people who dont like xr250 in tight woods riding

[zukijames]

this might not be allowed but.. has anyone else noticed that guys who dont like xr250's usually dont ride very technical trails? 

I love my xr250 in the really tight stuff.. the only thing i like better .. is my xr200 ?

speaking of that my 1988 xr200 (used and abused ) seems to have more right off idle power than my 1997xr250 almost like my 250 hesitates.

the 200 has fmf core 4? or something

the 250 has stock exhaust with baffle removed.( that helped originally i had a fmf supertrap) 


maybe its just the worn out ruined forks and short wb so the 200 lifts the front tire up over logs and rocks much easier..

both are geared down 1 tooth on the front sprocket

 

[zukijames]

or maybe my 200 is just an exception.. My wifes 1993 xr218 doesn't seem to wheelie as easy as my 200 and has same sprockets 

[adnohguy]

My 250cc 230f and 150f are way more fun to ride on the tightest and gnarliest stuff we got out here in central CA than my XR250r.

And I cannot say because I don't have one, but more than likely a XR200r?

[VortecCPI]

The late-model XR250s (1996-2003) do not make as much off-idle and low-end torque as the earlier (1986-1995) XR250s.  In my opinion a well-tuned XR200 makes every bit as much low-speed torque as a late-model XR250.  My CRF230 makes way more off-idle and low-end torque then the 2003 XR250 that was in the garage.

 

The four-valve RFVC 250 head definitely breathes very good on the top but the two-valve 200/230 head works better on the bottom.

[BOAB]

We have a stock 02 XR400 and a 277cc 03 XR250.  The 250/277 is a joy to ride in the tight stuff, the bottom end increase with the big bore kit/higher compression make it a blast to ride, I much prefer it over the much heavier 400.  Those who say the later 250s don't have enough bottom end haven't ridden a bored one much, that is set up nicely.  And Vortec, lol, we argued about this months ago, and I hope no hard feelings, but I still consider the 03 CRF230 we had to be a dog, it had no where near the power, stock, as the same year XR250, which we still have.  I have no trouble keeping up with, and even going faster than, bigger, newer bikes on the modded 250.  I routinely ride with my twenty something sons on their CRF450Rs, and in the tight trail stuff we all ride at pretty much the same pace comfortably.  They're not slow, either, the older one, when he competes routinely comes in ahead of some of the pros.

[Chuck.]

The 230F owners think their motors have more bottom end than anything else, I'll concede that with a 9:1 compression ratio and the mild cam they are very tractable with predictable power, which is a big plus for technical riding.  I've owned XR250Rs and yes they have a lot of bottom end but they are heavier than a 230F, and very much heavier than a two valve XR200R. The XR250 does have a short wheelbase and steep rake like the XR200 and 230F, which helps for trail riding. 

 

I have a CRF250X and it has good bottom end response along with more top end power than a XR400 (dyno charts), and a bit lighter than a XR250R.  But when I want to ride tight technical it is my lightened XR218 with modded suspension, it steers thru the woods like a rat in a sewer pipe. 

 

You notice that we all are talking about how Honda offroad bikes compare on tight technical trails, no input from  other colors or the MX crowd.

[adnohguy]

Yes, I did notice that.

[VortecCPI]

We have a stock 02 XR400 and a 277cc 03 XR250.  The 250/277 is a joy to ride in the tight stuff, the bottom end increase with the big bore kit/higher compression make it a blast to ride, I much prefer it over the much heavier 400.  Those who say the later 250s don't have enough bottom end haven't ridden a bored one much, that is set up nicely.  And Vortec, lol, we argued about this months ago, and I hope no hard feelings, but I still consider the 03 CRF230 we had to be a dog, it had no where near the power, stock, as the same year XR250, which we still have.  I have no trouble keeping up with, and even going faster than, bigger, newer bikes on the modded 250.  I routinely ride with my twenty something sons on their CRF450Rs, and in the tight trail stuff we all ride at pretty much the same pace comfortably.  They're not slow, either, the older one, when he competes routinely comes in ahead of some of the pros.

 

No hard feelings at all and I agree with all of your statements above.  We had two late-model XR250s here for many years (since 2009) and for the type of riding we do there is simply no contest.  The XR250 is much taller and heavier and the engine delivers power in a completely different manner.  If you go to WOT on a CRF230 at 2,400 RPM in third it will chug like mad.  If you do the same on an XR250 it will flame out or barely pull away very weakly.

 

Baja Trail Rider (Larry) recently made the switch from an XR300 to a CRF240 and he is extremely pleased.

 

One of my buddy's (rode open-class 2Ts when he was younger) switched from an XR250 to a CRF230.

 

Sgorenflo raced a 1991 XR600 for many years and he is extremely impressed with our two CRF230s.

 

If you research dyno data on the two bikes you will see the CRF230 makes more TQ at the bottom.

 

The CRF230 and XR250 are two  different bikes with two different target riding contexts.

I think the CRF230 you had was in need of some serious work.

Please keep in mind I am NOT speaking of a bone-stock CRF230 (i.e., stock jetting and all baffles in place).  In that case an XR200 will walk all over it as well as away from it.  The CRF230 has a miserable engine as delivered form the factory.  The XR200 does not and is quite snappy.

If your experience shows an XR250 makes more low-speed torque than a properly-jetted uncorked CRF230 you have surely not ridden the same.  The tiny cam, carb, and ports work wonderfully even with the mild CR.  It's like comparing an LG4305 SBC to a DZ302 SBC.  The LG4 makes way more low-speed  torque because of its lazy cam and small ports and valves but that is in no way to say it's a better engine (it's surely not).  I have also heard many people mock the XR200 for its incapable engine.  The fact is they have simply never ridden one in good working condition.

In closing I have spoken at length with both Mike Coe and Frank Nye and they happen to agree and have seen the same on their dynos.  I will ask Terry Miller if he has an opinion as to our little debate.

 

This is not a "which bike is better" thing.  I happen to love the XR250 but not for the type of riding we do.

Edited August 16, 2015 by VortecCPI

[BOAB]

 

You notice that we all are talking about how Honda offroad bikes compare on tight technical trails, no input from  other colors or the MX crowd.

 

I think most other riders just think we're weird with our air cooled, "old school" thumpers, even though a later model XR is newer than a whole lot of water cooled MX bikes guys ride.  I get strange looks sometimes, like why don't you get a newer, real bike, until they get their eyes opened. ?

[oldmanrip]

What is amazing is an XR200R with the XL185S cam.  Makes the torque both lower and bigger.  Can be installed in an hour.

[zukijames]

i've only ridden one crf230.. and it was completely stock. 

I'd take my xr200 or my wifes xr200  or my xr250 over it any day, the electric start was nice..felt bigger and taller than the 200s and slower than my 250.. but again comparing modified xr's to a completely stock crf230

[buildabike]

I recently rebuilt a 230 that the PO had ran without oil.  Looked new when I sold it and now I am regreting the sale.  I was so impressed with the handeling and low end.  Was just fun to ride.  It did inspire me to work on the jetting on my 95 xr280.  If I ever re[lace my xr it will be with a 230 along with suspension upgrades.  I love the e button.

[adnohguy]

Uncork and properly rejet a stocker and you will instantly have more power and speed than the stock tires allow.

After that you will be riding much faster and then the rear shock will need to be revalved (Minimum) or it will spit you on your head if you insist on going any faster.

After that's fixed then the front forks need revalved.

So after those (4) steps then you can dial up the HP even more and really enjoy the 230f to the max.

+ it's really fun tinkering on the bike and then enjoying the benefits of your efforts.

You buddy's will of course turn up their noses about your bike but that won't matter when your in front of them and not eating there dust anymore.

Enjoy

Edited August 17, 2015 by adnohguy

[zukijames]

Uncork and properly rejet a stocker and you will instantly have more power and speed than the stock tires allow.

After that you will be riding much faster and then the rear shock will need to be revalved (Minimum) or it will spit you on your head if you insist on going any faster.

After that's fixed then the front forks need revalved.

So after those (4) steps then you can dial up the HP even more and really enjoy the 230f to the max.

+ it's really fun tinkering on the bike and then enjoying the benefits of your efforts.

You buddy's will of course turn up their noses about your bike but that won't matter when your in front of them and not eating there dust anymore.

Enjoy

where i ride fast doesnt really matter its more like can you get up/threw that 

[Chuck.]

What is amazing is an XR200R with the XL185S cam.  Makes the torque both lower and bigger.  Can be installed in an hour.

Yes a milder cam from a XL will produce more bottom end, a stock XR200 has the most aggressive cam of all the 2 valve motors. Aftermarket cams can be even more aggresive and need to be balanced with displacement, CR, and other mods.

 

Uncork and properly rejet a stocker and you will instantly have more power and speed than the stock tires allow.

After that you will be riding much faster and then the rear shock will need to be revalved (Minimum) or it will spit you on your head if you insist on going any faster.

After that's fixed then the front forks need revalved.

So after those (4) steps then you can dial up the HP even more and really enjoy the 230f to the max.

+ it's really fun tinkering on the bike and then enjoying the benefits of your efforts.

You buddy's will of course turn up their noses about your bike but that won't matter when your in front of them and not eating there dust anymore.

Enjoy

My thoughts on a XR200R with a 17" rear wheel; engine power is a good match for the stock wheel/tire.

 

where i ride fast doesnt really matter its more like can you get up/threw that 

Bottom end tractable power and a radial ply Trials tire can make that happen if you have throttle control and can position your self correctly on the bike. I had to remove the cross brace on my handle bars so I could get further forward for a logging skid trail  hill climb. Same hill not a problem on my Trials bike. ?

Tinkering and enjoying the benefits is what it is all about.

[VortecCPI]

A lot of this has to do with what and where we come from.  I rode a 1984 AL Baker XR265 for a decade.  The 1984/1985 XR250 chassis was very small and went on to become the XR200 chassis.  I became accustomed (addicted?) to the small chassis.  This is likely the reason I love the small size of the CRF230.

 

My buddy also rode a 1984 AL Baker XR265 but he later went to a 1991 XR600.  He got used to the big heavy tall chassis so the 2003 XR250 feels like a toy to him.  He really likes the CRF230 but surely it must feel very cramped to him.  Even so he was very impressed with both the engine and the handling.

 

I loved that XR600.  It was a wallowing beast in the slow short tight technical stuff but it was also a bull dozer.  Throttle position, gear selection, lines, and setup were not all that important when you have stupid amounts of torque at your disposal.  It was stall-proof and a pure blast to ride even though it was huge.

 

Besides the engine the chassis is just as, if not more, important.  The two 1984 AL Baker XR265s had engines that were insanely powerful.  Both the 2009 CRF230 and 2003 XR250 aren't even close.  Not even remotely.  However, the 2009 CRF230 and 2003 XR250 make way more low-speed torque than those two Al Baker Xr265s.  Those engines were anemic at the bottom, if you could even call it the bottom.

 

As far as working in tight technical areas I have an issue with the bigger heavier taller XR250 by my buddy does not.

 

Anyhow...  Just a little rant for thought...

Edited August 17, 2015 by VortecCPI

[Chuck.]

Very good points.

 

Race Tech's Paul Thede states: "The best you've ridden is the best you know".

 

I'm a fan of riding a variety of bikes on different terrain, it broadens your perspective.