Nice look back, Tony. You and I must have the world's largest collection of magazines.....I had the ones you mentioned plus East Coast enduro mags and, when my daughter went to Europe, she got me a subscription to a French dirt big mag. I remember many of the characteristics of the bikes that you mentioned......the fragile CR pistons(store 'em in an egg crate) to the definitely enduro-type powerband of the Husky. I was especially sad to see the demise of the Maico's as I loved the way the pulled and handled (except the Corte Cosso shocks (and the primary chain...always mysterious what condition it was in). The Japanese bikes had a "universal fit" feeling, in general, with problems that seemed to continue too long before correction. That said, what an exciting time in the history of dirt bikes. Magazines could do some well-thought out bitching about the problems of bikes without the nit-picky primadonna whining of today. We all got to suffer jetting, suspension, balance, quality problems and felt like brothers in our "suffering". What a great time to be a dirt biker. I'm 74 now and still riding....don't know how much longer.
I just recently completed a full nut & bolt restoration of a 1984 YZ 250 in the Canadian red/white version . My dirt bike hero of teens was Ricky Johnson , so it was an easy choice when picking a project from this era . I enjoyed your review of the entire 84 class of 250 bikes . Keep up the great work here on your channel !!!
@@TheMotocrossVault this is why I don't like modern bikes as they are copies of each other.. Back in the late 70s and early 80s the bikes were changing big time... Air cooling was on the way out and liquid cooling coming in, disc brakes were replacing drums, rear suspension was changing from twin to mono shock and fregular shaped seats were being replaced by safety seats.
Was lucky enough to work at a shop in Australia that was one of a handful in the country that had all four japanese brands in the eighties, was a good time. Agree with the overview of these bikes with the added point of view that the disc brake was a massive advantage over the suzukis weak drum or the yamahas light switch and variable twin lead drum. Yamahas "z" spokes were a PIA. Suzukis frame used to break above the swingarm pivot and hondas seemingly simple atac valve needed regular cleaning to remain operative. Having said that i would be happy to have any one of these old rockets in my shed today.
Great vid Tony! Love to see the 1985 shootout. Honda Action magazine voted the Honda #1? The Honda was, besides the suspension, a great bike only if it was not built motor wise with the same durability as a potato chip. That mag lost credibility for me that year and cost my friend €$$£ in rebuilds. If Yamaha or Suzuki had built the same bike (like the Honda), MXA would have ripped it to shreds due to reliability or lack there of. Now a Yamaha engine in a Suzuki chassis would have been a thing to behold. The 1985 Dirt Bike Mag had an interesting take on the shootout that year. An entire video could be made on it😉 hint, hint.
I loved the CR and the YZ(we got the red & white models) 250's in 84 in Australia Even though l rode a KX80F2 in 84... Exciting times for me being 12 and racing MX back then
Thanks for all your efforts to keep Vintage bikes alive Tony. Some fantastic bikes being produced in the 80’s & 90’s. Love going to your channel and hitting the Rewind button. I started on a 1979 Italjet 50. Two stroke air cooled mono-shock with a hydrostatic clutch. My dad bought it new from a local Harley Davidson dealer! Fun 1st bike. Anyway, great work and keep the articles coming!
And had easilty the best suspension. Even in stock trim, the RM was the best bike for the average rider because of its suspension and better reliability over the Honda.
Loved Dirt Bike and MXA. They were expensive to buy in the U.K. but I didn’t care. Started reading in 77 until 83 when an injury racing in West Berlin meant I had to go on road instead. Great memories.
I had EVERY issue of Dirt Bike and Motocross Action back then from around 1980 and up would get so excited when the new issue would arrive. Rick Sieman "Super Hunky" Mr. Know-it-all Jody Weisel. Back then you had to actually use your brain and read.
I have a 2003 and it's an absolute beast. I'm a big heavy guy and the bike easily hauls my fat carcass around. The 4 speed box is actually not bad once you drop a couple of teeth on the back. I like the heft of it. It is heavy but its planted and will normally go where you aim it.
A Brad Lackey KX 500 please his my faverate ever Motocross champ I've lost a pic that was in Trials and Motocross news here in England that was on a front page of Brad Lackey from behind flying
The magazines did not like the "tippy and tall chassis" of the KX250? They were probably 1" shorter than modern 4-stroke bikes, (and my newer YZ250 2-stroke), and not a word about the bikes from the mags since 1998. I did just see a MXA vid on new bikes about a week ago, and they actually mentioned bikes getting too tall for the first time in their new employment. We knew that back in 1984. Jody knew that back in 1984. 4-strokes made the bikes taller too, with stock bikes edging out guys under 5'10" tall.
No one was on board with big Kawasaki's till '86..the Honda's were the TOP BIKES you felt so comfortable on..the yammy was a bull and felt like one. But I saw one win many races that year..suzukis were still a popular bike based on the suspension and success they had in the class in 81and 82..classic machines..just my eyewitness take from this era...I love your videos Tony ..it's like Christmas
My first year to throw a leg over a bike was 1984 the "zinger" PW50 I was just just 6 years old and remember the show room like it was yesterday my attention was drawn to the Tri Z the big one I remember my grand pop sitting me up one one Been riding with my dad and grandfather and now my boys and girls strange how I seem to have a visual favorite for every model year from 1980 to current Its a tie for me between 1991 CR or 1991 Suzuki for visuals And my favorite overall ride i have owned and ridden is a brand new 1994 YZ 80 so far to date
Every test with the Husqvarnas: "Dual shocks are horribly outdated and we can't believe Husky are still doing it. Oh btw the Husky's rear suspension works better than any other bike in the test." OH REALLY?! It's almost like linkage isn't totally necessary and you can create a rising rate using shock valving and progressive-rate springs (that's what PDS means on modern non-linkage KTMs; Husky did it in 83). It's almost like Öhlins know how to make suspension that works. Everybody's bikes got heavier when they went to monoshock. But the moto press and the children that followed it were more concerned with looking fashionable. Everyone was switching to mono so it must be categorically better for some reason. Everyone complains about badly setup linkages causing bizarre handling and needing a pile of fresh bearings every 10 minutes, but you gotta have it because it's "trick". I think Husky had it right then and it'd still be right now. Super high quality shocks with rising rate built into them. Balljoints at both ends for a canted angle (narrow up top for you, wide down bottom for chain clearance). The swingarm can be lighter because the suspension isn't cantilevered 5ft away from the axle. Your airbox can flow better and be more accessible, and your carb can have a straight shot into the cylinder rather than being cranked at some funky angle. And yes, if one of your shocks is blown and the other isn't, it will handle funny. But a blown monoshock handles funny too, and so does the loose worn-out linkage that you find on all the 80s bikes if you buy one today. Admittedly, the 83+ Husky frame was not known for handling, and Husky always built their bikes like armored personnel carriers so they ceded any potential weight advantage from the suspension, and then some. Next to an 81 dual-shock Maico, the Husky feels like a Volvo on 2 wheels. Their 250 was powerful but super peaky in 82, and forever after they stuck to their mild heavy-flywheel engine roots.
@@jayb9687 That can't be on the rear wheel. That would made them stronger then a 250 2 stroke from en 90's and early 2000. I don't belive it until I see facts and proof. End of story.
