very good point. but how many people have out high performance 4 stroke minis? nobody. they are really all trail bikes. that accounts for some. i think if they release a 150f that will eliminate the 105 too. hopefully not, hopefully they keep all the ones they have and this whole thing is a lie.
2010 KTM model info. Deleted models and upgrades/changes
Started by Chazmanian, May 12 2009 12:50 PM
111 replies to this topic
Posted 13 May 2009 - 07:03 PM
And heck, if we look at only >100cc models, 08/09 had 11 2-strokes and 11 4-strokes. The listed '10 lineup dropped 3 of each, putting them still on equal footing.
KTM really has a super wide array of off-road bikes, with half the big bikes and more than half the dirt bikes still 2-strokes. Heck, by my counting, there are six different 250's to choose from (2 and 4 stroke, SX, XC, XCW).
Based on that, bikes sales, what I see at races, and what the KTM factory riders are winning on, I really wouldn't worry about them dropping the 2-strokes.
KTM really has a super wide array of off-road bikes, with half the big bikes and more than half the dirt bikes still 2-strokes. Heck, by my counting, there are six different 250's to choose from (2 and 4 stroke, SX, XC, XCW).
Based on that, bikes sales, what I see at races, and what the KTM factory riders are winning on, I really wouldn't worry about them dropping the 2-strokes.
Posted 14 May 2009 - 04:27 AM
magic man, you make a lot of assumptions and are awful sure of yourself on things you haven't experienced.
Oh my, 8 lbs, it's a pig. FYI, the 200 weighs the same as the 250SX.
The 150 makes as much peak power as the 200, if not more, but the 200 has smoother, torquier power.
Why don't you throw a leg over one before jumping to conclusions.
kids.
just givin' ya grief.
Oh my, 8 lbs, it's a pig. FYI, the 200 weighs the same as the 250SX.
The 150 makes as much peak power as the 200, if not more, but the 200 has smoother, torquier power. Why don't you throw a leg over one before jumping to conclusions.
kids.
just givin' ya grief.
Posted 14 May 2009 - 06:41 AM
My local dealer tells me that the EPA noose will tighten again in 2012, and two strokes may be limited to track use only. It's fact that some lakes will not allow 2 stroke outboards, so I can see trails on federal land following suit, and not allowing 2 stroke motorcycles as well. It really kills me to think I wouldn't be able to ride my 250 on local trails, but it may happen. I hope the guy is wrong, but the writing could be on the wall. If you think this isn't possible, think of this. If someone told you a couple years ago that kids bikes would be outlawed, would you have believed them?
Posted 14 May 2009 - 11:05 AM
thescreamingkiwi said:
mtman, have you ever ridden a KTM 200? They are incredible bikes, my dad has one and I cannot find a downside. Rather, it is all the QUALITIES of the 125 and the 250 mixed together. I've wanted one for the longest time. He is very happy with his and the power is straight through with lots of torque everywhere. Smooth powerband as well.
I'm sure all the '10 bikes are sick but I could not be happier with my 144. It's been my dream bike for so long. I haven't nearly put the hours on it, my guess is under 10, but we're 2 peas in a pod I suppose you could say.
Too bad about the chains as well, IMO Regina and KTM go hand in hand.
I'm sure all the '10 bikes are sick but I could not be happier with my 144. It's been my dream bike for so long. I haven't nearly put the hours on it, my guess is under 10, but we're 2 peas in a pod I suppose you could say.
Too bad about the chains as well, IMO Regina and KTM go hand in hand.
Yes I have ridden a bunch of 200s starting in the late 90's till now . What good qualities do they mix? The lack of power from a 125, without any over rev? Or the weakest power of any 250? I know a lot of people love the 200, which I will never understand. I can see them as a trail bike since they are so tame (lame), but as we all know KTMs are "Race Ready". That tells me if was designed as a race bike, and not a good one at that. What class was it even designed for? In Europe it was to race 250's which with equal riders it will lose every time. That leaves the 200 class here in the states in Enduros and Hare Scrambles, or age classes, open, etc. I can honestly say that having ridden the 200 class from the C division up through the A division, that a 125 will also beat a 200 98% of the time. Which brings me back to my statement that they would be a decent trail bike. The power allows you to be lazy, it has great bottom end for a 125/150, but not the equivalent of a 250, then the power falls flat early compared to a 125/150, and it never pulls as hard as a 250. So its an easy bike to ride slowly, not like a 125/150 where if your trying to go fast you have to work at it. Likewise on a 250, if your riding it fast you have to really be on top of your game, although it can also be ridden lazy if you like. I just can't think of any situation in a race that I would prefer a 200 over either a 125/150, or a 250. Trail riding maybe a different case, but since I don't have any kids, and every ride I go on turns into a full on race with my buddies, I still don't want one. For this reason alone I think it deserves to be dropped, like it or not. It is the perfect example of what doesn't fit in this picture, and is the ultimate in-between do it all bike. It does nothing excellently, but it does everything ok.
If I hurt anyones feelings, well then I am sorry. But this is the internet and as long as there are no topless women, even if they are covered, or I am attacking anyone personally, then I can have my opinion. Oh and there is not a 200 out there that will run with a 250, even if it has everything you can do to it done, it may for half a day, but then it WILL grenade, just the way it is.
Posted 14 May 2009 - 12:52 PM
gmoss said:
magic man, you make a lot of assumptions and are awful sure of yourself on things you haven't experienced.
Oh my, 8 lbs, it's a pig. FYI, the 200 weighs the same as the 250SX. The 150 makes as much peak power as the 200, if not more, but the 200 has smoother, torquier power.
Why don't you throw a leg over one before jumping to conclusions.
kids.
just givin' ya grief.
Oh my, 8 lbs, it's a pig. FYI, the 200 weighs the same as the 250SX.
The 150 makes as much peak power as the 200, if not more, but the 200 has smoother, torquier power. Why don't you throw a leg over one before jumping to conclusions.
kids.
just givin' ya grief.
lol i didnt say it was a pig it matters to me because im small lol. i didnt insult the 200 either way, i like the 200s, they seem like cool bikes.
Posted 14 May 2009 - 01:27 PM
thescreamingkiwi said:
sure does....not even comparable....40HP of a 144 to the 35 of a 250F....?
just wondering were this info is coming from cause a KTM sx-f 250 makes over 37hp, wheel and not sure about the 144, but 40 seems to high
anyway not everything is about hp, in mx torque is just as important,
and then you all know about the power delievery....
so were are those number coming from???
Posted 14 May 2009 - 03:32 PM
Magic-Man-150 said:
i prefer to not go from a 150 four stroke to an equivalent of a 400 fourstroke for my next bike. it says all the xcs are getting clear tanks btw. im not all that experienced but im growing so i dont want a 200. plus its like 8 pounds heavier or something like that. its heavier than a 250sx.
I went from a TTR 125 to a KTM 250sx, it was tough at first but you get used to it. My friend went from a 230 to a 450, no big deal for him either.
Posted 14 May 2009 - 05:32 PM
db330 said:
just wondering were this info is coming from cause a KTM sx-f 250 makes over 37hp, wheel and not sure about the 144, but 40 seems to high
anyway not everything is about hp, in mx torque is just as important,
and then you all know about the power delievery....
so were are those number coming from???
anyway not everything is about hp, in mx torque is just as important,
and then you all know about the power delievery....
so were are those number coming from???
Sorry, HP numbers really interest me. numbers are here. 144 is also .3 ft/lb of torque behind a 250SXF.
http://www.motocross...73612DC6DF57917
Posted 15 May 2009 - 04:33 AM
mtman said:
Yes I have ridden a bunch of 200s starting in the late 90's till now . What good qualities do they mix? The lack of power from a 125, without any over rev? Or the weakest power of any 250? I know a lot of people love the 200, which I will never understand. I can see them as a trail bike since they are so tame (lame), but as we all know KTMs are "Race Ready". That tells me if was designed as a race bike, and not a good one at that. What class was it even designed for? In Europe it was to race 250's which with equal riders it will lose every time. That leaves the 200 class here in the states in Enduros and Hare Scrambles, or age classes, open, etc. I can honestly say that having ridden the 200 class from the C division up through the A division, that a 125 will also beat a 200 98% of the time. Which brings me back to my statement that they would be a decent trail bike. The power allows you to be lazy, it has great bottom end for a 125/150, but not the equivalent of a 250, then the power falls flat early compared to a 125/150, and it never pulls as hard as a 250. So its an easy bike to ride slowly, not like a 125/150 where if your trying to go fast you have to work at it. Likewise on a 250, if your riding it fast you have to really be on top of your game, although it can also be ridden lazy if you like. I just can't think of any situation in a race that I would prefer a 200 over either a 125/150, or a 250. Trail riding maybe a different case, but since I don't have any kids, and every ride I go on turns into a full on race with my buddies, I still don't want one. For this reason alone I think it deserves to be dropped, like it or not. It is the perfect example of what doesn't fit in this picture, and is the ultimate in-between do it all bike. It does nothing excellently, but it does everything ok.
If I hurt anyones feelings, well then I am sorry. But this is the internet and as long as there are no topless women, even if they are covered, or I am attacking anyone personally, then I can have my opinion. Oh and there is not a 200 out there that will run with a 250, even if it has everything you can do to it done, it may for half a day, but then it WILL grenade, just the way it is.
If I hurt anyones feelings, well then I am sorry. But this is the internet and as long as there are no topless women, even if they are covered, or I am attacking anyone personally, then I can have my opinion. Oh and there is not a 200 out there that will run with a 250, even if it has everything you can do to it done, it may for half a day, but then it WILL grenade, just the way it is.
Have you ridden in all the terrain types offered in the world? The 200 shines in these eastern woods where one needs enough torque, but not too much power. 125's struggle, and the 250 can be too much for some sometimes. Not all of us are A riders, which can usually make any bike work. Until you have encountered everything, keep an open mind.
Posted 15 May 2009 - 04:57 AM
the fastest rider i have ever wittnessed was on a ktm 200, a 250 or 450 or 505 or whatever might kill then in a strait line, add in corners and there is no contest, evan the power junkies are faster against the clock on a small bore, the only reason to need anything bigger is massive hill climbs, reliability 9although the 200's have no problems here either) or to compansate for the lack of size in a certain lower horn.
Posted 15 May 2009 - 08:17 AM
mtman said:
Oh and there is not a 200 out there that will run with a 250, even if it has everything you can do to it done, it may for half a day, but then it WILL grenade, just the way it is.
A good rider on a 200 will absolutely crush you on any bike, in any terrain that's not a straight line.
It ain't the bike. If people like 200's, that's great. I personally prefer racing a 250, but I get my butt whipped (expert enduro and desert) by guys on 125's and 200's, and even gay little 250f's. Not because of the bike, but because they are simply better riders.
Fwiw, shane watts seems to do well on a 200 even competing against 450's. It aint' the bike.
Posted 16 May 2009 - 08:25 PM
FWIW I ran my 09 200 xcw today for the first time...Coming off a WR 250 F this bike had tons of power and speed (in my old, slow opinion).
Posted 18 May 2009 - 03:32 PM
gmoss said:
Have you ridden in all the terrain types offered in the world? The 200 shines in these eastern woods where one needs enough torque, but not too much power. 125's struggle, and the 250 can be too much for some sometimes. Not all of us are A riders, which can usually make any bike work. Until you have encountered everything, keep an open mind.
I would have to say not everything but for what its worth. I have ridden all across the US minus Alaska, and Hawaii. No that doesn't mean I have ridden in every other state but I have ridden coast to coast, North to South. I got to ride in Europe and between everywhere I think I have dang near every type of terrain covered.
llamaface said:
A good rider on a 200 will absolutely crush you on any bike, in any terrain that's not a straight line.
Hopefully that wasn't directed at me personally, but as a general statement since you can get banned for personal attacks.
And while I agree that a better rider will beat a less skilled rider. 9 times out of 10 two equal riders on a 200 and a 250, the rider on the 250 will come out on top, even when the riders switch and ride the other bike. I have seen this in person at KTM demo rides at two different MX tracks, and then at one of our local XC training areas, that had typical enduro terrain, fast open, rocky, and tight scrub oak. True this isn't eastern "tight" but it is slow lock to lock turns. llamaface said:
It ain't the bike. If people like 200's, that's great. I personally prefer racing a 250, but I get my butt whipped (expert enduro and desert) by guys on 125's and 200's, and even gay little 250f's. Not because of the bike, but because they are simply better riders.
Absolutely true. THe better rider will nearly always come out on top. That was one of the things that I loved about racing my 125's, it always felt like David and Goliath.
llamaface said:
Fwiw, shane watts seems to do well on a 200 even competing against 450's. It aint' the bike.
As does Taddy. But Shane won more races on a 125, and from what I understand he switched to the 200 once he started getting hurt couldn't ride as aggressively, but I never heard that from him directly so it could all be just rumors, but I did get that from some higher ups at KTM North America. He also overalled the Aussie ISDE on a 125, and last time I checked that was the last time a 125 won, since then its been 400's, 250's, 250F's, 450's, and maybe an E3 bike but I don't remember. But a 200 has never won, not even a class let alone an overall.
Like I said earlier the 200 is a decent/good trail bike but not a good true race bike, which is why the 200 XC should be cut in my opinion, but the 200 XCW is ment as much more of a trail bike then a true race bike.
Posted 19 May 2009 - 04:55 AM
mtman said:
Hopefully that wasn't directed at me personally, but as a general statement since you can get banned for personal attacks. And while I agree that a better rider will beat a less skilled rider. 9 times out of 10 two equal riders on a 200 and a 250, the rider on the 250 will come out on top, even when the riders switch and ride the other bike. I have seen this in person at KTM demo rides at two different MX tracks, and then at one of our local XC training areas, that had typical enduro terrain, fast open, rocky, and tight scrub oak. True this isn't eastern "tight" but it is slow lock to lock turns.
Like I said earlier the 200 is a decent/good trail bike but not a good true race bike, which is why the 200 XC should be cut in my opinion, but the 200 XCW is ment as much more of a trail bike then a true race bike.
And while I agree that a better rider will beat a less skilled rider. 9 times out of 10 two equal riders on a 200 and a 250, the rider on the 250 will come out on top, even when the riders switch and ride the other bike. I have seen this in person at KTM demo rides at two different MX tracks, and then at one of our local XC training areas, that had typical enduro terrain, fast open, rocky, and tight scrub oak. True this isn't eastern "tight" but it is slow lock to lock turns. Like I said earlier the 200 is a decent/good trail bike but not a good true race bike, which is why the 200 XC should be cut in my opinion, but the 200 XCW is ment as much more of a trail bike then a true race bike.
Well, KTMWorld found out otherwise.
Bike shootout.
Seems you are the only one that shares your opinion. Nothing wrong with that, just sayin'.
