WR vs. DRZ? Seeking input
Posted October 26, 2004 - 12:22 AM
Thanks in advance!
Posted October 26, 2004 - 12:59 AM
Posted October 26, 2004 - 05:15 AM
Unless your real short on cash there is no choice. The WRF wins in every respect by a country mile, except value for money as a medium performance trail bike and maintanance costs. Two of my riding mates ride DRZ400E and they are very reliable trail bikes, but
Yes, the DRZ are very reliable and the $1,000 difference in price can
make anyone think twice...
my stock WR250F flogs them everywhere except up the steepest hills with water jumps where I lose revs over the jumps and have to drop a gear.
Um, whatever...The DRZ400E in it's stock trim will outrun a WR250F.
Especially if you're talking about a 200+ pound rider. I've ridden
both a stock WR250F and a well-jetted and piped WR250F. No way will
they out run a DRZ400E.
They are smaller, have less trave, harsh suspension and the WR250F and WR450F leave them for dead.
Smaller? Harsh suspension? Leaves them for dead? Man, it's time for
you to get off the sauce...
The DRZ is well-known for having a stock suspension that is too
soft. In fact, the stock suspension is sprung for a 175-lb rider so
any of us 200+ lb guys have to have them resprung.
Smaller? Um, the DRZ is also known for being tall and skinny which
can fool you into thinking it's light until you have to pick it up...
Why do you think Kouba makes lowering links for the DRZ??
So unless your cash strapped, 4'10", or only want a reliable medium performance trail bike then go the WRF.
That's a silly statement.
The DRZ is every bit as capable as the WR. The problem lies in the
fact that you need to spend the difference in price to make the DRZ
competitive with the WR.
The DRZ is a 400, the WR is a 450. The DRZ suspension is too soft
outta the box.
Yes, I'm entitled to my opinion just as you are. IMO, I think you've
got two possibilites...either your buddies don't know how to ride,
or their DRZs aren't properly setup.
A DRZ400E makes 41hp with the stock exhaust.
IF you think the DRZ cannot run with a WR450, just ask the guys in
the Moab thread in the Rocky Mountain forum what color they had to
see in front of them for 3-days.
With that said, would I buy a WR? Yes, the next time around I would
probably buy the WR because it now has e-start, is a factory 450, has
a wide-ratio trans and is about 20-lbs. lighter. I like the USD forks
because they're better stock than the DRZ for the big hits, but that
can be easily remedied on the DRZ.
If Suzuki lightens the DRZ and makes it a factory 450, I'd probably
go with that again.
For most riders, a stock DRZ400E will be plenty of bike. If you're a
more aggressive rider, then you're better suited for the WR450.
If you're an experienced rider like me, then you'll need to spend
some $$$ to make the DRZ competitive to an uncorked WR450.
The bottom line is that you can't really go wrong with either bike.
They're both very good machines.
Posted October 27, 2004 - 08:18 AM
In a nutshell the S bike is probably the best dual sport street legal bike available. (not sure about the KTM's) It's got plenty of zip, behaves on the street, and is very reliable. Conversly, it is heavy, does require some serious $$ to wake up, and is NOT an aggressive trail bike.
It's got some junk on it to make it street legal.(steel gas tank, chain guard, radiator fan, CRAP tires, and a butt plug exhaust)
The E or just plain DRZ 400 is a really fun bike. It has similar power to the S, a noticable amount more. Suspension is plush and the seat is soft too. I like how the DRZ steers also. It is a great technical terrain bike. The bike is very versatile as well. I would be comfortable putting a relatively new rider on one of these without hesitation. It is predictable, not a harsh power hit, and is super reliable.
I'll admit up front that I'm biased to the WR's.(afterall this is a WR forum ) The WR's really offer an aggressive rider a bit more. It definitely has a really punchy motor,proven reliability, and a good suspension package. It is also somewhat light weight in comparison to many other bikes out there. The WR's are a quite versatile trail bike too. What I really like about mine, is that at just about any speed, slogging or ripping, you can jam on the throttle and wheelie over anything. The power is addicting. The bike is a bit tall for me, but I have adapted.(grew longer legs)
I would argue the WR250 pulling away from a DRZ400 also, unless it is a severly hopped up 250. I don't know for sure. I have limited experience on the 2 fidy.
In essence, both bikes are great. I think your on the right track looking Yamaha and Suzuki. You very seldom hear of motor problems with either company. I can't say the same for the rest of the companies out there. Reliability shoud be a primary concern too.......because walking sucks.
Posted November 05, 2004 - 04:53 PM
Posted November 08, 2004 - 04:06 PM
Posted November 08, 2004 - 04:35 PM
Unless your real short on cash there is no choice. The WRF wins in every respect by a country mile, except value for money as a medium performance trail bike and maintanance costs. Two of my riding mates ride DRZ400E and they are very reliable trail bikes, but my stock WR250F flogs them everywhere except up the steepest hills with water jumps where I lose revs over the jumps and have to drop a gear. They are smaller, have less trave, harsh suspension and the WR250F and WR450F leave them for dead. So unless your cash strapped, 4'10", or only want a reliable medium performance trail bike then go the WRF.
Rirder makes the difference of someone pulling away from someone. I have a friend who can beat most on the tight trails on his xr 250.
IT is all in the rider.