150 sx vs 150 xc

[Byte]

what differences exist between these 2 bikes in terms of:

- internal gearing (gbox)

- frame

- hp

- suspension

- torque

- mid range and top end performance

i have read elsewhere: "If you will just be doing some track and some trail riding go for the XC model rather than the SX model. The XC will work well on track or trails, the SX will not work all that well on trails. Also if you go the XC route I would at least consider the 250 2 stroke XC-W. The power is a little more mellow than the SX version and will have far better torque for trail riding than the 150. So if you plan to race MX get a 150SX and if you plan to ride trails get the 150 XC."

and this... "The 150 XC has a higher fourth, fifth and sixth gear compared to its moto-focused 150 SX sibling. KTM lowered the overall ratio with the final-drive gearing, so first will work in tricky, tight situations and the gaps are never far apart. Internally the ratios for fourth, fifth and sixth have all been stretched so the bike has just a bit more legs than an SX would have. Of course, the clutch is the excellent Brembo hydraulic unit with simple adjustability and great control. This setup will easily do MX duty, and it has legs for long straights in GPs or fire roads, but you still have to rev it. The XC pulls better into the top-end than I remember the SX doing, meaning you can let the gears all work a little longer-always good on a small-bore two-stroke."

I understand the SX is dedicated for MX and the XC is suited for MX and trails but what physical changes to each bike exist to make them this way?

How is the SX better suited to MX than the XC?

I am keen to spend time on the mx track (but not race) with a small dash of ST work as a fun alternative to riding longer heavier trails on my 09 300 (keeper).

I accept that i need to respring/revalve my suspension and gear sprocket ratio to suit my 220lb frame on either 150.

btw, I am not int. in the 200 or 125.....

Byte

Edited March 3, 2010 by Byte

[Byte]

those of you ride a 150 - what are your thoughts?

byte

[MrBlahh]

both have reliability issues so nobody I know has really tried them, they all go for the 200 or 250's, I'm pissed they dropped the 200xc, because that's the bike I like

the suspension is also noticeably different, one is valved for mx, and one for offroad/light jumping, that's a huge difference in how they handle

[Byte]

thanks - is reliability still an issue on 2009 + bikes on these ones?

byte

[657pinkKTM]

No....They fixed the exploding piston problem. And I believe that if it does happen...theres a recall. But when I asked about a recall when I bought my bike, they gave me a blank stare. I was sure I read about it online. Sigh.

There is no difference between the 2 bikes, except the gearing.

[Byte]

thanks kiwi!

reading your signature - you have the sx (correct)?

How do u find the low end torque (I hear it is not as strong as the yz125)...?

How do u think it performs compared to the 200xc or xcw?

If low, how can you increase the low end torque and not compromise mid/top end?

Byte

[TommyB 754]

thanks kiwi!

reading your signature - you have the sx (correct)?

How do u find the low end torque (I hear it is not as strong as the yz125)...?

How do u think it performs compared to the 200xc or xcw?

If low, how can you increase the low end torque and not compromise mid/top end?

Byte

The ktm 144/150 has much more low end then a yz125, even more so then a yz144. The ktm 144 isn't just bored like a normal 144, it's stroked also. I've owned a yz125, yz144, 125sx, 139sx and rode a 144/150sx. The yz144 was great but wasn't all that you get with the extra stroke of the 150sx. The yz125 & yz144 rip and don't miss a beat.

I own a 200xcw & 125sx currently. The 200 runs different then a 125/144(150), similar but different. The 150 you can ride like a bigger bore bike vs the 125. With the 150 you can almost, repeat almost; be lazy like the 250/300 guys. The 200 is happy being rode like a 125 or as a 250. Perfect middle ground IMO.

[jmxdad]

The 2009 150sx has been a great bike and no mistake to buy:thumbsup:.

No mechanical issues other tha normal wear and tear after 40hrs of racing.

The standard selectable ignition Hi/Low traction map is a great feature, as is the ability to adjust the powervalve height for changes to the power characteristic of the bike. The bike had relatively soft springs standard which made it great for trail riding and less overall rider fatique.

It's fast enough if ridden well to keep up/beat 250F's.

Negatives, the jetting is slightly lean from the factory and the seat height a bit too tall for virtically challenged people like me, the pipe is a bit thin and dents easy (get the sxs carbon fibre guard and breathe easy), air filter fouls quickly and the OEM tyres are dated.

Using standard pump fuel, the bike goes better with slight jetting, powervalve, porting, head volume changes.

[Byte]

....some great points raised wth thanks.

interesting point about the 200 being able to be ridden like a 125 or a 250. what changes would you need to make to make it run like the 125 and how do u accommodate for the etxra weight the 200 has over the 125?

byte

[MrBlahh]

....some great points raised wth thanks.

interesting point about the 200 being able to be ridden like a 125 or a 250. what changes would you need to make to make it run like the 125 and how do u accommodate for the etxra weight the 200 has over the 125?

byte

the changes are your throttle hand and how much you rev it, I lug the hell out of mine in the woods, but on the track I keep it in the top half of it's rpm range, it's like 2 bikes in one

[Byte]

thanks.

Is the extra 9lbs bike weight and gyroscopic feeling on the 200 more significant compared to the same factors for the 150sx?

Byte

[Byte]

thoughts?

[hondacrftrx]

The same:

same motor

same frame

Different:

SX:

stiffer suspension

closer ration tranny

smaller fuel tank

XC:

softer suspension

med. ratio tranny

larger fuel tank

kickstand

hand guards/bark busters

So I'd say get the XC.