Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Return of The XR

Recommended Posts

Well folks Yamaha did it. They made a cross country bike for 2015. And we know Yamaha has the most reliable go fast bike of this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeez...  Could they make the wheelbase any longer???  It looks like the front tire and rear tire occupy two different time zones.  I guess you have to send a memo or telegraph ahead before you come to a turn...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well folks Yamaha did it. They made a cross country bike for 2015. And we know Yamaha has the most reliable go fast bike of this time.

Competition for the CRF250X I guess. It's still too tall for me and too long wheelbase for the woods,,,, In my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't bash it 'til you ride one. I've ridden a bike that was more nimble than my 230 while having a longer wheelbase and twice the stability on straights!

 

I spent plenty of time on top of a WR250F and hated every minute of it.  The long wheelbase and slow steering made it awful in the places we ride.  Just awful...

 

Nimblest bikes I've ridden are XR200, CRF230, and 84/85 XR250 (became XR200 chassis).  Everything else I've thrown a leg over steers too slowly for my liking and needs.

 

Not much need for stability when your top speed is~40 MPH...

Edited by VortecCPI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I spent plenty of time on top of a WR250F and hated every minute of it.  The long wheelbase and slow steering made it awful in the places we ride.  Just awful...

 

Not much need for stability when your top speed is~40 MPH...

 

I'm sure this YZ250FX is way different than the WR250F you have ridden, so I wouldn't make assumptions based off the WR250F. I'm not saying you're wrong at all. I used to ride an earlier model WR250F and it was very "bleh." However, there have been a couple full size bikes that I've ridden which were surprisingly nimble. But who knows? Maybe the YZ250FX is worthless to us! I wouldn't know.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure this YZ250FX is way different than the WR250F you have ridden, so I wouldn't make assumptions based off the WR250F. I'm not saying you're wrong at all. I used to ride an earlier model WR250F and it was very "bleh." However, there have been a couple full size bikes that I've ridden which were surprisingly nimble. But who knows? Maybe the YZ250FX is worthless to us! I wouldn't know.

 

Certainly could be the case.  I also spent quite a bit of time on top of a YZ250F and it was even worse than the WR250F.  It was GREAT in MX conditions but on the trails and in the woods it was worse than the WR250F.

 

"BLEH"...  Well written...  When I jumped on that WR250F I expected to be completely blown away.  I was blown away all right...  By how awful the thing was.  My 1984 Al Baker XR265 was WAY better than that miserable thing.

 

Unfortunately I am likely spoiled by all the small-chassis bikes I've spent so much time riding.  I took the 2003 XR250 out for a spin last weekend and, even though it's wheelbase is close to the CRF230 (54" vs 55"), I couldn't get through the woods anywhere near as easily or as quickly or as safely as I can on my CRF230.  The XR250 is, however, much more stable at higher speeds.

 

I guess I am one of those rare riders that really likes the small chassis of the CRF230, even though I have a 35" inseam.

Edited by VortecCPI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure this YZ250FX is way different than the WR250F you have ridden, so I wouldn't make assumptions based off the WR250F. I'm not saying you're wrong at all. I used to ride an earlier model WR250F and it was very "bleh." However, there have been a couple full size bikes that I've ridden which were surprisingly nimble. But who knows? Maybe the YZ250FX is worthless to us! I wouldn't know.

You the Domolisher live in California/Nevada...Vortectccpi lives in NC. Two different riding conditions. I've rode in Arizona and been through Nevada a thousand times. The west cost doesn't have a forest or any trees to encounter. The trees on the west cost are spaced so far apart one could drive Texas through them.

 

I have relatives who live from Michigan to Tennessee. I spent many months there also. The Forest are so thick, you wonder if you'll need to switch over to street bike riding. That being the case, both of you guys are right. If i lived in NC, i wouldn't get the new YZ250FX. But If you live on the west cost... Which i do! Yamaha Come Take my Money Please!  

Edited by The goat
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You the Domolisher live in California/Nevada...Vortectccpi lives in NC. Two different riding conditions. I've rode in Arizona and been through Nevada a thousand times. The west cost doesn't have a forest or any trees to encounter. The trees on the west cost are spaced so far apart one could drive Texas through them.

 

I have relatives who live from Michigan to Tennessee. I spent many months there also. The Forest are so thick, you wonder if you'll need to switch over to street bike riding. That being the case, both of you guys are right. If i lived in NC, i wouldn't get the new YZ250FX. But If you live on the west cost... Which i do! Yamaha Come Take my Money Please!  

 

Very good point.  I've spent some time in Northern CA, Southern CA, and West TX and it is quite different than what we have here and in New England (where I'm from).  When I visited Al Baker's XR's Only after they built my bike I was blown away by the wide-open spaces and huge expanses of terrain he had by his shop at the end of the landing strip.

 

I guess I need to be more descriptive when I talk about the riding conditions here.  You are right about trees.  Sometimes there's barely enough room to get between them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You the Domolisher live in California/Nevada...Vortectccpi lives in NC. Two different riding conditions. I've rode in Arizona and been through Nevada a thousand times. The west cost doesn't have a forest or any trees to encounter. The trees on the west cost are spaced so far apart one could drive Texas through them.

 

I have relatives who live from Michigan to Tennessee. I spent many months there also. The Forest are so thick, you wonder if you'll need to switch over to street bike riding. That being the case, both of you guys are right. If i lived in NC, i wouldn't get the new YZ250FX. But If you live on the west cost... Which i do! Yamaha Come Take my Money Please!  

 

You were in the SW, the PNW is different.

As you move north from CA the terrain becomes more vertical and trees grow closer together. By the time you get to WA and BC the trails become very interesting.

 

There is a video of the McNutt trail in BC in a thread about Trials tires, I rate it as a good intermediate PNW trail.

Walker Valley in western WA has some good trails, best is Gifford Pinchot NF and ID, lots of single track at elevation, and quit a few videos in the NW forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure this YZ250FX is way different than the WR250F.

 

I'm thinking "not" very different.

The bloke in the video was so vague in his description of the bike, didn't seem to me like it was doing anything amazing that any other actual MX bike could do.

Are the gear ratios farther apart?

Heavier flywheel for smoother motor that will still rip up top?

Why don't they do this on actual MX bikes if it's a win-win across the board?

No headlight?

I'm not sure I really grasp it's purpose or how it is much different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking "not" very different.

The bloke in the video was so vague in his description of the bike, didn't seem to me like it was doing anything amazing that any other actual MX bike could do.

Are the gear ratios farther apart?

Heavier flywheel for smoother motor that will still rip up top?

Why don't they do this on actual MX bikes if it's a win-win across the board?

No headlight?

I'm not sure I really grasp it's purpose or how it is much different.

 

Extremely different from any previous WR250F. 2015 YZ250FX to 2015 WR250F, not much difference. Completely different bike than any other year WR250F.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Extremely different from any previous WR250F. 2015 YZ250FX to 2015 WR250F, not much difference. Completely different bike than any other year WR250F.

So a new model WR250F without a headlight?

How else is the crosscountry model different?

 

Yamaha is getting smart like Harley Davidson.

Different paint job and tires = Brand New Model!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeez... Could they make the wheelbase any longer??? It looks like the front tire and rear tire occupy two different time zones. I guess you have to send a memo or telegraph ahead before you come to a turn...

Question from a plebe, isn't longer better for stability/handling?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question from a plebe, isn't longer better for stability/handling?

 Longer better for stability? = yes

 

 Longer better for handling? = yes or no

 

 Longer better in the desert? = yes 

 

 Longer better in the jungle? = NO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Calm down folks, it's a purebred hare scramble bike. Nothing less, nothing more. It's pretty much what most folks have done to make their YZ250Fs h/s bikes with Estart and FI. A guy i ride with just got one and for racing applications (which still qualifies as "woods"), it's an awesome bike.

While I agree it would not be ideal for tight singletrack, That's not it's intended use so not sure why everybody's bashing on it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure this is a great bike but when I hear "XR" I think of:

  • Durability
  • Reliability
  • Simplicity
  • Air-Cooled
  • Carburetor
  • Fast steering
  • Short wheelbase
  • Medium-travel suspension

I would have to say Yamaha has got a lot of this covered as their engines, although not "simple", are very good.  Although I don't care for the idea of Liquid Cooling or FI (and the myriad of associated components) on a woods bike I have not heard of Yamaha failures.

 

This still leaves us with the last three items which, in my opinion and riding experience, sets bikes like the XR200, CRF230, and XR250 out from the rest of the pack.  Again, I'm not saying this isn't a great bike but IF you have spent time on a well-setup XR200, CRF230, or XR250 you understand what I mean.  The dimensions of the XR200/CRF230/XR250 allow you to do things that can be very difficult on a bike with lots of travel, slow steering, and a long wheelbase.  In my opinion the late-model XR250 (>1995) is nowhere near as good as an XR200/CRF230 in the tight stuff but it is far better than the YZ250F and WR250F I spent some time on.

 

Not all of us require horsepower, stability, and a mile of travel where we ride.  Some of us need off-idle torque, twitchy steering, and a CG close to the ground so we can change directions and easily put our feet down if need be.

 

A smaller chassis with less travel and a trials-type engine would be a nice start.

 

I don't think anybody in here is bashing this bike; we're just thinking it's not an XR in the sense of what XRs are known for...

Edited by VortecCPI
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Reply with:

Sign in to follow this  

×