2 Valve or 4 Valve ?

[Youhave2minutes]

I for one certainly enjoyed watching speedway racing with the 2 Valve engines. Team riding was more apparent and riders seem to win races with track craft. Since the introduction of the 4 Valve, the bikes are too fast for today’s U.K. tracks resulting in less overtaking and poor handling of the machines resulting in more crashes and injuries. 
 

Your thoughts please, as I’m sure there will be lots of opinions for and against what I have outlined. So for me it’s back to basics. proving speed is not everything if it compromises the racing for the riders safety and the supporters for seeing exciting racing.

Edited October 21 by Youhave2minutes

[The White Knight]

100% agree with everything in your Post. 

On the safety front, I believe that the Bikes are far too fast for Tracks today.

I don't believe there wil be any change - but there certainly should be.

Well said, but not many on here will agree with you.

[Youhave2minutes]

3 minutes ago, The White Knight said:

100% agree with everything in your Post. 

On the safety front, I believe that the Bikes are far too fast for Tracks today.

I don't believe there wil be any change - but there certainly should be.

Well said, but not many on here will agree with you.

Well to be honest it stands out a mile to me. I’ve been going from the age of 8 and I’m now 64 and have seen enough to put up and argument over this topic. I’ve seen closer and more overtaking and team riding In races with the 2 valve over todays 4 valve.

Edited October 21 by Youhave2minutes

[Fromafar]

56 minutes ago, Youhave2minutes said:

I for one certainly enjoyed watching speedway racing with the 2 Valve engines. Team riding was more apparent and riders seem to win races with track craft. Since the introduction of the 4 Valve, the bikes are too fast for today’s U.K. tracks resulting in less overtaking and poor handling of the machines resulting in more crashes and injuries. 
 

Your thoughts please, as I’m sure there will be lots of opinions for and against what I have outlined. So for me it’s back to basics. proving speed is not everything if it compromises the racing.

Would agree with you,but we know nothing will change.We missed the boat on that one in GB.Technology Rules I’m afraid.

[40-38]

As an under 40 (just) latecomer to Speedway I never saw the old 2 valves, nor indeed the upright engines. I have wondered though whether the narrow band of power put out by a laydown engine really is suitable for some of the smaller, narrower tracks in the UK. I'd have assumed at around a track like Wolves used to be, or say Edinburgh, then an upright engine with a better balance of throttle control would work better.

I've noticed that a lot of riders tend to ride a diamond shape on a track as opposed to an oval, narrow into the corner and clattering the fence mid straight to enter the corner tight again, is that down to the engine or just the rider style? I've seen so many riders hanging on for grim death that you wonder if that's really not a terrible accident waiting to happen.

[Youhave2minutes]

49 minutes ago, Fromafar said:

Would agree with you,but we know nothing will change.We missed the boat on that one in GB.Technology Rules I’m afraid.

I know it won’t change but it just goes to show how going forward has made things worst especially in this sport☹️

[Youhave2minutes]

37 minutes ago, 40-38 said:

As an under 40 (just) latecomer to Speedway I never saw the old 2 valves, nor indeed the upright engines. I have wondered though whether the narrow band of power put out by a laydown engine really is suitable for some of the smaller, narrower tracks in the UK. I'd have assumed at around a track like Wolves used to be, or say Edinburgh, then an upright engine with a better balance of throttle control would work better.

I've noticed that a lot of riders tend to ride a diamond shape on a track as opposed to an oval, narrow into the corner and clattering the fence mid straight to enter the corner tight again, is that down to the engine or just the rider style? I've seen so many riders hanging on for grim death that you wonder if that's really not a terrible accident waiting to happen.

Tracks in U.K. are too tight on the bends for the powerful engines, the bigger circuits are fine like Belle Vue. But we all know Belle Vue is an exception.

[SaddlebowRoad]

1 hour ago, The White Knight said:

100% agree with everything in your Post. 

On the safety front, I believe that the Bikes are far too fast for Tracks today.

I don't believe there wil be any change - but there certainly should be.

Well said, but not many on here will agree with you.

absolutely agree with the tight and or narrow ones, its no coincidence that the wider & faster sweeping tracks such as bv worky redcar scunny and glasgow provide the best speedway nowadays

[Youhave2minutes]

3 hours ago, 40-38 said:

As an under 40 (just) latecomer to Speedway I never saw the old 2 valves, nor indeed the upright engines. I have wondered though whether the narrow band of power put out by a laydown engine really is suitable for some of the smaller, narrower tracks in the UK. I'd have assumed at around a track like Wolves used to be, or say Edinburgh, then an upright engine with a better balance of throttle control would work better.

I've noticed that a lot of riders tend to ride a diamond shape on a track as opposed to an oval, narrow into the corner and clattering the fence mid straight to enter the corner tight again, is that down to the engine or just the rider style? I've seen so many riders hanging on for grim death that you wonder if that's really not a terrible accident waiting to happen.

It’s down to the track and conditions and the overpowered engines

I can understand why the riders are wary riding on a wet surface, it was never a problem with the 2 valves because riders were far more in control of their bikes

Edited October 21 by Youhave2minutes

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv]

2 hours ago, Youhave2minutes said:

I for one certainly enjoyed watching speedway racing with the 2 Valve engines. Team riding was more apparent and riders seem to win races with track craft. Since the introduction of the 4 Valve, the bikes are too fast for today’s U.K. tracks resulting in less overtaking and poor handling of the machines resulting in more crashes and injuries. 
 

Your thoughts please, as I’m sure there will be lots of opinions for and against what I have outlined. So for me it’s back to basics. proving speed is not everything if it compromises the racing for the riders safety and the supporters for seeing exciting racing.

I don't see the being too fast as the problem - it's more the power band and the unpredictable nature of how bikes react

I'd say there is some merit in your opinion that going back in terms of equipment would likely improve the spectacle but it won't happen

Even more so now than ever it is winning that trumps entertainment - even though it could be argued (certainly at domestic level in Britain) that there is nothing worth winning

[Youhave2minutes]

18 minutes ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said:

I don't see the being too fast as the problem - it's more the power band and the unpredictable nature of how bikes react

I'd say there is some merit in your opinion that going back in terms of equipment would likely improve the spectacle but it won't happen

Even more so now than ever it is winning that trumps entertainment - even though it could be argued (certainly at domestic level in Britain) that there is nothing worth winning

I tend to disagree only on the speed issue, riders find it harder to control the bikes on todays U.K. tracks which are not well prepared  hence ruts and holes forming and build up of shale.

I know  circumstances  are not likely to change as like everything in this world  technology goes forward, but for our sport it creates dire circumstances the riders and supporters both suffer. So it’s a no win situation. Is there any wonder why our sport Is dying a slow death.

Edited October 21 by Youhave2minutes

[M.D]

I was at Iwade just over a week ago to watch Eastbourne V Lakeside, a small track that was slick.

Eddie Kennett rode a 1984 upright and you could see the power difference  the laydowns had over him from the start.

Once the laydowns had the advantage Eddie rode really well on it making up ground on riders and looked far more in control and exciting to watch.

You could see the power difference of course but got me thinking that this would be a far better meeting with them all on uprights..

[Youhave2minutes]

15 minutes ago, M.D said:

I was at Iwade just over a week ago to watch Eastbourne V Lakeside, a small track that was slick.

Eddie Kennett rode a 1984 upright and you could see the power difference  the laydowns had over him from the start.

Once the laydowns had the advantage Eddie rode really well on it making up ground on riders and looked far more in control and exciting to watch.

You could see the power difference of course but got me thinking that this would be a far better meeting with them all on uprights..

Thanks for your input👍

[rearingtogo]

Definitely two valve. Riders having more bike control and able to manage track conditions much better.

[piston197]

I remember Lewis Bridger coming to Newport with a 2 valve upright for the Winter Classic and not having a good day, good thing about that  winter meeting was Tim always had riders who would give it a go in the worst conditions, have a look at this final, passing and re-passing ( and a couple of falls)

 

[THE DEAN MACHINE]

The 2valve/4 valve argument is largely redundant, it’s has no real bearing on the current state of the sport, bikes are no faster now in real time speed than they were 40 years ago, what has changed dramatically is the speed of the back wheel, engine revs now are ridiculously and unnecessarily high, japs revved up to around 6000, 2valve Jawa revved up 7500 revs, 4 valve weslake were up to around 9500 and upright GMs to around 11500, the modern GM can max out at around 13500 revs although during a race you would be lucky to hit 12,000 revs but as I said earlier overall times over 4 laps haven’t really changed, the increase in revs is causing the tyres to disintegrate and it’s causing the tracks to disintegrate and it’s also made the bikes flat out power rather than throttle control, the modern silencer has reduced the usual power down to about 2000 revs, anything out side that usable rev range and you will not go anywhere, imo the introduction of a 10,500 rev limit via the rev limiter, a better tyre and a better silencer would make the bikes easier to control, you could also do things like smaller cam lift or heavier flywheels or softer compression to reduce the overall revs of the engine, it’s not too hard to implement these measures but unfortunately the sport is run by the riders for the riders via the tuners so don’t expect anything to change anytime soon 

[steve roberts]

Having watched speedway during the 2 and 4 valve era and the advent of lay downs is that riders today all tend to adopt thr same styles and are indistinguishable from each other. Whether that's down to the performance of the bike and/or track conditions is obviously open to conjecture?

[FAST GATER]

6 minutes ago, steve roberts said:

Having watched speedway during the 2 and 4 valve era and the advent of lay downs is that riders today all tend to adopt thr same styles and are indistinguishable from each other. Whether that's down to the performance of the bike and/or track conditions is obviously open to conjecture?

I would agree to a large extent but  that can be said for most m/cycle sport ,the riders that have always stood out to me are the likes of Nikki Ped and Doyle IMO they have a slightly awkward (to me ugly style )  always seem to be on the edge fighting the bike looking I  think  almost as if they are going to take a highsider any moment .Other riders look like they are in an armchair Hancock  , PK and Jack Holder  spring to mind , I think Fricke , Bewley have a lovely styles but there no mistaking BZ his is IMO unique .

[piston197]

37 minutes ago, FAST GATER said:

I would agree to a large extent but  that can be said for most m/cycle sport ,the riders that have always stood out to me are the likes of Nikki Ped and Doyle IMO they have a slightly awkward (to me ugly style )  always seem to be on the edge fighting the bike looking I  think  almost as if they are going to take a highsider any moment .Other riders look like they are in an armchair Hancock  , PK and Jack Holder  spring to mind , I think Fricke , Bewley have a lovely styles but there no mistaking BZ his is IMO unique .

I was in awe of the shapes Frank Smart used to get in, often leaning off the inside of the bike to keep it more upright, sometimes appearing to have his head under the left hand bar, this picture gives a flavour, but often a lot more extreme than this 

Frank Smart

[Sings4Speedway]

9 hours ago, THE DEAN MACHINE said:

The 2valve/4 valve argument is largely redundant, it’s has no real bearing on the current state of the sport, bikes are no faster now in real time speed than they were 40 years ago, what has changed dramatically is the speed of the back wheel, engine revs now are ridiculously and unnecessarily high, japs revved up to around 6000, 2valve Jawa revved up 7500 revs, 4 valve weslake were up to around 9500 and upright GMs to around 11500, the modern GM can max out at around 13500 revs although during a race you would be lucky to hit 12,000 revs but as I said earlier overall times over 4 laps haven’t really changed, the increase in revs is causing the tyres to disintegrate and it’s causing the tracks to disintegrate and it’s also made the bikes flat out power rather than throttle control, the modern silencer has reduced the usual power down to about 2000 revs, anything out side that usable rev range and you will not go anywhere, imo the introduction of a 10,500 rev limit via the rev limiter, a better tyre and a better silencer would make the bikes easier to control, you could also do things like smaller cam lift or heavier flywheels or softer compression to reduce the overall revs of the engine, it’s not too hard to implement these measures but unfortunately the sport is run by the riders for the riders via the tuners so don’t expect anything to change anytime soon 

Agree with everything above, the silencers are shocking and the tyres are dire. These have been introduced as money spinners rather than improvements to the sport. Sadly forcing engines changes is unlikely to take and the rev limiter idea was coming in 3 years ago and has moved nowhere (plus is still another rider cost).

A usable tyre is whats need and 1 per rider per meeting, none of this they shred so have 2 nonsense. If the bikes are destroying the tyres then the riders will have to look at ways of managing it (via engine/setup changes). Riders will change their equipment, riders have changed their equipment but they need an incentivised reason to do so rather than just pandering to their demands.