Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

feedback on which 2 stroke to get

Recommended Posts

I read the FAQ and got some info, but I'm hoping you can educate me. My son had an Outlaw 525 IRS quad with KTM engine. He traded it for a 2007 450 SX-F. I just rebuilt top end due to faulty cam chain tensioner. very unhappy with the whole thing, how hard it is to work on, hard to adjust valves, hard to change a plug, and on and on.

Our experienced riding cousins said the 300 2 stroke can be lugged on trails and doesn't have to be cracked wide open (like other 2 strokes), and overall is an awesome bike, even the older ones.

We ride trails mostly, some hill climbs and a bit of logging road (to get to the trails).

I have ruled out any SX style bikes. the 4 speed seems specific to track/racing, and they are hard to re-sell. So is MX vs EXC-W a huge difference? More top end speed with higher gearing?

I watched one good rider on a 250 rip up a hill climb like it wasn't even there. Other guys couldn't do it on more machine. I firmly believe the rider makes more difference than the bike. Once the rider is good enuf to tell the difference from maxing out what their bike can do, then they can talk about needing more HP, etc... I don't think my son is quite there. Maybe more HP makes it easier (I dunno??).

sorry, long way to asking (but thought backround would help)....AND money is also an issue. I know, i'm making it harder and asking a lot!!

What years should I look at? 250 or 300? MX or EXC? Anything else? THANKS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO, more HP is more tiring and makes it harder for learning riders to learn skills because they have to be so conscience of throttle input and getting kicked off. I have learned more on my 200's than any of the other bikes I have owned. IMHO, you want enough power to get the job done, but not so much that will penalize you if you make a mistake.

Yeah, the 300 can be ridden tamely, but that got boring for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

300's are very easy to ride with the amount of torque produced off the bottom.

The 250 & 300 KTM motors have extensively tunable power-valves which allow you to set the "hit" to your liking with a bit of experimentation.

IMHO, you want enough power to get the job done, but not so much that will penalize you if you make a mistake.

Agreed totally!

I'm actually beginning to desire a 200 for the same reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks guys. On power... I can tell you it sure is hard to find someone that can handle the 450 power. or maybe nobody wants the 450 Sx-F??

I didn't even consider a 200. never knew they had one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
do not fear the forces of a bigger bike gmoss. sometimes the hard way is the only way for a man to become A man.

:smirk:

be man enough to choose the right bike, and not the one that compensates your ego. :banana::bonk:

I have owned them all. In some parts of the country, the bigger bikes are the right choice, but here, not necessarily so. But, some just like HP.

mephis, the 200 is just as tunable, BTW. :busted:

It took me a few bikes to realize what I liked. It is really up to your PERSONAL PREFERENCE. Ride them all, making note of how they are set up. With a couple of adjustments, you would think you rode 2 different bikes with any of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would look for a 200EXC or the newer XCW. They are awesome bikes for trail riding or cross country racing. The MXC or newer XC bikes are great race bikes and can be motocross bikes if you stiffen up the suspension. The 300s are great but they can be a bit much and you can go anywhere on a 200 that you could go on a 300.

I bought my son a 150sx last summer and I have raced it at my favorite sand track. I love it and I haven't ridden my 250sx since I rode the 150sx. Small bikes are just a lot of fun!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like my 300 but they are pretty hard to ride on the pipe. What I like is you point it grab and handful of throttle, you either make it or not. It only take a second either way, no time to over think it.

On a tight track I'm sure a 200 would be a blast to ride, but it's easier to ride a bike easy than try to make power a bike doesn't have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Around here you run out of traction long before you run out of power. My riding buddy has an older (98) 300 that is tuned to be pretty mellow,and I ride a 200 that is set to be a bit pipey with a bit of hit in the middle. I'm somewhat bored when I ride his and he is a little white knuckled on mine. Turns out we both have bikes that suit our riding style. I like to be up and all over the bike while he likes to tractor along. Had the first 200 I rode been tuned like his 300 I wouldn't have bought it,because I didn't realize they were so tunable. Pretty sure the same goes for him. I guess that's my long winded way of saying you just need to evaluate the type of terrain you ride and choose a displacement accordingly. The power characteristics of any of them can be tailored to suit any preference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so are EX and XC basically similar in gearing, and the MX is more motocross?

timmy, I'd guess we're similar terrain to you, depending where you are in WA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
so are EX and XC basically similar in gearing, and the MX is more motocross?

timmy, I'd guess we're similar terrain to you, depending where you are in WA.

Ya,I'm in western WA,in the Cascade foothills. I'm sure an imaginary line across a map does very little to change a landscape. Lol I prefer a bike that is a little bit "buzzy" so my 200 set up the way it is is the best option for me. A 300 in that state of tune would be too much for me to safely handle in the mountains I think. I do ride in the eastern WA desert a couple times a year,and a 300 would probably be fun over there,but my 200 is perfectly capable.

As for the model designations,the MXC became the XC and the EXC became the XCW in 06 when they lost stock lights and I think spark arrestor. They kept lighting capabilities though,you just have to add the actual lights yourself. :bonk:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks guys. what I meant is: what are main differences? gear ratio? suspension?

I'm thinking NO to MX/SX cuz that's probably 4 gears, and set up for motocross??

MXC/XC might be bang on for trails. 5 gears?

XC-W is the wide range tranny and maybe better if you do more logging road, or paved road rindig, higher top speeds///that sorta thing?

Am I on the right track here?

THANKS!! and Merry Christmas everyone!!!!!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read thru the FAQ up top.

The 2 stroke MX bikes are 5 speeds. The tranny gearing is dependent upon size of bike. The <=200 have 6 speeds and the wide ratio is quite a nice tranny all the way around. The 250=> are 5 speeds till like 2010/2011, then became 6 speeds.

This has all been posted in detail, so a little digging will yield you the info you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The SX 2 strokes 125/150/250 are a bit snappy for trails, they also don't like the continuous high RPM's either, they are a bit high compression wise. You can fix that with some simple mods, higher flywheel weight and lower compression head. Gearbox wise, the 125sx/150sx/200xc are 6 speed, the 250sx is a 5 speed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey Tye, glad to see yer on this board aswell. From what I know of KTM, they seem to make specific models so you should be able to find your ride right out of the box. I was thinking the W (or equivalent) models might be too high geared, and the Sx stuff too radical. So the 200, 250 or 300s all sound good.

I think he likes the grunt for hills, but he isn't quite doing the crazy hill climbs others do. Too bad you can't take a few out and make an educated decision. I'm leaning to MXC/XC models. The 6 speeds sounds interesting. He only has 4 speeds in the 450 he has now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you end up looking at the 200, the W is a nice combo. granny first, close ratio 2nd-4th, and taller 5th and 6th gear. You get the best of both trannies.

The 300 will pull the W tranny fine. I found it gappy because I was not fast enough to make it work. The 250 works better +2 on the rear with the W. But, the W really comes in handy in the open terrain and stock gearing may work just fine. Throw a ReKluse in it and it becomes a moot point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In theory the EXC was a trail machine and the MXC was a racing type machine with the MX suspension and engine. The MXC had 18" rear wheel and a tighter spaced tranny.. Most of the older MXC's had a lower overall top gear as well. But it depends on the year.. Some years the EXC's had lights, the MXC's nothing.

Tranny wise just about everyone agrees that the EXC/XCW trannies were gappy between the first three gears. The MXC/XC's didn't seem to be.

Myself I have been riding KTM's since 84.. I had a 98 380, and then an 06 300. The 06 tranny did seem gappy, so I geared teh rear down 2 teeth.. That helprd but killed top end. I bought a 12 300 XC this time and the tranny is much better. Seamless in fact..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the extreme demands we encounter in the northwest/BC.... the 300xc or xcw is a better choice than the 200 for most riders ( very nice bike...had one for years but not ideal in more open, more elevation). you cannot go wrong going from the 450 to the 300 around here.

Joe

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  

×