'98 WR400F vs newer 400 & 426?
Posted May 10, 2002 - 07:05 PM
There's a used '98 WR400F for sale not too far from me that sounds interesting. Its a lot cheaper then the newer 400 & 426's that I have seen.
Can any of you tell me if the differences between the 98 and the later years are significant?
Any things to look out for, or mandatory upgrades?
I do mainly tight, wet woods riding up here in the NorthWet, with some occiasional trail riding in the Cascades where its a little dryer and the trails are a little more open (Little Naches, Easton, Cle Elum).
I was hoping to get a new or newer 400 or 426 or maybe even a WR250F, but I am having trouble raising the money, and I could afford this bike right now, so I am tempted to go check it out.
Any input would be greatly appreciated.
ps: I rode a nicely setup 2000 WR400F recently and loved it.
Posted May 11, 2002 - 06:02 AM
Posted May 11, 2002 - 08:02 AM
better steering (frame geometry)
MUCH better carburation
beefier clutch (early ones EXPLODED)
426 has better low end torque
better rims (Excel)
Posted May 13, 2002 - 05:32 AM
Posted May 13, 2002 - 06:43 AM
Originally posted by arrow101:
The 98's are good bikes mine has done a swag of kays no major dramas.
A swag of kays?
I have a hard time believing that. Got any pictures???
Posted May 13, 2002 - 06:50 AM
[ May 13, 2002: Message edited by: lewichris ]
Posted May 13, 2002 - 10:25 AM
Buy it. Ride it. Break it, Fix it. Repeat cycle.
Just my $.02
Posted May 13, 2002 - 11:26 AM