Dirt Rider . Net Text Version Home
300 vs 250 vs 400?
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: velosapiens---------------------
after having a blast at the sawmill enduro, but getting crushed once again (part riding skills, part trying to go fast on a klx300), i'm really starting to jones for a proper racing bike. based on dealer network (in northern california), what other successful riders are using here, and a short ride on a '01 300 exc, it seems likely that a 300 or 250 2-stroke, or a 400 4stroke are the likeliest options. i know they'll all be WAY faster than my klx. more importantly, they have WAY beter suspension than my klx, and are narrower and have much better ground clearance. can anyone comment on the following regarding these bikes:
a) fuel range. how much further can a 250 go than a 300? how bout the 4 stroke?
b) power characteristics. the 300 i rode seemed pretty nice, not too bad a hit (compared to my friends cr250). but do i really need any more power than a 250 2stroke? i only weigh 165 lbs.
c) maintenance. i've never owned a 2stroke, but it seems like they require more frequent, but easier maintenance than a 4-stroke. is this right? is it pretty much a wash in the long run?
d) jetting. i used to read that the 300's were finicky, but it seems like using the yamaha yz250 needle makes it all happy. how bout the 250? 400? i live at sea-level, but mostly ride between 1500-6000 feet (mendocino nat'l forest). which one is going to be easiest to deal with?
i'm leaning a little towards a 2stroke right now because of cost and lack of compression braking, but maybe i just need to learn to pull the clutch in more often on my 4-stroke. on the other hand, the 400 can be dualsported easily in ca, so that would open up a little more riding possibilities. of course, i might sell my klr650 and get a drz400s or dualsport an xr650r, so i could just use that for exploring and use a real race bike for real racing. what do y'all think?
thanks in advance for the info and comparisons.
Posted by: Strick---------------------
a) probably close to the same fuel mileage.
b)a 250 would probably be fine - you have to be the judge there, ride both if you can.
c)KTM rfs is more maintenance intensive than the KTM 2-strokes I've owned.
d)a race buddy of mine (your weight) just bought an '02 300. That bike rocks, and he hasn't touched the jetting, or even the suspension settings.
I must mention that I felt real sorry for those DRZ riders yesterday. I got a real, real, bad start and watched a couple of those bikes in the deep sand whoops yesterday. I hope none of them got hurt.
Posted by: JMD---------------------
I prefer the power of the 300 to the 250; the 300 is just easier to ride. It has the torque to get you up and over anything without getting too excited. Mine has not been finicky about jetting. And you can jet them for whatever you want, from smooth, seamless torque, to a screaming monster.
Still, I haven't ridden my 300 much since I bought my 400. I like the decreased vibration and the effortless power (though it's not as strong as the 300). I think I can ride it faster for longer than I can the 300. But I still can't bring myself to sell the 300 yet.
The four-strokes require much more maintenance. You have to change the oil more frequently. Also, you'll have to adjust the valves. The manual calls for doing it after three hours, and every 15 hours after that. It's at least a one-hour job. For me, it takes a couple. Maybe I'll get faster. And top-end rebuilds take on a whole new meaning.
But if you don't mind tinkering with your bikes, the RFS is a blast to own. Still, you will love any of those bikes you end up buying. If you're buying used, you might just go with the best value you can find out there.
Posted by: socal scott---------------------
If you're going '02? those 250's have the meatiest torque out of all 250's. With all that grunt and 250 quickness, you'd have it to easy. Soon you may get good pricing on the old model year,btw, there may be more 250's available. The 300's go fast. An SX with a power-valve adjustment that smooths-out the hit(my preference over flywhl weight). The SX as you may know comes w/hi/lo comp for the shock and 48mm fork as well as the ProTapper type bars. My take is you can easily make the SX suit your needs and have a superior mount.
Either bike will require re-valving,spring rates should be correct for your weight.
Heck, being that you're used to that KLX you might think about a 200 MX/C. Much lighter and more power.
Text Version Home
vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2013,
Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
vB Easy Archive Final ©2000 - 2013
- Created by Stefan "Xenon" Kaeser