Any 99 KX250 reviews?
Reeko
Anyone out there have a new 99 KX250? If so, I would be interested in
hearing opinions about them, especially how they compare to the 97 and 98's.
I am trying to decide if I should buy a used KX or wait for the new 99's.
Reeko
MX Tuner
There are other good mx bikes also. Why the KX? I'm sure you would
like it but there are others to consider.
MX Tuner
Uwe Hale
> There are other good mx bikes also. Why the KX? I'm sure you would
> like it but there are others to consider.
>
Yeah, like the KTM 200s!!! Right? Or is that the YZ400? Or XR650L?
Uwe Hale - 89 YZ250WR
Thanks to: Team LCS, www.lcsracing.com | MX South, m...@pipeline.com
Original post by Uwe Hale Copyright (c) 1998, All rights reserved
MX Tuner
>> There are other good mx bikes also. Why the KX? I'm sure you would
>> like it but there are others to consider.
>Yeah, like the KTM 200s!!! Right? Or is that the YZ400? Or XR650L?
I've got an eye on a '98 Vespa P200.
MX Tuner
Reeko
Based off of what I have read on Internet and in trade rags, I got the
impression that the KX was the best bike for a novice rider. (At least when
I read the 98 shootouts, generally the KX's smoother power and suspension
felt better to the novices.)
Again, any 250 will probably be faster than I will need (at least for a
while), so I am more concerned with the suspension and finding a power band
that will be better for someone starting to MX.
I have looked at the CR's but have heard that the engine appeals more to a
pro rider and that the suspension wasn't as good as the KX's . I don't know
too much about YZ's, but my local dealer (that I like to give my business
to) is a Honda/Kawasaki/Suzuki dealer.
Also, the people that I know at the MX tracks really love their KX's.
If you have other recommendations for a beginner MX rider (I have trail
ridden for a while, so I am not a begginer rider), I would be happy to
listen. All I know is that my XR is not well suited for MX
(heavy/suspension/power).
Reeko.
98XR400
MX Tuner wrote in message <360bbf14...@news.mindspring.com>...
>"Reeko" <re...@nomail.com> wrote:
>
>>Anyone out there have a new 99 KX250? If so, I would be interested in
>>hearing opinions about them, especially how they compare to the 97 and
98's.
>>I am trying to decide if I should buy a used KX or wait for the new 99's.
>
>There are other good mx bikes also. Why the KX? I'm sure you would
>like it but there are others to consider.
>
>MX Tuner
Kenneth Murphy
: Hi,
: Anyone out there have a new 99 KX250? If so, I would be interested in
: hearing opinions about them, especially how they compare to the 97 and 98's.
: I am trying to decide if I should buy a used KX or wait for the new 99's.
A friend compared a 99KX250 and a 98KX250 at the track yesterday. He's
a local mechanic and knows his job. He said: The 99 has got motor
all over the 98. The 98 "isn't even close" motorwise. The 99 had a
little better suspension, but *both* made him gratefule for his suspension.
His boingers are on a 98RM250, fully revalved by him.
Not much in the way of info, but at least it's something.
: Reeko
--
O aka Ken Murphy (kmur...@ford.com) Owner/Operator: 98YZ250
<M>erfman Thanks to: Jen, Erin, Apex Sports, DNA Racing, FMF Racing,
_/ \_ Boyesen/Twin Air, Sprocket Specialists and Works Connection
Disclaimer: Don't even pretend you thought I spoke for Visteon
MX Tuner
>Based off of what I have read on Internet and in trade rags, I got the
>impression that the KX was the best bike for a novice rider. (At least when
>I read the 98 shootouts, generally the KX's smoother power and suspension
>felt better to the novices.)
Rule #1- Don't believe 75% of what you read in a mag (and THAT is
being generous). The KX is a damn good bike. For a novice, I think I
would lean towards a Suzuki, though.
>Again, any 250 will probably be faster than I will need (at least for a
>while),
Yeah, quite a while. Most mortals can't fully utilize the power of
most 250s.
>so I am more concerned with the suspension and finding a power band
>that will be better for someone starting to MX.
Sounds like an RM.
>I have looked at the CR's but have heard that the engine appeals more to a
>pro rider and that the suspension wasn't as good as the KX's .
The CR is definitely geared towards more experienced riders. Anything
else has better stock suspension.
>I don't know too much about YZ's,
They're the most reliable of the bunch.
>but my local dealer (that I like to give my business
>to) is a Honda/Kawasaki/Suzuki dealer.
Good reason to buy a Honda or Kawasaki or Suzuki.
>Also, the people that I know at the MX tracks really love their KX's.
Ask some RM riders. Everyone I've ever talked to raves about how much
they like their RM.
I guess the only owners I've talked to who DIDN'T like their bikes
were Honda owners.
>If you have other recommendations for a beginner MX rider (I have trail
>ridden for a while, so I am not a begginer rider), I would be happy to
>listen.
I'm sure you wouldn't regret buying a KX but an RM may suit your needs
better.
MX Tuner
Jere Riberdy
Doesn't anyone care that the 1997 and 1998 KX250 were the best 250 mxer's
for the past couple of years. In fact KX 250's are usually amazing bikes.
If the guy wants to buy a bike with a history of kicking ass, let him. I
know I'm happy with mine and I'll stick with KX's because of that fact.
--
Jere Riberdy
1987 Mustang GT
1995 KX - 250
1990 KX - 125
MX Tuner wrote in message <360bbf14...@news.mindspring.com>...
>"Reeko" <re...@nomail.com> wrote:
>
>>Anyone out there have a new 99 KX250? If so, I would be interested in
>>hearing opinions about them, especially how they compare to the 97 and
98's.
>>I am trying to decide if I should buy a used KX or wait for the new 99's.
>
Jere Riberdy
wait, hold on for the 250 shootout and then make your decision.
Either way, many magazines rated both the 97 and 98 KX 250's over all the
other manufacturer's '98's! I know the mags are always right but I've heard
the same thing from many friends of mine who own the 97 and 98 KX's.
I'm sure you can't go wrong with any of the 97, 98 or 99 KX 250's
--
Jere Riberdy
1987 Mustang GT
1995 KX - 250
1990 KX - 125
Reeko wrote in message <6uc0p0$i...@news.or.intel.com>...
>Hi,
>Anyone out there have a new 99 KX250? If so, I would be interested in
>hearing opinions about them, especially how they compare to the 97 and
98's.
>I am trying to decide if I should buy a used KX or wait for the new 99's.
>
>Reeko
>
>
>
JOKERKX250
> The 98 "isn't even close" motorwise. The 99 had a
>little better suspension, but *both* made him gratefule for his suspension.
>His boingers are on a 98RM250, fully revalved by him.
Yeah...but tell him about the lack of motor in the RM!!!......the '99 kx is
gonna have to prove itself in the long haul next season as far as
reliability....they hacked the heck outta it to reduce weight....I wonder about
some of what they did.....well see...but I aint worrying..since Im on a '98 for
awhile...
As far as a new bike for Reeko....any of them is gonna be better than what you
got now...I would suggest anything from your local dealer...I would suggest the
Kaw or Yam...but you gotta ride/live with it...so you gotta make the call...the
only way is to go to the track and ride your fellow riders bikes to check em
out....and see what you like....it aint easy sometimes....if you havent rode
the diff brands...they all got diff traits....so good luck...have fun...and
dont let the dealer screw you either...no matter how "friendly" they are!!
lol....
JOKER....(Steve)
'98KX250
'88KX250
YzTombo
reeko i also have an xr400 and it doesn't moto
i now have the yz400 and after riding strokers
they are easier to ride than 250's (i had a 95 kx250).
power of the 125's are easier to ride than 250's
if you have not raced.
good luck
tombo
Kenneth Murphy
: > The 98 "isn't even close" motorwise. The 99 had a
: >little better suspension, but *both* made him gratefule for his suspension.
: >His boingers are on a 98RM250, fully revalved by him.
: Yeah...but tell him about the lack of motor in the RM!!!......the '99 kx is
He works for one of the best motor tuners in the states. His RM has motor
over just about everything at the track, so that's not a problem.
<snip>
: JOKER....(Steve)
MX Tuner
>Why is everyone dogging the KX?
The KX is a good bike.
>All I hear is about Yamaha's new YZ 250...
So is the YZ.
>Doesn't anyone care that the 1997 and 1998 KX250 were the best 250 mxer's
>for the past couple of years.
No, the mags rated them the best. Personally, this holds very little
water.
>In fact KX 250's are usually amazing bikes.
Amazing from what standpoint?
>If the guy wants to buy a bike with a history of kicking ass, let him. I
>know I'm happy with mine and I'll stick with KX's because of that fact.
And I said I thought he would be happy with a KX if that's what he
bought. But there are many other excellent choices out there.
From his past posts, he is not as mechanically experienced as some
others. Let him try cleaning the power valves and then ask him if he
still likes his KX.
MX Tuner
Russ Schooley
mxt...@mindspring.com says...
> And I said I thought he would be happy with a KX if that's what he
> bought. But there are many other excellent choices out there.
>
> From his past posts, he is not as mechanically experienced as some
> others. Let him try cleaning the power valves and then ask him if he
> still likes his KX.
MXT I agree there are some other good choices on the market, but why do
keep dogging the KX in your indirect manner? Why don't you just realize
that is "your" opinion just like the mags and each of us riders have
ours?
As for the Power Valves, please! I never had a problem on my '94 KX-250
that I raced/rode from '94 thru '97. Yes, maybe you have seen cases
where there were problems, but that doesn't mean it's a rule of thumb.
I, for one, have never experienced the problems or hassles you speak of
concerning the KX power valves.
Bottom line, the KXs may not be the best bike for everyone, but I don't
believe they are as poor as you would like people to believe either.
JOKERKX250
>He works for one of the best motor tuners in the states. His RM has motor
>over just about everything at the track, so that's not a problem.
Oooooook......so hes good to go then!!..lol
I never said i didnt like the bike...just not the stock motor...for the
record!.....
If you can afford motorwork...no problemo...was just talkin out of the box...
JOKER....(Steve)
'98KX250
'88KX250
MX Tuner
>MXT I agree there are some other good choices on the market, but why do
>keep dogging the KX in your indirect manner?
Believe me, I'm not "dogging it in an indirect manner". It has some
good points. If I didn't think so, I'd rake it over the verbal coals.
> Why don't you just realize
>that is "your" opinion just like the mags and each of us riders have
>ours?
That is exactly what I have said. I'm simply trying to bring up some
points to think about versus everyone saying their bike is the best
and that is what he should buy.
>As for the Power Valves, please! I never had a problem on my '94 KX-250
>that I raced/rode from '94 thru '97.
I doubt if you kept your bikes long enough and I'm certain you kept
them fairly well serviced. Let one go a little longer than normal.
>Yes, maybe you have seen cases
>where there were problems, but that doesn't mean it's a rule of thumb.
I never even suggested it was a rule of thumb.
>Bottom line, the KXs may not be the best bike for everyone, but I don't
>believe they are as poor as you would like people to believe either.
Show me where I even hinted they were/are poor bikes. Every time I
talk about them, I say (just like the first part of my post you
quoted) they are good bikes. I even went as far as saying he would be
happy with one if he bought one. Heck, he's trying to moto an XR 400.
Which 250 WOULDN'T he be happy with?
Maybe you should lose the chip on your shoulder.
MX Tuner
Q
I take what the comic books have to say with a grain of
salt I read them but just for the facts and make my own
descesion about the bikes for instance the 98
KX 250 won all the shoot outs but when they let
race tech pipe and revalve the suspension the honda was
unbeatible. But with so many changes with all the bikes this
year you do need to get as much info as you can. IMHO
I don't think you can go wrong with any of the big
japanese bikes but for me I've always been a honda and
yamaha buyer because of the quality but for the last
4 years I've just bought hondas. I look for qualities
in the bikes that i like wich ever one has the most I
buy what I don't like I fix. For me the Cr needed the suspension
fixed thats it and my 99 may not even need that The
jury's still out I have'nt riden much with all these damded
hurricanes anyway I'am rambling See ya
Chris F 99 CR250
Reeko
Where did you get that I was not "mechanically experienced "?
While it is true that I have not worked on Bikes (and therefore need advice
on bike specific issues such as suspension) I am mechanically experienced.
I work on cars, and have done frame of restorations on several. I can
rebuild chevy motors with no problem.
So maybe my posts ask questions that are trivial to people that have torn
down bikes, but don't assume that I am a mechanical idiot.
BTW, I can and do use a shop manual to work on my bike. I can follow the
book and get things done. However, I sometimes ask in this newsgroup because
the books don't cover everything or are not clear sometimes.
Reeko.
MX Tuner wrote in message <360d6c82...@news.mindspring.com>...
>"Jere Riberdy" <jrib...@ica.net> wrote:
>
>>Why is everyone dogging the KX?
>
>The KX is a good bike.
>
>>All I hear is about Yamaha's new YZ 250...
>
>So is the YZ.
>
>>Doesn't anyone care that the 1997 and 1998 KX250 were the best 250 mxer's
>>for the past couple of years.
>
>No, the mags rated them the best. Personally, this holds very little
>water.
>
>>In fact KX 250's are usually amazing bikes.
>
>Amazing from what standpoint?
>
>>If the guy wants to buy a bike with a history of kicking ass, let him. I
>>know I'm happy with mine and I'll stick with KX's because of that fact.
>
>And I said I thought he would be happy with a KX if that's what he
>bought. But there are many other excellent choices out there.
>
>From his past posts, he is not as mechanically experienced as some
>others. Let him try cleaning the power valves and then ask him if he
>still likes his KX.
>
>MX Tuner
MX Tuner
>Wait a second MX.
>Where did you get that I was not "mechanically experienced "?
From some of your questions. I certainly didn't mean for it to be
derogatory.
>While it is true that I have not worked on Bikes (and therefore need advice
>on bike specific issues such as suspension) I am mechanically experienced.
>I work on cars, and have done frame of restorations on several. I can
>rebuild chevy motors with no problem.
Then you very well know bikes and cars are not even in the same
league.
>So maybe my posts ask questions that are trivial to people that have torn
>down bikes, but don't assume that I am a mechanical idiot.
I never even implied that. The power valve timing marks on a KX can be
confusing at best. Even WITH a manual.
>BTW, I can and do use a shop manual to work on my bike. I can follow the
>book and get things done.
Great.
>However, I sometimes ask in this newsgroup because
>the books don't cover everything or are not clear sometimes.
That's why we're here.
>>From his past posts, he is not as mechanically experienced as some
>>others. Let him try cleaning the power valves and then ask him if he
>>still likes his KX.
Now reread what I wrote. I never said you were incompetent. I said you
didn't have the experience as some others.
Sorry if I pissed you off.
Go buy a KX.
MX Tuner
Reeko
MX Tuner wrote in message <360fde55...@news.mindspring.com>...
>
>>>From his past posts, he is not as mechanically experienced as some
>>>others. Let him try cleaning the power valves and then ask him if he
>>>still likes his KX.
>
>Now reread what I wrote. I never said you were incompetent. I said you
>didn't have the experience as some others.
>
>Sorry if I pissed you off.
>
>Go buy a KX.
>
>MX Tuner
Sorry if I was overly sensative. I think I hadn't had any coffee yet on a
Monday morning and was a bit cranky. Maybe I read more into it then you
meant.
Again, I did not mean for this to be a KX vs Other bike thread. I am not
hooked on the KX, it just seems that since all of my riding friends ride 96
or newer KX 250s and have great things to say about them, that it would be a
good bike for me. Also, I don't know anyone that rides a RM so it would be
difficult to test ride them (other than the dealer lot).
In fact, at all off tracks that I go to, there are relatively few RM's. (My
guess would be 1 in 30 or so. There is a pretty even distribution between KX
and CR with a few YZ's.
Reeko
Tim Mardis
it will out power any KX.
Premiums
Reeko , Tuner
Im glad to see you kissed and made up. Just kiddin' dont flame me. Tuner i
was wondering (from your name) What kind of work you do? where? and where did
you go to school for it?
Dont read anything into it i just wonder if you build bike or anything. Thanks
Bubba
Lessons learned from the mistakes
of others are the best value!
MX Tuner
>Tuner i was wondering what kind of work you do?
I work on cars for a living. Bikes are a hobby.
>Where?
Just north of Atlanta.
>And where did you go to school for it?
I've been to all the schools Audi had at the time ('84 to '89). I'm an
Audi Master tech. I've been to all the schools Volvo had at the time
('89 to '98). I'm a Volvo Master tech and an ASE Master Tech.
>Dont read anything into it i just wonder if you build bikes or anything.
Plenty.
MX Tuner
MX Tuner
>I did not mean for this to be a KX vs Other bike thread.
Neither did I.
>I am not
>hooked on the KX, it just seems that since all of my riding friends ride 96
>or newer KX 250s and have great things to say about them, that it would be a
>good bike for me.
And I said if you bought one, I'm sure you would be happy with it.
>In fact, at all off tracks that I go to, there are relatively few RM's. (My
>guess would be 1 in 30 or so.
The mags slammed them for the last few years. This, unfortunately,
carries a lot of weight with the bike buying public.
>There is a pretty even distribution between KX
>and CR with a few YZ's.
Honda seems to have a fairly faithful following (and for good reason-
they are excellent bikes).
MX Tuner
JOKERKX250
>Buy a CR. The suspension sucks, but
>it will out power any KX.
Maybe for an A class rider...but a beg/intermediate might have a problem
with this.....typical CR riders thinking...lol...
JOKER....(Steve)
'98KX250
'88KX250
Jay C
>
>>Buy a CR. The suspension sucks, but
>>it will out power any KX.
>
> Maybe for an A class rider...but a beg/intermediate might have a problem
>with this.....typical CR riders thinking...lol...
Not necessarily - I rode a '97 CR250 (that had a suspension re-valve) last
month and I thought it was the best 2-smoke bike I ever rode. What a motor!
And I am in no way, shape, or form anything even close to an A-rider! Do
they have a "D" class?
Jay C
'98 XR400
Russ Schooley
LtRodk...@webtv.net says...
> Buy a CR. The suspension sucks, but
> it will out power any KX.
>
>
have the '99 KX on top of the 250 heap for HPs this year.
Mike Baxter
Russ Schooley wrote:
Remember the Dyno don't ride Russ. The '97 YZ made the most HP on the
dyno, but you have ridden it and know the real story.
Mike
Rex M
Mike Baxter wrote in message <36116C94...@cybeq.com>...
Rex Mckinney
97 YZ250 for sale
99 YZ250
Jay C
>>
>>Remember the Dyno don't ride Russ. The '97 YZ made the most HP on the
>>dyno, but you have ridden it and know the real story.
>>
So THATs why everyone says that dyno results are not like the real thing! I
get it!
Jay C
'98 XR400
Russ Schooley
>
>
> Russ Schooley wrote:
>
> > In article <11878-36...@newsd-112.bryant.webtv.net>,
> > LtRodk...@webtv.net says...
> > > Buy a CR. The suspension sucks, but
> > > it will out power any KX.
> > >
> > >
> > Not from what I've heard. Inside scoop is that dyno results
> > have the '99 KX on top of the 250 heap for HPs this year.
>
> dyno, but you have ridden it and know the real story.
Agreed. Just passing along some inside scoop I had been told.
I am anxious though if the '99 KX retains its low-end and
snappy acceleration. The extra HPs could make it a real
holeshot monster, but that remains to be seen. ;)
buzzs...@my-dejanews.com
"Jay C" <stumpy....@mci2000.com> wrote:
> JOKERKX250 wrote in message <19980929002702...@ng150.aol.com>...
> >
> >>it will out power any KX.
I just went form a KX250 to a CR250. The power is different. If you are used
to the KX's sweet bottom end (like I was and still am) then it will take some
time to get used to a no/little bottom end motor like the CR. Hell, on my KX
I could leave it in third through a turn, give it a little clutch, and power
out of it. Now with the CR, I find myself hammering the clutch more. I also
need to keep my speed up through turns ar the CR falls off the pipe. John
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
JOKERKX250
>I just went form a KX250 to a CR250.
DAMN YOUR BAD LUCK!!!!....LOL...
JOKER....(Steve)
'98KX250
'88KX250
buzzs...@my-dejanews.com
Naa, I love the CR too. Both bikes have their good and bad points. The KX was
a great bike to learn on and still had plenty of power. The suspension was
also pretty damn nice too, but the frame broke. John