Trip to the dealer- VERY disappointed in the 150R

[New_2_4Strokes]

Honda built these to be 85/supermini class MX race bikes. As such, what I care about is motor, suspension, brakes and clutch. Honda did well for the price in these areas. The rest of the stuff matters little as it appears good enough to get the job done and simple enough to maintain.

Also, these bikes are not intended to be hot-rodded XR's, but they could be super woods racers with the basic woods mods (when available) just like big MX bikes.

[dr_drz]

Until Honda has some competition for the CRF150R, why spend any more on it than they have to? Honda is a business, not an art gallery. If it weren't for the fit and finish of KTMs, we would still be getting bikes like, well, the CRF150R.... cheaply done.

I don't like that Honda skimped on the bike, because we have all come to expect better from them. However, one positive thing to be said for them, they got the bike out without worrying about the AMA rules. They actually got the bike to the market. In the end, that is a significant contribution.

Now, if someone else will just come out with a 150F, perhaps we can get on with improving the quality.

[250GT]

"And what's with the castings of the motor? It bears almost no similarities to the seemingly higher quality work on the larger 250's."

I agree with Skateparks that the CRF150R frame is less impressively finished than it might be. But apart from the use of ordinary aluminum where magnesium alloy is used on the larger Unicam engines, does anybody who has looked closely at the CRF150R engine find that its castings are lacking in quality in any way?

Though I am hardly an expert, I would say that of the three excellent Unicam engines, the CRF250 is the one with the least apparent quality. The CRF450 and the new CRF150 both use removable camshaft carriers, with very nice die-cast components. The valve cover in these designs more fully surrounds, as opposed to just covering, the valvegear, resulting in better access to the head's internals. The CRF250 design has the valve cover in the same plane as the top surface of the bottom half of the camshaft bearings, which are integral to the cylinder head casting. This was deliberately done by Honda to reduce the number of machining operations, as well as of parts, during manufacture (compared to the CRF450 head) and results in a tighter space in which there are many more sharp edges, burrs, and casting irregularities (like flash) than in the beautifully produced CRF450 cylinder head.

I doubt that these rougher-looking internals of the CRF250 head affect its performance at all. There is no question that it is a fine engine. But if we are discussing the "fit and finish" of mechanical parts, we are making what are essentially aesthetic judgements anyway. I haven't looked inside a CRF150r motor yet, but from the detailed photos Honda has already published (for example, look at the Japanese-only CRF150r Fact Book, at

http://www.honda.co.jp/factbook/motor/crf/200609/004.html ) it seems at least as nicely finished as a CRF450 motor, notwithstanding the lack of expensive magnesium for some of its more visible parts.

[New_2_4Strokes]

Right on, 250GT! Also, thanks for the link to the Honda Japan factbook. The text is a bear, but the drawings and photo really do support your point.

[RLH]

now we are talking about build quality, which is different than fit and finish. If we were talking about build quality from the beginning, I would have brought up how my riding budy has a KTM SXF250 with only a few hours on it and he has had to have the engine rebuilt twice already. That is after he gave me the long lecture about how KTM overbuilds ALL the engine internals and Honda doesn't. Pretty funny looking back on it. His bike was pretty trick out of the box (except they still use a steel frame, which saves a TON of money), but if it doesn't run, I don't care how trick it is or how overbuilt it is compared to a honda. Lets not forget, honda is one of the premier engine builders in the world and they pride themselves as engine builders rather than a car company or motorcycle company.

"And what's with the castings of the motor? It bears almost no similarities to the seemingly higher quality work on the larger 250's."

I agree with Skateparks that the CRF150R frame is less impressively finished than it might be. But apart from the use of ordinary aluminum where magnesium alloy is used on the larger Unicam engines, does anybody who has looked closely at the CRF150R engine find that its castings are lacking in quality in any way?

Though I am hardly an expert, I would say that of the three excellent Unicam engines, the CRF250 is the one with the least apparent quality. The CRF450 and the new CRF150 both use removable camshaft carriers, with very nice die-cast components. The valve cover in these designs more fully surrounds, as opposed to just covering, the valvegear, resulting in better access to the head's internals. The CRF250 design has the valve cover in the same plane as the top surface of the bottom half of the camshaft bearings, which are integral to the cylinder head casting. This was deliberately done by Honda to reduce the number of machining operations, as well as of parts, during manufacture (compared to the CRF450 head) and results in a tighter space in which there are many more sharp edges, burrs, and casting irregularities (like flash) than in the beautifully produced CRF450 cylinder head.

I doubt that these rougher-looking internals of the CRF250 head affect its performance at all. There is no question that it is a fine engine. But if we are discussing the "fit and finish" of mechanical parts, we are making what are essentially aesthetic judgements anyway. I haven't looked inside a CRF150r motor yet, but from the detailed photos Honda has already published (for example, look at the Japanese-only CRF150r Fact Book, at

http://www.honda.co.jp/factbook/motor/crf/200609/004.html ) it seems at least as nicely finished as a CRF450 motor, notwithstanding the lack of expensive magnesium for some of its more visible parts.

[250GT]

Skateparks wrote: "I was appauled by the fit and finish of the bike compared to the 250R and X bikes..."

I wonder whether the plain surface of the CRF150R valve cover, which in addition to not being magnesium, is also not painted, added to Skatepark's disappointment. To support my own view that the CRF150R engine is of high quality, here are some additional links to images of its internals from Honda:

http://www.hondanews.com/CatID7746?mid=2006091264979&mime=JPG

http://www.hondanews.com/CatID7746?mid=2006091264990&mime=JPG

The expression "built like a Swiss watch" comes to mind.

[250GT]

RLH is exactly right when he wrote: "Lets not forget, honda is one of the premier engine builders in the world and they pride themselves as engine builders rather than a car company or motorcycle company."

RLH, when you say "overbuilt" do you mean "overengineered" in the sense of a mechanical device being made more robust (and thus heavy) than is necessary, or do you mean overcomplicated?

[Skateparks]

Again, I say that I am a HUGE Honda fan and have been since the 70's. I would also argue that the actual quality of the engineered parts (i/e motors, trans, suspesion) are top notch all the way and for the most part NOT up-staged by KTM or anyone else and I'm sure the 150R is no exception. Although KTM does provide a better LOOKING package (I realize it has nothing to do with performance) and I feel it more appealing on the dealer floor. That's where it ends. By the time I get my bikes home and get all of my favorite goods on it such as skid plates, handguards, etc) they all fall pretty equally in to my heart.

That being said, yes my post was in reaction to the most "juvinile" of matters- aesthetics. I say it again, I was disappointed with the fit and finish and overall appearance of the bike, a fact with which most have agreed.

I will, however, take a full stance on the e-start issue. there is NO reason (none of which I am aware anyway) that the new block could not at least have the starter mount forged in for implementation as an option at a later date. If that was the case I would still be displeased with the bike but I would be bitching as an owner....

[Jrocket]

I will, however, take a full stance on the e-start issue. there is NO reason (none of which I am aware anyway) that the new block could not at least have the starter mount forged in for implementation as an option at a later date. If that was the case I would still be displeased with the bike but I would be bitching as an owner....

Not a reason but just food for thought.The crf is intended for racing more than trail riding or for beginners.The bike is heavy enough already,the option of e-start would be nice but does a race inspired bike really need one? Cant be compared to the 250x-450x either,those are bikes capable of being street legalized and also for adults.Why would they need to offer e-start on their race bike if the crf150F has it already and is more beginner,trail rider friendly?

[coeshow]

Skateparks,

I checked out the CRF150R's at my local dealer and felt as you do about the "quality" of some of the items as well. For $4500 and knowing Honda's typical quality, it did seem a bit "cheap" and out of the ordinary.

That being said, if Honda does have plans for an e-start for this bike (Personally, I doubt it) the entire assembly could be done into the left side case as Honda did on the CRF230.

[Skateparks]

Not a reason but just food for thought.The crf is intended for racing more than trail riding or for beginners.The bike is heavy enough already,the option of e-start would be nice but does a race inspired bike really need one? Cant be compared to the 250x-450x either,those are bikes capable of being street legalized and also for adults.Why would they need to offer e-start on their race bike if the crf150F has it already and is more beginner,trail rider friendly?

I really feel that e-start on 4 strokes is important. These bikes don't start like an 85cc 2t, especially in the middle of a moto when the bike goes down in a corner and stalls. Better yet, make that 2 bikes that go down at the same time, in the same corner. When the bikes get back upright, the bike with the button will be 100 yards or more ahead, if the other bike starts within a kick or two. The intended riders of these bikes are 80-120 pounds, drmatically limiting their ability to kick a 4t.

Then consider the trail bike scenario. E-start is even more important there as many situations make it difficult to even get to the kick start. I've gone down several times in deep mud (conceled logs or rocks, never my fault) where we have joked that the kicker was below water!!! Hill climb disasters are second on the list and third would be the problems with starting in general after a crash when the fuel dumps out of the carb. These scenarioes, along with others, are my votes for the button!!! If weight is an issue, which I understand, take it off and kick away!!!

[Jrocket]

I agree to an extent.The e-starts belong on most 4 strokes,but not on a race bike.The manufactures have made bikes for different types of riding.If a manufacture built "a" bike for all instead of making different types of bikes to suit everyone,that manufacture would be put out of buisness.The crf150r is a race bike that was built to replace another race bike.I doubt you will ever see an e-start on a race intended bike,especially a mini.You cant compare trail bikes and race bikes alike.

[hunt1moore]

I agree to an extent.The e-starts belong on most 4 strokes,but not on a race bike.The manufactures have made bikes for different types of riding.If a manufacture built "a" bike for all instead of making different types of bikes to suit everyone,that manufacture would be put out of buisness.The crf150r is a race bike that was built to replace another race bike.I doubt you will ever see an e-start on a race intended bike,especially a mini.You cant compare trail bikes and race bikes alike.

KTM's premire bike SXF 450 has e-start for '07. Husqvarna put e-start on their entire '05 line-up including the MX bikes. The public wasn't ready so they removed it from their MX line in '06. All their TE modles come with it and are DOT approved for plates and are 100% racing bikes. Husky offers the e-start for all models including the TC (mx version).

I have installed it on my TC 510 and consider it a secret weapon on the track.

Husky will put it back on as a stock item in '08 or '09. It is unfortunate that the Japanese companies have to do it before the public completely accepts it.

However, I understand that we will see fuel injection and e-start from Japan soon.

[smr96]

Just look at how long it took the BIG 4 to start putting decent bars on their BIG bike's! As of now Honda has nothing to compete with its new offering, when they do they'll have thing's to improve on. SMART.

[RLH]

Just got the bike. While I was at the dealer I was comparing the CRF to a KX85. Talk about cheap, look at the frame tubing, diameter and welds on the 2 bikes. night and day. The CRF looks very impressive compared to the KX.

[Skateparks]

Now THAT I agree with.

[socalxr]

I already know two guys that have sold their 150r's.

[RLH]

I already know two guys that have sold their 150r's.

which is supposed to tell us what???

[westladog]

Yeah..those two guys also weigh 200lbs each too....

which is supposed to tell us what???

[westladog]

I'll tell that the 150F would win.

My wife and I rides at the same level. When either one of us rides the 150R against the KX100, the 150R always win. I used to think the KX100 was the best mini bike until I rode this 150F today. The powerband is awesome.

Just wait and see. As more people ride this bike, they will abandon their mini 2-strokes (even the 105SX!).

Skateparks,

I hope you don't mind, but I think I might have to steal your quote, "Is it possible to have an opinion without . . ." I think that's the brightest comment I've read on-line in a really long time.

Oh. Since I'm on your "disappointed in the 150R," I might as well make at least one comment.

I'm positive it's the CR85 chassis. That's fine. I still can't believe it could be half as fast as a CR85. It sure would be nice to have a shootout.

CR85 vs. CRF150 vs. BBR175 (CRF150F conversion).

Who would win? That's what I want to know.