Honda TRX 450R banner

1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
120 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Well I got tired of reading these magazine test about the 450r having a light frontend so I weighed mine today. The front weigh's 180lbs. and the rear weigh's 190lbs. That seems like a good ratio to me(49%FRT to 51%rear). I wonder what the yfz weigh's front and back? Does anybody have a buddy that has one and could weigh it and find out if the magazine's are right or wrong?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,877 Posts
Those are very similar numbers as I came up with. I'm unsure of the YFZ's bias - but the 450R's was very similar to a 400EX - only lighter at all 4 corners.

I think they're confusing a "light front end" with an easy to wheelie stock setup coupled to a torquey engine. Big difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
120 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Originally posted by 86atc250r@Jul 21 2004, 11:57 PM
I think they're confusing a "light front end" with an easy to wheelie stock setup coupled to a torquey engine.  Big difference.
Ditto that!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
Good posts. The front end is light compared to the ratio of my C'Dale when riding them back to back but I love it. I've never had problems and it seems to do better for me when it comes to MX. Light weight and nimble handling I'll take any day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
I have both a TRX and a YFZ (although very little ride time on the TRX) and I've found that the Yammie will only wheelie if you want it to. I got on the gas coming out of a corner on the 450R and it came right up on me- maybe I wasn't far enough up on the tank, but my YFZ just wouldn't have done that. I'm not bashing the 450R or anything, this is just what I've experianced.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,877 Posts
Like we were saying before though --- just because a machine wheelie's easy doesn't necessarily mean it has a "light" front end.

For instance - if I lower a TRX and raise a YFZ, I can guarantee that the YFZ will have a much more significant problem with wheelies than the TRX. However, if both quads weight biases are the same, they will both still handle well in the air and still have an overall balanced feel.

The YFZ's stock setup is a bit lower than a stock TRX - this is likely where the bulk of the difference is in how easily the two pull the front tires off the ground.

If you get the chance, put your YFZ on the scales and weigh the front vs the rear and let us know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,846 Posts
I agree, I have heard of people getting a longer swinger for dragracing and I thing that is unnessary, here are a couple of pics of my quad lowered and the results of me praticing some holeshots on the pavement.


burned them all the way through 1st 3.5 psi in the rear tires, I weigh 265lbs


This was NOT power braking, just a standard hard holeshot that you would do dragracing. I think it will be hooking up really well on damp hardpack, i will keep you posted.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,877 Posts
Longer swingarm for drag racing? Bad idea unless you can afford to lose traction :)

Lowering is the ticket for keeping the front end down.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,846 Posts
Originally posted by 86atc250r@Jul 22 2004, 11:14 AM
Longer swingarm for drag racing? Bad idea unless you can afford to lose traction :)   

Lowering is the ticket for keeping the front end down.
Exactly!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
314 Posts
Am I missing something?? I have seen quads setup strictly for drag racing and they were all running extended swingarms. There was a guy running a custom turbo setup w/EFI on a DS650 on ATVConnection putting down like 110hp and he was running like a 12" extended swingarm. Also all the guys at my local dragstrip racing sportbikes that have dedicated drag bike all run extended swingarms. Also even though the frame is total custom the Top Fuel Harleys run extended swingarms. All it is doing is extending the total length of the bike making it more difficult to lift the front end. As far as loosing traction, that doesnt make sense. Basically think of the bike as a ratchet with the rear tire being the socket. can you put more torque down with a 2" long ratchet or a 12" long ratchet? There is a reason top fuel dragsters and rails are so long, to help promote traction and to keep the front ends down.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,877 Posts
If you've got a million HP then you may be forced to run an extended swingarm.

When you extend the swingarm you are giving up traction. For a typical YFZ or 450R lowering is the ticket --- if you extend the swingarm you will have far less traction than the guy that lowered his.

The trick is finding the combo that works for your power level. If you're talking a 200hp snowmobile powered Banshee - it's likely you will have to extend the swingarm and just take the traction loss in exchange for keeping the front from pulling an uncontrollable wheelie.

To think about it correctly you have to think about where the weight is. When you move the rear tires back, more weight is biased onto the front end (which is one of the reasons it's less likely to wheelie).

In some applications, where traction is a premium, like sand drags, this obviously becomes less of an issue and you'll see a lot more extended swingarms.

Traction is also one reason TT quads sometimes use shortened swingarms.

Your analogy about top fuel dragsters is partially correct - however, if you notice they are not constructed like a quad. All the weight is over the rear tires (on a quad, when you extend the swingarm, the rear tires move away from the weight). The vehicle is long which gives it stability. The length also adds weight and leverage to the front end which helps keep it down.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
314 Posts
I still dont see how you loose traction but that is not to say I doubt you.I agree that the lower you go the better traction you get and by lowering the front lower than the rear you will help promote taction even more at the cost of handling in turns. I just find it really funny that EVERY person I see drag racing with quads, bikes and cars run longer and lower to help go quicker. As far as dragsters go funny cars run with the motor up front in front of the driver and they also run low and long. Your right all the weight is up front and the longer you go the more weight you move off the rear tires but on takeoff you transfering all that weight via levrage to the rear tires, hence my ratchet analogy. I have been drag racing since I was a little kid with my dad and have always had it put into my head that you want low and long.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,685 Posts
Originally posted by Lason@Jul 22 2004, 04:23 PM
I still dont see how you loose traction but that is not to say I doubt you.I agree that the lower you go the better traction you get and by lowering the front lower than the rear you will help promote taction even more at the cost of handling in turns. I just find it really funny that EVERY person I see drag racing with quads, bikes and cars run longer and lower to help go quicker. As far as dragsters go funny cars run with the motor up front in front of the driver and they also run low and long. Your right all the weight is up front and the longer you go the more weight you move off the rear tires but on takeoff you transfering all that weight via levrage to the rear tires, hence my ratchet analogy. I have been drag racing since I was a little kid with my dad and have always had it put into my head that you want low and long.
you loose traction cause there is not as much weight on the back tires anymore....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
314 Posts
Originally posted by TRX450rlude+Jul 22 2004, 04:44 PM-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Lason
@Jul 22 2004, 04:23 PM
I still dont see how you loose traction but that is not to say I doubt you.I agree that the lower you go the better traction you get and by lowering the front lower than the rear you will help promote taction even more at the cost of handling in turns. I just find it really funny that EVERY person I see drag racing with quads, bikes and cars run longer and lower to help go quicker. As far as dragsters go funny cars run with the motor up front in front of the driver and they also run low and long. Your right all the weight is up front and the longer you go the more weight you move off the rear tires but on takeoff you transfering all that weight via levrage to the rear tires, hence my ratchet analogy. I have been drag racing since I was a little kid with my dad and have always had it put into my head that you want low and long.
you loose traction cause there is not as much weight on the back tires anymore.... [/b]
once again your right there is less weight on it when sitting still but when the quad takes off, all the weight is transfered to the rear tires (hence the front end become light)and physics says it will have MORE leverage on the rear tires than it would with a standard length swingarm. I tell you what, if your at your desk then pick up a pencil and hold it in the middle somewhere and push the side of the eraser into your desk. Now, hold it by the opposite side of the eraser and do it again. You will more than likely break the eraser clean off because your applying more pressure because of leverage. I guess Im the only one that sees this, owell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,685 Posts
Originally posted by Lason+Jul 22 2004, 04:59 PM-->
Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2004, 04:44 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Lason
@Jul 22 2004, 04:23 PM
I still dont see how you loose traction but that is not to say I doubt you.I agree that the lower you go the better traction you get and by lowering the front lower than the rear you will help promote taction even more at the cost of handling in turns. I just find it really funny that EVERY person I see drag racing with quads, bikes and cars run longer and lower to help go quicker. As far as dragsters go funny cars run with the motor up front in front of the driver and they also run low and long. Your right all the weight is up front and the longer you go the more weight you move off the rear tires but on takeoff you transfering all that weight via levrage to the rear tires, hence my ratchet analogy. I have been drag racing since I was a little kid with my dad and have always had it put into my head that you want low and long.

you loose traction cause there is not as much weight on the back tires anymore....
once again your right there is less weight on it when sitting still but when the quad takes off, all the weight is transfered to the rear tires (hence the front end become light)and physics says it will have MORE leverage on the rear tires than it would with a standard length swingarm. I tell you what, if your at your desk then pick up a pencil and hold it in the middle somewhere and push the side of the eraser into your desk. Now, hold it by the opposite side of the eraser and do it again. You will more than likely break the eraser clean off because your applying more pressure because of leverage. I guess Im the only one that sees this, owell. [/b]
yeah but there would be more weight on it if the tires were under the quad....you are spacing the weight out further from the rear tires, the further you go back with the back tires the less weight will be transfered on take off. with the tires directly underneth the quad all the weight is going onto the tires, and not spread out more from front to back....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,964 Posts
It is a fact that the longer the swingarm, the more power loss. If you have to transfer your power further, how will it stay the same? Pretend you have a 10 foot long swing arm, you will obviously not have CLOSE to the power that the guy with the 2 foot long swingarm! This is just a smaller difference, but the same will happen to a lesser degree....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
314 Posts
Well as far as power loss you are correct, almost. The power loss occurs in the act of lifting the front end , hence the reasoning of a extended swingarm. One thing though, why is it that shortening your swingarm will make it want to wheelie MORE? I still say 90% of people drag racing using extended swingarms cant be wrong and it makes perfect sense in my head from a physics point of view and also from all my years hanging out at drag strips and in shops gutting and tubbing. On that same note I will agree to disagree with you guys. Do what works for you, that is the main gameplan overall anyway. Ride safe guys!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,685 Posts
Originally posted by Lason@Jul 22 2004, 05:35 PM
Well as far as power loss you are correct, almost. The power loss occurs in the act of lifting the front end , hence the reasoning of a extended swingarm. One thing though, why is it that shortening your swingarm will make it want to wheelie MORE? I still say 90% of people drag racing using extended swingarms cant be wrong and it makes perfect sense in my head from a physics point of view and also from all my years hanging out at drag strips and in shops gutting and tubbing. On that same note I will agree to disagree with you guys. Do what works for you, that is the main gameplan overall anyway. Ride safe guys!
what you are not understanding is with the right amount of power extended swing arms are better....but you have to have enough power to compensate for the loss of traction of having a longer swingarm...the people that you are talking about dont just run a superlong frame with a stock 350. ..they mod the hell out of the motor...thats why they can use a extended swingarm....

Just to prove my point, Have you ever drag raced your quad on a track with lights, times and all. I have raced several banshees, ect with extended swingarms...and I always get the holeshot on those quads...however a few seconds into the race and they are flying by me like I was sitting still. thats because i got way more traction then they did durring the take off.....but once they get going and start to hook up...then they are gone....does this sink in even a little.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
150 Posts
I also believe the idea of mistaking the light front end for torque. My best frien has the YFZ LE and i ride it all the time. My impression as with his(owner of YFZ) was that the honda has more "pull" in the lower rpm range.........Its that simple the yammi seems to want to rev a bit before it takes off....so it seems as if its a faster revving engine but its prolly just the difference between single vs double cam.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,685 Posts
Originally posted by 450Rfullthrottle@Jul 22 2004, 07:12 PM
I also believe the idea of mistaking the light front end for torque. My best frien has the YFZ LE and i ride it all the time. My impression as with his(owner of YFZ) was that the honda has more "pull" in the lower rpm range.........Its that simple the yammi seems to want to rev a bit before it takes off....so it seems as if its a faster revving engine but its prolly just the difference between single vs double cam.
that is my experince with the YFZ too...I have over 20 hours on one...and I posted that exact same thing in here a while back...

with the YFZ you have to wait for the engine to get its RPMs up before you feel anything...almost like waiting for a turbo to spool up....on the TRX the power is there now....the trx can go from about ready to die becasue ist bogging so much, to throw you off the back instantly...you dont have to wait for the RPMs to get up to get going....thats why the TRX wheelies easier....trx just has way more torque...
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top