was embarrassed by the older bikes, especially coming out of corners. At the end of the day, it was revealed that the YZF had low tire pressure (which is excellent for handling) but still couldn't keep up with the open bikes, and it had resulted in some octagonal Excels. Now, is it fair to be comparing a 426cc 4-stroke to 430-500cc two-strokes in this terrain? Not really. And that's the point.

I'm not going to sit here and say that the YZF is an inferior bike, and I'm sure it would be more successful at modern racing than the Husky and Maico would be, because the power isn't necessary for those conditions. But, for the conditions that I ride and that play a role in whether I judge a bike's performance to be good or bad, power does play a very significant role, and from my experience, a bigger-than-250cc two stroke has power that is both plentiful and usable.

[jlv]

I concede that a modern four stroke with a flat tire will handle worse than an old husky.

[JETZcorp]

It wasn't flat, it just wasn't as high as the other two. Remember, when you have lower pressure, that means that the tire will be more flexible and increase your contact area with the ground. The guy didn't have flat tires, by any means, but he was just a fair bit lower than the Maico and Husky. Husqvarna, by the way, introduced a feature that was supposed to take advantage of the property I mentioned above, where more tire flex adds grip. While all the other manufacturers were using 18" rear rims, Husky went to 17" while maintaining the same diameter at the knobs. This gave them more sidewall and thus more flex on the tire, and that helped Husky earn their reputation as some of the smoothest-pulling bikes around, even though their flywheel weight was far below that of Maico (though still much heavier than the pipey Japanese bikes.) Given the choice, I would always run with lower pressure than I currently do, except that there is the risk of getting a flat or denting a rim like Kyle did.

Though I should point out, in the spirit of the thread title, the YZ426F does appear to use a steel frame (for what it's worth.)

[rgaede]

those yz426's and yz400's handle like (insert desired word) compared to the new fours; My dad has one so I'm able to talk. I've ridden everything from the old super rats to modern crfs, and the crf has the older bikes in every fashion. And it's not necessarily the lower the pressure the better. On the type of terrain that your describing 15 psi cold would be a good pressure to go with. You only run lower than like 12 on a modern bike if you're riding in deep sand or watery mud.

[Wilmx829]

doesn't low tire pressure slow you down?

[DJ99X]

Yes, but it provides more grip on dirt

[Netdemon01]

Why doesn't Maico make a bike that would be competitive in the AMA nationals or supercross? The more brands the better I think. I was hoping Cannondale would make it through those many years ago during it's debut.

I think my YZ400F handles just fine, but then again I've been riding it since I was 13 and don't know how the new bikes feel.

[DJ99X]

If you dont plan on getting a new bike, I wouldn't recommend trying one in the near future, or you will want a new one

[rgaede]

That's how I ended up with my crf. Rode my dads a couple times, loved the increase in power, susp improvements, and chassis improvements over my 125, and ended up buying one.

[JETZcorp]

Why doesn't Maico make a bike that would be competitive in the AMA nationals or supercross? The more brands the better I think. I was hoping Cannondale would make it through those many years ago during it's debut.

They do make a 250, and they say it's got 54 horses. One thing to remember, though, is that Maico is currently a small-scale niche brand that really doesn't have the funds to rock the boat with an all-new bike. Even when they were the Porsche of motocross, it took them many years to scrape together the money to make a big leap forward in 1978, and that basic engine stayed in use until 1982 with only minor changes (bored from 440 to 490cc, and new primary chains.) The engine their using now is essentially a 1983 engine with a new, water-cooled cylinder with some different bore and stroke dimensions. Nevertheless, their engines are more than competitive and the bikes come stock with a lot of high-end parts. Personally, if I were going to choose a new Maico to buy, I'd take the 620. It doesn't quite have the power of the 685, but it's said to have a more exciting powerband than The Beast.

Here's the link to the 250, it costs 7,990 Euros, which is equivalent to about $9,880. They don't come cheap, I'm afraid.
http://maico-bikeworld.de/catalog/produ ... 6f21d47fc8

[stotts713]

not a ktm fan at all but i saw in transworld that they were making chromoly frames for 2010 or 2011 and it will be like crisscross round tubes..it looked pretty cool but looked heavy..they are also supposed to be making 350 4strokes that will be sickkkk