KDXRIDER.NET

Dirt Bike magazine shared this link on twitter this morning. (history of the kdx)
http://dirtbikemagazine.com/home-featur ... aki-kdx200

Neat article! Thanks for posting.

Very cool!

I ran across this article online last summer while I was researching John Penton's link to the KDX. Great article. The end of the article says (don't really understand this),

"And that’s the sad legacy of the KDX200. Despite being around for so long, it was killed before its time. The 2006 KDX would no doubt continue to sell well today if the two-stroke trail bike hadn’t been outlawed."

When were two- stroke trail bikes outlawed? and when did it become legal again?

The article is dated 01/12/15 but I could have sworn I read it before, in fact I borrowed some of the info to write the kdx200 Wikipedia page

Thanks for the link.

yep, it is a little older, it is a repost

A 2006 and newer made KDX200 could not get on USFS land, which would hurt sales, in my estimation. Please note, 2006 made, not 2006 model made in 2005 before the EPA laws changed and impacted 2-stroke off-road (non-MX) bikes. I believe you can see the differences in KTM's line-up change around that time with the models not having the spark arrestor.

In 2002, the EPA came up with laws that affected 2006 and onward.

I guess Kawasaki did not want to market it as a "competition only model" or include it in "all models testing of emissions".

This site was around before the hammer got dropped, and I am sure we discussed it before the 2006 time frame. I think I posted a link a while back to the EPA site or a copy of the law.

With that said, why was there no 2006 KDX220R?

and with all that said, Kawasaki is sucking the last few years on bike choice. They must be focusing on ships and bulldozers.

As Jason said, bikes built Jan 2006 and onward had emissions targets if to be used on public land for recreation. Two strokes weren't outlawed, but the hydrocarbon allowances are small enough that a simple, carbureted two stroke won't pass. Two stroke trail bikes could exisit with direct injection, but then you are looking at adding a lot of cost, weight, and complexity to an engine design who's strong points are light weight, low cost, and simplicity.

adam728 wrote:As Jason said, bikes built Jan 2006 and onward had emissions targets if to be used on public land for recreation. Two strokes weren't outlawed, but the hydrocarbon allowances are small enough that a simple, carbureted two stroke won't pass. Two stroke trail bikes could exisit with direct injection, but then you are looking at adding a lot of cost, weight, and complexity to an engine design who's strong points are light weight, low cost, and simplicity.

So why (for example) are un-plated KTM 2-strokes allowed in the Allegheny National Forest Trails here in PA? 2-strokes have really made a comeback in recent years, but what regulation was dropped?

It's mostly a California thing. Can't get a "green" sticker on 2T bikes there any more. Japan isn't going to read every law for every state. They are going to pick the most difficult state to register in and use that info.

Really cool article. Thanks for sharing.

I am not certain on the law, but google search can find it for you.

Whatever it was, it did change how non-competition models were regulated. I do know that.

Keystone wrote:

adam728 wrote:As Jason said, bikes built Jan 2006 and onward had emissions targets if to be used on public land for recreation. Two strokes weren't outlawed, but the hydrocarbon allowances are small enough that a simple, carbureted two stroke won't pass. Two stroke trail bikes could exisit with direct injection, but then you are looking at adding a lot of cost, weight, and complexity to an engine design who's strong points are light weight, low cost, and simplicity.

So why (for example) are un-plated KTM 2-strokes allowed in the Allegheny National Forest Trails here in PA? 2-strokes have really made a comeback in recent years, but what regulation was dropped?

It's rarely, if ever, enforced on the end user. Tomorrow on the computer I can find the EPA regulation links. Notice all those KTMs likely say "closed course use only". There are regs saying you cannot use one outside of public land or racing. Even that you can't mod a regulated bike, like a WR. But never enforced.

Lookee what I found ... http://articles.superhunky.com/4/281

Nice! Haha!
Wish that had a date on it.

Well......It looks like Yamaha is entering the mix.

http://www.cycleworld.com/2014/12/24/20 ... fications/

Granted they are 4 strokes, but it's the first real challenge to the KTM faithful from the Japanese manufacturers. I sure hope Kawasaki gets in the mix, preferably with a 2 stroke.

Interesting that they release a green sticker and a non. Thinking outside the box. I'm not a big yamaha fan, but it's a start.

Swing-and-a-miss by Yamaha on the big deals to me. Cost to rebuild top end? Time to rebuild top-end? Service intervals? Ease of engine modification (can't just port)? Those are the reasons I love a two-stroke.

dingerjunkie wrote:Swing-and-a-miss by Yamaha on the big deals to me. Cost to rebuild top end? Time to rebuild top-end? Service intervals? Ease of engine modification (can't just port)? Those are the reasons I love a two-stroke.

I'll give you things like weight, simplicity, ease of sevice, etc. But ease of engine modification? I'd argue the Yamaha beats the pants off the KDX there. They sell a programmer for it, not to mention what the aftermarket will bring for tuning. Wet clay ride day? Take some timing out and tame the hit. Soft sand race? Tune it up for peak power. Add in cams, exhaust, etc and you can seriously define how bike runs.

2 stroke porting is great and all, but you aren't exactly going to play with multiple setups a day, nor go too far and then just come back a few iterations.