400 or 426

Hey guys, I was wondering if the 400 is still a good bet or should I be looking at the newer technology of the 426/250f? I am also debating between the 426/250f and in saying that should I be looking at the WR 400? I live in Colorado and will be riding a little of everything, track, mountain trails, woods and so on. Thanks guys for any advice.

I've got a WR4 that handles pretty much everything quite easily. I've left the timing (WR) though because I rode another WR4 with YZ timing and it was way too snappy-made it harder to ride. A YZ426 would be energy-sapping to trail ride, unless the trail is open. I've ridden a YZ250F and it's much less energy-sapping to ride because it lacks power compared to a 426. You'd need to gear it up though to space the gears out.

The only feature of the later YZ/WR's that is notably better is the forks, they lack the spike of the 98-00 models and are more progressive in the action.

My $.04...

My '01 WR426 absolutley loves every aspect of Colorado that I throw at it. Berthoud tracks, Rockies rocky trails, the woodiest of tight woods single track, IT LOVES IT. Going from 6,000 to 14,000 feet, no problem.

As far as a decision between 250, 400, or 426....... doesn't seem like you can go wrong with any of them. Keep in mind, that for us at elevation, we automatically are handycaped do to the thinner air. I can say that the additional CC's up in altitude help to off set this minor problem. If you think that your going to require seemingly unlimited power, even if you need to grow into it, go with the bigger bike for sure. But hey, the 250F is no slouch either, just be honest with yourself on how demanding your going to be with your bike....... don't suppose any of this helps, sorry.


Dodger :):D

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