Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

1993 rm 250 vs 97 klx 300

Recommended Posts

What would the main difference be between a 1997 kawasaki klx 300 and a 1993 suzuki rm 250? I just want to know because i may trade my 300 for it.

Thank-you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

obvious ones to me would be one is a mild manered trail riding four stroke and the other is a race track two stroke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, about the only thing in common with those two bikes, is they both have a clutch and a throttle... VAST difference is how the bikes work, how they like to be ridden, age, ability to find parts, etc.

Unless that old RM is in perfect perfect shape, or you have known the owner and know the history of it, I wouldnt touch that bike. Especially if your KLX is working well, and you arent having trouble with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I obviously dont know your skill level but I've ridden several older RM250's and you want to talk about a light switch power band.......hang on. To be really effective on trails they need some tuning. A 93 would scare me unless its in pristine shape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a 92 rmx250, actually really liked that bike. Ram a rm250 piston, two rings, longer life, and a pipe and it ran really well on the trails. Dont know about the rm though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had a 99 KLX 300 in HS race condition and also a 93 RM 250 (current ride) that I use for HS.

Diff that I can tell right off the bat is that the KLX isn't built for anyone over 5' 8"...lol The bike feels cramped even with lowered pegs and forward bar risers. But boy did the KLX chug al lug. Great woods bike, but I couldn't get over the cramped feel of it and traded it in on a WR250F.

I will agree with the other guys...stay away from the 93 RM unless you know the history and check it out close. Most 93's are ragged (which mine was that I bought) and have had to sink some serious cash in it to get it in HS form. I still don't see the light at the tunnel on what needs done to make it perfect.

Also, the 93 RM 250 has basically no bottom end (not good for tight woods) or going up slippery steep hills with trees/logs scattered about. You have to be in the power ALL the time which leads to out of control.

With that said, up a tooth on the rear & an 8oz flywheel along with better jetting has he3lped the bike out. You still have to be in the power to do anything, but can lug it a little before pulling in clutch or hammering the brakes. Fun, fast bike that can slice & dice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the old RM's. The only complaint I have with them is the lack of low end grunt and the funny clutch action. The clutch has an on/off feel, and can be dificult to use clutch work to keep it in the power at lower speeds. Definitely more suited to an MX track out of the box, but with some work to the clutch and a few mods, can make an excellent trail machine.

Share this post


Link to post
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:

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...