Educate me on 250 dualsports

[RollingJ]

My NX250 weighs 287lbs and can run 70 all day long, but you have to drop to 5th on the uphills. She turned 23 last summer.

[jimhaleyscomet]

Originally Posted by jimhaleyscomet

Lets take this discussion over to the 250 dual sport forum as we shouldn't take the WR thread so far off topic...

http://www.twtex.com/forums/showthread.php?t=78038

None of them are as nice as the KLR650 at high speeds. Not to say it can't be done but all the weight and geometry that makes the KLR terrible in the mud makes it much nicer on the highway. The light weight of the dual sports makes them much more fun in the dirt and around town but a bit wind blown on the highway. Above 50mph the KLR wins hands down.

[KenH]

Jack, a stock XL250 would run 80mph top. That was in 1973, with a point/coil ignition, air cooled, and a carb.

2-strokes could be tuned for a wider powerband, or high peak horsepower. Not both. Reed and rotary valves helped, but a 2-stroke with the powerband of a 4-stroke of equal displacement was way down on peak power, a 2-stroke with the peak power of a 4-stroke had a narrower powerband. The XL250 and XL350 Hondas could easily be tweeked to perform as well as the 2-strokes of the day, with superior fuel efficiency and durability that provided distinct advantages over long course events. Such builds were not cheap by any means, but over a couple seasons the engines were cheaper in the long run due to significantly fewer re-rings. My typical between race maintenance was an oil change, air filter clean, check the plug, and oil the chain. Pre-race might include a jetting or sprocket ratio change. I ran one engine Friday night dirt track, Saturday enduros, and Sunday motocross for 2 years on the same spark plug.

The XLs were not all that much heavier than the 2-strokes of the day, especially once the stock 18-pound muffler was canned and stuffed in an aftermarket frame (Redline and Champion both made a variety of frames for the early XLs).

If one wanted to race, or pretend to race, a 2-stroke was generally the way to go, especially for smaller displacements. If one wanted light weight on trails and a wide powerband, it was a toss-up--a smaller displacement 4-stroke of the same weight could provide the same putzing torque and peak horsepower of a larger 2-stroke. If one wanted to haul deer corn 70mph down the highway to the lease, then out to a stand site, a 4-stroke was they way to go.

[Jack Giesecke]

Well, enough gears with the right spacing and I can deal with a peaky two stroke power band. I've raced a KX80 in minis, ported and a FMF high rev pipe and carb to match, compression at 185 PSI (Ran VPC12), TZ125, an RS125, and a couple of TZ250s and a RD250 with a TZ top end (that one was way fun in superbike classes against tuned to the max 500cc 4 stroke thumpers). So, I can deal with the powerband. I loved the old RDs, too. I didn't race dirt back then, couple of flat tracks in my youth is all and I was a rank novice at that.

Heck, I still have that little KX, quit racing it in '06. I put an inductive tach on it. It was ported to the max and the pipe was wrapped, was set up to red line at 13K. It signed on at 11K. We got a little crazy with it at the time because I was racing big tracks against RS125 framed 80cc Mx motored stuff. On the little TMGP kart tracks it was a might tough to keep on the pipe if you got off line or balked by a slower rider or something, but I managed with it. It was way fun, little wheelies off the corners, sliding everywhere (ran 125 slicks on it), was like a little MotoGP bike on a little MotoGP track. All the thrills without the pain of the spills. That little toot could spin up the rear off the corners, too, especially if things got damp. I could even steer the thing with the rear wheel when I had to, that took control on that peaky little toot. The high side was never very far away in the wet, though.

What I liked about 2 stroke dual sports (we called 'em "enduros") and street bikes was the simplicity of 'em. Of course, there were down sides to 'em, cranks didn't last if you tweaked 'em too much, jetting got to be touchy with tuning, but all you had to do is raise the exhaust port a bit and install an expansion chamber and, suddenly, you'd be getting tickets for wheelies around town. No cams, no valve lash worries, just the points and, maybe a pull the head and jug to decarbon once in a while, especially if you were cheap with the injection oil. Oh, I always carried a spare set of plugs for the RD and ESPECIALLY that GT550. The GT was one of those torque tuned bikes with no top end, but the injection was straight into the crank case on the bearings and the oil didn't mix well with the gas. It'd soot up the plugs pretty quick and, man, dial it on at 4K and it was like a mosquito fogger... But, ya know, that's ultimately what killed them with the EPA.

Yeah, there were down sides to the two strokes, but I still loved 'em.

[KenH]

I have a DT360 now, but the 2-stroke I really miss is the 501 Maico. Dump the clutch in 3rd gear at the start and run an entire 45 minute moto without shifting. It had only had a 4 speed box, 1st was for idling through the pits. 2nd was for enduros, 3rd was for motocross, and 4th was for desert. Great fun.

[jimhaleyscomet]

Some of you know I test drove a new WR250r and purchased a used KLR650 instead because the stock WR just did not seem to have any punch down low. Later, I wanted to dump my lemon KTM450exc and I traded it for a new Honda CRF250L.

Well I have had a chance to ride a new to Nate 2008 WR250r and compare it to my 2013 Honda CRF250L. The WR has a bigger rear sprocket, an air box mod, FMF power core exhaust, FMF programmer, and pro taper bars. The honda is bone stock except for tank bag and grip puppies. You can figure a new WR with this setup costs about $8000. However, this used one with 5000 miles cost less than the Honda's $5,000 price.

If one had a bone stock WR and wanted it to have more power down low the mods delivered. Still, the power band on the Honda is much flatter throughout the rpms. The WR power comes on fast (unlike stock), then drops a tad, but shortly comes on and stays on all the way to maximum RPM. The WR can get to 60 easier and seems faster than the Honda. The lower stance of the Honda is MUCH easier and more comfortable to ride when taken quickly down a tight dirt trail (like we find in fields and along river banks in Houston). On rocky technical terrain and above 25mph the WR power and suspension are superior. Rider skill not the bike will determine which one wins in a race and neither will walk away from the other nor be left in the dust except perhaps in flat out wide open racing. The WR feels slightly more comfortable and capable at 60mph than the Honda. The Honda's fuel injection and $5000 price make me wonder if carbureted 250 dual sports have a place in the new dual sport bike market.

The honda is a dual sport first that could be taken on the enduro or mx track and still be fun. The modified WR is more of an enduro bike that also dual sports. A more capable rider than me could probably bring out more of the WR's suspension and power advantages but a short seamed person would probably prefer the Honda. I also prefer the Honda even though I am 6' tall. Given a choice what bike will I ride? If I go to Rio Bravo MX or Bastrop (mostly rocky wide open trails/roads) then I'll take the WR. I would also take the WR if I were to ride from Sugar Land to Sam Houston NF to ride trails. However for those distances I would more likely trailer the Honda or ride my KLR650 instead. Around town, at the beach, and on trails near my house I will choose the Honda. Unless of course Nate is in town. Then he rides the WR and I will really enjoy being on the Honda regardless of the terrain.

The good news is a rider really can't go wrong deciding between these two bikes.

[SwampFox]

Originally Posted by jimhaleyscomet

... The Honda's fuel injection and $5000 price make me wonder if carbureted 250 dual sports have a place in the new dual sport bike market.....

I've wondered the same, being convinced after a brief demo ride on a CRF250L from a cold start. Wow, no fiddling with the choke. I understand the 2013 XT250 will be also be FI. However, the USA 2013 KLX250S will be carb'd, but the Euro model is FI??: http://www.kawasaki.co.uk/KLX250

[Jack Giesecke]

Where EFI would be REALLY nice is the high country.

[KenH]

I expect within 5-10 years all new bikes will be EFI. I'm working on an EFI set-up for Tdub's upcoming engine mods, specifically for the issue of extreme altitude changes.

[1TallTXn]

Originally Posted by KenH

I expect within 5-10 years all new bikes will be EFI. I'm working on an EFI set-up for Tdub's upcoming engine mods, specifically for the issue of extreme altitude changes.

I'm betting the EPA will make EFI mandatory. I sure wish the EPA would go die a quick and painful death.

[Jack Giesecke]

Originally Posted by 1TallTXn

I'm betting the EPA will make EFI mandatory. I sure wish the EPA would go die a quick and painful death.

Well, maybe not, but to meet new standards, it'll be necessary, most likely. They're going drive by wire on all the cars for the same reason, ever restrictive emissions standards. It really sux. I like EFI for riding in the mountains, though, I gotta admit. that old GL1100 felt like it lost a cylinder above 8K feet.

[1TallTXn]

Originally Posted by Jack Giesecke

Well, maybe not, but to meet new standards, it'll be necessary, most likely. They're going drive by wire on all the cars for the same reason, ever restrictive emissions standards. It really sux. I like EFI for riding in the mountains, though, I gotta admit. that old GL1100 felt like it lost a cylinder above 8K feet.

EFI is great. I'm a fan. They're getting overly complex to meet EPA standards now. Makes them hard to work on.

I'm toying with the idea of a pair of low-boost turbos for the GL. Would solve that pesky altitude issue

[jimhaleyscomet]

A quick update. While riding the WR instead of the CRF250L today I realized how folks can figure out which one they will like more. If one usually stands when riding trails then they will prefer the WR. If one usually sits while riding trails they will prefer the CRF250L. IF you stand 50/50.... well good luck deciding as either bike will please!

[hizzo3]

Originally Posted by Jack Giesecke

Well, maybe not, but to meet new standards, it'll be necessary, most likely. They're going drive by wire on all the cars for the same reason, ever restrictive emissions standards. It really sux. I like EFI for riding in the mountains, though, I gotta admit. that old GL1100 felt like it lost a cylinder above 8K feet.

I am a fan of efi as well. If I get the time and money, I really want to convert the DRZ I have over.
1 reason is because of mountains.
#2 is the ability to fine tune rough spots in your rpm range and gear dependent. Sometimes you just need more power down low, but not so much in cruising speed in high gear. Some Strom owners have actually richened the first 3 gears, and leaned out the last 3 for a good mix of power and economy. And yes the PCV has the ability to map each gear differently.
#3 it is so much easier to plug in a dang USB port than to change jets!
#4 I've heard of carbs clogging up much easier than injectors.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[Jack Giesecke]

Well, number four is solved by RIDING it, ya know. Let it sit, drain or add stabil. Modern ethanol gas is GREAT for small engine mechanics in the spring. Man, I used to clean up cleaning up carbs on lawn mowers once the grass started to grow.

[trainman]

What can I say, I'm really enjoying mine. I've owned KLR's, DRZ's, DR's, BMW Dakar's, all were 650's. This CRF250L is probably the most fun bike of all of them. Had a hard time choosing between the WR250R and the Honda, glad I went with the Honda, for at age 67 it suits me just fine.
John

[Jack Giesecke]

Danged sharp lookin' bike ya got there.

[trainman]

A quick update. While riding the WR instead of the CRF250L today I realized how folks can figure out which one they will like more. If one usually stands when riding trails then they will prefer the WR. If one usually sits while riding trails they will prefer the CRF250L. IF you stand 50/50.... well good luck deciding as either bike will please!

I wondered why I purchased the Honda over the Yamaha, it's because I'm 67 and I prefer setting to standing these days.

John

[Jack Giesecke]

Originally Posted by jimhaleyscomet

None of them are as nice as the KLR650 at high speeds. Not to say it can't be done but all the weight and geometry that makes the KLR terrible in the mud makes it much nicer on the highway. The light weight of the dual sports makes them much more fun in the dirt and around town but a bit wind blown on the highway. Above 50mph the KLR wins hands down.

It's for this reason I'm keeping the KLR. I live down 2 miles of rather rough dirt road and she flies down that road. Corners, she can spin up the rear with the blip of a throttle, kinda fun broad sliding out of a turn, reminds me of flat tracking, but I cross it up feet up. In the woods here, I'd been using it, but finally freshened up the old Chinese 200 the other day and fired it up. It'd been sitting for at least 9 months without starting. It fired on the third crank! I bought it in 2004 and never titled it, was for getting down to my place in Calhoun county when it was wet since I sold my old 4x4 Toyota. I'd throw a plate on it and ride it on the street now and then, but not often, didn't wanna tempt the po po too much. It's body work has cracks, plastic fender got busted when my friend thought he was going to help me unload it by grabbing the fender. But, no problem, it still runs well and goes well offroad and has a little rack for my feeder corn. It's a 250 lb motorcycle, but cruised at 60 max and buzzed obnoxiously through the seat. I can FLY on that thing through the woods, though, where I tip toe on the KLR. I can ATTACK a trail with it riding it physically throwing it around where I have to finesse the KLR with the throttle. The suspension on the 200 is a might harsh, but that's okay, handles 100 lbs of corn pretty well.

Anyway, I have decided against any radical new bike purchases in the near future. I have what I need down here. I might sell the SV650, though. It's a long way to the asphalt for it and I really don't ride much on the highway and when I do, I'd rather be on the KLR. I have to get the SV down here and do a few things to it before I put it up for sale. I have a building now to store it in, what I was waiting on.

If I had NOTHING, I'd be all over that Honda, but I really feel the KLR is a better choice considering my uses and the fact that I do have a smaller bike, even if it isn't exactly state of the art.

[jimhaleyscomet]

Well Jack,

Since as the OP you asked the question, I hope you don't mind if we keep posting on here even if you are not purchasing one anytime soon.

A lot of people have the same question about which 250 dual sport and how does it relate to 650 dual sports and this thread is shaping up to be a fairly good explanation of the different rides each bike offers.

Jim