Separate topic, really, but here goes:
First: this is not about speed! I don�t know/care how the weight compares. Looks are just too subjective a feature to even start arguing about.
But: - Easier to run? Without a shadow of doubt! Nothing could be easier. - Have you ever met anyone who actually WANTS (sorry about itpro-ism) a KF just because that�s what they most desire? I mean as opposed to getting one because they have the ability and ambition to compete at the highest level, and that�s what the diktat from Italy says you must use to do so. Conversely, there are many, many people who deeply desire an Aixro just for what it is and does: for how it performs � and I don�t mean the speed. So KF is top-down imposed; Aixro is bottom-up customer demand-driven, despite the barriers placed in its way. That alone, I think, speaks volumes. - The 2-stroke vs. 4-stroke debate is complex. However, the market has already emphatically decided on the 125cc, 2-stroke TAG engine it wants: Rotax MAX � again, bottom-up customer demand-driven. KF brings nothing genuinely new to the table, apart from serving a different set of interests (in Italy). So the 125cc, 2-stroke concept is rehashed and repacked and sold as the way forward. Aixro most definitely brings something new / different / genuinely exciting to the table. - Furthermore, for as long as we are still playing about with fossil fuel-burning combustion engines, I understand concepts such as the Aixro provide a lot more options for environmental improvement, such as more silencing, catalytic converters. Nowhere else are 2-stroke engines described as the way forward. = As a concept for the medium-term future, KF is a farce.
I presume you disagree with some or all of that?
|
|