In XRC's latest issue, the offroad LRP ZR .21X is reviewed. The engine has some potency to be sure (it broke the record for peak horsepower and has decent power even after the peak) but there's one sentence that didn't quite sound right to me. I've still got a lot to learn in this hobby and wanted to hear thoughts on this quote:

"The downside to all that power is that fuel consumption is going to be near Hummer-like proportions..."

If you take an engine and run it rich, it'll produce less power and consume more fuel. If you lean it to where it should be, it'll produce more power and consume less fuel right? But if you are comparing engine X to engine Y, is the one that produces more power likely to consume more fuel?

Regardless of whether the fuel mixture is rich or lean, a more powerful engine tends to make that power by pulling more of said mixture through the engine.

what was the power output of the motor ? I am curious ?

User experiences will tell me more than a power diagram.....

But no, power is not always related to fuelconsumption, even some modified engines are able to run longer on 1 tank of fuel. With all 2 stroke engines the exhaust is the most important part depending power and consumption.

absolutely.... finely tuning an engines loop scavenging effect can make more power by blowing less fuel out of the tune pipe leaving more in the combustion chamber to burn....my internal sleeve mods do exactly that....

The peak horsepower was 1.86 @ 22,250 rpm and 82.18 oz.-in of torque at 23,250 rpm. From there, the power trails off as follows:

At 30,000 rpm you've got 1.30 horsepower.
At 35,000 rpm you've got 1.00 horsepower.
At 40,000 rpm you've got 1.00 horsepower.

Note that the engine was still turning 1.00 horsepower at 43,000 RPM where they stopped the dyno.

Mark, I have one of these -it's a monster...I used it at the Vics, with the 7mm insert and 60% throttle I was still passing people

And Arboleda, don't worry, fuel mileage is NOT a problem