To Maxsym-ize or not?

[J.R. Osborne]

It's been a busy day on the forum for me today guys. Another issue has come to the forefront- the Maxsym 500 GP 4-stroke engine.

Let me make this clear, I am not running the Maxsym for this season. I do not have one or plan on getting one. I emailed Guy Heathcote at Maxsym back in Sept/Oct. of last year to discuss the engine, but that's as far as it went.

When we made the rules to include the engine it was to offer us competitors another new engine choice. It was never going to be allowed to make everything else obsolete (i.e. weight would be added to slow it down if necessary). We felt that a fuel injected 4-stroke w/ electric start would open up the access to the FE class because you would not have to be a GP tuner to run the thing. I think alot of guys who would like to run the twins don't because they are way more difficult to maintain/tune than even a full size race car. The typical FE teams are hardcore karters because it does take alot of commitment to campaign one.

Steve Edwards from the U.K., Anthony Williams, and Rob Howden do NOT think the engine is good for the class. Their main concern is that it will make what we are running now obsolete. I do not have a problem taking the engine out of eligibility for our series if that's what everyone wants.

Here are what I think the Pro/Cons are:

Pro:

1) Engine should be a touch-and-go operation allowing many more regular guys access to the superkart class.
2) Engine is currently on sale for $6995 (British Pounds), ready to race.

Con:

1) Engine could be more powerful than what we currently have and cause problems trying to slow it's performance to within our current standard so not to make our engines obsolete.
2) As development goes up, so does the price. The engine could get to be very expensive in the future.

So let's hear the discussions of which way you want to go fellas.


J.R. Osborne
_________________
Anderson/Gas Gas/P-1

[Riley Will]

I, and having a vested interest, would leave the door open for any other engine being 4 stroke or 2 stroke. "MaxSym have a long way to go before they are competitive".........That is a quote from someone close to them. However, they will never get there if there is no place to allow them to campaign. I hope that we do see them on the track racing against our TZ's, RS's, and BRC's........This is what makes the USSC so attractive, the best from around the world. Maybe we can start to see some FPE and SGM too. More flavors for our palats (sp?).

MaxSym may not be there yet, but I hope that they continue and strive to succeed. Competition is what brings out the best in racer's and engineer's alike
_________________
Riley Will
BRC Engineering
rwill@brceng.com
(403) 216-0630 wk.
www.brceng.com

[Chris Reinhardt]

I don't understand why everybody is so scared of the 4 cycles?

http://www.maxsym.com/gp500-600/documents/Powercurves.pdf

is showing peak HP @ 90, isn’t that pretty close to a strong TZ/RS 250? Weren't these companies contracted to develop 4 cycles as a replacement for the 250 GP bikes?

Chris R.

[Anthony Williams]

Why don't you guys simply take a look at the professionals i.e. MOTO GP! Since they allowed the 1,000 cc 4 stroke into the class, the 500cc 2 strokes have now become the very distant "also rans!" And these 500cc 2 strokes are factory entered bikes!

Let me also remind you of JR Clasens 4 stroke entry in the ICE class at the 2003 Laguna race. That kart simply ran away with the race, he ended up running with Alan Rudolph in his Hemmingway powered twin! Martin even commented on the podium how nice it was to run with one of his old adversaries from the 125 class!

So what chance does an old technology TZ / RS / BRC carburated 2 stroke have against a developing 2005 fuel injected Maxsym engine that produced 90bhp on there very first waterbrake dyno run?!
Slim and none in my opinion!

There needs to be some kind of governing body that oversees rule implementation i.e. introduction of a brand new 4 stroke engines - rule.

Rob Howden suggested quite some time ago that we need to form a drivers association so that we can vote specifically on this kind of hot topic!

SO LETS FORM A DRIVERS ASSOSCIATION so we can vote on this in a demorcratic fashion!

Riley, I am shocked at your welcome-mat to the 4 stroke! You have invested huge amounts of time, money and effort and you now have a very competitive package! Maybe you have some underlying agenda that nobody knows about just yet.
The Maxsym engine will one day arrive on the grid and when it does it is without doubt going to blow away all the 2 strokes! Then what have you got? A class with a bunch of guys heavily invested in 2 strokes who are no longer competitive, and who can they sell there 2 stroke engines to? No body!

This has the potential to split the class up when there just isn't enough competitors to split up! Then we are faced with small grids - which is really what we have now!

I suggest that everyone go look at the Maxsym web site and pull up the price list and see with your own eyes just how much one of these engines will cost! http://www.maxsym.com

We need to have some stability in this newly formed East / West race series, introducing rules for 4 strokes does not promote stability, let the series run for a few years and gather momentum then lets talk about THE FUTURE.

Don't shoot this series in the foot!

Anthony Williams.

[url][/url]

[Charlie Tackett]

And how well did Kyle do last year in a twin??? Last spring Ted qualified 5th overall at Laguna running our 450 and was in 4th when a mechanical DNF bit us. However, lap times at Laguna and other tracks were comparable to front running 250 singles.

Prices? price a customized for karting Gas-Gas. I was told $8000 euro plus $1500 for a custom pipe. You could darn near buy two of our 450's for that price!!! And just wait, it won't be long before that GasGas sows up on a kart here.........and then what do you do with your 257's and CR's?? What's the otc price on Riley's motor? How about a full-tilt modified from the cases on up JHA RS250????

And what about this 450 4/ twin????:

[Brad Davis]

Man that aprila looks like the engine I have heard that Riley Will is going to be importing. Sure is beautiful looking. Riley is that true. Is this the engine that you will be importing. I may have got my rumors mis matched.
Introducing these expensive high powered engine into a system that is suffering from a bad economy seems as though it could have a strong effect on the whole system. Karting is down 50% in Europe and the US. We need to think clearly how to manage what we have and what will stableize our existing situation. Just my 2 cents worth.

[Randy Domikis]

JR,

One option would to have an experimental class that could run along with us, but could not receive points along the way. This way, you would not deny them to develop the enigine, but not be allowed to run away from the field if capable. This status could easily be changed to allow the engines after one year and the approval of the group of people you have already assigned to help you with the series (i.e You, Johnny, Firioz, etc...)

In my opinion, WKA has never taken a hands on approach to a ever changing class. If they would go back and look at things like weight and tech, they would have had many more competitors run their races.

I know that the only way you and the series can suceed is with entries is by listening to the people racing and the people who would like to race with us. I am sure as you have mentioned in another post is that you will indeed listen and consider all proposals and opinions. You have shown your ability to do this over and over again! Thank you for taking this path. I really think it will be helpful in the years to come.

Randy Domikis

[Rob Howden]

This is good discussion on this topic but I MUST make one clarification on my position here. I have firmly stated in e-mail communication with J.R. and over the phone with Mr. Williams the following:

I believe that the eligibility of the MaxSym should be tabled for at least ONE year. I'm not saying to ban it or any four-stroke forever, I'm simply stating that the Maxsym is an unknown quantity that has no real reason to be included in the 2005 rules. We don't NEED this motor right now, so let's not rush it in. After it's been developed a little more, on Supermotos, sidecars and whatever else they have planned, the proposed Driver Association can discuss it for 2006 or 2007.

Guys, don't make the mistake of opening a door that you can't close again. Once a couple guys have purchased this motor, you'll never be able to ban it. Leave the door closed this year and we'll keep an eye on the package. The class will need to adapt to head into the future, but this is not the time.

The superkart program is in good shape right now with motors and the U.S. Superkart Championship has momentum. Let's not try to fix something that doesn't need fixing.

RH - HCI
_________________
Rob Howden
Editor / Publisher
www.eKartingNews.com
www.eKartingNews.ca
www.eFormulaCarNews.com
www.eSportsRacer.com

[Chris Reinhardt]

Why is everybody trying to stop progress? The 2 strokes are on the extinct list period, only a matter of time before they are all gone. Stopping somebody from running a type of kart or type of engine is what turns people away. Let whatever run, you can always handicap with weight at a later date.
The ex-pres of the CIK that resigned, wasn’t that partly because he was making a mandate to eliminate 2 cycles? So I don't think the CIK is a good reference in this matter. I think the approach of letting everything run together is a better one; we can really see how they both stack up and adjust accordingly.

Chris R.

[Mark Brown]

[Anthony Williams]

The following is from DARCY DECOSTE, I am posting this on his behalf.

Here are the facts as I see them:

1. Contrary to what most people think, 4-strokes, even at twice the
displacement level will not necessarily develop a higher peak horsepower
than the "half displacement 2-stroke" that has to compete against it.
However, what they will have, if properly developed, is a wide, linear
power band that will produce much more bottom and midrange power compared
to the 2-stroke. Remember, they get to be twice as big in swept volume.
Contrary to what most people think, midrange power is what really makes a
motor fast, not peak horsepower and this is why a true 90 -100 bhp at the
countershaft 500 4-stroke is going to run away from the 250 2-strokes. At
this bhp level they are at peak power parity, but half way down the band
they are going to be up 10-15 bhp. One only needs to look as far as 125
motocross to see a example of this. In this class, the 250 4-strokes
actually makes less peak power than the 125 but when you go down the band
into the bottom and midrange, the 250 4-stroke is up 5-7 bhp! Guess who
usually wins off the corners! By the time the 125 gets going at the end of
the straight there is another corner and the advantage is back with the
4-stroke.
This is also why a outstanding driver like Kyle Martin could beat the hell
out of most of the 250 twins with a 4-stroke single that was probably at
least 20 bhp down on the best 2-strokes. He didn't have the peak but off
the corners (where it counts in acceleration) he probably had as much and
more hp. Combine that with his higher cornering speed and it was enough to
get the job done against all but the very fastest 250's.

Bottom Line: In the right hands, the Maxsym could devastate the 250 twins
in a short amount of time assuming the people responsible for it's
development are competent.


2. 4-strokes, in the state of tune required to compete with 2-strokes under
a 2:1 displacement rule, are LESS reliable and MORE expensive to maintain
by a factor of 2-4 times. I would remind all those bench racers out there
that disagree with the above statement, before they comment, to pickup some
of the latest issues of the current motocross magazines and "note" the
interesting articles they are now writing on "why your new 4-stroke
motocross racer needs to be rebuilt so much more often than your 2-stroke
did", or, "why your 250 4-stroke is going to cost you $3000 to rebuild
after that little over-reving mishap". My personal favorite is the article
with the statement "there are a lot of hand grenades out there now". That
one say's it all.
The fact is, to match the level of performance of those so called "obsolete
2-strokes", 2:1 displacement advantaged 4-strokes require higher cylinder
pressure and higher crankshaft speed to makeup the torque loss incurred
with the "dead strokes" that is part of their cycle.

Bottom line: 4-strokes stress their parts harder and there are more parts
to stress. In simple terms, this means more parts have to be replaced
sooner compared to their 2-stroke counterparts.


3. When failure does occur in the 4-stroke, more often than not, it is
catastrophic in nature. A common 4-stroke failure, the highly loaded
connecting rod fails,... and saws the cases in half. Whoops! That one hurts
a bit. Of course the achilles heel of the 4-stroke is the valve train, just
as the piston is the weak link in a 2-stroke. Unfortunately the
consequences of a failure are not on the same level. Pull or drop a valve
with a 4-stroke and there is a excellent chance the entire top half of the
engine will be reduced to rubble. Period. Makes the 2-stroke piston seizure
seem downright mundane doesn't it?

Bottom Line: When the 4-stroke blows up, and it will like all racing
engines do, it hurts more parts in a more serious manner.

4. Want to argue about the costs involved in racing 4-strokes? Remember,
I'm an engine builder and I not only build kart motors but also
motorcycles. I get to see first hand what costs what in the racing world
from the perspective of the guy that keeps the stuff going.
How about the intermediate to pro level motocross racer that rebuilds the
top end of his STOCK 250 4-stroke bike every 8 hours of operation. How
about a $900 bill for parts and labor. Outrageous, you say! Well, talk to
the OEM. Titanium valves, keepers, springs, seats, cams, pistons, rings
etc. cost money, actually a lot of money, and all these parts and more have
to be replaced on a regular basis to prevent disaster in the 4-stroke
world. I'm not even going to talk about the almost double labor time to
exchange these parts and make the necessary adjustments to things like the
valves, (remember you have 4 or 5 of them per cylinder).

Don't believe me, then maybe you might want to talk to the president of
KTM. He recently revealed in a article in CycleNews magazine that the cost
to KTM to race 4-strokes compared to 2-strokes increased by a factor of FOUR!!
Maybe Honda HRC is a more respected source regarding the costs of racing
2-stroke vs 4-strokes. They recently admitted that they had miscalculated
the costs involved in switching from 2-stroke to 4-stroke racing, ie
MotoGP. Originally they had expected costs to merely double compared to the
2-stroke program. They now admit that costs are somewhere between 3-4 times
where they were with the 2-strokes.
For the guy who made the comment on the forum about the CIK and their
refusal to adopt a 4-stroke format. Why do you think they made the decision
they did? Is is possible, being in Europe, they actually are aware of what
has been going on regarding the costs associated with 4-stroke racing?
Absolutely!!

Bottom Line: 4-strokes contain more parts that cost a lot more money that
have to be replaced more often. In the reality world of 4-stroke racing,
2+2 really does equal 4. 4-strokes cost substantially more to operate and
maintain.

Based on what I have seen happen in motorcycle racing when 4-strokes were
introduced into certain 2-stroke classes, I have to predict that a 500cc
4-stroke twin will demonstrate a significant performance advantage over the
250 2-stroke twins. This performance advantage will probably obsolete the
250 2-strokes within a very short period of time. The cost associated with
racing the 4-stroke will be substantially higher which will eventually
reduce the number of participants in the class, exactly the opposite
reaction it is supposed to have.
Additional problems will be a single source for parts and information
supporting the engine, one only needs to look as far as ICC in sprint
racing to know what this means as far as parts costs, (astronomical),
availability, (it's not), and performance advantage, (gee, why can't I get
the special cam too). Another problem will be NOISE, which no one is
looking at yet but at some point is going to become MAJOR, just like it is
starting to in motorcycles. Funny thing how 2-strokes LIKE to have a
silencer on the end of their pipe but not 4-strokes!!

I agree with Rob Howden, once you let the Genie out of the bottle it's all
over. It can't be put back in. One only needs to look as far as the ICC
motor in sprint kart racing and the so called 4-stroke revolution in
motorcycle racing to see the very, very, expensive consequences of
introducing the "next greatest thing" without thinking over the possible
consequences.

Darcy

[Chris Reinhardt]

JR or somebody correct me if I'm wrong. Doesn't the rules that are currently written state 250cc twin cylinder 2 stroke or 500cc twin cylinder 4 stroke, and 250cc single cylinder 2 stroke or 500cc single cylinder 4 stroke?
I think that part of the rules are as old as the WSK and is JR Clasen's vision which should be a template for the CIK and the rest of the world.
Nobody has seen one run yet and people want to ban them?
Maybe we should add: 250 twin cylinder 2 stroke or 500cc twin cylinder 4 stroke, unless the 4 stroke is faster, then we ban them!


Darcy, trying to beat Randy's posts?
BTW I race a 450 and I have had my hands on most of the 450's running in karting including several big failures!!! I'll take a set of cases over a Russell Anderson cylinder any day. You should know better then to compare a motocross engine to a road race kart engine anyway, road racers keep the motors much more fresh then any motocrosser.
You know the WKA is going through the same thing with the flat head Briggs vs. the overhead Animal engines. All the engine builders are making every excuse possible to keep the new engines out. Why? Because they have alot of time and money vested in the old flat heads.
I see that same scenario here....



Chris R.

[Riley Will]

Darcy, very informative post........Thank you for your insights.

Anthony W., I "welcome" the MaxSym only because I am confident that with the design of that engine, our BRC250FE will out perform it. I would also like the opportunity to see.

Brad Davis, I could get the Aprilia 450 engine but I think that would be a conflict of interest at the moment. The R&D department at Aprilia laughed when I asked if it would be as fast as their RSV250 2-stroke on the track.....They felt that it might run with the RS125 GP bike in a comparable chassis. Weight is a huge issue along with how the mass will change handling.

The materials to run a high performing 4-stroke (not used in the MaxSym) cost very dearly. To run a MaxSym, IMO, would be comparable to a pre00' TZ, it may prove to be cost effective in that guise.....Pushing the performance above that will certainly require huge $$$$$ and a few spares.

My only point to all of this is that MaxSym needs a theater to develop in. BRC did too. If they are excluded at the outset, a cost effective and reasonable performing twin cylinder 4-stroke engine will never be developed for our Karting concern. When the sky falls, as Chris R. has told us all is happening, we won't have an alternative. Until then, keep enjoying yer castor oils on Sunday's and a welcome hand out for invention .
_________________
Riley Will
BRC Engineering
rwill@brceng.com
(403) 216-0630 wk.
www.brceng.com

[Charlie Tackett]

Gee, after all these decades, I now finally realize why 35 yrs ago I traded my BSA 441 VS in on a shiney new Kawasaki Greenstreak 250 rotary!!

The mmost important thing in your post, Anthony, is in his first line:

Here are the facts as I see them:

There is an obvious bias and shows thru as clear as day adn it is obvious a post intended to support your stand point.

Why don't we hear about the 450 4/ riders with 200+hrs on their bike with no problmes and nothing done to them. Seems like that would get you thru a few seasons of superkart racing. And making it sound, like you need to replace absolutely everysingle item above the cases excepting for teh bare culinder and bare head every 8hrs is absolutely ridiculous, sorry. Certain items, maybe and yes, depending upon what was done to it and how it was run. A 50hp 450 run on an mx track is going to have different requirements and upkeep than a 60+hp 450 framer running on a mile.

WHic is a point in this class that everyone wants to ignore, whther its 4/ or 2/.

Gee, I guess the only thing a 2/ ever does is suffer a simple stuck piston...one you can clean up befoer the next heat and just throw in a new piston. I guess them girdles on the 257's must be some fancy supersecret aero device, eh?

Obviously no one has seen a CR250 that had blown the cylinder right off, taking two of the f case studs with and the adjacent junks of the separate case halfs they came from? ANy body ever seen a 256 with a rod sticking thru the cases? DOn't suppose nobody has ever seen a 257 with a big crack thru the posrts, or a two-piece cylinder??? Or how about a 2-cycle piston cracking and breaking apart. Or Seizing a crankbearing and spider-webing cracks thru the adjacent case half, which is now a very expensive boat anchor.

WHy don't you ask Darcy, or swedetech or ANderson on the replacement cost for a cylinder, head, piston, and crank on a blown up CR250. I betcha that $400 dollar cylinder is going to cost you *well* over a grand by the time you get it back. And that's a frickin CR250 Honda cylinder!!! Not a what....... $4000 Aprilla cylinder??

Hey RIley, what does your motor cost, complete, ready to run, out the door, full retail, best of everything on it. $15,000?? $17,000

If I get stupid with jetting, hole a piston and it breaks apart and ruins the cylinder beyond repair, what is a new, ported, replacement Aprilla going to cost me...oh, and to be comparative to Darcy, you do the work, not me, so don't forget your labor.

Johnny, the RS250 guy....what's a JHA cylinder go for a current exchange rates, or a cylinder you or Stocky has done??

Take that Gas-Gas that has all the Euro guys bent out of shape with its performance. If what I was told is correct... $8,000 + $1500 for the pipe is $9500 euro, which comes to what, about $12,400 or so USD? Minus the slipper clutch, you could replicate our 450 for about $6-6500. And want to check the prices on a crank or cylinder on that Gas-Gas???


SO what's my point? My point is rather simple. As long as run under totally open, unrestricted rules whether it is on a 4-stroke or a 2-stroke, the reliability is going to go right out the window and the cost right thru the roof and there ain't going to be racers beating down your door to join teh class. (well, hmmm, covered teh roof, window and doors, there!!!) AN open unlimited 2-stroke can be just as prone to catastrophic failures as a open class 4-stroke and both can be outragously expensive to repair.

PS, I don't care how much faster that Kaw Greenstreak was, it never sounded as sweet as that old 441!

[Charlie Tackett]

Oh, btw, Darcy is indeed spot on about the torque curves of a 4-stroke and also the importance of mid-range, IMHO. WHy do you think we ran a PJ36 on our 125 and did a few other things to sacrifice peak hp/high rpm for a stronger mid-range.