Feb '10 MXA

[krony506]

I bought the 2010 CRF250 this year based on early reviews and a couple guys on thumpertalk had them. All the early reviews were very positive but then all of a sudden this bike had more problems than you could shake a stick at. I am still very happy I bought this bike but I just don't trust the magazines anymore. I listen to the guys on here way more.

[Into the sunset]

From what I understand MXA has testers of every different skill level that race the bikes week after week for months. I have read articles where they weren't kind to a specific bike and they aren't afraid to say so. The fact that they said that the 2008 CRF 450 would have won their 2009 Shootout hands down speaks volumes about them not being afriad to state their opinion. They try to give the reader a balanced approach to the current bikes in stock form for the sole purpose of racing MX. These a very narrow parameters. I would think that if we were able to ride each bike for numerous motos for several weeks, we could make a decent judgement. I'd have to say that won't happen for 99% of us. There are many other factors to consider as well and that includes our own abilities. The only person that make the decision about the right bike for you is you.

I believe MXA gives the good and bad and the reader should decide on what's best for their purpose.

[highmarker]

The other magazines also have testers of differing skill level and race the bikes at different tracks, and often stack the results different. Goes to show that ALL the bikes are good enough to win when they "fit" the rider on them. The one's consistently ay the bottom may be just a couple hunderd buks in mods from being the "right bike".

[Fast Forward]

One of the most interesting things I’ve seen in a 450 shootout (I can’t remember which one, it was in the last two years) was average lap times each bike produced by the different skill levels of the testers (in that shootout the KTM had the fastest average lap times however it didn’t win the shootout). If all the bikes are left stock, and simple set up and adjustments are made, and one bike is capable of producing faster lap times on average, that bike should be the winner in my mind. If a bikes purpose is to go around a motocross track faster than it’s competitor then measure that! Of course this method would still be packed with uncontrollable and flawed variables (i.e. track conditions/type, rider fatigue, etc) and wouldn’t necessarily identify the best bike from other perspectives (i.e. price, reliability, etc) but it would provide some insight into which bike had the highest potential of getting a rider around the track the fastest if left stock (I’m sure there are a large % of riders out there that ride stock machines).

I don’t personally take any shootout to heart and tend to buy what I want, not what shootout testers like. IMO all the new bikes are so good that the rider skills are the only limiting factor in determining which bike can win races. However, if a rider turns laps on bike A, B, C, and D and is consistently turning faster lap times on bike B, and then several other riders find they consistently turn faster lap times on bike B, it’s a decent conclusion that bike B has the best combination for those specific test parameters to enable riders to ride their fastest.

[ace402]

One of the most interesting things I’ve seen in a 450 shootout (I can’t remember which one, it was in the last two years) was average lap times each bike produced by the different skill levels of the testers (in that shootout the KTM had the fastest average lap times however it didn’t win the shootout). If all the bikes are left stock, and simple set up and adjustments are made, and one bike is capable of producing faster lap times on average, that bike should be the winner in my mind.

I agree for the most part. It was either MXA or Transworld, I don't remember...but anyway they ranked the YZ250F last in their shootout even though a few of their riders produced their fastest lap times on it. It was definately at least two out of the five riders but it may have been three. Either way they ranked the bike last that 40%-60% of their riders went the fastest on...

[Dr.Crankenstien]

The other magazines also have testers of differing skill level and race the bikes at different tracks, and often stack the results different. Goes to show that ALL the bikes are good enough to win when they "fit" the rider on them. The one's consistently ay the bottom may be just a couple hunderd buks in mods from being the "right bike".

Correcta mundo!

[racerxx276]

. Its no secret that Jody like's the ktm...and he's God at MXA.I'm not surprised it won.

I owned the 2010 KTM 450SX and rode it for a month before selling it to get the YZ.

It IS a great bike. Great motor, awesome brakes and good handling. But it felt heavy and slow handling compared to the YZ. If your 6'2" 230 lbs get the KTM ,its made for you! Its the ultimate play bike, however when it comes to pure MX I'm sooo happy to be on the YZ. Stock vs stock they are pretty close, but the YZ has a lot more potential than the KTM does...

I'm confused with those folks that are concerned with "things that can go wrong"?

Good... stay away from the YZ.. all the more for me!

Have a great Christmas!

[nephic]

losts of greatinput on here. The comment about TWMX is correct in that their 250f test had the majority of riders throwing down their best avereage lap times on the Yamaha, but still ranked it last...ya...too much low end....er something. And a few griped about the suspension...also amusing to me. In fact, if you go through the last few years and look at MXA 450 shootout winners, you should probably be buying a 2007 YZ450f. Come to think of it, that's not bad advice.

[twenty34]

That fact that KTM beat EFI bikes speaks volumes. It can only get better once they have EFI as well.

Having been on these bikes, the KTM turns better overall. Not that the YZ doesn't turn, but the KTM has a "planted" factor that can't be matched. After coming off the new YZ, I'd much prefer the KTM. The powerband is superior over the YZ as well. Not sure how they messed that up after all the talk of 3 years of testing by Yamaha and the vibration on the YZ is very annoying as was mentioned somewhere here as well.

But in the end, if you are a talented rider, it really won't make a hill of beans what you ride as you'll stil be fast, regardless.

[AndyM1022]

I agree for the most part. It was either MXA or Transworld, I don't remember...but anyway they ranked the YZ250F last in their shootout even though a few of their riders produced their fastest lap times on it. It was definately at least two out of the five riders but it may have been three. Either way they ranked the bike last that 40%-60% of their riders went the fastest on...

I know Dirt Rider had lap times in there 2009 450 shootout. KTM was the quickest in both the pros and novice/int.

[no air charlie]

You may be living in the past. I feel there are too many new changes to the YZ and I would tend to think the YZ might have too many things that can go wrong in comparison. You may have had something you didn't like in a particular year, but how does that related to 2010? Do you feel they haven't progressed like any bike maker for that matter? From what I understand, MXA has liked the YZ in the past, but didn't commit to a raving review this time, perhaps this tells you something?

You won't buy a new 2010 yz 450f because of all the changes? Is this because you bought an all new 09 Honda and got burned? Just curious if you also owned a 97 CR 250?

[highmarker]

There has always been logic to not being a 1st year guinea pig for the manufactures, maybe it's not the case with the new yama? and maybe it's not SOP for magazine to shy away because of it? but it still is a consideration. Learned the lesson myself a couple times and remain gun shy. If I was a competitive racer with money or points on the line, then I'd be all over it if it looked to gain an advantage.

Edited December 25, 2009 by highmarker

[no air charlie]

Yep, I have also been burned by the all new bike. Remember the 1990 KX 250? First perimeter frame production bike and I HAD to have one. While I didn't have any mechanical issues with the bike, it was not a very good cornering bike.

I just find it interesting that someone who would buy a completely redesigned 09 CRF 450, would make a statement about not buying an 10 YZF because its completely redesigned.

[ReedRulz]

That fact that KTM beat EFI bikes speaks volumes. It can only get better once they have EFI as well.

Having been on these bikes, the KTM turns better overall. Not that the YZ doesn't turn, but the KTM has a "planted" factor that can't be matched. After coming off the new YZ, I'd much prefer the KTM. The powerband is superior over the YZ as well. Not sure how they messed that up after all the talk of 3 years of testing by Yamaha and the vibration on the YZ is very annoying as was mentioned somewhere here as well.

But in the end, if you are a talented rider, it really won't make a hill of beans what you ride as you'll stil be fast, regardless.

It sounds to me like RICKK is just a Yamaha hater. Well I'm a Yamaha lover and probably always will be. Lets just wait a couple weeks and see how that better handling and more powerful KTM does against the Yamaha in SX.

[twenty34]

Yep, I have also been burned by the all new bike. Remember the 1990 KX 250? First perimeter frame production bike and I HAD to have one. While I didn't have any mechanical issues with the bike, it was not a very good cornering bike.

I just find it interesting that someone who would buy a completely redesigned 09 CRF 450, would make a statement about not buying an 10 YZF because its completely redesigned.

I guess I find it just as interesting that you point out the 1990 KX 250 as not being a good bike, yet it had some new bells and whistles so you had to have it? How does that differ than the 2010 YZ? Are you suggesting this bike is perfect in it's current form?

As for the 09 Honda, if you ever rode it, you wouldn't feel so confident the new YZ is the best bike to ever role off the showroom floor. Moreover, the 09 Honda is still 11 lbs lighter than the 2010 YZ. Now there's progress! I still have my Honda and frankly, there's a list of things that I find more appealing than the new YZ having been on both. Not suggesting it's perfect as there's a balance issue for some of us lighter riders, but otherwise, it's been one of the best bikes I've ever had.

[twenty34]

It sounds to me like RICKK is just a Yamaha hater. Well I'm a Yamaha lover and probably always will be. Lets just wait a couple weeks and see how that better handling and more powerful KTM does against the Yamaha in SX.?

Right. And if Bubba switched to KTM tomorrow he wouldn't win the SX title either I suppose.

BTW: Not sure how you can say I hate Yamaha. I came from a YZ and loved it, other than the fact that it didn't turn. Still one of the best suspended bikes I've owned.

[kotaro]

I still want the Yami YZ450F and the KX450F more than any high-fallutin' Keep-Throwing-Money's out there!

In the trails out here, name 'em 525EXC's, 450EXC, 505SX ---- they all run hot when the going gets tough and in super slippery conditions, batteries easily discharging.... pffftttt! And they bloody Kost-Too-Much never! ?

The Jap bikes, even the lowly air-cooled Yami DT125's, are the most bullet-proof of 'em all, count in even Honda's CRF450X! ?

I like the idea that Yami takes bold innovative risk and thereby setting the standards for the long-haul yet once again for MX bikes

[ReedRulz]

Right. And if Bubba switched to KTM tomorrow he wouldn't win the SX title either I suppose.

BTW: Not sure how you can say I hate Yamaha. I came from a YZ and loved it, other than the fact that it didn't turn. Still one of the best suspended bikes I've owned.

Im not just talking about Stewart Im talking about all the Yamaha riders.

[ReedRulz]

Right. And if Bubba switched to KTM tomorrow he wouldn't win the SX title either I suppose.

BTW: Not sure how you can say I hate Yamaha. I came from a YZ and loved it, other than the fact that it didn't turn. Still one of the best suspended bikes I've owned.

How did switching to KTM work out for McGrath?

[no air charlie]

I guess I find it just as interesting that you point out the 1990 KX 250 as not being a good bike, yet it had some new bells and whistles so you had to have it? How does that differ than the 2010 YZ? Are you suggesting this bike is perfect in it's current form?

As for the 09 Honda, if you ever rode it, you wouldn't feel so confident the new YZ is the best bike to ever role off the showroom floor. Moreover, the 09 Honda is still 11 lbs lighter than the 2010 YZ. Now there's progress! I still have my Honda and frankly, there's a list of things that I find more appealing than the new YZ having been on both. Not suggesting it's perfect as there's a balance issue for some of us lighter riders, but otherwise, it's been one of the best bikes I've ever had.

Yep, had to have that 1990 KX 250 and came very close to putting a deposit on an 09 Honda when the photos came out. Luckily I waited. Personally, I consider the 09 Honda the 97 CR 250 of this decade or the 1990 KX 250 from the 90s. Lots of flash but a step backwards in actual performance. (Actually that KX 250 felt like an 09 CRF, had a stinkbug stance and the front end would wash out with out warning.)

As for the YZF, it will be 3 months before the snow melts and I will even have a remote chance of riding one. I have no idea of how "perfect" it is. But the fact that the 09 Honda had issues doesn't mean the YZF will.

Personally, I bought a leftover 08 Honda in Oct. I wanted to get one before all the 08s were gone. However, if I buy a 2010, the YZF is at the top of my list.

Did you own a 97 CR 250?