My WR450F tight woods "racer" build.



168 replies to this topic
  • KennyMc

Posted July 30, 2014 - 07:33 AM

#21

So you find the power of your WR to be inadequate and you need more? Really? Have you changed your FI mapping at all? You can make your WR feel very much like a YZ with simple FI change, if that's what you're after.

But be careful what you wish for. You're going down the same path Dirt Bike (or was it Dirt Rider?) did with their new/old WR comparo... they put Hot Cams etc in the new WR just because that *was* the hot ticket on older WRs. And then they complained that is was too moto, too much hit, bottom end was too abrupt, yadda yadda. They went out of their way to make the bike into exactly what they didn't like about it. More power isn't going to make you any faster on that bike, guaranteed. If anything, it will just slow you down.

Agreed, great for desert, overpowered for the tight stuff, IMO and experience with going from a stock WR, to a YZ cam WR to a KTM 350 EXC. Gearing changes included.

IMO, comparing oneself to other riders isn't the way to gauge the effectiveness of changes. You should do that based on how well you do and feel after riding in the same conditions in the same terrain. Better yet, switch bikes with someone your riding with and see how there bike rides/feels in those conditions. I just mention this as I have a "similar" but obviously not the same bike and can compare it to my new bike. There is no comparison, for me.

  • MidlifeCrisisGuy

Posted July 30, 2014 - 08:29 AM

#22

So you find the power of your WR to be inadequate and you need more? Really? Have you changed your FI mapping at all? You can make your WR feel very much like a YZ with simple FI change, if that's what you're after.

 

But be careful what you wish for. You're going down the same path Dirt Bike (or was it Dirt Rider?) did with their new/old WR comparo... they put Hot Cams etc in the new WR just because that *was* the hot ticket on older WRs. And then they complained that is was too moto, too much hit, bottom end was too abrupt, yadda yadda. They went out of their way to make the bike into exactly what they didn't like about it. More power isn't going to make you any faster on that bike, guaranteed. If anything, it will just slow you down.

 

I'm an amateur.  This is a hobby.  I'm playing around with things to see what sort of performance I can get out of this bike.  If it doesn't work out, I'll put the stock cam back in.  No harm, no foul ?  

 

I haven't played around with maps yet.  I'm trying to emulate the much revered KTM 350 XCF powerband, a little less exhaust braking, a little less power down low and 50 HP on top.  I'm doubting that maps can do that for me, but I'll try.   I'm pretty sure that map tuning + YZ cams will get me there.

 

I have a theory that engine response masks bike weight.  Its like you can throw the bike around with the throttle and this makes it easier to ride.  

 

The KTM 350 and my bike weigh about the same.  I'm suspecting that snappier throttle response is going to make the bike feel lighter. 

 

I already experienced this once.  My friend rode my bike after I replaced the exhaust and asked how much weight I had removed since he last rode it.   The answer was about 2 pounds, which shouldn't have been noticeable.  Given that the exhaust dramatically increased throttle response, it felt like a lot more.   I'm hoping that YZ cams do more of that. 



  • Krannie McKranface

Posted July 30, 2014 - 12:22 PM

#23

Hey Bill, what's the difference between the stock YZ cam and the Hotcam we have in our WR's? It was my understanding that is what we have, the stock YZ cam for our model year bike with a decomp pin adjusted to allow for the e-start to work.

 

I wish I knew. I just dont' trust the cam timing on Hotcams. I think they are inconsistently timed....



  • Krannie McKranface

Posted July 30, 2014 - 12:34 PM

#24

I'm an amateur.  This is a hobby.  I'm playing around with things to see what sort of performance I can get out of this bike.  If it doesn't work out, I'll put the stock cam back in.  No harm, no foul ?  

 

I haven't played around with maps yet.  I'm trying to emulate the much revered KTM 350 XCF powerband, a little less exhaust braking, a little less power down low and 50 HP on top.  I'm doubting that maps can do that for me, but I'll try.   I'm pretty sure that map tuning + YZ cams will get me there.

 

I have a theory that engine response masks bike weight.  Its like you can throw the bike around with the throttle and this makes it easier to ride.  

 

The KTM 350 and my bike weigh about the same.  I'm suspecting that snappier throttle response is going to make the bike feel lighter. 

 

I already experienced this once.  My friend rode my bike after I replaced the exhaust and asked how much weight I had removed since he last rode it.   The answer was about 2 pounds, which shouldn't have been noticeable.  Given that the exhaust dramatically increased throttle response, it felt like a lot more.   I'm hoping that YZ cams do more of that. 

 

What the hell?

 

Who is telling you its a 'much revered powerband" ?

 

I've owned modern KTM's and ridden a dozen or so. They are all the same......soft soft soft power delivery, with a gradually rise to peak power way up in the 8-11k range.

 

This is fine if you don't like to learn how to properly use the clutch, brake and throttle, or if your are a magazine trying to 'sell' the product to the consumer.....but what if you need power RIGHT NOW?

Well, that means down shifting at least twice, and then wringing out the motor.....you know, run at really high rpms where rear wheel hops over every little spec, and can't gain traction.

 

OK, what if you need to climb a hill that has loose soil, and it is very steep....what do you do?  

 

On a KTM, you carve a trench at 8k to get up the hill, paddle your feet, get off and push...pretty much struggle.

On a WR, you short shift UP in gears, and motor up at 4K, where the motor does not affect traction nearly as much, and your tire doesn't even spin.

 

My friend, you have drunk the ORANGE KOOLAID if you think KTM power is 'better' in any way, shape or form!   

 

Now if you are going to ride really tight woods, without mountains, and you want to ride fast for a long time, or really slow without gravity affecting you too much,   the KTM works great.

 

Throw in a mountain ( or 10 of them) , gravel, big boulders, and no room for getting a running start on the difficult trails, and it's 10 times harder on the KTM.



  • MidlifeCrisisGuy

Posted July 30, 2014 - 12:36 PM

#25

Hey Bill, what's the difference between the stock YZ cam and the Hotcam we have in our WR's? It was my understanding that is what we have, the stock YZ cam for our model year bike with a decomp pin adjusted to allow for the e-start to work.

 

This thread might help clear that up, but its a bit confusing.

http://www.yfzcentra...ifications.html



  • MidlifeCrisisGuy

Posted July 30, 2014 - 12:46 PM

#26

What the hell?

 

Who is telling you its a 'much revered powerband" ?

 

I've owned modern KTM's and ridden a dozen or so. They are all the same......soft soft soft power delivery, with a gradually rise to peak power way up in the 8-11k range.

 

This is fine if you don't like to learn how to properly use the clutch, brake and throttle, or if your are a magazine trying to 'sell' the product to the consumer.....but what if you need power RIGHT NOW?

Well, that means down shifting at least twice, and then wringing out the motor.....you know, run at really high rpms where rear wheel hops over every little spec, and can't gain traction.

 

OK, what if you need to climb a hill that has loose soil, and it is very steep....what do you do?  

 

On a KTM, you carve a trench at 8k to get up the hill, paddle your feet, get off and push...pretty much struggle.

On a WR, you short shift UP in gears, and motor up at 4K, where the motor does not affect traction nearly as much, and your tire doesn't even spin.

 

My friend, you have drunk the ORANGE KOOLAID if you think KTM power is 'better' in any way, shape or form!   

 

Now if you are going to ride really tight woods, without mountains, and you want to ride fast for a long time, or really slow without gravity affecting you too much,   the KTM works great.

 

Throw in a mountain ( or 10 of them) , gravel, big boulders, and no room for getting a running start on the difficult trails, and it's 10 times harder on the KTM.

 

I'm with you, Krannie, all the way.   My WR450F woods "racer" project is all about building a better bike for the very conditions you mention.  I too think the WR450F engine is damn near perfect. 

 

I shot GoPro vid of my last ride, or so I thought.   When I got back home, I found the drive to be empty.   I'll shoot vid again the next time I'm out.



  • Krannie McKranface

Posted July 30, 2014 - 01:00 PM

#27

...oh, and anyone that thinks the WR power is 'too much', then stop and think about it for a second: is it 'the bike' or is it you?...cause the bike is very tame stock, and a bit less tame uncorked. 

 

The WR is just enough.



  • KennyMc

Posted July 30, 2014 - 01:08 PM

#28

I will agree to disagree with Bill on his characterization of the two bikes as I currently own them both. But that is taking into account my riding style, skill level and bike setup on both (EXC, not XC-W, but mapped as such). The KTM is by no means "off the showroom floor" as it sits today even though I just got it 2 weeks ago. Never rode it stock so I would have no comparison on what the modifications did for the performance.

Sorry for the detour of your thread, the WR motors are one of the most rock solid motors to be put out IMO. :thumbsup:

Edited by KennyMc, July 30, 2014 - 01:09 PM.


  • Krannie McKranface

Posted July 30, 2014 - 02:20 PM

#29

I will agree to disagree with Bill on his characterization of the two bikes as I currently own them both. But that is taking into account my riding style, skill level and bike setup on both (EXC, not XC-W, but mapped as such). The KTM is by no means "off the showroom floor" as it sits today even though I just got it 2 weeks ago. Never rode it stock so I would have no comparison on what the modifications did for the performance.

Sorry for the detour of your thread, the WR motors are one of the most rock solid motors to be put out IMO. :thumbsup:

 

Ken, I would love to ride your bike, if the suspension has been set up.....if I am allowed. I have a note.



  • GP1K

Posted July 30, 2014 - 03:49 PM

#30

I'm an amateur.  This is a hobby.  I'm playing around with things to see what sort of performance I can get out of this bike.  If it doesn't work out, I'll put the stock cam back in.  No harm, no foul ?  

 

I haven't played around with maps yet.  I'm trying to emulate the much revered KTM 350 XCF powerband, a little less exhaust braking, a little less power down low and 50 HP on top.  I'm doubting that maps can do that for me, but I'll try.   I'm pretty sure that map tuning + YZ cams will get me there.

 

I have a theory that engine response masks bike weight.  Its like you can throw the bike around with the throttle and this makes it easier to ride.  

 

The KTM 350 and my bike weigh about the same.  I'm suspecting that snappier throttle response is going to make the bike feel lighter. 

 

I already experienced this once.  My friend rode my bike after I replaced the exhaust and asked how much weight I had removed since he last rode it.   The answer was about 2 pounds, which shouldn't have been noticeable.  Given that the exhaust dramatically increased throttle response, it felt like a lot more.   I'm hoping that YZ cams do more of that. 

 

You can get a ton of performance out the WR motor. Uncorked it's pushing 50 hp. With a full exhaust, some cams, a little headwork, you could be pushing 60 hp. The question is how much do you really need, and what will that do for you? It won't make you faster, and definitely won't make your bike any easier to ride, quite the opposite.

 

Your bike will never feel as light and nimble as 350, and trying to make it so is a fool's errand. It's a totally different bike, totally different motor, and most important, 100cc smaller. YZ cams won't make your bike feel any lighter, it will just move the powerband up the RPM range, which is just great for tight woods riding... NOT! YZs are designed for MX tracks. WRs are designed for trails/woods. There's a reason the motors are tuned differently. Shedding a bunch of weight is a good thing. Making your motor like YZF for woods riding is not. Just my $.02.



Visit the ThumperTalk Store for the lowest prices on motorcycle / ATV parts and accessories - Guaranteed
  • GP1K

Posted July 30, 2014 - 03:56 PM

#31


I've owned modern KTM's and ridden a dozen or so. They are all the same......soft soft soft power delivery, with a gradually rise to peak power way up in the 8-11k range.

 

 

Bwahahahaha that's some funny shit right there. Has every KTM you've supposedly owned been a bone stock corked up EXC with sugar in the tank? My 250 XCF-W has more power EVERYWHERE than a 250X or WR250, and it's lighter too. It will pull third gear sit down wheelies off the throttle alone, no problem. Which I seem to recall you claiming your *500* couldn't do, with 'world reknowned tuners' at your disposal. Which is laughable, as my 250 can do it, showroom stock. I rode my buddy's 500 EXC this weekend. He has XCW gearing on ATM. It wheelies violently in the lower gears if you're at all ham-fisted on the throttle. "Soft" is about the last word I'd ever use to describe its power. All he's done is an FMF pipe and BDSB's 'magic mod' and gearing... that's it. Go ride a 450 SX or XCF then tell me how 'soft' the power is.

 

The hate is strong with this one. lolz



  • Krannie McKranface

Posted July 30, 2014 - 04:03 PM

#32

Bwahahahaha that's some funny shit right there. Has every KTM you've supposedly owned been a bone stock corked up EXC with sugar in the tank? My 250 XCF-W has more power EVERYWHERE than a 250X or WR250, and it's lighter too. It will pull third gear sit down wheelies off the throttle alone, no problem. Which I seem to recall you claiming your *500* couldn't do, with 'world reknowned tuners' at your disposal. Which is laughable, as my 250 can do it, showroom stock. I rode my buddy's 500 EXC this weekend. He has XCW gearing on ATM. It wheelies violently in the lower gears if you're at all ham-fisted on the throttle. "Soft" is about the last word I'd ever use to describe its power. All he's done is an FMF pipe and BDSB's 'magic mod' and gearing... that's it. Go ride a 450 SX or XCF then tell me how 'soft' the power is.

 

The hate is strong with this one. lolz

 

No one is talking about a 250x or WR.

If you consider the power of a 500 EXC to be violent, that explains a lot. 

I owned a brand new 2012 450 SXF and it was a pig. Slowest open class bike I have ever owned.  You had to ride it like a 125 two stroke to accelerate.

My 2008 KX450 and 2008 CRF450R were so much faster it was embarrasing.

Even my 450X with an R cam was signifigantly faster (but 22lbs heavier).

 

You read the magazines and believe what they say about KTM being 'the most powerful 450'....and that has NOTHING at all to do with being fastest. Virtually nothing.

 

There is no hate here, but you are implying I am stupid and lying, so you need to cool it, trolling in a WR forum when you don't even own one. 

 

Trolling means trying to insite an agrument for your own amusment. 


Edited by Kah Ran Nee, July 30, 2014 - 04:05 PM.


  • GP1K

Posted July 30, 2014 - 04:22 PM

#33

No one is talking about a 250x or WR.

If you consider the power of a 500 EXC to be violent, that explains a lot. 

I owned a brand new 2012 450 SXF and it was a pig. Slowest open class bike I have ever owned.  You had to ride it like a 125 two stroke to accelerate.

My 2008 KX450 and 2008 CRF450R were so much faster it was embarrasing.

Even my 450X with an R cam was signifigantly faster (but 22lbs heavier).

 

You read the magazines and believe what they say about KTM being 'the most powerful 450'....and that has NOTHING at all to do with being fastest. Virtually nothing.

 

There is no hate here, but you are implying I am stupid and lying, so you need to cool it, trolling in a WR forum when you don't even own one. 

 

Trolling means trying to insite an agrument for your own amusment. 

 

Bone stock 500 EXC, no. This particular 500 EXC, yes. It is not 2-stroke violent by any means, but it sure as hell isn't 'soft' either. But it has power RIGHT NOW and plenty of it.

 

Yeah I guess that's why Ken Roczen and Ryan Dungey are # 1 & 2 in the points for MX right now, cuz their bikes are such slow pigs.

 

Yes, your intense and irrational hatred of KTMs is well documented on this forum. "KTM ruining offroad riding" ring any bells? Not calling you a liar, but to say all KTM's have 'soft soft soft' power is simply untrue. Ignorant and uninformed then?

 

And I'm not trolling. Check my sig, I own a 2012 WR450 as well as my KTM. This is definitely amusing, but not because I'm inciting it.



  • MidlifeCrisisGuy

Posted July 30, 2014 - 05:09 PM

#34

You can get a ton of performance out the WR motor. Uncorked it's pushing 50 hp. With a full exhaust, some cams, a little headwork, you could be pushing 60 hp. The question is how much do you really need, and what will that do for you? It won't make you faster, and definitely won't make your bike any easier to ride, quite the opposite.

 

Your bike will never feel as light and nimble as 350, and trying to make it so is a fool's errand. It's a totally different bike, totally different motor, and most important, 100cc smaller. YZ cams won't make your bike feel any lighter, it will just move the powerband up the RPM range, which is just great for tight woods riding... NOT! YZs are designed for MX tracks. WRs are designed for trails/woods. There's a reason the motors are tuned differently. Shedding a bunch of weight is a good thing. Making your motor like YZF for woods riding is not. Just my $.02.

 

If you read above, you'll note I'm just looking for a little more throttle snap and maybe a little less engine braking.  Putting YZ cams in a WR doesn't make it a YZ engine, there are other differences.  Furthermore, my 2012 is fuel injected and I can use that to detune the whole setup any way I desire.



  • Krannie McKranface

Posted July 30, 2014 - 06:26 PM

#35

Bone stock 500 EXC, no. This particular 500 EXC, yes. It is not 2-stroke violent by any means, but it sure as hell isn't 'soft' either. But it has power RIGHT NOW and plenty of it.

 

Yeah I guess that's why Ken Roczen and Ryan Dungey are # 1 & 2 in the points for MX right now, cuz their bikes are such slow pigs.

 

Yes, your intense and irrational hatred of KTMs is well documented on this forum. "KTM ruining offroad riding" ring any bells? Not calling you a liar, but to say all KTM's have 'soft soft soft' power is simply untrue. Ignorant and uninformed then?

 

And I'm not trolling. Check my sig, I own a 2012 WR450 as well as my KTM. This is definitely amusing, but not because I'm inciting it.

 

What does a factory bike have to do with anything. 

Put either one of those guys on a stock KTM and it would be in pieces in a few laps.



  • Krannie McKranface

Posted July 30, 2014 - 06:29 PM

#36

I'm sorry for the continued detour of your thread



  • GP1K

Posted July 30, 2014 - 06:37 PM

#37

What does a factory bike have to do with anything. 
Put either one of those guys on a stock KTM and it would be in pieces in a few laps.


I rest my case.

  • KennyMc

Posted July 31, 2014 - 12:32 PM

#38

Ken, I would love to ride your bike, if the suspension has been set up.....if I am allowed. I have a note.

I promise, last "detour"....Bill, no problem if you want to take the skoot for a test ride but I think you'll have to wait until I do the suspenders.  Right now they are stock as all I have ridden is the mtn's in the Sierra's.  Going to KM this Saturday as well and in these conditions they will work fine, it will be in the desert that I know I will have issues.  Might just put big boy springs in them and see how the valving works, dunno yet, need to talk to a couple of tuners that I know.  Tempted, but don't think $3K for Ohlins is in the future :jawdrop:



  • Krannie McKranface

Posted July 31, 2014 - 12:42 PM

#39

Yeah, don't go Olins. Travis can help you out, or Greme Brough, or Dick's Racing.

I recommend not using Factory Connection or Superplush for WP, from personal experience.

 

I just want to feel the powerband vs the 2011 version, which I didn't care for. I know it's changed signifigantly since then, but can you short shift it is what I want to know...



  • MidlifeCrisisGuy

Posted July 31, 2014 - 12:53 PM

#40

FYI, 2012 WR450F camshaft lift, from the shop manual.

 

Intake:  A - B = 30.1 - 22.45 = 7.65 mm.

Exhaust: A - B = 30.1 - 22.35 =  7.75 mm.

 

YZF camshaft lift (06-09)

 

Intake: 8.64 mm

Exhaust: 8.45 mm

 

YFZ (Quad) camshaft lift

 

Intake: 7.67 mm

Exhaust: 8.48 mm

 

So even if the YZ camshafts were timed the same as the 2012 WR cams, they have more lift.  I think the decrease in lift started with the 2012 engines as pre 2012 WR cams seem to have the same lift ?   Details are sketchy though.






 
x

Join Our Community!

Even if you don't want to post, registered members get access to tools that make finding & following the good stuff easier.

If you enjoyed reading about "" here in the ThumperTalk archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join ThumperTalk today!

The views and opinions expressed on this page are strictly those of the author, and have not been reviewed or approved by ThumperTalk.