NW_drZ

Members
  • Content count

    1,501
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,046 Excellent

About NW_drZ

  • Rank
    TT Platinum Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Washington

Recent Profile Visitors

2,509 profile views
  1. The Core 3 and radius X are both great. Haven't ridden the CX but I'd imagine it's performance on hydro bikes is no different than the than the standard radius X. The CX just comes with a little more bling (clutch cover, inner hub). Given the option though I would go with the CX since it's only $100 more than the Core 3. According to Rekluse the Core 3 is still selling just as well as the radius X and CX, so they aren't in a rush to discontinue it. Sycamore is right when he says the CX has a slightly lighter pull. The Core 3 uses 3 medium / 3 heavy clutch plate springs (on my Beta) while the CX uses 6 medium. They do this since the Core uses your standard friction plates and not the torque drive (which are thinner and have more). With the Midwest lever my Core 3 still has a lighter clutch pull than my stock clutch with the stock lever. As far as hook up goes, my Core 3 with heavy wedges and low RPM springs hooks up very similar to my buddies radius X. I'd give the radius a slight edge in responsive hookup when not using the lever. However I ride the bike still like a manual so I don't rely on the rekluse hookup as much. Also don't listen to the haters on here. I still ride the bike like a manual (feathering the clutch). And when I ride a manual equipped bike (buddy bikes) I have zero problems with the standard clutch. I could do all the same gnar and ride just as fast. Just not as long [emoji6]
  2. I may switch to the Amsoil when i run out of the Motul. Noticed its quite a bit cheaper.
  3. It's what came with my Beta and what my dealer stocked. Motul 800 and 710. After reading up it seemed the 800 wasn't geared towards the woods rider so I stuck with the 710.
  4. I ripped the OI off my 250RR and continue to use the 710. I actually get less spooge pre mixing.
  5. Was running an 140 M5B for a bit and recently switched to a 110 VE-33. Forgot how much the smaller tire lends it self to cornering and maneuvering. I prefer it.
  6. I did have a WPS lithium battery on my FX.
  7. Cant go wrong with either. For reliability the Yamaha is hard to beat. The Beta will need a new seat either way, the stocker is a brick. Even standing 90% I hated that thing. For what its worth, if the YZ250X had an e-start when I was shopping to replace the FX that would have been my choice.
  8. Both are fantastic bikes and it really comes down to preference. However, ill try to give you my best interpretation. Chassis: At your height, the Beta will definitely be more friendly. Im 6'2" and never liked the tall stink bug of the FX. In the flow it wasn't a problem, but even at my height I found dabbing difficult at times in the gnar single track. The Beta definitely rewards a rider that stands and weights the front end. Doesn't like to turn as much in the seated position. The FX does both well. I found I sat more on the FX to carve corners while on the Beta I would stand through the same turns. When standing I find that the Beta rewards the rider more than the FX. As in, I feel like the bike responds a touch better in the stand up position than the FX. More flickable, leans better and is just more maneuverable at slow speeds. The FX also comes off as a top heavy bike. Doesn't feel bad in motion. But I definitely noticed it more when picking it up or at really low speed. Body: To me the Beta definitely has the edge in hotness They are fantastic looking bikes. I like the FX looks as well though. The beauty of the Beta does come at a cost however. My graphics started peeling on the first ride, and the plastics are definitely not as robust as the FX. One thing I loved about the FX was the infused graphics. I wish more companies would do that. One thing I didn't like about the FX was the airbox cover. Awkward, ugly and my air filter got noticeably dirtier quicker than the Beta. Motor: Both are good. Actually, both are fantastic. The FX is a solid 250F motor that has good pull throughout the RPM range. Snappy for a 250F and is very competitive. The 250RR is a very user friendly 2 stroke and with the adjustable PV you can really make the bike nice and docile or a fire breathing beast. The RR has a lot more power than the FX and it did take a few rides to get use too. Jumping on my buddies FX now really puts this into perspective. At low RPMs I find the 250RR smoother and more controllable despite the power difference. Don't let the extra power of the 250RR deter you. It really is an easy bike to ride. Suspension: The FX forks are great. I did nothing other than adjust clickers to get them were I wanted them. Very confident at speed. The Beta's were quite harsh at first and not compliant. After hours of break in and putting the correct springs in for my weight they work pretty good now. In the tight gnarly stuff I don't notice the gap between the two as much as I do at speed. Fortunately I mainly ride woods single track so the Sachs are working fine. Overall though, the KYB are on another level. Im reminded when I jump on my buddies YZX. I still plan on revalving my forks at the end of winter to get everything out of them. As for the shock, I actually prefer the Sach's. Feels more compliant and planted to me. Both are good though. Reliability: No questions asked, the Yamaha gets the nod here. My Beta has been riddled with little problems since I got it. Fortunately the 6 month warranty took care of it all. Both my WR and FX were stone cold reliable. Zero problems with those bikes. In the Betas defense, most were small things that were easily fixed. As for maintenance, the Beta is a lot nicer to work on. Despite the top end not being that hard to do on the FX (piston, rings, cam chain, etc.), working on the Beta / 2 stroke is just so much simpler. It makes me appreciate the bike more. Overall ride: The Beta has allowed me to excel quicker than the FX did. I think a lot of this has to do with the terrain we ride. I think the Beta just caters to it better and feels more at home in the gnar. I also feel a lot more confident on it as the weight and overall stature feels more controllable. I like this about it. I feel like I'm more in control of the bike than I was with the FX in the woods. And most importantly, I have A LOT more fun on the 250RR. Its just a damn fun bike to ride. A lot more playful and flickable. I always come out of the trails with more smiles on this bike. I find myself jumping off things, attempting bigger step ups, and picking harder lines with the Beta. With that said, the FX gave me a lot of smiles too. It was really good when things got going fast. It just rallied with speed and confidence. But as mentioned earlier, I ride more tight single track and prefer this style of riding. Therefore, the Beta gets the overall nod for me.
  9. The new KTMS have a ridiculously light pull. Lighter than my FX was (though the FX was pretty light too). After putting 70 hours on my Beta w/ the hydraulic I definitely like it better than the cable FX. Took me a few rides to adjust and determine this. I feel like the modulation and engagement is more precise and I never get clutch fade which is nice. That said, the FX clutch feel was really good when compared to other cable actuated bikes I had prior. If I was to get another FX in the future a hydro clutch would not be at the top of my list as mods to do despite preferring it to the cable clutch.
  10. Agree with Goatse on this. Only seem like minor tweaks to me. Putting on an over sized rotor costs $100 on RMATV. I did it on my 15'. And deleting the kicker to me isn't an improvement. Given the option I'd take the 17' but it doesn't get me excited over the prior year FX's. I will however be curious about the FX when they do a redesign similar to what they did with the 450 this year. The FX is a great bike. If money wasn't a concern I would of kept mine when I bought my Beta 250RR.
  11. Gearing and maybe the PV setting gave it that impression. Never asked. Both felt good but the XC to me felt higher strung. Neither compared to my 250rr though
  12. ODI makes the Emig grips. Not sure if he has any roll in the company. I'm also not aware of any other brands that make lock ons for dirt bikes. The ODI half waffle are what are standard on the new KTMs.
  13. Is the 120 pretty wide? I remember running the 110 way back in the day and it was super narrow for a 110. I like the standard 110 size generally over wider tires.
  14. ODI half waffle. Preferred the texture to the Emigs and liked the thinner profile over the thicker rogues.
  15. When I road the 17 300 xcw it too felt neutered compared to its 300 XC brother. Kinda similar to what you described with the Huskies (TE and TX). That said, I think I would like the XCW motor better in the tight woulds. Less arm pulling. Kinda why I like the 250.