View Full Version : Raptor660R vs. blaster

11-30-2002, 05:59 PM
what would win in a wood's race?

yamaha 250
12-01-2002, 03:22 AM

12-01-2002, 02:26 PM
With the right rider, A blaster could make a raptor cry mercy in REAL woods. Both Tri-Z-Jim and I are hardcore woods riders, and can attest to the versatility of a smallbore machine in the woods. I myself have embarrassed polarises, banshees, and many others on my old 200x. I know my 250r is faster, but I still think i could get through the real tight stuff faster on a 200x that was setup right.

ATC crazy
12-01-2002, 04:30 PM
The Raptor would woop the Blasters trailprotrailprotrailprotrailprotrailpro

12-01-2002, 04:40 PM
Nonsense. Go take a real trail ride with some experienced riders, and you will see how the blaster excels in its enviroment. By trails, I don't mean wide open fire roads. Most of the harder trails i ride on you hit 15mph and you have to lock the brakes for the next hairpin. The blaster is light, nimble, and small. Perfect woods machine.

12-01-2002, 09:00 PM
I do a bit of tight woods riding, and the Blaster was pretty awesome. But in those tight trails my X is hitting trees left and right and branches, and the Blaster sailed through. The X is close to if not narrower than the Raptor. Any kind of straight-away though the raptor would win.

12-01-2002, 09:49 PM
Stock for stock the Raptor should have no problem being the victor.

12-02-2002, 09:25 PM

12-03-2002, 12:48 AM
Some people just have to learn the hard way.

12-03-2002, 01:47 AM
the raptor would beat it in reverse

12-03-2002, 04:51 AM
Banshee350, In actuality, i ride a atc250r which would easily hand it to your punk ass provided it has the engine bolted into it. You ride a warrior from what you say. Warrior Versus Atc250r, hmm...

Actually, Im pretty sure I could hand it to you on a blaster.

Either way, Once some of you pups get beat by lesser machines and realize its not always the ride that counts, you might change your tune a bit.

raptor 660r
12-03-2002, 05:51 PM
could the raptor beat a 250r? im not asking u johonny blaze.

12-03-2002, 06:40 PM
why? scared of the response?

If you want the facts, in a drag race a atc250r is actually a little slower stock. It stays right with the raptor though. A woods race is a different story.

raptor 660r
12-03-2002, 07:42 PM
no u will say a 250r cause thats what u ride

12-03-2002, 08:34 PM
I ride a 250r, yet I said the 660 has an edge in a drag? Interesting.

12-04-2002, 09:16 PM
i know what u said i didnt read it all when i wrote it. i am glad u said the right answer.

Big Darn Mike C
12-05-2002, 02:31 AM
The raptor, while a fine machine, is no god. It sits high and is tippy so how can that equate to beating a blaster through tight trails in reverse. I realize that this is another dumb rtopic but reading through the responses pissed me off. In really tight trails, hats off to the Blaster.

12-07-2002, 04:45 AM
Okay I want some more opinions. Blaze said the raptor is faster that a stock 250r. I don't know, one way or another, but I would like some opinions.

12-07-2002, 09:39 AM
Stock for stock the Raptor would beat out the TRX250R in drag racing.

12-10-2002, 07:27 PM
Atc or trx, the raptor still wins. The atc is a pretty good race actually. If the raptor gets the holeshot, it will stay ahead of the trike right til they top out, which is about the same speed. Theyre a very close race but i would give the raptor the advantage.

12-11-2002, 12:05 AM
This argument needs some sort of median - We're talking stock Machines - meaning off the showroom floor with Yamaha air in the stock tires. Now with that settled - We'll take my friend Tri-Z Jim as an example - I think even he will admit that if you gave him a stock Raptor and he raced himself on a stock Blaster on an MX track, the Raptor would be victorious. Now, as for this best "woods" racer, its too subjective a question - look, at some point, someone is going to find some woods trail that is too tight for a much larger machine like a Raptor to navigate better than a smaller machine like a Blaster. So, if you were to compare the two on a true cross-country racing course with the same rider at the controls what would be the verdict? - The radial tires on a Raptor are MUCH better than the balloons on a Blaster, a Blasters top speed is 45mph compared to the Raptors 70+mph, the Raptor has 34hp. compared to 16hp. for the Blaster (thats over twice as much), there is a 320lb vs 390lb weight difference between the two BUT the horsepower ratings more than make of for that, and lastly the Raptors suspension is in another league when compared to the Blasters. Look at it this way - which would you enter a "100% Stock" class cross-country race on. The Raptor gets my vote. ..... now for the TRX/ATC250R vs RAPTOR 660R dragrace, I have to tell ya - on paper, the TRX/ATC's would win - at least up till top speed - they have 2-4 more hp (depending on year) and are 50 - 80lbs lighter (respectively) - the only thing holding the Hondas back on the top speed end would be stock gearing. I have seen quite a few ATC-R's embarrass Raptors where I ride - My '90 LT-R would frequently spank them as well - but it was far from stock.

12-11-2002, 12:19 AM
well said my friend :)
I too would choose a raptor in a real xcountry race,but where I ride its pretty much useless.

12-11-2002, 01:49 PM
I run cross country races, so Im going weigh in on this one. First, I hate these kinds of posts because they are so vague on the details which make a complete difference in the answer. First Ill say if you are talking tight woods, fairly dry, on fairly level ground, the Blaster will easily eat any quad out there alive. However, when we talk actual cross country races, you have to toss in muds bogs, sometimes most of the track, and some serious hillclimbs into the equasion. While Blasters pass through mud rather well, they lack the low end, and you have to make them scream to keep from bogging. On a long, muddy track, this can be disasterous for the engine. Personally I think the Blaster stock tires are ideal for the Blaster under these conditions. They dont have the nads to turn aggressive mud tires in heavy mud. The stock Raptor tires are more suited for dirt track, but it can bog through heavy mudd all day with little effort, and when you get to those big hills, the Raptor can really climb quite easily.
What I really love about Harescarmbles and cross country is that its a lot more rider oriented than machine. Mods have little influence on outcome. Sure its nice to be geared down a bit, and have your 2 strokes piped for low end to mid range, along with some good mud tires (flat profile tires suck in mud), but thats about all you need. At almost any point on the course, your stock quad is capable of running a lot faster than you as a rider are. Things like top speed, and who gets the holeshot are pretty irrelevent. Mosts use informal and sometimes creative starting methods. I had one where you had to run down the course about 40 yards, around a marker and back to your quad, then jump on it and start it and go, and I dont think Ive ever gotten beyond 4th gear in my low geared R, so "how fast it will go" is of little importance since you never top out on a good track. Also, other than contributing to rider fatigue, suspension isnt that big of a factor. While the Blasters no linked shock is inferior on an MX track, its not much of a disadvantage on the XC course.
In my last race there were 5 or 6 Raptors out of 15 in my class. I beat all of them on my R, but had they been on R's, and I on a Raptor, I dont know the outcome would have been any different. I can say that if you make a lot of mistakes, the Raptor will cover them better, but its going to be the best rider at the end of the day that wins. You cant buy a win in XC like you can with MX, or drag racing.

12-11-2002, 09:06 PM
Tim, think of any of the 10 million races you have been in, and race against yourself using a stock Blaster and a stock Raptor - which one would you win the race on?, or better yet, someone came along and said -I will give you the money to run a x-country race team but you can only choose either a Blaster or a Raptor as your mount - which would you go with?.

12-11-2002, 09:21 PM
After reading what tim sr. wrote I will add this. My Blaster has a few mods and is geared down quite a bit.It has plenty of low end and top speed is around 45 mph.Stock is 55-6 mph. I need the low end torque more than I need the Horspower.Most of my trails you would be lucky to hit 18 or 20 mph.Some places I'm in 1st gear and it takes about 10 minutes to go 200 feet.
I used to race hare scrambles in the 90's.The Northeast has some of the best and toughest hare scrambles around.Most are 2 to 3 hrs long and about 40 miles in length(5 to 7 laps).Most riders cant go at race pace for that long.I honestly doubt I could last 2 hrs anymore going at my race pace :) I've also seen racers die in the woods(accident,dehydration,heart attack,etc).
After you get good at hare scrambles(on a bike),you can race enduro's and have to race in the woods and stay on time for 4 to 7 hrs and ride 75 to 100 miles from point A to point B.you only do 1 lap so you dont get to memorize the coarse at all which is an advantage i had in hare scrambles.....and with that said I'm going to bed so i can wake up at 2 am and plow snow wooooohooo not!

12-11-2002, 09:51 PM
Exactly my point Wickedfinger. In a real Ohio Harescramble that Im used to running, the Blaster would have had trouble pulling the mud and the hills, and would have had to resort to the alternate routes, which is why I qualified, in tight woods, fairly dry, without the major hills, they kick butt, but even under the worst conditions they would still be competitive, especially when setup right like TriZ Jims. Now throw on a 240cc kit, and and some hydraulic barkes, and youll have a Blaster that eats the big boys for lunch on HS courses! Also unlike motocross, which has a separate class for Blasters, they have to run in Woodsman, (beginner) 2 stroke, or Senior (35 and older), which they do run, and are competitive, but ye, Id take the Raptor. If they ran on teh mini quad course, without the hillclimbs, and mud bogs, Id take the Blaster.

12-13-2002, 01:09 AM
Tim, and Jim as always, your opinions mean more to me than most. .... also, I was thinking more along the lines of purely stock, off the showroom floor machines pitted against each other.

12-13-2002, 02:32 AM
i have rode my neihbors raptor sevaral times ( he borrows my trike i borrow his raptor). the raptor is scary fastbut when i hit the tight woods out here it becomes a disater. take it from me there is no competition. the warrior would kill it unless there was a strait shot.

12-13-2002, 11:50 PM
IN a drag race I have faith in the R (TRX or ATC...ATC for sure) getting a good holeshot but you are looking at a 660cc 5 valve engine vs. a 250cc 2 stroke. Maybe a DOHC 500CC 4 stroke would be evenly matched with the R's but the Raptor has displacemtn on its side.

...These questions are pointless to begin with.....go ride & shaddup.

12-14-2002, 08:12 PM
Now, to hinder my own argument ..... don't let displacement fool you guys - your common, garden variety 5hp Brigg's & Stratton displaces almost 220 cc's (yeah is a stoneage underhand, side-valve motor) - Horsepower is Horsepower. Remember also, the bigger the four stroke, the more it weighs - just because the Raptor is 660cc's with a 5 valve head, dosn't mean it has the most horsepower - any good 250cc Class liquid cooled 2-stroke produces more HP than the Raptor motor - CC for CC a properly tuned 2-stroke will always have nearly twice the power of a 4-stroke, Imagine the power of a 660cc, power valved pinger (yes, I've read the research on the limitations of large displacement, single cylinder 2-strokes - but its not to this discussion). Remember too, you have all of the valve train, timing chain, oil pump to move around on a thumper. Ya, Ya - horsepower just burns a hole in the ground and torque moves mountains - but in the end horsepower (and skill) wins races, not torque or CC's.

Billy Golightly
12-15-2002, 02:37 AM
I'l just grab one of the 8 Macio 760's made that are sitting museums and borrow the motor when I make a trip to glamis to race at comp hill.

01-02-2003, 12:24 AM
I dont know anyone in my area that has a Raptor......But mabey this summer I will find one and whip its sorry 4stroke trailprotrailprotrailprotrailprotrailpro with my new blaster 490, well its not new its a 1994 with a 1989 YZ490 motor and DG pipe......all I can say is its a real blast!

01-03-2003, 12:36 AM
I got a package of 2 dollar bottlerokets that'll whip any of your asses 2 stroke or 4 stroke whatever you bring....lol

actually Im 14 and I have a atc 125m and one of my freinds bought a 2002 660 raptor and I keep up with him wherever we go and hes pushing it id say 20-30+ mph over jumps, bogs and straight aways (not as ruff as some of you are talking)...... but if he takes his raptor to the rode he leaves me in the dust hands down ;)

01-08-2003, 12:36 PM
250r and a Raptor .....what are you nuts.....not even close.....Rap all the way....i have a 686 GRIZZ and from a dead stop on pavement i simply destoyed my buddies 250r three wheeler......had him by 10 bikes till my top end limiter kicked in and he went sailing by me....but that was not till after 68 mph.....250rs are fast but lets get serious and stop kidding........

01-08-2003, 08:31 PM
Sorry Timbo, any good rider would destroy your 125m on a Raptor.