KLX300 v.s. WR250

<FORM METHOD=POST ACTION="http://www.thumpertalk.com/forum/dopoll.php"><INPUT TYPE=HIDDEN NAME="pollname" VALUE="1098053631Tybmx2006">

KLX300 v.s. WR250

<input type="radio" name="option" value="1" />KLX300

<input type="radio" name="option" value="2" />WR250

<INPUT TYPE=Submit NAME=Submit VALUE="Submit vote" class="buttons"></form>

try to post a reason why you like the KLX or the WR. thanks :cry:

the klx has much more low end power. you have to ride the wr like a two stroke to get power out of it. plus the wr has a high center of gravity. im saying this as of personal experience as my friend owns a modded wr. ill take my klx any day. :cry:

There was a recent thread in this forum that covered this quite a bit. Do a search for WR and KLX and you should be able to find it. Good luck.

PS - get the KLX and have the suspension redone, put on on pumper and aftermarket exhaust and laugh at the WR riders. :cry: :cry:

what is from with the suspension? oh, by the way, whats a pumper? :cry:

what is from with the suspension?

??? :cry: :cry:

"Pumper". Short for Pumper Carb. ie: Mikuni 33mm - better for tight slow stuff especially if you have a stock bore 300, Mikuni 36mm - better for wide open stuff or if you have a big bore, Keihen (sp?) FCR35mm - finiky to tune, but excellent all around pumper carb.

Thanks, thats good to know. :cry:

Does anybody know why nobody in the wr forum is posting to my post. I asked why they like the wr250, and no response, is there a reason to this? Is the WR that bad of a bike? :cry:

lol .... I doubt that it is anything like that, be patient and you might hear back.

KLX's rock anyway :cry:

Does anybody know why nobody in the wr forum is posting to my post. I asked why they like the wr250, and no response, is there a reason to this? Is the WR that bad of a bike?

List several specifics you want to know and start a post with one of them. If you've been on the board long enough, most of them have answered these questions a lot and they don't want an open ended question. A specific question will get you answers/opinions depending on when you submit it (weekends the guys ride) and who's on the board. WR riders love their bikes.

My 02 cents- If you ride an area where you can burn up the valves with some wide open area, the WR is more usable for high speed use with mods than the KLX. Where we ride, I can turn a corner, put the front wheel on a greasy hill, slip the clutch and chug it in 2nd or 3rd gear. Much better low end. On loose hills demanding low end grunt and and traction, the WR will dig a hole, even with clutch work. My WR friends look ahead and plan for a little runway. The WR250 does not have the flywheel effect for low rpm in stock form. They do much better in the dry conditions in our area than when its wet, even with mud studs. What are your riding conditions and what are your skills? These are key questions for picking a bike.

They are both good bikes, it depends on the pilot and the environment he's in.

thanks, that helped a lot :cry:

I bet if we all go over to the WR forum and post that the KLX is a great bike you'll get some action! :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

yea, there will deffintely will be some action. :cry: :cry:

I doubt that it is anything like that, likely that this forum is perhaps frequented more by regulars. be patient and you might hear back.

just a datapoint, but there are 113,000 more posts in the YZF/WR250F forum as compared to the KLX300 forum, and 16,000 more threads. i'm pretty sure that there are enough "regulars" in the quarter liter BLUE forum. :cry:

the problem is, as was noted in this thread, that the original poster started a poll without providing any input on riding ability, riding conditions, bike budget, mechanical aptitude, race/non-race riding, needs, wants, favorite color, etc etc etc.

and without that info this is just another "Ford or Chevy?" conversation. to simply create a thread requiring a binary decision and then expect deep introspective into the merits of each bike was a bit naive. this is primarily a function of experience -- things look black and white to kids but as you get older you realize how much gray is out there.

anyway, no one in the YZF/WRF forum was ignoring the original poster. we just couldn't figure out what exactly was wanted. for that matter we still don't know. is the WRF a better bike than the KLX? everyone on the WRF board thinks so. but everyone on the KLX board thinks opposite. is anyone surprised by these results?

the fact is no one on the internet can tell you what bike is right (or "better") for YOU. you'll need to ride a friends bike, or bum a ride off of someone at the local trails/track. this is the only way to understand what you are buying.

but anyway, WRF's are so very much better. :cry:

jim aka the wrooster

'01 wr250f

Ty, this is the guy you need to get info from. He rides the WR in enduros- if that's your goal. If your are interested in mods to fit a WR to your type of riding, Jim can help.

The WR was my first choice for a new bike, but it wasn't green sticker and I wanted something I could ride all year. I then looked at my buddy's CRF250X, which I really was impressed with the way it handle and not to mention the "magic button". The CRF forum and all of the talk about the valve problems scared me off from buying the CRF.

I then started reading about the KLX300R and got a chance to ride one. As I said in an earlier post "WHAT A FREAKING AWSOME BIKE".

I have been racing since I was six, but I have been on a ten year hiatus. So, for my skill level and budget, the KLX is a perfect bike that gives me room to grow as I get back into the sport.

They are both great bikes, but I have no regrets not getting the WR.

I think Jim is trying to get you to give him more details about what you really want in a bike so he can give you a reasonable answer.

The KLX300 was a great bike when it first came out 10 years ago. The problem is that it hasn't been improved and is showing it's age. They run pretty decent, are reliable and handle well and have a low seat height. The suspension is fairly soft for aggressive riding and the low seat height also means less ground clearance. You will bottom the bike on obstacles that the WR will clear. The really big thing about these bikes is you can pick them up cheap. A used one in good condition can be had for $2500 or so. My dad's buddy is on his second one and he can absolutely rail on the thing. His other buddy is a beginner/intermediate and also rides one and has no problems riding difficult areas and keeping up with the group. They have been really reliable but you do need to take them somewhat apart and use loctite on the bolts. Othewise, you'll lose plastic and the overflow tank.

The WR is as modern as you are going to get. Fully adjustable suspension, high revving, titanium valved 4-stroke with a pumper carb. Opened up, they run pretty damned good and the suspension and chassis are up to the task of everything from play riding to enduro's. Even occasional trips to the motocross track are reasonable with the bike. Basically, you can run as hard as you are willing and they are VERY reliable. The downside for me with the WR's is they are a little top heavy and have a tall seat and I'm short so it was a bigger problem for me than others. They will cost you more than the KLX, used or new and hold their value pretty well.

For me, between the 2, I'd take the WR hands down. Opened up it's faster, handles great, the suspension is worlds better and can really be pushed at speed.

How old, how tall, how much to you weigh, what are you looking to spend, what type of terrain do you ride and what level rider are you?

The KLX300 was a great bike when it first came out 10 years ago.

-- Actually the KLX had a major upgrade (to 300cc) about eight years ago. ('97)

-- Actually the KLX had a major upgrade (to 300cc) about eight years ago. ('97)

:cry: :cry: :cry: Sorry, I remember the KLX250's and the jump to 300cc was a big step but the chassis didn't get much updating. I still stand by what I've written above, what was good a decade ago is dated today. However, for the money, they are a great bike.

I've got time on both of these bikes and if you ride fast the WR is a much better bike. My dad also has a 04' CRF250X and it's better for fast riding than the KLX as well.

Like I said before - maybe it was another thread - it all depends on where you ride and what type of rider you are. If you're riding tight twisty technical rocky uphill areas, the KLX will be cruising right up while the WR's will be boiling over and spinnning holes. (Been there done that) That is unless they have an A rider on them that can keep the momentum up thru the nasty stuff. In the tight twisties, the KLX will outshine the WR. Now, most serious riders - WR riders included will get the suspension reworked for their weight, riding style, etc. Once that is done the difference between rides is much less pronounced. You can't compare the WR to a stock or even semi stock KLX. When the mags test the WR against it's competion, they always replace the exhaust or at least unplug it because it won't compete with the competition with the stock exhaust on it. As soon as someone buys a WR they usually cut the grey wire, etc, etc, to basically make it a YZ with lights. On the KLX, you've got to unplug the bike, work on the suspension and get a jetting kit in the carb. Then, the bikes are pretty close. Different, but closer. Put a pumper on the KLX and the extra cc's of the KLX push it out ahead IMO. Now don't forget, we're talking modded here. It's all good. The WR is a great bike, just different.

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