Enduro VS. MX bikes--any opinions?
CONKMWC
250. I do not motorcross, but ride exclusively in the woods. Right off the
bat I noticed more power, lighter weight, better agility and easier
maintenance. A lot of guys ride enduro bikes in the woods, but I can't see
any reason to do it anymore. The only disadvantages I see are no lighting
coil (who cares) poorer gas mileage (who cares) and shorter range due to a
smaller fuel tank. This last detail is the only concern I have. Can
someone tell me why the enduro bikes are preferred for woods riding?
Mark
Mungenwhiffer
following comments are based on my experience with various
IT250's (eighties enduro bike for you young ones) and other
bikes I've owned, including a few YZ's.
1) Maintenance is easier on an enduro bike. Quick release
wheels and air filters make life just that little bit
better.
2) As you mentioned, enduro bikes make a bit less power.
This means less highly stressed engines, giving better
reliability and longer life.
3) Here in Australia I can ride my IT250 on the road, but I
can't do that with any motocrosser without a lot of
hassle.
4) Spring rates on enduro bikes are supposed to be better
suited to bush riding, rather than to withstand those
bloody massive supercross things.
Brett.
Jeff Deeney
adventure is only an adventure if you're running short on both gas and
daylight at the end of the day :-) Lights and better mileage make sure
that you can *really* get into trouble by the end of the day.
Most enduro bikes have very good waterproofing on the air box. Many
moto-cross air boxes are not designed for water crossings. Take care of
this before you find yourself pushing your bike out of the middle of a
river.
-Jeff Deeney- DoD#0498 NCTR FOLMA#2
j...@fc.hp.com AMA#540813 COHVCO '85 XT600 '88 XR600-Shamu
We don't stop riding because we get old, we get old because we stop riding.
Mur DeJonge
then I suggest contacting an aftermarket gas tank manufacturer to get
a larger tank for your particular bike. I've even done the leg work
for you...
Clarke Mfg. Inc.
29032 S. Salo Rd.
Mulino, OR 97042
They have many sizes and styles available. Good luck!
Mur at MDEJ...@SunBelt.Net
Mike King
I have ridden motocross bikes (YZ's) for years in the woods and desserts here
in Idaho. We have very technical trails in the mountains (though usually dry)
and fast wooped out stuff in the sage brush desserts. A motocross bike works
very well in those situations. There are usually a few modifications that I
liked with my motocross bikes. 1. A larger fuel tank. You can buy those from
companies like Clark, etc. 2. A larger flywheel. You can buy those from Moose,
Stealy, etc. I have even made them myself. 3. I like some type of odometer to
know how far I have come. 4. You need a spark arrester. 5. One of my YZ's
(1986) even had a wide ratio transmission from an IT (4th and 5th higher). That
is an expensive modification that is not always possible, but it is desirable
with the trails I ride here in Idaho. With these modifications, the bike is
just as good as an enduro bike, sometimes better.
Most of the enduro bikes now are just a motocross bike with some of the things
I mentioned. Look at KTM. No real difference between motocross bikes and enduro
bikes, except for lights and wider ratio transmission. I now ride a Suzuki RMX.
It has most of the attributes of a motocross bike, but with lights, spark
arrestor, etc. On this particular bike I have had to make modifications to it
to make it suitable for my weight and to add power, so it is debatable whether
it would have been better to start with a motocross bike.
Perhaps you are thinking the Honda 4 strokes as enduro bikes, I agree that a
motocross bike is generally a better ride for an experienced rider. Some riders
do very well on the big 4 strokes (Scott Summers), but most intermediate to
expert riders prefer a motocross or modern 2 stroke enduro bike.
--
_____________
Mike King email: mi...@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com
Hewlett-Packard Disk Memory Division
Mark Ingersoll
> After a long string of KDX,s I finally plunked down the money for a KX
> 250. I do not motorcross, but ride exclusively in the woods. Right off the
> bat I noticed more power, lighter weight, better agility and easier
> maintenance. A lot of guys ride enduro bikes in the woods, but I can't see
> any reason to do it anymore. The only disadvantages I see are no lighting
> coil (who cares) poorer gas mileage (who cares) and shorter range due to a
> smaller fuel tank. This last detail is the only concern I have. Can
> someone tell me why the enduro bikes are preferred for woods riding?
Hi Mark! While in Florida Trail Riders, the 1992 KX 250 was the rule for
the top riders due to the super smooth motor and stability. However, in a
nutshell, here is what I found before becoming a motocrosser:
1) Terrain suits some bikes better than others. In tight woods sections,
KDX's would eat my RM for lunch. Plus, I got 25 miles to the tank where my
buddies got 80 miles to the tank in their KDX 200's. However, when it came
to slamming whoops and fast technical sections, I was a little faster.
2) Maintenance: There is a myth that enduro bikes require less maintenance
since they are were less-stressed. However, my bike suffered 200% more
abuse on the trail than on the track. Trees, mudholes, submarining, brush
plowing, dust, sand baths, etc. caused a great deal of money to chains,
tires, levers, filters, plastic, seat covers, etc. On the track, my money
mostly stays in motor and chains. Thus, I feel that MX can often be less
abusive to a bike. The key here is terrain and riding style.
3) Which leads to riding style. My buddies knew I was a hard charger and
steered me clear of weak 2-strokes. I went full MX and AM SO GLAD I DID!
The power suited me in both trail and MX. Is this true for everyone?
Certainly not. Depending on your personality and riding style, you should
choose a bike that you'd feel comfortable with. If I wanted long, smooth,
and paced trail rides, I'd go for a 4-stroke (mileage, smooth power). If I
wanted to race enduros, perhaps the RMX or KDX is an optimal bike. For
wide open desert, I think I'd like a big 4-stroke, or 2-stroke MX 250 or
500.
In my opinion, the range of bike choices and manufacturers really suit
riding style and terrain. Saying that a 2-stroke or 4-stroke is
arbitrarily better for trail isn't really true. However, my advice to
everyone is DON'T SELL YOURSELF SHORT! MX bikes will work on trail, but
trail bikes don't do so well on tracks. So when you're considering a
ride, consider MX bikes can do both. But be aware that dedicated trail
bikes do well at what they're designed at, especially when they're doing
another trail loop while you're wheezing back to the truck for more gas!
Ride hard, guys!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Ingersoll - <ing...@cs.odu.edu>
Old Dominion University / Unisys / Elizabeth City MX Club
Virginia Beach, Virginia
Check out my main page at: http://www.cs.odu.edu/~inger_m/main.html
Check out my moto page at: http://www.cs.odu.edu/~inger_m/moto.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
That One Guy
con...@aol.com (CONKMWC) wrote:
~After a long string of KDX,s I finally plunked down the money for a KX
~250. I do not motorcross, but ride exclusively in the woods. Right off the
~bat I noticed more power, lighter weight, better agility and easier
~maintenance. A lot of guys ride enduro bikes in the woods, but I can't see
~any reason to do it anymore. The only disadvantages I see are no lighting
~coil (who cares) poorer gas mileage (who cares) and shorter range due to a
~smaller fuel tank. This last detail is the only concern I have. Can
~someone tell me why the enduro bikes are preferred for woods riding?
~
~ Mark
~
~
Can't help you with the woods question, I ride a KX-500 myself. But as far as
the short range question goes, IMS makes large volume 'desert' tanks, that
fit like a glove. I have one on my desert racer, holds something like 3.3 or
3.6 gal. And I like my KX just fine for trail riding too.
Chuck Markley
http://coyote.accessnv.com/chops/bitd/bitd.html
when in doubt, wind it out!
KX-500 E1
XL 883
CCCc H H OOO PPPPp sSSSSs
cC H___H o o P p S____
cC H H o o PPPP s
CCCc H H OOO P sSSSS
Don Zandstra
: After a long string of KDX,s I finally plunked down the money for a KX
: 250. I do not motorcross, but ride exclusively in the woods. Right off the
: bat I noticed more power, lighter weight, better agility and easier
: maintenance. A lot of guys ride enduro bikes in the woods, but I can't see
: any reason to do it anymore. The only disadvantages I see are no lighting
: coil (who cares) poorer gas mileage (who cares) and shorter range due to a
: smaller fuel tank. This last detail is the only concern I have. Can
: someone tell me why the enduro bikes are preferred for woods riding?
: Mark
Generally, Enduro bikes are easier to ride ddue to different gearing,
softer suspension, less travel, meaning lower to the ground, and a larger
fuel tank. A motocrosser is brutal and designed for track use and short
rides. Fun, yet demanding, and takes some training and talent to use
effectively. The Enduro bikes are just easier for most riders to handle,
plus usually have some sort of lighting capabilities. Personally, I
prefer a good Trials bike to either for everything but a full on
motocross track. How does that sound?
Dswray
>After a long string of KDX,s I finally plunked down the money for a KX
>250. I do not motorcross, but ride exclusively in the woods. Right off
the
>bat I noticed more power, lighter weight, better agility and easier
>maintenance. A lot of guys ride enduro bikes in the woods, but I can't
see
>any reason to do it anymore. The only disadvantages I see are no lighting
>coil (who cares) poorer gas mileage (who cares) and shorter range due to
a
>smaller fuel tank. This last detail is the only concern I have. Can
>someone tell me why the enduro bikes are preferred for woods riding?
>
>
I think it really depends on where and how you ride. East Coast single
track technical trails usually require several modifications to a
motocross
bike. Most guys (even A and AA racers) add weight to the flywheel (some
also put in steel clutch plates) to tame the power, revalve the front and
rear suspension, add a larger tank, add lights and some way to power
them (like the Acerbis battery pack), add an odometer, and add a spark
arrester.
On an enduro bike like a KTM 250 EXC you don't have to do all this and
they
cost less than a motocross bike.
But if you are riding in more open areas, don't race enduros (so you don't
need the silly lights to pass tech inspection or an odometer) then a
motocross
bike would be a fun way to go .
Your concern about the gas capacity is a biggie for me too. You can buy
an aftermarket tank but some of them (like your KX) really hurt the way
the
bike feels ... some are ok ... some are not available.
I was looking at a new Suzuki ... RM or RMX ... don't know which. If I
get the
RM I will need to do some stuff to tame it down and make it work in the
woods
... if I get the RMX I will need to do some stuff to make it faster.
Right now
no one makes a bigger tank for the 1996 RM250 ... so that is a big
problem.
Ok, enough rambling ...
David
Bob Knapik
Other than 4-strokes the only truly manufacture enduro is the KTM to my knowledge.
I have own two so far a "94" 300exc and now I ride a "96" 550mxc. I reply to your ?
of the difference in an "enduro" vs. "motocross" machine. There are many. Motocross
machine were developed for just that motocross, complete with a close ratio
transmition which runs a super tall first gear for moto start and a relitively low
5th gear, which would definatly not be a big issue if you only ride woods but the
tall 1st gear is. Also the motor was designed for motocross, usualy meaning there
isn't as much pull or low end as and enduro bike would have and they usualy will hit
a bit harded at a lower rpm range. I think the key here is trackability the motor on
an enduro is design for a clean smooth pull, alot easier to controll and use in the
woods. Also the suspention is set up different the enduro bike will normaly be a
little lighter every where. Which is good for going through more enduro type terain
rock, roots ect. I not saying that your KX will not work well but do do so it
probably means a revalve, some gearing changes, some motor mods flywheel weight,
power valve spring change, and a pipe and a larger fuel cell to make it ideal for
the woods. This is what you could have purchase with a 250 mxc which is the KTM for
cross country / without lights the 250 exc would be the KTM for enduro's / with
lights.
I have been there with a 88 yz 250 and poured mass amounts of money into it to get
it into a good woods bike an then finnaly figuered out KTM had it the hole time.
Hope this help,
TBOB
Robert_...@ccm.ch.intel.com
P.S. Please don't pay attention to my spelling I knoe it sucks!
Anymore ? please feel free to email.
Merrill Hoekstra
> Most of the enduro bikes now are just a motocross bike with some of the things
> I mentioned. Look at KTM. No real difference between motocross bikes and enduro
> bikes, except for lights and wider ratio transmission. I now ride a Suzuki RMX.
> _____________
> Mike King email: mi...@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com
> Hewlett-Packard Disk Memory Division
Actually there is quite a bit of difference between the SX and E/XC
line produced by KTM. They have come closer together over the years,
but the bikes are still different. The E/XC's of course have lighting coils
and a bigger tank, they have different spring rates and valving, odometers
and larger gas tanks. Although the cylinders and pipes are the same among
250's, 300's, etc, the off-road bikes have spark arrestors and the additional
electrical equipment associated with the lighting coil gives them a
heavier flywheel and the associated tractable power.
What KTM has done is take true first-line mx bikes and convert them for
you. Previoulsy you could buy an MR or an IT or some other enduro-only
J-bike, but these were very distant cousins of the true Honda or Yamaha
or whoever race bikes. KTM makes race-worthy bikes and sells them.
I personally ride a 250sx. I only own one bike now and I feel the compromise
of riding an mx bike in the woods is less than riding an enduro bike on
the track. Since I weigh over 200#, I need the heavier springs anyway,
and the KTM's are probably the best off-road bikes among the made-for-moto
crowd. If I lived back in New England again, I would choose a true
enduro bike since the trails there are so snotty and rocky that mx bikes
are just too hard to ride.
My $.02 Merrill Hoekstra
Stephen Rentsch
found that although weight is a disadvantage, the KDX was superior.
The main reason being the use of low down power that is smooth through
the power range. Several times I have been caught on steep hills where
the power produced by MXers has been too savage, and uncontrollable as
you have to keep the noise happening.
Also because you have to keep a MXer humming, in order to stay on the
pace I have found that they become very tiring to ride all day (I'm sure
the 4 strokers would agree !)
However, I must admit that a KX with a RAD valve, and Pro Circuit pipe
is hard to beat.
SR
Steve Schow
: since they are were less-stressed. However, my bike suffered 200% more
: abuse on the trail than on the track. Trees, mudholes, submarining, brush
: plowing, dust, sand baths, etc. caused a great deal of money to chains,
: tires, levers, filters, plastic, seat covers, etc. On the track, my money
: mostly stays in motor and chains. Thus, I feel that MX can often be less
: abusive to a bike. The key here is terrain and riding style.
Exactly. I think the original point was that Enduro bikes could be made
more durable since they are under more abuse than an MX bike....although
the engine itself might take a little less stress.....
Mike King
Husqvarna 2 and 4 stroke enduro models, Suzuki RMX250, Kawasaki KDX 200 and 250
(the 200 is the better than the 250 KDX), Husaberg 4 stroke models, and ATK 2
and 4 stroke enduro models. There are several displacements from KTM,
Husqvarna, Husaberg, and ATK. There are also little-imported models. There is
CRX from Honda and several smaller european models, like Aprilla and Gas-Gas.
The differences between motocross and enduro bikes are getting fewer and fewer,
it seems. For example, the motors and suspsenion for the KTM enduro (EXC),
cross country (XC), and motocross (SC) bikes are identical. The EXC and XC
bikes have larger fuel tanks and a wider ratio transmision, and the EXC has
lights and odometer.
--
Hsesh
minimal set up. You can buy one and go trail riding immediately and have
it handle reasonable well in the woods. Since your talking about trail
riding and not racing who cares how much faster or slower an MX bike goes.
For hare scrambles and enduros I perfer a modified MX bike due to the
lighter weight, better handling, less tiring, etc.
gl...@oro.net
>>>>
Your talking apples and oranges here with a KDX and a KX250. Try a real enduro
bike like a properly set up RMX 250. My RMX gives up a little on the MX track with
softer suspension and wide ratios, but when you get out there and are going from high speed fire roads to
tight woods and mud I woudn't want anything else (well posibly a shiny new WR 250).