1992 Yamaha WR250 vs. KDX200
Scott Durocher
Kawasaki KDX200) but am looking for feedback from others on their
strengths/weaknesses, problems etc. I'm 6'1", 215 lbs. I rode quite a
bit about 15 years ago but really haven't since then, so I'm a novice. I
will be using the bike mostly in open fields with small hills but also
the occasional trails and track. Any comments on the suitability of
these bikes and others' experiences would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Chris Buckley
a great womens/small men's off-road bike with a fairly low seat height,
friendly power delivery and good handling, but it is a small bike. I
know about 6 people with KDX-200's, two are guys under 5'9" and weigh
less than 150lbs. the rest are women, and they all love their KDX's.
The WR-250z in contrast is a full sized bike more in the tradition of
the YZ-250 but designed to be more of an off-road bike than a
motocrosser. The only complaints usually heard about the WR250z are as
follows: Bike does not come stock with a spark arrestor, Bike has a
lighting coil but does not come equipped with lights, finally many have
complained over the years that the power delivery of the WR is not well
suited for off-road riding,
that the power hits like a YZ-250, but you will get used to it.
As far as problems with either bike goes I have never heard anyone
complain of any problems with their KDX's, they are about as dependable
as death and taxes, the WR-250z is equally as dependable, probably more
because it's a Yamaha.(here come the flames)
Chris
1989-91 YZ-250
1992 WR250z
2 BSA's,
Suzuki dirttracker,
3 Husky 510's
XR-200 (wife's)
Hodaka "dirt squirt"
Uwe Hale
> I'm considering buying one of these two bikes (1992 Yamaha WR250 or 1992
> Kawasaki KDX200) but am looking for feedback from others on their
> strengths/weaknesses, problems etc. I'm 6'1", 215 lbs. I rode quite a
> bit about 15 years ago but really haven't since then, so I'm a novice. I
> will be using the bike mostly in open fields with small hills but also
> the occasional trails and track. Any comments on the suitability of
> these bikes and others' experiences would be greatly appreciated.
> Thanks.
>
Both are great bikes. If all you're doing is tight woods then go with the KDX.
If you want to do the occasional MX (and at 215#) get the WR. The WR is
probably lighter and definitely more powerful. It has a flywheel weight so the
power shouldn't scare you.
Uwe Hale - 89 YZ250WR, 99 GasGas EC200
http://www.rrdr.org
http://www.smackovermotorsports.com
Johnpace2
ultra smooth. I also added the YZ tank to slim down the beast. The wide ratio
tranny is really nice too.
--John
bullwinkle
I made similar mods to my '93 WR250. I like it better than the KDX because
you can do more events with it. Like Uwe said, if you are going to do
occasional MX then the WR is the better choice.
The smooth power on the WR is great for trails. A friend of mine who used
to race KDX's in Enduros said my bike has the low end of the KDX and the top
end of his old YZ.
Ivan
'93 WR250
