Page 2 of 2
Posted: 09:26 pm Feb 12 2008
by Ondatrail
canyncarvr wrote:That's got 'bogus' written all over it.
I've seen countless references to 'H' series bikes with an FmF Fatty..and it's no such thing.
It's akin to posters saying they have a 'Gnarly' profile pipe..and that term means nothing in regard to which profile they DO have.
I'll post a pic tomarrow.
Posted: 12:01 am Feb 13 2008
by jc7622
Whatever pipe fits or doesn't fit what bike, I definately agree with whoever said to get your suspension and handling sorted out before upgrading the motor. I was able to open it up some this weekend and it scooted along a lot faster than it used to. I'm glad I had the KX forks on the front to help keep me in control.
Posted: 08:29 am Feb 13 2008
by Ondatrail
Proof:
Posted: 09:24 am Feb 13 2008
by jeopardy98
That's the same pipe I have on my 92.
Posted: 11:53 am Feb 13 2008
by canyncarvr
Proof? Of what? A Fatty on an 'H'? I said I'd seen such myself, and doesn't make other things I'd said about Fattys less true now than then.
...never mind....
Posted: 09:10 pm Feb 13 2008
by 2001kdx
Onda, ya didn't prove anything....
Facts:
* The FMF fatty was made for "H" series bikes. This we've established, but Carvr claims there was only one version of the Fatty, just as with the "E" series fatty, unlike the k-35 "woods" and k-30 "desert" that the gnarly line offers.
I wonder if there's a way to prove one way or the other......
Would a picture of an H series Fatty with a -30 stamped on the tab, right alongside a picture of an H series Fatty with -35 do it?
Posted: 09:24 pm Feb 13 2008
by Indawoods
The engineers at FMF were smoking a Fatty when they made pipes for the KDX!
Nothing is consistant.....
Posted: 09:34 pm Feb 13 2008
by Ondatrail
