OOPs I did it again

[glenncal1_imp]

So after buying a 1973 DT100 just for fun, this little gem shows up on CL. 1982 DT100 with only 163 miles showing on the clock. It is not pristine but I couldn't resist.

 

[SportsterDoc]

Ahh...2 stroke simplicity!

 

[Blockhead_imp]

Beautiful!

 

[use2b_imp]

Nostalgic fun and those little things can flip you

 

[rboe]

Ah, those old ones have timing chain issues....... :dodgy:

 

[LongRanger_imp]

I thought they used timing belts, not chains...

 

[PowerDubs_imp]

Uhh.... no timing chains, no timing belts.. the timing was all static mechanical- the physical location of the ports in the cylinder.

Why would you need a belt or a chain when there are no valves, no cams, and therefore no rotational driven opening mechanism?

 

[peterbaron]

......and a lots of mods with ports, exhaust and intake were done with 2-stroke without spending a lot of money...lovely rpm with high "C" sound

pb

 

[PowerDubs_imp]

Cheap and easy- no need to buy high performance camshafts, no need for bigger valves, no need for different valve springs.

Where's my dremel? was all you needed to know.

 

[glenncal1_imp]

Somehow I don't think I am going to turn a 100cc trailbike into a raving 2 stroke monster

 

[PowerDubs_imp]

At highway speed, and streetbike gearing - no.

But having grown up on 80's 2-stroke 80cc motocross bikes- they can certainly put you on your a**, or into a tree in 1-2 gear if you were to rev them, and pop the clutch while not having much experience.

 

[Banned_imp]

At highway speed, and streetbike gearing - no.

But having grown up on 80's 2-stroke 80cc motocross bikes- they can certainly put you on your a**, or into a tree in 1-2 gear if you were to rev them, and pop the clutch while not having much experience.

Yeah, that is the reason I rode (I use "rode" is the loosest way possible) a 2-stroke once and only once.

I found 4-strokes to be much more agreeable.