Jump to content

2011 XCs: 250 or 300?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 9

  • 11

  • 13

  • 8

depends what you wanna do with it, tha way i see it, the 300's is better suited as a trail bike, lazier torque off the bottom, doesnt rev as well, and quite punchy in the midrange, where as the 250 is more suited to a fast rider/racer, rev's out better, not as agressive in the midrange and not quite as much torque, it's really a case of how do you ride? if you find yourself revving the bike and enjoy the thrill of holing the throttle wide open that extra twos econds longer then you mate before braking, then go the 250, if you mozey around using the low/mid range and short shift, get a 300.

with that said the XC's are setup strait up more agressivly then the XC-w's, and suite a more agressive ride, so in my opinion the 250 is the onyl way to go with the XC's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

depends what you wanna do with it, tha way i see it, the 300's is better suited as a trail bike, lazier torque off the bottom, doesnt rev as well, and quite punchy in the midrange, where as the 250 is more suited to a fast rider/racer, rev's out better, not as agressive in the midrange and not quite as much torque, it's really a case of how do you ride? if you find yourself revving the bike and enjoy the thrill of holing the throttle wide open that extra twos econds longer then you mate before braking, then go the 250, if you mozey around using the low/mid range and short shift, get a 300.

with that said the XC's are setup strait up more agressivly then the XC-w's, and suite a more agressive ride, so in my opinion the 250 is the onyl way to go with the XC's.

Ttoks, it's interesting that you say that...

I rode with a buddy of mine Sunday who has a 2010 250XC. He says he has never liked the 300. He says the 250 has more torque off the bottom.

Many people say that the 250 is the "sweeter" bike, due to handling.

Even though the 250 and the 300 are within a pound of each other on the scale, the crankshaft on the 300 weighs more...and this is not only unsprung weight, which has a greater effect on handling, but it is rotating weight. The lighter crank of the 250 means less centrifugal force, and, therefore, less resistance to turn-in than the 300.

There is no denying the power and torque of the 300, though. It has so much torque, most people say it's like riding a 4-stroke. And it has so much power, that it will easily pull away from one of the 450 KTM woods bikes.

I have just heard that the 250 is a "sweeter" bike overall...but I'd have a hard time *not* buying the 300 over the 250 if I was in the market, since it's only $100.00 more on the sticker price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's one fancyassed ktm if the crank is unsprung weight.....

OK, so maybe I'm wrong...I guess only the suspension is unsprung weight?

But, as wrong as I may have been, it's really beside the point...which was that the rotational inertia of the crankshaft has a huge effect on the handling of the motorcycle.:banana:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ttoks, it's interesting that you say that...

I rode with a buddy of mine Sunday who has a 2010 250XC. He says he has never liked the 300. He says the 250 has more torque off the bottom.

Many people say that the 250 is the "sweeter" bike, due to handling.

Even though the 250 and the 300 are within a pound of each other on the scale, the crankshaft on the 300 weighs more...and this is not only unsprung weight, which has a greater effect on handling, but it is rotating weight. The lighter crank of the 250 means less centrifugal force, and, therefore, less resistance to turn-in than the 300.

There is no denying the power and torque of the 300, though. It has so much torque, most people say it's like riding a 4-stroke. And it has so much power, that it will easily pull away from one of the 450 KTM woods bikes.

I have just heard that the 250 is a "sweeter" bike overall...but I'd have a hard time *not* buying the 300 over the 250 if I was in the market, since it's only $100.00 more on the sticker price.

this isn't a case of "getting twice as much for a $1 more is better" deal. bigger/more isn't always better.

as Ttoks said, the bikes ride differently. you really need to determine which fits you better. OR, don't think at all about it, buy one, and don't look back. Either will put a grin on your face. Just finding the right one tends to put a bigger grin on yer face. :banana: I know it did for me.

keep in mind, the 250 can become a 300 fairly easily, not for a $100 though. You can always turn a 250 into a 300 down the road, maybe when it's time for a topend...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slow Hand.... I just ran the part numbers for the cranks on the 250&300 XC and the 250&300XCW. The numbers are the same so that would tell me that these engines share common cranks. Why is it that you think the 300 cranks are heavier?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the crankshaft, flywheel and con rod in the 250 is exactly the same as what's in the 300, you can cross referance the part numbers yourself if you like and the piston is but a few gram heavier, so the rotating mass is almost exactly the same, any differance in handlign comes directly from the 300 having more twist on the chassis,w hich does make a big differant to a bikes handleing, but the 250 definatly doesnt have the torque off of bottom that the 300 does, that's the entire point of a 300, the 250 is smoother due to having less pull however, it won't chug up hill's like a 300 will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slow Hand.... I just ran the part numbers for the cranks on the 250&300 XC and the 250&300XCW. The numbers are the same so that would tell me that these engines share common cranks. Why is it that you think the 300 cranks are heavier?

2011 250 XC Bore & Stroke: 2.61 x 2.83 in. (66.4 x 72 mm)

2011 300 XC Bore & Stroke: 2.83 x 2.83 in. (72 x 72 mm)

Does same stroke mean same crank size?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have ridden an '09 250 XC and '10 300 XC back to back and can tell you that there is a big difference. The 300 makes more torque off the bottom and the motor spins up slower than the 250 does, but the 300 has a very strong mid-range punch. The 250 feels softer and smoother off the bottom, but spins up quicker like a typical two stroke. However, it does it in a way that puts traction to the ground. It actually feels like it has less hit in the mid-range than a 300, it just revs quicker. The 300 definitely feels heavier even if it really isn't much at all.

I think that guys under 175 pounds or so prefer the 250 and guys closer to the 200 mark generally end up going with the 300. I weigh about 215 in gear and must say that I am very happy with my 300 but could probably have just as much fun riding the 250 which would probably also tire me out less by the end of the day. Even though the 250's motor spins up faster, I think it is actually smoother and less abrupt that the 300 when you twist the throttle hard. You just have to ride the 250 a bit harder due to the gentler/ smoother power delivery. Both bikes chug along just fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO bike choice depends much more on where you ride than anything else. I live in the open desert and when you are riding a sand uphill wash or sand of any sort, most bikes feel underpowered. I'm a firm believer in buying the best bike for the terrain and usually you find that you become faster and have more fun. The above posts make good points regarding the qualities of the bike.

Although to Slowhand, not sure where you are getting your info as to the differences. I have a 250 and my buddies have 300's. I have spent several hours on both. The ONLY difference is the power delivery. Same frame, tires, weight, crank, etc. The only difference is the top end. And as far as outrunning a 450, make sure you take into account the gearing, because a 300 simply will not outrun a 450 that is geared the same. It won't put power to the ground as well and it does not make as much power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2011 250 XC Bore & Stroke: 2.61 x 2.83 in. (66.4 x 72 mm)

2011 300 XC Bore & Stroke: 2.83 x 2.83 in. (72 x 72 mm)

Does same stroke mean same crank size?

OK, looks like I was wrong.

The extra 43cc comes from a larger bore, and not a longer stroke.

So, there really should not be any difference in handling between the 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO bike choice depends much more on where you ride than anything else. I live in the open desert and when you are riding a sand uphill wash or sand of any sort, most bikes feel underpowered. I'm a firm believer in buying the best bike for the terrain and usually you find that you become faster and have more fun. The above posts make good points regarding the qualities of the bike.

Although to Slowhand, not sure where you are getting your info as to the differences. I have a 250 and my buddies have 300's. I have spent several hours on both. The ONLY difference is the power delivery. Same frame, tires, weight, crank, etc. The only difference is the top end. And as far as outrunning a 450, make sure you take into account the gearing, because a 300 simply will not outrun a 450 that is geared the same. It won't put power to the ground as well and it does not make as much power.

I'd be interested to see a dyno chart of a 300 XC vs. a 450 XC.

I would think the 300 should make more HP.

True or false?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A 300 makes as much HP as a 530 according to KTM. I ride surrounded by big bore thumpers (and still ride them myself) all the time and the one who gets to the turn first is the one who lets off last. In other words, a 300 will run with the big bore thumpers on WOT terrain but that's not what the 300 is really for IMHO. The 300 really shines on varied twisty tight terrain with lots of verticals when you're exhausted from being hard on it for a couple of hours. That's when the well mannered 300 becomes the bike of choice not when the banner drops. It all depends on what you want out of your dirt bike. I like or love them all, even the MX conversion 450F's, but there's no doubt the 300XC-W is one bad ass all around ride....anyone can tell you that.

Here's a link to Knight's blog and some cool opinions about 2T v. 4T.

http://www.knighter.net/joomla/index.php?option=com_kunena&Itemid=121&func=view&catid=11&id=847&limit=6&limitstart=6

Edited by cubera
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be interested to see a dyno chart of a 300 XC vs. a 450 XC.

I would think the 300 should make more HP.

True or false?

HP is only part of the equation, you have to remember torque and not just peak power, but width of the power band. I have drag raced 300's vs 450's hundreds if not thousands of times. If the gearing is the same, the 450 will win. We have swapped riders as well, so rider ability is not the issue.

I am not saying a 450 is better, I have a 250SX. I like the two strokes, I just am making the point that a 300 is not an overly powerful beast. In the open desert, it is actually just right. And, like Cubera said, the longer you ride it - compared to a 450 - the faster you will be because it is much less tiring to ride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sheesh, the answer is pretty simple. If you like riding the pipe all the time then get the 250, if you want the same power but at lower RPM then get the 300. From my experience, the 250 REQUIRES a more aggressive style of riding. The 300 on the other hand lets you ride a little lazier which is in turn less tiring, you also get away with more mistakes. To say a 250 will run away from a properly tuned 300 is just RETARD talk. Some people just love that feeling of being on the edge all the time. Thing is, you can ride the 300 that way but I hope you're ready and capable b/c it will KICK YOUR A$$ if you make a mistake (whiskey throttle scary on 300XC)! Due to gearing, the W is less aggressive and much more forgiving, I personally like the XC better but it runs out of gear fast and that's just to annoying, fixed for 2011..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Knight's blog:

Dyno are as follows :-

MotoUSA for the 2009 450EFi’s had an average of 48hp and 42ft/Lbs torque.

Kleeman USA – 300exc @ 57.5hp and 49ft/lbs torque (KTM site confirms this)

Kleeman USA – 250xc @ 51hp and 39ft/lbs torque.

There's so much more to making time than HP:lol::banana::eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Knight's blog:

Dyno are as follows :-

MotoUSA for the 2009 450EFi’s had an average of 48hp and 42ft/Lbs torque.

Kleeman USA – 300exc @ 57.5hp and 49ft/lbs torque (KTM site confirms this)

Kleeman USA – 250xc @ 51hp and 39ft/lbs torque.

There's so much more to making time than HP:lol::banana::eek:

Uh someone's Dyno is either jacked or someone is posting total BS. Sorry but there is no freakin way a 300 or 250 is producing more HP and torque than a 450. Maybe those 450 numbers were at the rear wheel and the KTM numbers were from the crank.......that would be more believable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Reply with:

×
×
  • Create New...