Dirt Bike magazine test on WR450

I wonder what those guys have been smoke'n, they say you can feel the sub frame through the seat, are they crazy or am I? I weigh 200lbs. and I've bottomed it out pretty hard and I don't feel a thing. I've even tried to push my thumbs down hard enough to feel the base and I can't. I think its pretty comfortable and about the right density. They also say to mount Pro Tapers you have to spend $80.00 bucks for an adaptor, Rocky Mountain MC sells them for $35.00 bucks. Other than that I thought the test was pretty good.

I think the seat is better than the one on my 02 WR250. No complaints from me.

They have to bitch about something. LOL. :)

I thought the results they posted were pretty harsh. Implying that the WR's reign as the best woods bike will soon be over by 2004 when Honda brings out their bikes, and stating that the WR is still 6 lbs heavier than the KTM. They also made it seem like the the bike had a problem because you couldn't use the new decompression cam on older bikes. That was a really lame gripe imo. It had nothing to do with the 03 WR whatsoever as far as performance. I could have seen if it was purely about going to YZ timing, but it wasn't.

The only other complaint which I've read elsewhere was about the handling compared to last years 426. Probably a power thing, although I'm sure the fact that they created a new frame with more flex might have something to do with it.

I've learned more in 2 yrs. on thumpertalk, than i have in almost 30 yrs. reading dirt bike. :)

That is no joke.

I think we forget (myself included) The magazines are a money making thing. They have to. They do this by entertaining us.

Imagine what a person would own if they listened to everything the magazines had to say.

I will start the list.

20 inch front tire

17 inch rear (from 20 years ago)

a Can-Am (from 30 years)

If they gave the shootout results, you would not need to buy next months issue. I also think the internet is hurting the magazines. Anyone who reads Thumpertalk knew the inns and outs of the WR 450 three months ago.

My dad had a 1980 Can-Am! The local dealer gave it to him to ride for a season and it was a great bike. He was consistently in the top 10 in the desert that year. I will admit though...it was ugly. Man I miss Preston Petty fenders! :):D

That really was a lame gripe to say Yamaha took a step backwards because you can't exchange parts with older models. I've never heard any of the magazines say that about any new model before, in fact the more I think about it the dumber it sounds, think I'll send a letter off to them.

Is the review on line? Yamaha must not have bought enough ads this month. They do not mention that it has better suspension etc. They say silly things that do not matter. They do this with all the bikes. I am curious as to what dirt rider will say. I have a 2000 YZ 426 and feel this is a better bike. I will take 6 punds of linkage for the better hanling it provides anyday. O.S I here KTM might go back to a linkage? Is that just a rumor? ---Mike

This is there old 400 specs. 265 DRY!! WR450 261 wet with e-start. I will take it!



* DOHC liquid-cooled 5-valve

* Electric sensors & gadgets everywhere

* New steering geometry

* Price: $5899

* Dry weight: 265 lb.


* Excellent top end power

* Great suspension

* Super stable at speed


* Sleepy low-end power

* Seat position too far back

* goofy throttle stop is standard

* Stock pipe is too loud or too quiet

Hey RCannon,

But I really like my 20 inch front tire. Yea, I admit the Dirt Rider article did push me over the edge to try it.

your right,I wonder where where they get there info? I have read many things in the past that are very misleading ! like the old saying goes dont believe everything you here!or read! they say 262 dry.yamahas web site says 245 whats up?? has anybody actually weighed a wr??

The Oct 2000 issue of Dirtbike has a writeup on it, and they mentioned LaRocco, Albertyn, and Lamson using this as their prefered choice (at least in 2000). The dirtbike staff said they could carve tighter lines with more speed and confidence. They also say "So, it's an aquired taste. The benefits of the 20-inch front end don't jump out and bite you until you start slamming every corner like Steve Lamson and Mike LaRocco. Then, you'll never want the 21 again."

So what does a non editorial type think?

Oh, and speaking of lame future theories for dirt bikes, how about the 79 CR125 with that gigantic 23 inch hoop? Talk about ridiculous. Good thing that died the same year.

they say 262 dry.yamahas web site says 245

I'm with Dirt Bike all the way on that one. Mfg claimed weights are notoriously unreliable. Maybe they weigh the all parts with no tires, grips....

That means NO fluids! AT ALL!!! No fork oil, shock oil, engine oil, or grease. No radiator fluids or brake fluids. And no gas. I don't know what the weights of all these fluids are, but I'm sure it could account for at least 15 lbs minus gas.

Personally, I wouldn't care if these bikes claimed to weigh 15 lbs more than you expected IF, they were equipped some better enduro ready gear. Like full skid plates, handguards, and a nice electronic odo with a guard. Maybe even a steering damper with a nice set of adjustable bar mounts and 1-1/8" bars. Maybe an option list would be nice. It is a 6k to 7k purchase.

I weight my 450 last night with a skid plate,bark busters and a GYP exhaust insert with a full tank of gas. 276 lbs.

Dry weight is all fluids and no gas (I didn't make it up), a standard by all magazines.... My WR450 out of the crate weighed exactly 262 (I posted the photo with my super-Deluxe digital scale). Since then I've taken off the lights and kickstand and replaced the pipe with a Ti-4. Im now at 254.... Not too shabby............

Ready to run weight is all fluids minus fuel(as gas is the one liquid which will vary throughout use). Manufacturers dry weight figures are all the components minus any and all fluids. I've also heard dry weight figures that include certain fluids, but in reality, the minute you add any liquid to any figure, you can't really call it a "dry weight". Magazine guys aren't going to go through all the effort to drain fluids for an article, nor can they. Dirtbike mag actually doesn't say 'dry weight" any more. They use the terms "running weight with no fuel".

Thanks MaicoFred. Just from the posts here and what my friends own:

400 XR 280 lbs. My KLX has the same weight. A friend has a KTM 400 EXC, that is also within a pound or two.

Since I start at the truck with a full tank of fuel, that's what I call bike weight. Unless the new Honda takes a big drop most of the big (and some of the small) bikes are still up there.

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