Anyone pick up a 450FX yet?



951 replies to this topic
  • MidlifeCrisisGuy

Posted March 15, 2016 - 03:58 PM


I went out to the garage today and put my Husky on the scale. 2015 FE 350, has OEM plastic skid plate, hard parts rear disc guard, flexx bars, BPD rad guards and Cycra hand guards. It had maybe 1.25 gallons of gas in it. She topped the scales at 269 lbs! So full of gas I'm looking at 280LBS! If I were to have guessed, i would of said, maybe 250 lbs as it certainly doesn't feel like a porker which it obviously is. So the Yamaha 450FX at 253 lbs don't look so heavy now.

 

My friend's TE300 is heavy too.  I wanna say 258.

 

The YZ450FX is 263 pounds, stock, full of fuel.   My much modified WR is 252-5, depending what I've go ton it.   My YZ250FX, mostly stock is 250 lbs.  I'll lighten it up in a couple weeks. 



  • motocrotts

Posted March 15, 2016 - 04:03 PM


My friend's TE300 is heavy too.  I wanna say 258.

 

The YZ450FX is 263 pounds, stock, full of fuel.   My much modified WR is 252-5, depending what I've go ton it.   My YZ250FX, mostly stock is 250 lbs.  I'll lighten it up in a couple weeks. 

 

I've always known those 2 smokes were heavy, my 250X feels like my sherco compared to the 2stk KTM's.



  • JakeTheGreat

Posted March 15, 2016 - 05:25 PM


if you've read the reviews and find them so close the decision should be pretty easy to make just based on price alone.

if you could find another 3,000 reasons to buy the KTM unless you really need a desert racer with the MX transmission ratios i can not see 3,000 in value to buy the KTM.

i came really close!

i was able to ride the KTM in the dealer parking lot and it was the transmission alone geared the way it was just in 1st gear that turned me off.. i already knew this would not be the bike for me in the stuff i ride.

then we looked at sprockets, larger in the rear by 3 teeth and 1 lower in the front just to get close.

then i looked at mapping and it costs money to get that done by the dealer.

then i looked at the actual out the door sticker and decided to buy the yamaha.

i already had a 13 WR so i pretty much knew what to expect from the FX

all i can tell ya is the weight or how light the bike felt totally surprised me, felt easily 30 lbs lighter in the front end.

and the power is down right scary!

my KTM friends are all amazed and one who has a husaberg (this year is the same as a KTM) is looking for a new bike and i think will buy the FX. he rode it and for a while i wasn't sure if he was coming back! i knew he was very impressed.

so again if you can think of even 2,000 reasons to buy a KTM be my guest.

but the FX will not disappoint.

easily one of the best bikes ive owned and besides a few upgrades i did is an amazing machine right off the showroom floor.

if the weight concerns you, my bike is now within about 6 lbs with a full tank as the KTM with a full tank. don't let the numbers online mess with your head..

 

Wow man what did you do to shed all that weight? I know of things like changing the battery to save 3 or 4 lbs but you put your bike on a serious diet. Weight is the only deciding factor on leaning towards the XCF over the FX but if I could get some insight on how you did it, the FX would be a no brainer. 

My buddy just picked up his XC-F last week so I hope to get a ride soon.

Please let us or at least me know what you think about it. I had a 14 450 SXF that i loved and now have a 15 300 XC that is okay but miss the lazy riding style and torque of a four stroke. Just rode two hours on a 14' YZ 450 at the JBC 6 Hour at Glen Helen and fell in love with everything but the brakes and the clutch pull. I know these problems have been fixed on the FX and that is why I'm so eager to steer away from the orange kool-aid. 


Edited by JakeTheGreat, March 15, 2016 - 05:26 PM.


  • RMK800

Posted March 15, 2016 - 05:33 PM


You can drop 6 pounds by doing two things. Battery and TI pipe with header from fmf. So from 262 that get you to 256. I replaced the rear sprocket and their is no weight saving there. You do also have to remember that the YZ comes with bigger tire front and rear. You put those same tires on your down to 254. That's about as close as your going to get to a KTM besides removing the kickstand, kick starter etc. which I think is crazy to do.

6 to 8 pounds off get you within 10 to 12 of a KTM.

I got my 500 back from blu crew credit and was going to dump it into suspension, but got that figured out. Was so tempted to buy a full TI system FmF on eBay for 830, but the stock pipe is really good. Is it worth 1hp and 3 pounds? FMF torque is actually worse then stock. So I decided to do the prudent thing and I orders me a Scotts steering damper. So between my hand guards and my Scotts I'm almost back to what I lost when I went with a lithium battery.

Edited by RMK800, March 15, 2016 - 05:45 PM.


  • Bass Mechanic

Posted March 15, 2016 - 05:44 PM


You can drop 6 pounds by doing two things. Battery and TI pipe with header from fmf. So from 262 that get you to 256. I replaced the rear sprocket and their is no weight saving there. You do also have to remember that the YZ comes with bigger tire front and rear. You put those same tires on your down to 254. That's about as close as your going to get to a KTM besides removing the kickstand, kick starter etc. which I think is crazy to do.

6 to 8 pounds off get you within 10 to 12 of a KTM.


Exactly! And when you remove the fuel and weigh it empty just like how KTM does it when they advertise their weight you get another 12 pounds.
Now keeping in mind that nobody rides a bike with no fuel, rather a full tank and the Ktm holds .5 gallons more with a full tank you have to add 15 lbs to the Ktm advertised weight.
Now your within 1-2 pounds of the Ktm
When you think about it the Ktm is nothing special with regard to weight. All they did was use a lithium battery and remove the kick starter.
Can't speak for the weight of material the exhaust is made from, maybe aluminum?
But doing the same tricks to the Yamaha yields the same result.
You people that read specs only read what you want to believe. And KTM's marketing trickery works! Had they listed their weights with a full tank of fuel people wouldn't be so fixated on the weights!
What you should do is everytime you see a weight for the Ktm just disregard that number and add 15 to it. It's amazing to me how brainwashed people get.

  • MidlifeCrisisGuy

Posted March 15, 2016 - 05:53 PM


Exactly! And when you remove the fuel and weigh it empty just like how KTM does it when they advertise their weight you get another 12 pounds.
Now keeping in mind that nobody rides a bike with no fuel, rather a full tank and the Ktm holds .5 gallons more with a full tank you have to add 15 lbs to the Ktm advertised weight.
Now your within 1-2 pounds of the Ktm

 

There is a mistake in the weight calc here.  You can't easily get the Yami within a couple pounds of the KTM.   It will always be 10+ pounds heavier.  I think you are double accounting the KTM fuel.

 

I don't care what the scale says.   When Jimmy Lewis says it feels as light or lighter than the KTM, that is what I care about.  And remember they are comparing it to a 2016 XCF which is a lot lighter than the 2015 XCF.

 

And while we are talking about cost, the March 2016 issue had a nice write up on the 450FX  and also in the issue was a 3 page write up about the things you need to do to get a 2016 KTM 350 XCF to work properly on the trail - suspension, exhaust, tuning, linkage guard, etc.  In other words the KTMs are not trail ready out of the box.

 

The clincher for me is the transmission with the low 1st gear, the excellent suspension, the Yamaha programmer and the reliability.   Lots of people are having issues with the new KTM shocks.  They say have it fixed, but they must have thought that when they shipped them too. 


Edited by MidlifeCrisisGuy, March 15, 2016 - 06:00 PM.


  • motocrotts

Posted March 15, 2016 - 06:21 PM


Exactly! And when you remove the fuel and weigh it empty just like how KTM does it when they advertise their weight you get another 12 pounds.
Now keeping in mind that nobody rides a bike with no fuel, rather a full tank and the Ktm holds .5 gallons more with a full tank you have to add 15 lbs to the Ktm advertised weight.
Now your within 1-2 pounds of the Ktm
When you think about it the Ktm is nothing special with regard to weight. All they did was use a lithium battery and remove the kick starter.
Can't speak for the weight of material the exhaust is made from, maybe aluminum?
But doing the same tricks to the Yamaha yields the same result.
You people that read specs only read what you want to believe. And KTM's marketing trickery works! Had they listed their weights with a full tank of fuel people wouldn't be so fixated on the weights!
What you should do is everytime you see a weight for the Ktm just disregard that number and add 15 to it. It's amazing to me how brainwashed people get.

 

Exactly, KTM has the same marketing as HD!  They must, right?  They listed my Husky as 240 dry! I'll drain the gas and re-weigh, since when does a gallon of gas weigh 25lbs?



  • MidlifeCrisisGuy

Posted March 15, 2016 - 07:42 PM


Dirt Bike Mag weighs all the bikes they test. 

 

The 2016 TE300 is listed at 230.2 with no fuel.  It has a 2.9 gallon tank, so it has 20 ish pounds of fuel.  That puts it at 250.2 fuelled up.  Add a linkage guard, pipe guard, a better skid plate, a 140 rear tire and a steering damper and that is why my friends TE is 258 pounds.

 

The 450FX tested in March weighs 253 without fuel. It has a 2 gallon tank, so that puts it at 266 pounds, full of fuel and it still needs hand guards and a headlight.  Call it 270 ready to roll.  Drop off 6 pounds (Li battery, kickstand, pegs and a few other little things) and you are at 264 pounds, only 6 pounds heavier than the TE that DB says is "pretty tough to get any better than".  

 

If the KTM 450 XCF is 20 pounds lighter, that puts it at 233 without fuel.   KTM advertises their 2016 450 SXF at 227 pounds, so 233 doesn't seem like a stretch when you add handguards, kickstand and other stuff.

 

If the KTM 450 XCF is 20 pounds ligher than the 450FX and you drop 6 pounds from the FX, that narrows it to 14 pounds.   The KTM also carries and needs an extra 0.5 gallons of fuel, so that is another 3 pounds, which puts the difference at 11 pounds.  You also need a linkage guard on these bikes, which adds weight and $$$.  1.5 pounds ?  Call the difference 10 pounds.

 

At some point factors other than weight come into play.   If the stock FX feels lighter than the KTM and you lop another 6 pounds off of it, half from the battery high up under the seat, that is going to further improve handling.  Suspension matters, the transmission and clutch matter and the engine matters.   I can overlook 10 pounds on a bike that has these things and is reliable.



  • cubera

Posted March 15, 2016 - 08:44 PM


I'm a little portly too. No big deal



  • Edge316

Posted March 15, 2016 - 09:09 PM


Dirt Bike Mag weighs all the bikes they test.

The 2016 TE300 is listed at 230.2 with no fuel. It has a 2.9 gallon tank, so it has 20 ish pounds of fuel. That puts it at 250.2 fuelled up. Add a linkage guard, pipe guard, a better skid plate, a 140 rear tire and a steering damper and that is why my friends TE is 258 pounds.

The 450FX tested in March weighs 253 without fuel. It has a 2 gallon tank, so that puts it at 266 pounds, full of fuel and it still needs hand guards and a headlight. Call it 270 ready to roll. Drop off 6 pounds (Li battery, kickstand, pegs and a few other little things) and you are at 264 pounds, only 6 pounds heavier than the TE that DB says is "pretty tough to get any better than".

If the KTM 450 XCF is 20 pounds lighter, that puts it at 233 without fuel. KTM advertises their 2016 450 SXF at 227 pounds, so 233 doesn't seem like a stretch when you add handguards, kickstand and other stuff.

If the KTM 450 XCF is 20 pounds ligher than the 450FX and you drop 6 pounds from the FX, that narrows it to 14 pounds. The KTM also carries and needs an extra 0.5 gallons of fuel, so that is another 3 pounds, which puts the difference at 11 pounds. You also need a linkage guard on these bikes, which adds weight and $$$. 1.5 pounds ? Call the difference 10 pounds.

At some point factors other than weight come into play. If the stock FX feels lighter than the KTM and you lop another 6 pounds off of it, half from the battery high up under the seat, that is going to further improve handling. Suspension matters, the transmission and clutch matter and the engine matters. I can overlook 10 pounds on a bike that has these things and is reliable.


Don't always trust what you read in the mags. For instance Dirtbike had the 2015 yz450f at 236 with no fuel last year and this year the have the 2016 yz450f at 239lbs. There's no way the yz450 gained 3 lbs this year.

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

Posted March 15, 2016 - 09:12 PM


I went out to the garage today and put my Husky on the scale. 2015 FE 350, has OEM plastic skid plate, hard parts rear disc guard, flexx bars, BPD rad guards and Cycra hand guards. It had maybe 1.25 gallons of gas in it. She topped the scales at 269 lbs! So full of gas I'm looking at 280LBS! If I were to have guessed, i would of said, maybe 250 lbs as it certainly doesn't feel like a porker which it obviously is. So the Yamaha 450FX at 253 lbs don't look so heavy now.


It ain't 253 with handguards, rad guards etc etc, she will be over 280lbs...

  • Monk

Posted March 15, 2016 - 09:26 PM


Dirt Bike Mag weighs all the bikes they test.

The 2016 TE300 is listed at 230.2 with no fuel. It has a 2.9 gallon tank, so it has 20 ish pounds of fuel. That puts it at 250.2 fuelled up. Add a linkage guard, pipe guard, a better skid plate, a 140 rear tire and a steering damper and that is why my friends TE is 258 pounds.

The 450FX tested in March weighs 253 without fuel. It has a 2 gallon tank, so that puts it at 266 pounds, full of fuel and it still needs hand guards and a headlight. Call it 270 ready to roll. Drop off 6 pounds (Li battery, kickstand, pegs and a few other little things) and you are at 264 pounds, only 6 pounds heavier than the TE that DB says is "pretty tough to get any better than".

If the KTM 450 XCF is 20 pounds lighter, that puts it at 233 without fuel. KTM advertises their 2016 450 SXF at 227 pounds, so 233 doesn't seem like a stretch when you add handguards, kickstand and other stuff.

If the KTM 450 XCF is 20 pounds ligher than the 450FX and you drop 6 pounds from the FX, that narrows it to 14 pounds. The KTM also carries and needs an extra 0.5 gallons of fuel, so that is another 3 pounds, which puts the difference at 11 pounds. You also need a linkage guard on these bikes, which adds weight and $$$. 1.5 pounds ? Call the difference 10 pounds.

At some point factors other than weight come into play. If the stock FX feels lighter than the KTM and you lop another 6 pounds off of it, half from the battery high up under the seat, that is going to further improve handling. Suspension matters, the transmission and clutch matter and the engine matters. I can overlook 10 pounds on a bike that has these things and is reliable.

Lol, sorry to say but the bullshit is getting too thick. Every pound you can shave off a FX you can shave off a KTM. There is a 20+lb weight difference between a KTM 450xcf vs a Yamaha YZ450FX. You want to add a lighter exhaust, you can do the exact same to the KTM. The only one viable thing that you cannot do to a KTM is add a LiPo battery which the KTM comes stock with. Whatever random number you want to believe/makeup/imagine regarding weight between a KTM 450sxf and a YZ450F (and of course their HEAVIER offroad brothers, it is proof positive the KTM will always be lighter. There will never be a 10lb weight difference between the 2 offroad bikes, NEVER! Unless you throw major coin at the YZFX.

You go on and on about how you made your WR lighter, but you had to eliminate virtually everything off the bike to make it lighter, the battery, the e-start, plastic guards, plastic etc etc etc.

I've ridden both a YZF and a SXF 450 and the SXF feels lighter, smaller and handles better in almost every virtual way, the offroad brothers will feel exactly the same...

The whole retarded argument regarding you friends TE is pointless because you have already added 10lbs to the bike with a extra gallon of fuel, linkage guards etc etc. Take a gallon out and add all the offroad garb to the FX and it still 18-20lbs heavier.

I find you only want it include what YOU want to include so you do this math without being honest about the weight. Compare a bike with a linkage guard with another bike with a linkage guard...

Edited by Monk, March 15, 2016 - 09:30 PM.


  • Not sponsored

Posted March 16, 2016 - 03:16 AM


I have a te300 guarded up for woods and an fx with a light battery and q4, no kickstand. While I don't have the ability to weigh them I put them on the stand one after the other and there is no comparison, the fx is considerably heavier, I'd estimate 15lbs or more.

  • cubera

Posted March 16, 2016 - 06:40 AM


Lol, sorry to say but the bullshit is getting too thick. Every pound you can shave off a FX you can shave off a KTM. There is a 20+lb weight difference between a KTM 450xcf vs a Yamaha YZ450FX. You want to add a lighter exhaust, you can do the exact same to the KTM. The only one viable thing that you cannot do to a KTM is add a LiPo battery which the KTM comes stock with. Whatever random number you want to believe/makeup/imagine regarding weight between a KTM 450sxf and a YZ450F (and of course their HEAVIER offroad brothers, it is proof positive the KTM will always be lighter. There will never be a 10lb weight difference between the 2 offroad bikes, NEVER! Unless you throw major coin at the YZFX.

You go on and on about how you made your WR lighter, but you had to eliminate virtually everything off the bike to make it lighter, the battery, the e-start, plastic guards, plastic etc etc etc.

I've ridden both a YZF and a SXF 450 and the SXF feels lighter, smaller and handles better in almost every virtual way, the offroad brothers will feel exactly the same...

The whole retarded argument regarding you friends TE is pointless because you have already added 10lbs to the bike with a extra gallon of fuel, linkage guards etc etc. Take a gallon out and add all the offroad garb to the FX and it still 18-20lbs heavier.

I find you only want it include what YOU want to include so you do this math without being honest about the weight. Compare a bike with a linkage guard with another bike with a linkage guard...

 

The KTM comes with the exhaust that most of us would put on the FX to save weight over the OEM so there is some room to get rid of a few pounds off the FX that have already been done on the XC-F. Needless to say, the weight argument is getting old. The FX will always be heavier than the XC-F to some extent but it's not the weight that matters as much as how heavy it feels. There are lots of fat chicks who are light on their feet.....

 

I just wanted to add that in some circumstances weight is not always a bad thing. I spent lots of hours on a XR650R, the BigRedPig, which was amazing over boulder sized rocks and incredibly adept at some fairly tight single track, and was the ride of choice for those long rides in Baja.....for example. Having said that, there is not really a valid argument against Monk's point that lighter is better in virtually every situation.


Edited by cubera, March 16, 2016 - 06:45 AM.


  • stroker

Posted March 16, 2016 - 06:53 AM


Don't forget that some bikes come set up in a way that very few people will actually ride them (no real guards, paper thin tubes, even thin plastics, etc.  I always like to set up a bike the way you will actually ride/race it.  Then weigh it.  You may be a little shocked at that final number.   Now get some mud on it and weigh it again.

Your 4 stroke anything can start reading to 300 lbs!

 

More Weight can be a positive and a negative (positive: more momentum, less deflection.  Negative: harder to lift it on the stand, harder to pick up after your 25th crash) 

 

Less weight can be a positive and a negative: positive, easier to put on stand and pick up after the 25th crash, some aspects of handling are better.  Negative: more deflection and skittering around on trail junk, often will be more fragile, will not hold it's line as well, also less traction and hook up (think about that one)

 

MX bikes: I like lighter feel.  

 

Offroad bikes: as long as you have the skills to put the wheels where they need to be, many benefits to a bit heavier bike (within reason of course, no KLR 650 please LOL) also the mid to big bore 4T can be much easier to ride, low end torque finds traction instead of hi rpm hp from the smaller motors that tends to spin, harder to ride in bad terrain.

 

Final point on weight: lighter bikes can have thinner engine cases, plastics etc to get that weight down (no magic, less weight means less stuff, less stuff means weaker, unless exotic metals are employed).   So it can mean a less durable bike that will not last as long and will need more parts replacement from wear and breakage.  Just compare an XR to a modern thumper.  No one will argue which bike will last longer and require much less maintenance.  Nothing is free.  We are in the weight wars, we will test how far we can go before the maintenance schedule gets too much for the average guy, and the cost of ownership becomes unbearable for the average guy, the time spent wrenching instead of riding becomes too much etc.

 

That is another reason for the resurgence of the 300cc 2T motor.  Not really light requires more fuel, and when armoured up weights 250 lbs +/- no matter what the mags say. (owned plenty of them, got another one right now).  But it has some big motor character of lower rpm torque, not fragile and enough heft to hold their line, but not too heavy to pick up after a bad one.


Edited by stroker, March 16, 2016 - 07:04 AM.


  • MidlifeCrisisGuy

Posted March 16, 2016 - 07:38 AM


Lol, sorry to say but the bullshit is getting too thick. Every pound you can shave off a FX you can shave off a KTM. There is a 20+lb weight difference between a KTM 450xcf vs a Yamaha YZ450FX. You want to add a lighter exhaust, you can do the exact same to the KTM. The only one viable thing that you cannot do to a KTM is add a LiPo battery which the KTM comes stock with. Whatever random number you want to believe/makeup/imagine regarding weight between a KTM 450sxf and a YZ450F (and of course their HEAVIER offroad brothers, it is proof positive the KTM will always be lighter. There will never be a 10lb weight difference between the 2 offroad bikes, NEVER! Unless you throw major coin at the YZFX.

 

I never said that the KTM couldn't be made lighter.   For me it is about $$$$.   Anything can be made lighter with more $$$.   The KTM is already way more expensive, so making it lighter via $$$ doesn't make sense.   So I compare the FX to the stock KTM weight.   If I threw the $2500 ? that the Yamaha is cheaper at making it lighter, we'd probably have pretty equal bikes.  FWIW, it is probably a lot cheaper to take 10 pounds off the Yamaha than it is the KTM.

 

 

 

You go on and on about how you made your WR lighter, but you had to eliminate virtually everything off the bike to make it lighter, the battery, the e-start, plastic guards, plastic etc etc etc.

  Yes, I did.  That was the "price" of getting it to handle well in the bush.  It was a pig stock.  What was I supposed to do ?  I did the best I could with it.  I'd rather ride it the way I have it than stock.

 

 

 

I've ridden both a YZF and a SXF 450 and the SXF feels lighter, smaller and handles better in almost every virtual way, the offroad brothers will feel exactly the same...

  Jimmy Lewis doesn't think that, but OK.  JL says the FX was preferred in tighter conditions and by smaller riders.  Seems to me he thinks the FX is more nimble, which is what I am looking for.

 

 

 

The whole retarded argument regarding you friends TE is pointless because you have already added 10lbs to the bike with a extra gallon of fuel, linkage guards etc etc. Take a gallon out and add all the offroad garb to the FX and it still 18-20lbs heavier.

I like to compare a bike's weight ready to ride on the trail.   The TE is a fuel pig and it needs to carry an extra gallon.   And it definitely needs the linkage guard, pipe guard and a heavier skid plate to be trail ready.  It is the trail head weights that I am interested in.    The TE will be comparatively a bit lighter at the end of the ride due to using more fuel.

 

 

 

I find you only want it include what YOU want to include so you do this math without being honest about the weight. Compare a bike with a linkage guard with another bike with a linkage guard...

  The TE and the XCF both need linkage guards, so I add them into my calcs.  Just like the FX needs handguards and a light, so I add them in as well. I don't include steering dampers because I don't ride with one, though maybe if I was riding a 2 stroke I would want one on it.   I don't find them necessary on the 4 strokes, but that might just be me.

 

I hope this clears up MY methodology of comparing bike weights.  There is no BS to it.   The manufacturer's listed weight is only a starting point for me.  I wanna compare what it weighs on the trail head, ready to go.

 

And yes the XCF will always be the lighter bike.


Edited by MidlifeCrisisGuy, March 16, 2016 - 07:44 AM.


  • MidlifeCrisisGuy

Posted March 16, 2016 - 07:43 AM


I have a te300 guarded up for woods and an fx with a light battery and q4, no kickstand. While I don't have the ability to weigh them I put them on the stand one after the other and there is no comparison, the fx is considerably heavier, I'd estimate 15lbs or more.

 

My estimate was 258 versus 270 = 12 pounds, after removing some weight from the FX, so we are basically agreeing.



  • MidlifeCrisisGuy

Posted March 16, 2016 - 07:50 AM


If we really want to start splitting hairs, I think the FX uses a bigger battery for better starting and if we are running lights the FX has better electrical output.   If lights are a priority, we might be adding weight (and flywheel inertia) to the XCF to equal the comparison.   The FX has a charging system more comparable to the EXC than the XCF.

 

And while we are at it, how is the XCF at over heating ?   If the FX is like my WR, it doesn't need a rad fan, at least in my riding conditions.  If the XCF is as prone to over heating as people say the 350 XCF is, it needs a cooling fan whereas the FX doesn't.   Which brings us back to alternator output on the XCF if we need to run a light.

 

These are all trail head weight factors.


Edited by MidlifeCrisisGuy, March 16, 2016 - 07:54 AM.


  • grayracer513

Posted March 16, 2016 - 09:01 AM


The obsession some people appear to have regarding a few pounds of weight is somewhat seriously amusing to those of us who learned to ride on 340 pound bikes, I must tell you.  Owners of XR650's must be rolling on the floor.  But what the hell? Carry on.



  • keeseckb

Posted March 16, 2016 - 09:56 AM


Yea I have read that review multiple times but feel like it's bias towards the FX. Just got the new Dirt Bike Magazine and they did a compare and they gave it to the XCF. Just stuck in the middle between the two and want to hear someone on the forums real opinion. 

 

Go listen to the interview with Jimmy Lewis on Seat Time. He says that the YZ450FX is the most recent bike/product tested that they had the lowest expectations for but delivered the best results. He typically doesn't like the current generation YZ's so he went into the test with a biased toward the KTM but was blown away at the YZ450FX. It's a good listen and I think you can find it on YouTube or Stitcher. 







Related Content

 
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.