atc 200 engine in xr .Can I pull start 10.25 : 1?

Have a few xr200  rolling  chassis . Also  have a atc 200 bottom  end.Considering  completing  the atc engine  with an xr top end that has a decent  10.25:1 wiseco .Could  this setup  still work  with pullstart?

 

Would  be a good  machine to carry  a chainsaw  for trail clearance  

I have an '85 xr200r chassis and an old '81 atc200 engine I'm thinking about pairing up together in the future. 

Pull start and no clutch. 

If you have the decompression lever, I don't see where you'd have trouble getting it to start. What all do you have in the way of rolling chassis sitting around? 

A couple  of  2000 xr 200.They can be found  for cheap on craigslist  occasionally.No engines . 

It will work.  No first hand experience, but there was a guy a few years ago at a ride who had put one together.  The cases are wider than dirt bike cases, it looked weird, but it was in there and ran, lol.

It will bolt in. Just maybe a little work on the pegs as it's wider on both sides like mentioned.

On 12/26/2017 at 6:43 AM, vulcanduro said:

A couple  of  2000 xr 200.They can be found  for cheap on craigslist  occasionally.No engines . 

Wish I could find em cheap around here. I look on Craigslist here, and even surrounding states, and never find complete bikes or rolling chassis for cheap. I found mine for $300 but nothing really since. 

On 12/26/2017 at 6:52 AM, poldies4 said:

It will work.  No first hand experience, but there was a guy a few years ago at a ride who had put one together.  The cases are wider than dirt bike cases, it looked weird, but it was in there and ran, lol.

A friend of mine said he met a guy who had done it, said it's great for hills and tight stuff.

Thing that sucks is it bolts up in the '86+, but not directly into the '85. I'll get it to work if I decide to try 

I have a 1985 xr200  roller  as well . Got an eye  out  for  a 1986 to 1995 xr250  engine  as it will drop in directly .An xr 200  with a 280 engine  will be a a fun machine  

1 hour ago, vulcanduro said:

I have a 1985 xr200  roller  as well . Got an eye  out  for  a 1986 to 1995 xr250  engine  as it will drop in directly .An xr 200  with a 280 engine  will be a a fun machine  

In all reality, that would just be an '86+ XR250R, as the 250 took on the '84-85 XR200R chassis in '86. Only thing that would keep it a 200r is the 17" rear wheel and steel swingarm.

If I could find a 250r engine for cheap I'd put it in my '85 frame. 

I'd take one of your 2000 rollers and put my spare atc200x engine in it

Wasn't  aware  that the 86 xr 250  chassis  was same as 85 200.I know  that the 85 xr200  that I have is smaller  than  my 2004 xr250 . 

I wouldn't  have  a problem  parting  with one of my  200s,but you'd have to come up to Canada ! 

From what I remember reading in multiple threads on here, that's what happened. The '86+ XR250R carried on the '85 XR200R chassis. I'm sure they made another change at some point, which would explain the size difference? 

Yeaaaahhh, I don't know about the Canada trip thing lol. Where at in Canada? 

Niagara  Falls . I'm near Toronto . The used motorcycle  market  is full of good  deals . Often bikes  from the city that are only  used occasionally  at the cottage  can be had.

On 12/27/2017 at 4:24 PM, vulcanduro said:

Wasn't  aware  that the 86 xr 250  chassis  was same as 85 200.I know  that the 85 xr200  that I have is smaller  than  my 2004 xr250 . 

I wouldn't  have  a problem  parting  with one of my  200s,but you'd have to come up to Canada ! 

84/85 XR200/XR250 went on to become 86 XR200 while 86 XR250 got a newer bigger chassis.  We had two 84 Al Baker XR265s and they were very small and great for woods work.

Chuck can likely offer some good insight into this topic...

Edited by VortecCPI

I had an 84 and an 87 XR250R but i can't find the specs on the 86-95 250s.  I didn't notice any big differences between the 84-85 version and the 86-95 version except improved suspension on the 87 and maybe the wheelbase was a bit longer.   I do remember one ride with my oldest son and my riding partner during which I brought the 87 for my oldest son to ride, the  two of us had our  Suzuki RM Full Floaters with modded XR200R engines that we had built and used for years in Enduro competition.   My riding partner and I were always about the same speed but when I was on the XR250R I couldn't keep up with him on fast terrain.  That may not be a fair comparison because our Honzukis had a longer wheelbase,  2" more suspension travel, and were about 40lbs lighter. Riding technique was also different between the two bikes: The XRs are quick turning and you steer them, they didn't really care if the power is on or not.  The RMs were a typical MX of that era and worked good on sweeping corners and seemed to corner better with power on.:ride:

The 86+ XR250R had a new chassis and a revised engine but a lot of dimensions carried over from the 84-86 which is good news because most chassis parts such as plastic and suspension would swap among 84-95 models of the XR250R and the 84-02 XR200R. 96+XR250R was a new design.

Just remember that the 84-85 XR200R is based on the 84 XR250R RFVC 4 valve engine and the motor mounts are very different from the 2 valve engines, And there were 3 200s in 84, two of  which were 2 valve models; XL200R based on the 83 XR200R, and the twin shock XR200. 

Interesting  point  regarding  your 200 powered  rm being quicker  than  the xr250 . I have  considered  xr200  cr125 project . Not sure  if cr chassis  would  be  any better  for my use(woods)  than the smaller , tight turning  200.I like it's small stature.Have avoided swapping  to a heavier  front fork because  didn't  want to  loose  any flick ability . It's like riding  a  larger  xr100.

Thanks again,Chuck .The scope of your knowledge  regarding  the xr bikes never ceases  to amaze  me!

The comparison was at higher trail speeds in whoops; the XR250 chassis just couldn't travel as fast as the Rm chassis, it was kicking me in the butt. The RM also had a lot of steering rake for slower steering and more high speed stability, but it didn't turn as well as the XRs on tight trails.    As a side note the early 91-83 XR200Rs (I owned one along with the RM) had a lot of rake and a short wheelbase, and I never liked how they handled, or climbed hills.  The new 84 full cradle chassis was a big improvement. My classic example of the differences between a XR and a MX bike was about 60 miles into a particularly gnarly Enduro and  I noticed I was late steering the bike into corners, and then I was passed by an XR; I realized I was muscle fatigued from man handling the RM in the tight stuff and didn't have the strength to timely  initiate turns. 
My CRF250X feels a lot like my old RM but it has modern suspension with  a very stiff chassis, and a bit less steering rake than the RM, plus at least twice the HP. It is a great fast trail bike if the suspension is revalved. And I finally got the engine tuned so it works well on the tight gnarl.  On one trail ride to a new area my riding buddy, with a XR218 who has ridden my X,  and was surprised at how well my X worked on the tight technical.
My modded 01   XR200R is my bike of choice for tight technical trails. As a side note my oldest son, who started riding at 6 and is now 40+, thinks my XRs suck compared to a good MXer; maybe I need to take him on more of my special trail rides. :lol:

So as always mileage varies.

A buddy of mine had a atc185s that we put the wiseco 10.25 piston in and a big al cam in and he was able to pull start it. The kickback was pretty bad on it though sometimes. It would yank the pull cord handle right out his hand.

Put that engine on and xl175 frame

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now