250 vs. 450 which one do I get?


20 replies to this topic
  • Vegemite_luva

Posted February 08, 2007 - 04:45 PM

#1

I am trying to decide on getting either a used WR250 or WR450. I will do a 50/50 split between riding mx tracks and trails in NJ/NY/PA/CT so this means soft and loose mx tracks and extremely technical rocky/rooty/muddy East coast trails. I want a low maintenaince bike that is reliable enough where I can just take the bike into shop twice a year(check valves, piston, rings, etc) and I would do the air/oil every few rides myself. I weight 200 pounds without gear and value fun over speed.

Given my weight I am afraid I will over work the 250 and spend too much on maintenaince and want more power in 6 months but on the flipside I am afraid the 450 is too clumsy on the mx track and super technical trails.

I have found a 2003 WR250 and a 2003 WR450 that fit my budget(around $3000) so I am anxious to move on either one of these bikes before they are gone. So I humbly ask all you WR kung fu masters to show me the way.

  • ARin

Posted February 08, 2007 - 04:59 PM

#2

how much do you weight, and how much experience do you have?

  • Vegemite_luva

Posted February 08, 2007 - 05:01 PM

#3

I weight 200 pounds without gear and I am an intermediate level rider.

  • Old_Yeller

Posted February 09, 2007 - 11:40 AM

#4

I had the same question and bought the 450. My buddies all bought 250s and now they wish they would have bought 450s. Go do a search on valves in the 250 forum and be prepaired to be shocked at how much trouble they have. The 250s eat valves like I eat pizza! One of my buddies already needs a valve job after just one year. My bike is still going strong!

GET THE 450!!!

  • MN_Paul

Posted February 09, 2007 - 03:10 PM

#5

While I haven't ridden the 250, when I have sat on them back to back with the 450, I have to look to see which bike I am on. The weight difference isn't that much (although the 450 carries it's weight a bit higher) but the power difference is quite a bit. Sometimes, extra power makes riding easier.

Paul

  • Jwar1r1t3

Posted February 10, 2007 - 07:39 AM

#6

While I haven't ridden the 250, when I have sat on them back to back with the 450, I have to look to see which bike I am on. The weight difference isn't that much (although the 450 carries it's weight a bit higher) but the power difference is quite a bit. Sometimes, extra power makes riding easier.

Paul


I felt the same way when I sat on both of them, and I opted for the 450. I ride the east coast trails, and do little mx. When I say little, it isn't that much, and not very big jumps. I'm more into hillclimbs and technical trails.

You will be more than satisfied with the 450, more power than you need is better than not enough, and get it sprung for your weight and it will handle MX fine. I wouldn't valve it for MX because then it would be difficult to ride in the trails.

Honestly, I don't think the weight is going to hamper any situation in the woods. My XR 250 weighs 9 lbs lighter DRY. But holds more feul and more oil, so It ends up being pretty much the same. And the XR 250's are the choice for tight single track.

The only thing that makes riding in the tight stuff easier with the XR is that it is geared lower. You can fix that by getting a 13 or 12 tooth sprocket on the WR. Get the 450, you won't be wishing you got anything else.:censored: :lol: :ride:

  • dtkiko

Posted February 10, 2007 - 07:54 AM

#7

a YZ250 2-stroke, the absolute woods bike :censored:

why don't you drop by yammie's 2-stroke forum, mate, and post the same question; this time with on 250 2-stroke against a 450 thumper...

by the way, XR's are good in tight trails especially for beginner and novice trail riders because for one reason: they are low-compression type engines. no wonder, you don't need special skills to trackdown the power....peak power of XR250's is just 23-24 hp.

good day, boys.

  • Jwar1r1t3

Posted February 10, 2007 - 07:45 PM

#8

a YZ250 2-stroke, the absolute woods bike :censored:

why don't you drop by yammie's 2-stroke forum, mate, and post the same question; this time with on 250 2-stroke against a 450 thumper...

by the way, XR's are good in tight trails especially for beginner and novice trail riders because for one reason: they are low-compression type engines. no wonder, you don't need special skills to trackdown the power....peak power of XR250's is just 23-24 hp.

good day, boys.


So 10.5:1 is a low compression??? And horsepower is not what the XR is about. They are all about the torque and tracktability. They are a hell of alot easier to ride in the woods than any 2 stroke.

  • ARin

Posted February 11, 2007 - 01:45 AM

#9

if you are 200 lbs, and have a MODICUM of seat time under your belt, then i think a 450 would be more "appropriate".

  • Beejay

Posted February 11, 2007 - 01:49 AM

#10

As Old Yeller says, get the 450 & you'll soon be trying to get more power out of her.

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

Posted February 11, 2007 - 06:58 AM

#11

I debated this question for about a week finally deciding that if I wanted to slake my need for speed in the dirt that I had better get the 450 to haul my 200lb (with gear) butt.

The other line of reasoning went like this...I've already owned a 250...I'm a big boy now and therefore completely ready for a 450.

Besides...I'll fly almost twice as far and stay in a coma almost twice as long than I would getting off the 250...right!

-Jay

  • RangerCharlie

Posted February 11, 2007 - 07:32 AM

#12

Where did you find that 250f's eat valves??? I think you are waving that wand over all 250f's, which is wrong.
I've raced my '05 WR250 for 2 years now and it has not needed a valve adjustment yet, each time it has been spot on. I know several other people that race 250f's and they haven't had much of an issue either.
That's like taking the 2 WR450 riders I know who have had valve issues and saying all 450's eat valves...
For the track and tight trail I think the 250 is better, open areas and D/S yes I would got with the 450.
BTW I have a friend selling a '03 WR450 if you are interested...

  • dtkiko

Posted February 11, 2007 - 07:58 AM

#13

So 10.5:1 is a low compression??? And horsepower is not what the XR is about. They are all about the torque and tracktability. They are a hell of alot easier to ride in the woods than any 2 stroke.


yup XR's are easier to ride in woods that's why they are for beginners :lol: they have better tracktability than any hyper 2-stroke but not better in that aspect on 2-stroke enduro bikes like the DT's. the same that XR's are excellent woods weapons doesn't apply, however, for expert woods/ trail riders....GNCC and all other gnarly events, e.g. erzberg and last man standing, are flooded with 2-strokers :censored:

2-strokes MX bikes demand far better riding skills in tight/ gnarly sections than 4-strokes. why i know this? because i have owned and driven enduros and MX bikes (XR200, DT125, YZ125) over the years and exclusively only on trails...

yamaha and suzuki boosted their sales last year on 2-stroke bikes because more and more off-roaders, especially the euros are now becoming aware of the falacies in the vaunted 4-stroke fad :ride:

do you have any idea how much torque does the XR's and other 4-stroke OHC enduro bikes produce? well XR200's produce only 15.21 N-m (same as my DT125), yamaha XT225 (17.56 N-m), and XR250 (19.20 N-m). in comparison, DT175's produce 18.64 N-m of torque. XR250's produce only a peak power of 23-24 hp...the same way, XR400's between 30-31 hp.

compare that to a YZ250, peak power of 47 hp and torque of 50 N-m, couple it with an FMF gnarly pipe and a 9-oz flywheel weight to tame down the power thus better tracktability, i don't see any evidence even just by the numbers that the vaunted XR250 is torquier than the baby-blue 250 :applause:

good day, gentlemen.

  • bigbully

Posted February 11, 2007 - 09:57 AM

#14

There was a recall on the '06 YZ250F valves and all of sudden people are saying Yamaha 250s in general eat valves or require valve maintenance often!

  • bigbully

Posted February 11, 2007 - 09:59 AM

#15

By the way, I actually met a guy in the desert a couple of weekends ago who had a brand new '07 WR250. He moved down from the 450, because he said the 250 was more fun and faster (He wasn't a small guy either) :censored:

  • Vegemite_luva

Posted February 12, 2007 - 05:58 PM

#16

Hey RC, I think I am buying your friend's bike, is his name Mike?

Obviously I have decided to do the Tool Man Taylor thing and get "MORE POWER" and go for the 450. I honestly don't know where you got that anyone was complaining about the WR valves, perhaps you misread someone saying I should get stiffer springs to deal with my poundage but not fool with the valving.

Anyhow, I am hoping to pickup the WR450F this weekend and I want to thank all you WR Kung Fu Masters, your Kung Fu is good.

  • blackdog9

Posted February 13, 2007 - 05:05 AM

#17

If you are doing tight trails, rocks and woods I would prefer a 250 2-stroke bike. Remember that a wide ratio trannny with big engine is more suitable for open spaces....:censored:

  • Vegemite_luva

Posted February 18, 2007 - 07:23 AM

#18

If I could have found an equally good deal on a 250(F) then I would have gone for it but can you really beat a 2003 WR450F with a bunch of mods like Fluidyne large capacity radiators, Boyeson Quikshot, full FMF Q exhaust, and all the free mods for just $2,500.00. Anyhow, I just picked up a 2003 WR450F and I am as excited as a little schoolgirl(well maybe not quite like that but you get what I mean). I took it for just a little spin and wow this thing is fast! It's a little tall for me so I am definitely going to get the seat foam shaved and a gel insert installed. Plus I am going to look into getting the suspension shorted super moto style and I am probably will install a rekluse or hinson auto clutch in the near future. Now enough time on the computer, time to ride!

  • happe

Posted February 25, 2007 - 09:14 PM

#19

I have had both (3 years on the 250,1 year on the 450) and weigh 200# also, Get the 450 no question..You don't have to go WFO Just nice to have and you won't notice the weight.

  • TuningFork426

Posted February 26, 2007 - 12:41 AM

#20

By the way, I actually met a guy in the desert a couple of weekends ago who had a brand new '07 WR250. He moved down from the 450, because he said the 250 was more fun and faster (He wasn't a small guy either) :applause:


Did you belive him ? :applause:




 
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.