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?
|
|