I'm the prowd owner of a new YZ426 as of 1 week ago. An intersting point when deciding my choice of bike were the brochures issued by Yamaha on the YZ426 and WR400. Claimed power outputs were 58hp and 48hp respectively. It was those 10 hp that made me buy the 426 rather than the 400 although the latter is more suited to the offroad racing we do here in South Africa. Is the 426 really that much more powerful? I had never riden any of the 400's before making my choice so I dont really know how my new bike compares to the 400 models in terms of performance. Any comments?

Incidently my last 2 bikes have been KTM 300s (1998 and 2000) but I know my 426 would whip both of these in terms of tractible power. I must say that having recently ridden my 426 and a friend of mines KTM 520exc (another great bike), I cant ever see myself going back to a 2 stroke.

Great post it had been a few years since I had rode and I went 4 stroke over 2 stroke as well. I love to here a story were someone left not only a 2 stroke but the 2 stroke that made me think it was maybe the best tool for the job(KTM300EXC).

The horse power rating you read seem a little high. I would guess the 426 is more around 48 horsepower not 58. The reason that the WR HP rating may be significantly lower is that it has some restrictive components out of the box. Namely a throttle stop, restrictive pipe, air box cover and differnt timing. Trust me they still rip just fine and will keep up with a 426 with a fe modifications.

What do you think of the KTM 520 E/XC vs. the 426? I'm getting ready to buy a new bike to replace my YZ400 and am considering the 520...That is if I can find one! They are hard to come by here. Already 10 deposits on 2001's at the local shop.

------------------
Chris in the Mojave
'98 YZ400F

Check out the May issue of Motorcross Action. They compared the 426 with the 520. Net, net the 426 won.

This weekend I took my YZ426 on a real technican bush ride. It included rocky hill climbs, rutted uphills , all slow 1st gear stuff. Boy, did I battle. I dont know how many times I stalled the bike. First gear is just too long and uncontrollable .On sections like this with my KTM 300 , I used to sit and wait for my buddies but on Saterday it was the other way round. I will have to take some of my words back - in tight enduro terrain the 300 rules (at least at my level of riding).

I can see WR 1st, 2nd and 5th gears and a flywheel weight coming very quickly. I'm sure this will make the bike a lot more user friendly and manageable. I will keep you updated.

In conclusion I must say I am still very happy with my YZ426. Once your speed picks up anywhere past 10km/h the bike rips. Wheelies are childs play (I've enough roasties on my butt to prove Im not the most skilled rider in controlling a wheelie with the back brake on a 2 stroke). I've still got sore cheek muscles from smiling so much from my last ride. Roll on next weekend.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chris in the Mojave:
[B]What do you think of the KTM 520 E/XC vs. the 426? I'm getting ready to buy a new bike to replace my YZ400 and am considering the 520...That is if I can find one! They are hard to come by here. Already 10 deposits on 2001's at the local shop.

I only rode my friends 520 for a short while but in that time I was very impressed with it. The 6 speed is very versatile with a short 1st and long 6th making it well suited to most offroad terrain (I'll have to wait and see how it handles that rocky hill I battled with on my YZ426).

The motor felt smoother than the 426 but not as powerful. However we havent dragged the bikes side by side to test their real performance. The suspension felt a lot plusher on the 520, obviously having been set up more for offroad riding rather than motorcross. I however prefer the stiffer setup of the 426 (that opinion could change after my next 500km race) as it inspires more confidence when hitting big humps and whoops.

Yes, there could well be a 520 in my future.

I just bought a 426 and wondered the hp rating to. Finaly found it. http://www.fmfracing...26dynochart.jpg

I honestly think the bike there testing my be hammered to death becuase they sure at least feel like they have more than it claims. My friend has a dyno but im not sure i wanna set my bike on there and hammer it to find out

Quote

ruiner: Thanks for the dyno chart! Don't forget that sometimes HP at crank is used and sometimes HP at rear wheel is used. I've seen quite a few rear wheel dyno results that put 426 right at 47 HP. Gears, , bearings, drive chain etc. could eat 20% or more between crank and rear wheel. So at crank the 426 could make as much as 60 HP ergo the claimed 58 from CraigW's orig. post.