New 2 stroke road legal superbike being built.

I think this is just the start of the comeback of 2 strokes.4 strokes sound nice but they don't hold a candle to these wild beasts.We could be seeing road legal TZ750's, RG500's, RD500's the lot i reckon.
 
Last edited:
Questions... how will it actually meet Euro6 regulations? Which it will need to meet to be classified as road legal over there.

Not to mention all the countries and states with a blanket ban on two-stroke motorcycles.
 
I don't know mate, but they are building it.Don't know about any technology they have used on this bike.Will have to find out.
 
I think it's a grand idea to have a new two-stroke superbike... I'm just wary about big promises like that, especially since the terms "road-legal" and "two-stroke" have such a tenuous relationship in this emissions-restrictive climate.
 
Here are all the tech specs of it.Fuel injected in house built 500cc 80 deg V4 with 160bhp @ 11,500rpm at the crank and 145kg dry, so makes fireblades look pedestrian then.Tune this up with a remap, K&N air filter and a full race exhaust system and you will probably get 180bhp plus and about 15kg's less aswell.This is an amazing machine.One day all 2 stroke race/road bikes will come back.

http://www.ronax500.com/en/ronax_tech.php
 
Last edited:
The only problem i see and it's quite a big one, it doesn't have direct injection with fuel injection.Just EFI only.Don't know what the cylinders are made of either.So may not be reliable.I hope Aprilia and the rest of the manufacturers bring out loads of 2 stroke motorbikes again.
 
Last edited:
I still feel like the EPA is going to give it hell in the states.
 
The Aprilia SR50 had direct fuel injection about 10 years ago, and so did an RS250 Apriilia at about the same time.So goes to show the technology is there.And these in question are 2 stroke.
 
Technology isn't the problem. The problem is the EPA doesn't want them on the roads.

They give dealers issues all the times selling new dirt bikes. The tax the HELL out of you if you buy a new 2 stroke dirt bike. That's why a lot of people are going 4 stroke because that technology is moving forward. 2 strokes are a thing of the past in the US. That's why Yamaha got rid of the Banshee. Most people want the smooth power and torque of a 4 stroke, not the ring-a-ding-ding of a 2 stroke that's peaky and more difficult to drive. Call those people what you will, but that's the majority of the people in the states.

Simply put, unless you race die hard, almost no one cares about 2 strokes anymore. Everyones too lazy to even mix gas these days.

Besidse the odd Banshee here or there, I don't even remember the lsat time I heard a 2 stroke on the trails. Especially not on the road.
 
Well if somebody built a 2 stroke bike, with all the technology needed to prove they can pass emissions.And they still want them to jump through hoops, they are just being awkward.You know what i mean.It's more cost effective and has less pollution to build a 2 stroke, than to build a duracell powered bike ( and safer think battery acid ) that you have burn none exsistent coal for to run it.There is technology out there like bikes using 80% less 2 stroke oil to run it, because it's DFI is that accuarate.You could put a 24 litre fuel tank on a 2 stroke dakar bike but that wouldn't be nessarsary.Because they are that fuel effiecient.There are engines also that are half 2 and 4 stroke aswell ( don't know how this works ).

Have a read of this article

http://www.forzacentral.com/forum/t...echnology-creates-a-four-stroke-beater.38087/


I say screw 4 stroke bikes, they are just boring.
 
Last edited:
4 stroke bikes are "boring" because they almost never break.

I can't remember a single time when a 4 stroke broke at the track, yet I've seen a few 2 strokes blow up. (Once with me on it.:grumpy:)

For anything on the road a 4 stroke power delivery is superior, and although rebuilding a 2 stroke is cheaper, you have to do it more often.

That article was posted 5 years ago, and I haven't heard anything about it
Concepts are fine, but something would've been done by now if it actually worked.
 
Well if somebody built a 2 stroke bike, with all the technology needed to prove they can pass emissions.And they still want them to jump through hoops, they are just being awkward.You know what i mean.It's more cost effective and has less pollution to build a 2 stroke, than to build a duracell powered bike ( and safer think battery acid ) that you have burn none exsistent coal for to run it.There is technology out there like bikes using 80% less 2 stroke oil to run it, because it's DFI is that accuarate.You could put a 24 litre fuel tank on a 2 stroke dakar bike but that wouldn't be nessarsary.Because they are that fuel effiecient.There are engines also that are half 2 and 4 stroke aswell ( don't know how this works ).

Have a read of this article

http://www.forzacentral.com/forum/t...echnology-creates-a-four-stroke-beater.38087/


I say screw 4 stroke bikes, they are just boring.
I don't think your are understanding me.

They do build them. The EPA doesn't want to deal with them anymore. Bopop is right. If it actually worked they would be out and popular by now.

They flat out do not meet required regulations by the EPA, period.
 
There might be a clue in that vid about what the 2-strokes are up against re: emissions......

Yes, I know that's not one of the "new" direct-injected motors, but still.
 
Back