200 or 250 at Altitude

[Back2Braaap]

Was really keen on getting a 200. I’m 170 with gear, trail riding with boys in CO/UT, mostly at 6k ft+ and sometimes up to 10k ft. I’m coming of a CRF250X and found that I was losing power going into the mountains (bike jetted for altitude). I read a post where some comments stated that the Beta 200 would be similar than the 250X - that has turned me off the 200 a bit as I dont want to struggle when climbing. I’m not an experienced rider and I’m over 50 so I’m not looking to try to wring every bit of power out of a 200 once we get to elevation, so I’m wondering if a 250 would be better. The dealer told me I should get a 300, but I’m not a big guy and think the 300 would be too much for me to handle. I will be adding a Rekluse.

[BassMan]

Altitude, trail riding, Rekluse, 300.

[redhurricane]

I've ridden both- you won't be disappointed in the 200RR compared to the x. Still own one 250x, but it is leaving next week. Good usable power down low, and plenty up top. If you're nearby the Denver Metro, swing by and we can talk more in person. Daughter was on this 250x for 6 years, and decided on the 300RR as a replacement. She rode the 200rr as well at the demo day, but wanted the 300 instead. 

 

Either the 200 or 300 will still feel significantly lighter than the CRF does, 25-30# actual weight difference, and with a lower CG and rotating mass it will be much nicer for our part of the world. 

 

[redhurricane]

I'll add- if you are only doing casual trail riding and are on the smaller side height wise, consider the xtrainer as well. (bike behind the crf in my pic which we have lowered 1.5")

[FUHL]

The 300 Low end torque will help more than hinder. I ride my 300 like a 4 stroke.

[Beta300REcat]

23 minutes ago, TukTuk said:

The dealer told me I should get a 300

 

7 minutes ago, BassMan said:

Altitude, trail riding, 300.

 

300;

FULL DISCLAIMER: I weigh 175lbs and ride a 300 at sea level.

 

[turbo dan]

I used to have a KDX200 that served dual sport duty.  These are not known as powerhouses but with a pipe, reed block and minor porting the bike ran great at ~5800 feet.  It was geared tall enough to run 90 MPH and it would still carry the front wheel under hard acceleration through first and second with no effort, just sitting on the seat.

A 250 four stroke will feel anemic at high altitude.  A properly set up 200 two stroke will still have power to spare, especially geared for trail riding.

[firffighter]

1 hour ago, TukTuk said:

I’m not an experienced rider and I’m over 50 so I’m not looking to try to wring every bit of power out of a 200 once we get to elevation, so I’m wondering if a 250 would be better. The dealer told me I should get a 300, but I’m not a big guy and think the 300 would be too much for me to handle. I will be adding a Rekluse

The 200 takes some experience in that you're on the clutch/throttle quite a bit. 6 years on the 200's and all of that at around 4500' elevation and weigh 220. The 200 has a big fun factor, especially in the flowing terrain, but it's a bike that keeps you busy and at higher elevation with steep terrain a 300 is hard to beat.

A 300 with a Rekluse is pretty much the go to and commonly used machine for PNW terrain for good reason. It's easy to ride and allows you to use the smooth linear power to climb. Sounds like your dealer has some good advice. 

[gullywasher]

To qualify, nearly all of my riding is above 7500 ft, and I own a 300 RE. I'm not a fast rider, nor am  I particularly skillful either.

I was curious about 200 and got to ride one at a demo day recently. I honestly don't get what all of the excitement is around this bike's displacement, unless people just appreciate having to develop the skill around working the clutch to keep the pipe dialed in. Don't get me wrong, it was a great bike, makes loads of power and was much easier to ride than the 125, IMO.

But the 300 is way easier to ride, slow  or fast. You can lug through technical  stuff, blast up steep climbs at 10K feet, pick your way through the trees, or lift the front end  without a second thought, all while botching your gear selection.  With a Rekluse, I would imagine the 300 is the ultimate twist and go mountain machine.

If you are avoiding the 300 because you are concerned about having too much power, I don't think I'd worry about that. It can be dialed in pretty mellow.  The power has yet to get me in trouble, and I would wager you are probably a better rider than I am.

[Gflo]

Either a 250 or 300 would work well.  With the big variations in altitude, a bike with efi would suit you well.  Either a 350 four stroke or a KTM two stroke with tpi.

[Back2Braaap]

21 minutes ago, Gflo said:

Either a 250 or 300 would work well.  With the big variations in altitude, a bike with efi would suit you well.  Either a 350 four stroke or a KTM two stroke with tpi.

At my age, more interested in a 2T being a lighter ride.

[Beta300REcat]

22 minutes ago, TukTuk said:

At my age, more interested in a 2T being a lighter ride.

40lbs lighter is A LOT. Especially when doing u-turns, etc.

[Baxter67]

The way you explain your riding, it seems the 300 xtrainer would be your best bet, the 100cc difference is not an issue, the 300 is detuned and mellow with plenty of grunt to keep you happy, also a low seat height. 

[redhurricane]

5 minutes ago, Baxter67 said:

The way you explain your riding, it seems the 300 xtrainer would be your best bet, the 100cc difference is not an issue, the 300 is detuned and mellow with plenty of grunt to keep you happy, also a low seat height. 

this.

 

Just because Barry did not review the forks favorably, does not mean the xtrainer is not a STELLAR machine for Colorado trial riding. @TukTuk I would encourage you to look at the xtrainer. Or come see ours. that bike replaced my wife's crf250x. 

[jmgatx]

 250 jetted well is probably more than adequate.  I have a 16 250 race with rk tek head and it feels great up to 10k jetted well. Over 10k it definitely suffers and you have to be more onthe clutch. Have a 300 race now as well and its not intimidating at all. Even with pv flush. Im 175 with gear ride mostly sea level and a competent rider. To be honest, sounds like an xtrainer would be perfect for you, but all an improvement over the 250x. Except the 200. Thats a sea level, tight woods ripper. 

[mrdsee]

One can also have their head cut(or cut a spare head) for high altitude work. When Eric Gorr does an engine he asks what altitude you ride at. This will make up for the loss of compression/power lost due to the lower baseline atmospheric pressures of higher altitudes. Jetting helps of course, but does not address the root issue of lower compression.

[firffighter]

49 minutes ago, redhurricane said:

this.

 

Just because Barry did not review the forks favorably, does not mean the xtrainer is not a STELLAR machine for Colorado trial riding. @TukTuk I would encourage you to look at the xtrainer. Or come see ours. that bike replaced my wife's crf250x. 

Totally agree. A lot of guys dismiss the xtrainer. It's an excellent bike for tackling difficult high-elevation terrain. It's designed for slow speeds but that motor will lug up anything easily. The lower height is a huge advantage in difficult terrain as well. 

[WRider995]

4 hours ago, FUHL said:

The 300 Low end torque will help more than hinder. I ride my 300 like a 4 stroke.

Me too.  Get the 300.  You can handle it, it just chugs, and very smooth.  

[wwguy]

I love my 2016 Xtrainer 300 and put 1400 Idaho singletrack trail miles on it last year.  But the stock suspension, especially the forks, was a real stinker for me.  If stock Xtrainer suspension was the only option for me I would have been on a different bike before the end of my first season on it.  I've since put a Fox RC2 shock and Marzocchi 48mm CC forks under it and it's my dream trail bike.

Just my two cents after 200+ hours on it.  As noted in the post above some others obviously feel the inexpensive Olle suspension is adequate for how they ride their Xtrainers. But it's definitely not a full enduro suspension.  Thus the $1400 price difference between the Xtrainer 300 and the 300RR. 

[redhurricane]

11 minutes ago, wwguy said:

I love my 2016 Xtrainer 300 and put 1400 Idaho singletrack trail miles on it last year.  But the stock suspension, especially the forks, was a real stinker for me.  If stock Xtrainer suspension was the only option for me I would have been on a different bike before the end of my first season on it.  I've since put a Fox RC2 shock and Marzocchi 48mm CC forks under it and it's my dream trail bike.

Just my two cents after 200+ hours on it.  As noted in the post above some others obviously feel the inexpensive Olle suspension is adequate for how they ride their Xtrainers. But it's definitely not a full enduro suspension.  Thus the $1400 price difference between the Xtrainer 300 and the 300RR. 

$550 spent on xtrainer suspension in lowering and valving/spring rate work and it's vastly better than stock. STILL lower in price than the 300RR or 200RR sprung for her weight and valved right.