thinking of switching


35 replies to this topic
  • The Hopper Show

Posted November 21, 2014 - 07:05 PM

#1

so i started this thread:

 

http://www.thumperta...t-right-for-me/

 

and i am wondering your guys' opinions. i figure i would try the yamaha forum in addition to the ktm forum as there is usually bias both ways.



  • Krannie McKranface

Posted November 21, 2014 - 07:54 PM

#2

It's a different animal.

If you ride woods, really woods, it would be an improvement and easier to ride.

But, if you ride area where you must turn with power, or climb long hills, or ride whoop fields, a properly set up WR will do better, even being heavier.

If you are an 'upshift and throttle' kind of guy, then stick with four strokes. If you are a 'fan the clutch all day' kind of guy, then the 2t works fine.

 

You also have to remember that the KTM 150 and the KTM 500 have the same ergos....they are all on the small side, and that can be a problem for tall guys, especially over 225lbs.

 

I am currently trying a 350XCF-W and having fun with it, but it is USELESS for long loose uphills or sand. Can't keep up. You have to slow down to make it.

It's also too small for me, even with every possible ergo expansion mod made. Very hard to put weight on the outside peg when cornering....



  • offrd beatr

Posted November 21, 2014 - 07:56 PM

#3

Super technical ugly gnar=exc/xc-w
High speed rhythm or open terrain=WR

  • stevethe

Posted November 21, 2014 - 09:17 PM

#4

I think the KTM 300 has some merit for your use. Not the 200 it doesn't have enough low end or top end.

On the other hand you could upgrade to an aluminum frame 450. Properly set up way more torque. You just have to master making every hill so you don't have to pick it up.

  • YamaLink

Posted November 22, 2014 - 07:44 AM

#5

Read the ktm thread and this one several times trying to think of the "answer" but as others have stated there will be compromises for both.

 

KTM: lighter

WR450: you're used to it and it's got a great motor

kTM: front suspension is junk

WR450: heavy

 

Are you dead set on these two options? How about another brand?



  • beezer

Posted November 22, 2014 - 09:36 AM

#6

I'd wait and see if Yamaha comes out with a YZ450FX.

 

Big riders seem to like Yamaha's ergos.

 

You can buy a Yamaha and get 10 years out of it.



  • MidlifeCrisisGuy

Posted November 22, 2014 - 09:36 AM

#7

See my sig.  Or start with a YZ450F.


Edited by MidlifeCrisisGuy, November 22, 2014 - 09:37 AM.


  • GP1K

Posted November 22, 2014 - 09:44 AM

#8

Read the ktm thread and this one several times trying to think of the "answer" but as others have stated there will be compromises for both.

 

KTM: lighter

WR450: you're used to it and it's got a great motor

kTM: front suspension is junk

WR450: heavy

 

Are you dead set on these two options? How about another brand?

 

KTM front suspension is 'junk'? Since when?? :rolleyes:


so i started this thread:

 

http://www.thumperta...t-right-for-me/

 

and i am wondering your guys' opinions. i figure i would try the yamaha forum in addition to the ktm forum as there is usually bias both ways.

 

I think you have your answer.... keep your WR or 300 XC-W.



  • YamaLink

Posted November 22, 2014 - 09:52 AM

#9

I should rephrase. Of the multiple newer KTM in the garage (150, 250SX and XC, 350, 400 and 450) the shortcoming of the bikes is their front forks in comparison to what's available on the market. On the trail they are so nice (which the OP is intending to use bike for), but at race pace or on a MX track the stock KTM forks (especially the 450) are severely lacking compared to the Yamaha and Kawasaki (which the OP did not ask about nor cares about).

KTM front suspension is 'junk'? Since when?? :rolleyes:


 

I think you have your answer.... keep your WR or 300 XC-W.


Edited by YamaLink, November 22, 2014 - 09:53 AM.


  • GP1K

Posted November 22, 2014 - 09:57 AM

#10

I should rephrase. Of the multiple newer KTM in the garage (150, 250SX and XC, 350, 400 and 450) the shortcoming of the bikes is their front forks in comparison to what's available on the market. On the trail they are so nice (which the OP is intending to use bike for), but at race pace or on a MX track the stock KTM forks (especially the 450) are severely lacking compared to the Yamaha and Kawasaki (which the OP did not ask about nor cares about).

 

So not junk and actually good for the OP, but junk for Ryan Dungey. Got it. :thumbsup:



Visit the ThumperTalk Store for the lowest prices on motorcycle / ATV parts and accessories - Guaranteed
  • joey330

Posted November 22, 2014 - 10:01 AM

#11

I should rephrase. Of the multiple newer KTM in the garage (150, 250SX and XC, 350, 400 and 450) the shortcoming of the bikes is their front forks in comparison to what's available on the market. On the trail they are so nice (which the OP is intending to use bike for), but at race pace or on a MX track the stock KTM forks (especially the 450) are severely lacking compared to the Yamaha and Kawasaki (which the OP did not ask about nor cares about).

Revalve then, I went with factory connection on my Ktm and I love them. I have a 200, I have rode every Ktm there is in a 2014-2015 model in October at demo days.
The bikes are nice, the 350 was weird. But manageable. I like 2 strokes. All of ktms Bikes are top of the line. No doubt

  • Krannie McKranface

Posted November 22, 2014 - 02:53 PM

#12

No, he's right. 

 

All the WP forks are too flexy, and have tiny little base valves (and mid valves, where applicable) compared to 2005 and later KYB or Showa.

Very difficult to get a progressive feel to the shim stack(s), and even when you get close, the triples, tubes and sanctions all flex too much.

 

Ryan Dungey's bike is nearly all unobtanium, and about $70k, so not sure why you would bring that up.......and Roczen stated in his last interview that the weakest link to the KTM stock AND factory product is it's flexy nature in the frame and forks. 

 

Now, if you weigh 165lbs, then it's all moot.



  • KennyMc

Posted November 22, 2014 - 03:23 PM

#13

Comparing anything that I ride and where I ride to that of a Supercross racer would be a waste of time. Now maybe a GNCC racer, that would make some sense. :thumbsup:

  • Krannie McKranface

Posted November 22, 2014 - 03:44 PM

#14

Comparing anything that I ride and where I ride to that of a Supercross racer would be a waste of time. Now maybe a BENCH racer, that would make some sense. :thumbsup:

 

 

fixed



  • KennyMc

Posted November 22, 2014 - 04:41 PM

#15

fixed

I just think it's hilarious when people compare what a Supercross racer does to their bike to what the weekend warrior does. Talking about the punishment and how a bike reacts too it. I can never create the bike dynamics of a Supercross racer as I don't do triples being 40' in the air.

But what a GNCC racer does to their bikes, that would be more comparable. Riding the same type of terrain I would expect the bikes to react somewhat the same......somewhat ;)

  • Krannie McKranface

Posted November 22, 2014 - 04:47 PM

#16

I compare all bikes to Evil Knevil and his Snake River bike, since it still holds the record for height and distance. Well, height at least.



  • KennyMc

Posted November 22, 2014 - 05:13 PM

#17

I would love me a rocket bike :lol:

  • stevethe

Posted November 22, 2014 - 05:31 PM

#18

I recently rode a stock KTM 500 exc I noticed it very torquey and the suspension very plush. However when I pushed it over the woops it was all over the place and while the torque was nice it was overgeard by the owner and barley made the hill my WR flew up. Booged in third and hit the rev limiter low on the rpm's in second.

Edited by stevethe, November 22, 2014 - 05:33 PM.


  • Krannie McKranface

Posted November 22, 2014 - 05:34 PM

#19

I recently rode a stock KTM 500 exc I noticed it very torquey and the suspension very plush. However when I pushed it over the woops it was all over the place and while the torque was nice it was overgeard by the owner and barley made the hill my WR flew up. Booged in third and hit the rev limiter low on the rpm's in second.

 

I sold my 500 XC-W after 5 rides. I've had 2 WR's since then.



  • letitsnow

Posted November 22, 2014 - 05:42 PM

#20

It seems like there is a certain weight that a bike has to be to not fall apart or be too flexy.   I'm just not sold that lighter is always better. 

 

I would never switch to a 300 due to any weight difference - I might make the switch to get the power characteristics of the 2 stroke, but not for the weight difference.  

 

I weigh 150 lbs and ride a steel framed WR450 at a slow A pace in the tight trees.  After riding 2 strokes for years, I really like the planted feeling of the big 450.  Also - I can ride at 30 degrees in the snow, or 95 degrees in the dunes and the bike runs without a jetting change - not perfect, but it gets it done.  My 2 strokes required constant changes...  


Edited by letitsnow, November 22, 2014 - 05:43 PM.





 
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.