Dear MXA,
Not that I'm a huge fan, or even a little fan, of Cannondale, but it must hurt MXA to eat all those nasty things you said about their engine design (backwards cylinder, upfront airbox, fuel injection, etc) now that the Yamaha YZ450F is using the exact same technology. I can't wait to read your apology.
It is true that Cannondale blames MXA for the failure of the 2001 MX400 (and the eventual failure of their company), but it is not true that we are to blame (only that Cannondale thinks we are). Cannondale produced a bike that received rave reviews from many magazines (remember that Dirt Rider called it the “Bike of the Year”). MXA was the only magazine that told the public, in no uncertain terms, that the MX400 was a roach. We didn’t build the bike, we only tested it. The failure of Cannondale doesn’t reside with MXA, but with the designers, engineers and executives at Cannondale that built a bike that wasn’t any good.
MXA’s main goal in testing motorcycles is to give the consumer enough honest information from which to make a good buying decision. We want the consumer to know as much about a bike as possible before he spends his hard-earned money. We have no regrets about our 2001 Cannondale test—but we would have regrets if we had written some powder-puff test and people had wasted their money on a bike that didn’t deliver. We deserve the heartfelt thanks of every person we saved from the Cannondale MX400.
And we will apply the same testing standards to the 2010 Yamaha YZ450F. If it is good, we will say so. If it is bad, we will say so.
As for your question, why would we apologize?
If we took wood, hammers and nails and cobbed together a book shelf that failed to hold books, how would that differ from Cannondale taking a reverse cylinder, fuel injection and upfront air filter and cobbing together a bike that didn’t work? It’s not the parts, it’s how you use them.
It is true that Cannondale turned their cylinder around backwards, but you do understand that they did not leave room to build enough tuned length into their exhaust pipe. They basically had a head pipe and midpipe that were about six inches long. That is not the way to produce power. They had minimal low-end, but the MX400 did eventually make good mid-and-up power, but it was certainly not a good four-stroke powerband.
It is true that Cannondale put the air filter behind the front number plate, but you do understand that drawing air through a hole in the head tube of the frame was not sufficient to run the engine at high rpm (and they were forced to put a second air intake under the gas tank after the pre-pro failed to run well enough). That meant that you had to clean two air filters (and to get to the second air filter you had to remove the seat, radiator wings and gas tank to get to it). It took 30 minutes to change the air filters.
It is true that Cannondale tried to be creative, but you do understand that creativity that doesn’t work is best left designers of French cars and Russian stereo equipment.
WHAT IS REALLY TRUE ABOUT THE CANNONDALE IS...
... that the front suspension was too soft to be raced.
... that the no-link rear suspension had such a bad rising rate that the bike only worked in a straight line. And compared to the soft front end, the rear was way too stiff.
... that the electric starter wouldn’t start the bike when the engine was hot.
... that the fuel injection was so poorly tuned that the bike would flame out at low rpm, yet idled so fast that you could ride the bike around the pits without touching the throttle (and to turn the idle down—which just aggravated the flame-out—you had to virtually take the bike apart).
... that the radiators were so poorly designed that the bike would overheat in a short moto (and riders hooked their legs on the too short radiator wings).
... that the oil in the frame made the frame so hot that it would burn anyone who accidentally touched the aluminum.
... that Cannondale’s frame was a copy of the incredibly rigid (and disliked) Honda frames of 1997-98 and 1999. The 2001 Cannondale MX400 handled like a 1998 Honda CR250. That is not a compliment.
... that the seat was a big cushy marshmallow that just got in the way.
...that the Cannondale MX400 weighed 260 pounds.
... that the Cannondale was unreliable. We broke our first test bike in less than 20 minutes (camshaft came loose). The second one only lasted three hours (circlip groove in the mainshaft wasn’t deep enough and the clutch basket came loose). Even Cannondale's factory race bike, ridden with tremendous bravery by Keith Johnson, never finished an important race.
Here is exactly what we said about the 2001 Cannondale MX400 back in 2000. It was true then and it is still true today:
“Thanks, but no thanks. Have you ever dreamed of building your own motocross bike? Would your dream bike be slow, heavy, complicated, unreliable, poorly suspended and bad handling? When you start with a blank sheet of paper there is no one to blame but yourself. Cannondale needs to buy an eraser and start over." MXA December 2000
|
|