Upcoming decision between WR250 and WR450



62 replies to this topic
  • yamsman

Posted February 02, 2003 - 04:39 PM

#21

Thanks redhead1331,

Can you elaborate on how well the WR250 does on the steepest hills you ride. I mean, how long and steep are they, how do you ride them, and how does the bike do -- does it run out of RPMs on the ascent.

I'd rather get the WR250 -- but am tempted by the low-to-mid powerband of the WT450. My mind is 50/50, and I need convincing either way.

BTW, how much do you weigh??

yamsman

  • Corkster

Posted February 02, 2003 - 04:48 PM

#22

Love my 426 but if I had the decision again I would go for the 250. I am not a good enough rider to use the 426 power and am faster on other people's smaller, lighter bikes. You will probably learn more about weight distribution, braking, accellerating and cornering trying to maximise a 250 instead of trying to just hang on to the 450.

  • BikeKiller

Posted February 02, 2003 - 05:03 PM

#23

does the WR250 have enough low-end torque and tractability to handle most hill-climbing scenarios -- ie, would you describe its climbing capabilities based on your experiences.

lets use smilleys for this :D :) :D it has more than enough... i was riding in spokane at a place called 7 mile.. and there are some serious hills there... they used to be so big that u needed a big bore aka 500 to climb... that little WR just flew right up them like they were ant hills.. and torque.. there is alot there that sometimes isnt needed... and about the power band of the 450... actually what kind of trails do u ride?? becuz some of the low end that the 450 has to offer can just become hazourdus to riding... im not throwing any rocks at the 450 but its a fact.... i hope this helps your decision

  • yamsman

Posted February 02, 2003 - 05:05 PM

#24

Thanks much john450f,

Your 450 encouragement and dual sport comments are really helpful. It seems to me that paying 16 lbs for a substantive increase in power -- especially at the low-to-mids -- is a very profitable trade-off. I imagine I'll be kicking myself later if I go for the 250 -- but I'm not convinced. Let's say 51/47 for the 450, and 2% telling me to chill...

Regardless, I really appreciate ALL of the comments and suggestions I'm receiving -- and I suppose know that either bike would be a blast. I won't be talking with the dealer until Tuesday -- so, keep those cards and letters coming in..

yamsman

P.S. It's worth noting that if the WR250 and WR450 hold about 24 lbs of fluids -- meaning 253 and 269 lbs wet, respectively -- then the 16 lb differential is ONLY a 6.3% increase above the WR250's wet weight.

  • r1superstar

Posted February 02, 2003 - 05:12 PM

#25

I have the 250, and I am about your size, it has pleanty of power for me, and i don't think i will outgrow it any time soon. I have never ran into a situation where i wished i had more power. The 450 is too heavy, and takes more oout of you to ride.


:) Too heavy. My WR426FP feels as nimble as my KX 250 race bike. And if yamsman progresses really fast, he WILL be bored of the WR250.

"Yamsman",

I am 6'-0" 170 lbs. I LOVE my WR426FP!! It has plenty of power, and is also a &%$#@! cat if need be. Power is really smooth all around! I have encountered many hills thus far and the 426 has not let me down yet. (Knocking on wood) It is very nimble and as stated by others, flicks easily and the weight is not noticeable unless you drop it and have to pick it up. It is also good on the Motocross track but you'll need to stiffen up the suspension for this type of application.

As far as the YZ 450 goes, unless you don't plan on riding some tight stuff, then get this. But the WR fairs really well in the woods, and has five gears vs. four on the YZ. Please feel free to ask me any questions you may have.

Peace............db

  • yamsman

Posted February 02, 2003 - 05:16 PM

#26

Thanks also Superbike,

Your (and john450f's) dual sports comments are noted. I'm not sure if the YZ250 is an option at this point -- as I don't know if the dealer has or can get one. But this opens the door to other possibilities -- and more things to consider -- ouch!! my head is beginning to hurt...

But I'm carefully reading and considering all ideas and suggestions. Thanks.

yamsman

  • yamsman

Posted February 02, 2003 - 05:24 PM

#27

Thanks Corkster,

I think you make an IMPORTANT point by saying I'll "probably learn more about weight distribution, braking, accellerating and cornering trying to maximise a 250 instead of trying to just hang on to the 450."

You guys are forcing me to think... Which is great!!!

yamsman

  • r1superstar

Posted February 02, 2003 - 05:27 PM

#28

Love my 426 but if I had the decision again I would go for the 250. I am not a good enough rider to use the 426 power and am faster on other people's smaller, lighter bikes. You will probably learn more about weight distribution, braking, accellerating and cornering trying to maximise a 250 instead of trying to just hang on to the 450.



The two are not that big a difference in size or weight.

  • yamsman

Posted February 02, 2003 - 05:31 PM

#29

Hey BikeKiller,

Your comments are really helpful and welcomed -- and I don't want any more HP and FTLBS than are needed. Can you explain what you mean by, "some of the low end that the 450 has to offer can just become hazourdus to riding." I need educating..

  • neWRiver

Posted February 02, 2003 - 05:58 PM

#30

Thanks Corkster,

I think you make an IMPORTANT point by saying I'll "probably learn more about weight distribution, braking, accellerating and cornering trying to maximise a 250 instead of trying to just hang on to the 450."

You guys are forcing me to think... Which is great!!!

yamsman




I would echo this sentiment as well. The 250F is a great bike to learn on. And very fun to ride (get bored with it?- I don't think so). The 450F is a better bike to go fast on. Also, for dual sporting, I don't think you'd be happy with a 250F if you really plan to put in any real "on-road" mileage.

That said, alot of guys are making both bikes work well for different types of riding. You'll have a great bike no matter which you choose.

The 250F is perfect for the "escapist Weekend Warrior" and has plenty of low end (you'd be surprised) and can get up and move at a pretty good clip. Unless you regularly tackle the nastiest climbs you can find or are interested in WOT through the desert (or on the road), you won't really need the extra power of the 450F. But, that doesn't mean you shouldn't have it if you want it. :)

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

Posted February 02, 2003 - 06:03 PM

#31

Hey r1superstar,

As I mentioned in a reply to john450f -- "It's worth noting that if the WR250 and WR450 hold about 24 lbs of fluids -- meaning 253 and 269 lbs wet, respectively -- then the 16 lb differential is ONLY a 6.3% increase above the WR250's wet weight."

These figures are (I think) fairly representative -- because the "stated" dry weight of the 250 and 450 is 229 and 245 lbs, respectively. My understanding is that 2.6 gallons of gas weighs about 18 lbs, and the remaining 6 lbs are the other fluids.

While I appreciate that lighter-is-better in most handling situations -- I'm trying to get a handle on why a 6.3% (ie, 16lb) increase in weight can be a considered a deciding factor. I'm not saying it isn't really important -- but I don't understand how it off-sets the power/performance gain of the 450.

Redhead1331, Corkster, and BikeKiller make the case for LESS-FILLING -- and BikeKiller even says, "some of the low end that the 450 has to offer can just become hazourdus to riding."

Your response (and those of others) is welcomed...

  • BikeKiller

Posted February 02, 2003 - 06:10 PM

#32

yamsman.
im not sure but have u ever ridden a bike like the cannondale or something similar?? those bikes have a lot of torque and if u are in the right place at the wrong time then that torque could tear u up.. on a slick hill u could easily just dig a rut with that torque on the 450.. on the 250 however it has just the right amount of torgue and Hp that it just pulls itself up the hill... as i said. it all depends on where u ride.. if u have a ton of hills and wide open areas then the 450 is hard to beat.. now if u have a really tight single track area with hills then the 250 is really really hard to beat... i have ridden the YZ426 the KTM400 and the Cannondale E440 all of the bikes are awsome but sometimes all the power that they have to offer can be a bit to much for somebody to handle... all of the bikes i would own in a blink but for where i ride.. and what i ride.. the WR is perfect Belfair is single track in some places and double track( im not sure if that is right :)) and the 426 when i rode it was just a bit much in some of the hills.. it dug holes and ruts.. whereas when i went back to my WR there was no ruts or holes dug so.. these are my thoughts on teh matters.. im not sure if others share the same ideas about the bikes and there power..

  • yamsman

Posted February 02, 2003 - 06:25 PM

#33

Thanks neWRiver,

Your POV is appreciated and the points you make seem sensible and measured. 1) I don't crave speed, 2) any actual on-road would be limited even if my WR was dual-sport, 3) the 250 is a great bike to learn on (Corkster's point), 4) I will be the escapist WEW, 5) I won't be climbing the "nastiest" hills.

So, you may be right -- in that perhaps I won't need the additional power. But you are saying that the 250 has AMPLE (on steroids) low-end power to QUICKLY accelerate my 180 lbs under just about any conditions -- a question I guess you've already answered in the affirmative. (BTW, what is a WOT??)

  • yamsman

Posted February 02, 2003 - 06:39 PM

#34

Thanks BikeKiller,

Your reply nailed it. I'm getting the idea of your experiences and knowledge of too much available power being hard to control under certain circumstances. I won't be riding in wide-open areas -- rather, primarily in "single track areas with hills." And I'm sure that if the 426 was too much for you, then it will be too much for me.

Everyones input has been really helpful -- on both "sides." Now, I'm 52/44 toward the 250 -- and 4% brain-dead. I think I'll have to pick-up this thread tomorrow. THANKS, and please provide any other thoughts you have on this question -- especially regarding anything I might not have considered up to this point.

  • neWRiver

Posted February 02, 2003 - 06:41 PM

#35

But you are saying that the 250 has AMPLE (on steroids) low-end power to QUICKLY accelerate my 180 lbs under just about any conditions



At 180 pounds you are not that heavy. But, at 150 lbs (and only 5'8") I am pretty light so that does bear consideration. The question about quickly accelarating is pretty subjective. Are you talking about accelerating out of twisty turns in the woods or are you talking about getting to 90MPH as fast as humanly possible (BTW, WOT means wide open throttle)? Will the 250F get you butt moving or pull you up a hill right now? Hell yeah. Fast enough to scare yourself if you want to. But, you will have to twist hard to get that effect.

The thing is, there is no question that the power to weight ratio of the 450F is superior. The weight to managability and the power to managability ratios are a different matter. You will have to push the 250F to produce. You will learn how. You will have fun. The 450F will give you power on tap. But, will you use it? You will certainly have to "manage" it and at times your right hand can get you in trouble quick. Will the 250F leave you wanting more? In some spots, yeah. Probably less than you think, though.

  • Hawaii-Rider

Posted February 02, 2003 - 08:12 PM

#36

Yamsman:
you are getting all the advice you need!....so let this ol you know what throw in $.10 more!! :)

If you are riding single track, woods, trails, play etc and not hitting wide open CR500 stuff as a rule, the WR250f is more than plenty.
Ive clocked mine at just short of 90mph, hair dependent! So if you have enough, the little does too!

Being out of the game for a few years, the 5 valve 1/4 liter motor will open your eyes. She is pretty awesome, and on the trail it will keep up with anything given pretty equal rider skill. = competive to the max!

No you cant go wrong with any of todays bikes, they pretty much are all awesome. Key is finding one that you enjoy and makes you smile the mostest!
Honestly after 30+ years of this game, the WR250f with the mods is more than enough for almost anyone in the tight stuff, woods play etc and vet moto etc.
The extra power of the 450 is pretty nice, but you will find it can easliy wear on you in the trails if you start to push it or on long rides.

First priority is awesome legs. Give me an okay motor, with awesome legs and I will rail.
In the tight single track a well set up XR250 will flat run circles around most anything, thing is bike makers know that us guys refuse to check our egos at the door! :D

The 250 will make you smile and you wont be as tired when you are running hard or when you are done as the 450. You will feel the weight up high more than the 250, which translates into turning effort, lane changing effort and just pure wrestling with the beast in the mud and tight ....
so......off my soap box....but you cant go wrong with either....but power aint always the answer, smooth delivery, and great legs are IMHO.
98% of us cant use the power the modern bikes put out....you may on paper show where the 450 only weighs X more than the 250 but felt weight, more rotational mass of the bigger bore etc...you feel it....rode em all, would love to have any of in the garage....and in fact after my dale, the WR of my oldest boy is my most favorite bike to ride....and it hauls my 225 pound carcass around just fine!...
I will not throw WRocks at any of Yamahas line, all sweet....and you can have huge smiles on any of em!...

Good luck!

HR
:D

  • yamsman

Posted February 03, 2003 - 02:58 AM

#37

Thanks for the follow-up NeWRiver,

Regarding "quick" acceleration -- I'm definitely not "talking about getting to 90MPH as fast as humanly possible" -- instead, more on the order of "accelerating out of twisty turns in the woods" and climbing single-track hills, and the like.

Your thoughts about "weight to managability and the power to managability ratios" and that my "right hand can get [me] in trouble quick" are dovetailing into the advice of JL, redhead1331, Corkster, BikeKiller, and Hawaii-Rider -- including the argument that the 250 is simply easier and less taxing to handle and the better bike to develop all-around riding skills on.

Yet the input by ddialogue, ThumperWR450F, r1superstar, john450f, Superbike is persuasive -- generally making the case that the 450 is also easy to handle (albiet, less so than the 250,) more of a rush with its ton of reserve low-end power, and a bike to grow into.

Both groups have made a great case -- although it seems the 250 advocates have presented a more thorough and thoughtful case, while the 450s have made a more passionate (though sensible) one.

I will have to re-re-re-read all of this -- because I am still uncertain. Yet, happily, several of you have said that there is NO bad choice in this.

yamsman

  • yamsman

Posted February 03, 2003 - 03:25 AM

#38

Thanks Hawaii-Rider,

Your pro-250 remarks -- read in the morning after a night's sleep -- were terrific. Those, along with neWRiver's (also read this morning) seem the capstone for the 250 case. After all, I'm only looking to maximize my fun and adventure as an "escapist WeekEnd Warrior," riding on rough terrain or trails or in woods -- with no real "competitive" aspirations. A scenario suggesting a tilt toward finess, rather than power.

And I'm sure your points about "legs" and "felt weight, more rotational mass of the bigger bore" is right on the money!!

Let's say I'm leaning 54/46 toward the 250.

And EVERYONE'S input is really appreciated!!

yamsman

  • Math

Posted February 03, 2003 - 03:38 AM

#39

I did not read all the posts but I was in the same situation of choosing between a 426 and a 250 last year and I finally choosed the 426.

I would have liked to have the 250 in the woods better than the 426 because I think that the 426 has too much power for 95% of their owners at least and that includes myself(I know guys, too much is never enough!!!! :D :D Yaahhhhh!!!)so one could say the 250 as enough power and is lighter and choose it...JUST LIKE i WAS ABOUT TO DO.

BUT BUT BUT THE THING IS THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT DUAL SPORTING!!!! NEWRIVER AND R1SUPESTAR GOT IT RIGHT. YOU NEED THE EXTRA 200 CC TO FIT ON THE ROAD. THIS HAS BEEN THE DECISIVE ARGUEMENT FOR ME AND I DON'T REGRET MY CHOICE. BUY THE 450F.

YOU WON'T BE EJECTED OF THE BIKE ANYWAY BECAUSE OF TOO MUCH POWER. JUST BE REASONABLE ON THE THROTTLE. WHEN THE TIME TO PASS THAT TRUCK AT 70MPH COME, YOU'LL BE HAPPY TO HAVE THAT MUCH POWER. It is a matter of security. Being that small as the 250 on the road feels risky to me. I've never tried but I'm pretty sure dying is not very practical.
:)

  • JL

Posted February 03, 2003 - 03:54 AM

#40

yamsman - just to make matters worse for you have you thought of this

At present the 250F is regarded as the best 250 BUT is the 450F the best 450 for the average rider? I'm thinking KTM and Husaberg here, sorry but just my thoughts :)




 
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.