I have a 2006 RM 250 that I am setting up to run Harescrambles.  Right now its setup with the following:

IMS tank
Skid plate
Handguards
FMF Gnarly Pipe
FMF Q series silencer

I ran a couple races last year and did OK.  Looking to improve the mountain performance.  I do fine with the clutch and don't kill it too often but it is a handfull and tires me out.  I am thinking that the FWW would smoth out the hit and I have heard great reviews from guys running the Rekluse.

Is anybody running them both.  What weight are you using on your flywheel.  Anything else that would help (gearing ect.) ???????

Thanks

Sorry for the duplicate post tried to remove the second one but dont know how.

I would highly recommend a rekluse. I have the Z Start Pro and love it. it will save you alot of energy. Have you tried changing out your gearing yet. (Sprockets) ?

I've got a 2012 ktm 200 xcw and I'm running a Rekluse pro and a 9 oz flywheel both work great together. I had the fww before the rekluse and it smoothed out the hit and helped with stalling. The Rekluse with the fww almost eliminated stalls. With your bike having more hit than mine stock, I think you will really like the set up. Good luck!!

I had a Rekluse and FWW on my YZ250, I really liked the setup. I rode without the Rekluse and I noticed the back end would break out and spin pretty easily. With the Rekluse the power was put to the ground, it seemed as if it hooked up alot better!

Good Luck,

Singletrak

i dont recomend a rekluse to anybody. but thats just me. they are un-reliable and you cant afford to have that on race day.
now of course there will be some one on here ranting about me bashing on rekluse but IMO they are not a good thing to have on a race bike and also, who honestly needs an auto clutch to compete!?!? just learn to use the effin clutch man! (im only kidding stop cryin')

ok now onto the FWW i hate FWW's too! but thats because i ride a four stroke. all you boys still ripping up the woods tracks on a 2 stoke should be running one of these bad boys!
FWW's are great on a 2 smoker, but a four stroke already has the rotating mass. putting one of these on would just be sacrificing power for traction that you already are capable of having with out it. the four strokes have a much smoother power band than a 2T. just learn to roll the throttle on a 4T and youll be fine. a 2T however this is much more difficult to do because no matter how smooth you are sometimes its hard to tame that power band.
so IMO:

FWW is a GREAT IDEA in you case! but not recomended for any one on a four stroke.

Edited by rpxtreme03, 07 February 2012 - 05:14 AM.

rpxtreme03, on 07 February 2012 - 05:11 AM, said:

im curious about your woods racing experience.. totally appreciate your opinion on poo-pooing a recluse and heavier fww for 4strokes, but it aint' the concensus of most riders. And how does a 4stroke have any more rotating mass than a 2stroke?? the power curve is different, much more linear.

If you have done some enduros and/or harescramble racing, you would appreciate what a recluse can do for you in the tight stuff TWO HOURS into a race, and how the slightly heavier fww changes the motor characteristics. Even on a crf450r (that i race in A class). Raced and have ridden for 30+ years, and just recently jumped on the auto clutch bandwagon. After racing with one and having the best finish to date .. i couldn't even ride my practice bike as well till i got one for it too. You can still ride WITH THE CLUTCH whenever you want (exp or core), but in tight stuff it is amazing, the added traction when opening the throttle is way better, it still is running when you fall.. yea, who would want all that !! LOL

Edited by MELK-MAN, 07 February 2012 - 10:07 AM.

Melk-man, he was kidding!

As for choosing between a Rekluse or FWW, I would lean towards the auto clutch!

MELK-MAN, on 07 February 2012 - 10:06 AM, said:

like i said befor a FWW is just sacrificing horsepower for traction that is already available with the four stroke. four strokes create less peak horsepower and are much easier to lug than a 2T. the reason for the lugging is because the rotational mass of a 4T is more than that of a two stroke. there are many other characteristics which play a role here as well but this is a major reason. now everybody has heard the words inertia and mass and the fact that things in motion tend to stay in motion.
a heavier object takes longer to get it moving as fast as a light one.(part of the reason 2T rev so quickly) but the heavier one will stay in motion longer and is less likely to stop due to outside forces. this is where the FWW comes to play in a 2 stroke. the motor revs up slower making it easier to control and giving you traction and also making it lug easier because its less likely to stall at low rpms.
A

rpxtreme03, on 07 February 2012 - 10:36 AM, said:

again, do you actually RACE in the WOODS? Do you need 50+- HP in the woods?? occasionally, but not very often is the answer:) i will totally agree that for some faster riders ON AN MX TRACK the stock FWW is ideal.. but that is not what the OP asked:) He is building a WOODS bike..  HE ALSO HAS AN RM250 - a serious two stroke mx weapon, let alone woods machine (follow along). As far as "inertia" "mass" all that.. for most woods riders, AND woods racers, there are advantages to a bit more flywheel weight. it tones down the hit of a big 450 that can occur even just off idle, that means more traction! more fww makes crossing logs and big obstacles easier with less risk of stalling. And yes, less stalling is a beneficial side effect of more fww.

For most, there is WAY more power available with a 450 or other 4strokes in the WOODS. (notice i'm not talking about and outdoor mx track, or supercross where you need outright acceleration from corner to corner, and to wick-up the motor to clear the tripple?) We are not talking about that kind of riding!
For you readers saying with an auto-clutch you don't need heavier fww.. that is not true either. One does not make up for the other, the fww can give more ideal motor characteristics favorable in enduro and woods riding, and COMPLIMENT an auto clutch. Woods racing/riding is NOT riding on your local MX track..

I USED to think the way you do rpxtreme, "auto clutch is for pusses.. if you can't use a clutch good your not a good rider".. and flywheel weight? why would i wanna add weight to my motor? THEN, i found out the guys that were beating me in "A" class harescrambles used auto-clutches, especially those on 4strokes.. i got one, AND NEVER LOOKED BACK. SO, till ya raced offroad/woods with one, as well as have rode a 4stroke with a little more fww, im not sure your opinion will count for much.. no disrespect.

Edited by MELK-MAN, 07 February 2012 - 12:19 PM.

thats why i said what i did...see what im saying. everytime i say this to some one it brings about the same argument.
MELK-MAN READ THE DANG POST!!!!!
i said becuase he is on a two stroke he should be running the FWW!!
and yes i do race the woods!! ive been riding my hole life and two years ago i race my first HS im racing the 250b cllass on my 2006 crf250r this year.
and your saying you dont need 50 plus horsepower..then why are you even on a 450...your right most riders in the woods dont need all that..thats why i ride an unweighted 250f..its got all the power i need and its a lot light than the 450's but i still wouldnt want to sacrifice power for no reason..the four strokes already have the ability to hook up and have a controled power.
thats like saying i have a great after market pipe on my bike but im going to go blow some money on a stock pipe because its got too much power with the aftermarket..duh!! no you and i and every other racer on the planet would run the after market!
and stop talking about mx tracks i never once mentioned them..and no kidding motocross and supercross you need more motor!
every once in a while you like having that extra power in the woods too though..you dont need it to be competetive but it sure does come in handy..

you know that guy youve been trying to pass for half a lap and cant seem to find a good coner to take him on..well you see that big hill up ahead with multiple lines and a bottleneck at the top..oh too bad your bike is the gutless wonder and can barely build the "r's" to climb it none the less make the pass. looks like your number two today! sorry bud.

ok now take that 2 stroke 250 and throw it on a dyno next to a four stroke 250 you can afford to loose some power to get that extra control.

and btw ive rode both ktm 250sxf i bought with a FWW and hated it! the motor felt guttless with it on. every time i broke out of a corner and really got on it the bike was slow to climb rpms and felt verry doggy on low-end. it did compliment the lugging ability on lowend though. but like i said i could do it all just as good with a little more practice and have that extra power to boot.
ive also ridden a two stroke with the FWW..the two strokes are much faster revving and have more power than the four strokes there is no arguing that point. only prob with this is the ridability of them is far less than the 4T.
here is a good application for that FWW..only time you want to sacrifice power is when something is too hard to control. not when it just makes it easier.
a 2 stroke for many is too hard to control in the woods with out a heavy FW on it. they where themselves out fighting the bike. where the four stroke just makes a perfectly capable bike more capable but sacrifices hp that the 4T already lack compared to the 2T.

and the auto clutch ive ridden many a crf250r with one and a yz250. i hated that feeling when it engaged and disengaged. i felt like i had no control, but it was a feeling i would have gotten used to in time. i also didnt like the fact that if you did stall the bike you cant just dump the clutch while your still rolling and have it running again. you have to stop and kick it, but the again you dont stall it as much..moral of the story auto clutches arent a bad idea but where theystand right now i would not own one until there is more on the market for options..for starters there expensive. and also i just dont feel that they are good enough yet. ive seen way too many people have problems with them..ive seen them chew aup a brand new $180 basket in 6 hours of riding. ive seen the break friction after friction till the kid finaly took it out and sold and and dropped a wiseco in it.
wiseco might i mention has a lifetime warranty on their clutch!!
so when you get sick of not finishing because of a faulty clutch i'd look to them.

your logic is truely mind blowing! lol. your assesment of power doesn't work exactly as you imply. Simply having the power on tap doesn't mean every rider can use it, and over a 2hour woods race someone on a much more rideable 250four stroke might have more energy at the end than a similar caliber rider on the more powerfull (but less power down low) 250twostroke, or a 450four stroke. Not in every case of course..It isn't about max hp to get up a hill .. its about crossing the finish line ahead of anyone your racing with. There are lots of ways to do that. Obviously there is no "perfect" bike or everyone would get THAT bike, im sure you see and talk with riders that love the 2stroke, and as many that love a 4stroke. AA rider Kyle McAfee is consistantly top 5 and was on a kx250four stroke! he doesn't use an auto clutch, nor does he like bark busters! He is now on a ktm350four stroke and loves that bike.
   The set up of any riders weapon can mean the difference in finishing 1st or 5th.. Suspension is key, but so is a reliable and rideable motor.. one advantage a 4stroke has in woods is fuel consumption and the smooth power (you knew that already..i know). due to the good low end grunt of the crf450, you are often at low throttle positions. But get an open field section? and the 2stroke won't have a prayer if geared right.. the RECLUSE allows lower gear ratios! (you don't have to go from the stock 48 to a 50 to not stall in the tight stuff!) you can keep the stock 48 or even go down to a 47 (for our courses down here in FL) and have a missle in the open filed section driving right by the 2stroke that is "ring-a-ding-dinging" topped out.  

I don't know what riders you know that are having problems.. but the riders that are breaking auto clutches and parts within, do so because they think they can just put it in a tall gear an ride everything in that one high gear. Result? the clutch gets superheated, warps metals, cracks fibers, and wears hubs and pressure plates as they are spinning WAY faster than they should be. Ride an auto clutch like you would without the auto clutch (in the right gear all the time) and even the lower cost EXP that removes fibers can work for many riders. I know SOME good riders that don't like em, but know as many or more good riders that won't race without (myself included). It isn't because the technology isn't good enough, or there aren't enough choices.. Dyna ring had been around for years, they are no more (have no idea why not) so Recluse is the only game in town but the product WORKS if you don't abuse it and expect it to do more than it's designed to do. But what do i know, im only leading the poits after 9 rounds in A class with the CHEAPEST exp recluse on a crf450r.. Not only is my clutch in perfect condition, the fibers are still in spec after 50 hours on the meter since installed. Rotella synth oil changed in the trans every 5-8hrs depending on when it gets nasty looking. Yes, it does get nasty a bit sooner with the auto clutch but that was to be expected.

One critical aspect of the auto clutch is set up.. if someone doesn't take the time to get the right engagement set up they might not like it (as you have found). And some riders simply do not like an auto clutch! That goes for C class and AA riders! different strokes for different folks.. Just keep in mind the exp2.0 and CORE is very adjustable. There are 6 tiny springs in the ring, those are highly adjustable depending on what combo of the 6 you use. Then the 6 wedges can be replaced with heavier ones than stock if you want a faster engagement.. The expCORE requires that, as well as adjustment at the pressure plate so not as easy, but you get a true stock feel clutch with free play at the lever..
So while i appreciate you likley have the skill and woods experience to make some good assessments (although you will find a massive difference in speed from the b class to the a class), without having one i wouldn't go passing as much judgement as you are. After all, if not satisfied recluse will take the thing back for a FULL refund..

Edited by MELK-MAN, 08 February 2012 - 08:06 AM.

I don't race, so I can't address that.  But, I do ride woods and singletrack a lot and can say that my original Rekluse installed in '08 has performed flawlessly since day one.  Too many folks say you can ride in higher gears with it and just let the clutch do its thing, but that's a load of crap in my opinion.  Ride it exactly like it had a manual clutch, staying in the proper gear, and it will perform nicely.  I wasn't that good a rider but it took over a chore I had a problem with and made riding much more fun for me.  Yeah, I wish I could control a manual clutch well enough to not need the Rekluse (especially when trying to get the front end up over logs and such), but at least it keeps me going forward and smiling.

I strongly dislike autoclutches. I tried a Rekluse and an EFM.  Couldn't finish a event without them slipping.  Made me feel I had to ride harder than normal. I do feel a proper weight FWW is a good idea on a MX 2stroke.  If you get an Enduro / Cross Country Husqvarna or KTM you won't need one.

thank you finaly some one who agrees with me!! my gfs little brother has a 2011 KTM xc 250..the bike lugs like a four stroke with the stock FWW but ive ridden many mx type 2T and the bikes are wack in the woods.
i really just dont feel they are necessary on a four stroke. i feel that the four strokes(especially 250's) are fully capable with a stock FWW to have the same control and rideability as one with a heavier FWW. it might take you a little more practice on your throttle control but in the end you will have everything you wanted plus that little extra HP, an extra $150 in your pocket(for some perhaps just not so far in debt ), plus what ever other ability you have gained with that little extra practice.
I know ive only raced a short time and may not have all the credabilitty as some but im still entitled to mmy opinion damnit! lol
and melk-man you first said you could could use different gearing because of the auto clutch, then you said that the reason people ar ehaving problems with the auto clutch is because they are not running the propper gearing. they just let the clutch disengage at low speeds too much and it heats the clutch and destroys it.
well not only did you contradict yourself there a little, but is that not what the clutches are designed to do?

I find it hilarious that everything i have said here has just been summed up in 2 lines by the expert lol

rpxtreme03, on 09 February 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:

you entitled to your opinion mate but damn it stop trying to force it down everyone's throat.

the purpose of an autocluth is to make life easier, you can preach about practice and having proper clutch control all you like, the fact is in a race you stall twice a loop in a race and you've lost a minute per lap, a minute per lap if the differance between a 2st and a 3ed place finish, i've been running a rekluse EXP 2.0 for the last year in my woods race bike, a KX450F with no reliability problems despite missing 3 fibre and 2 steel plates outa the clutch on a 52hp bike, and taking the stalling out of my laps has improved my lap times based just on that, the added confidence has taken it down even more and the increased corner speed allowed and ease of maintaining momentum on hills has ont he same bike, with the same suspension increased my times by 4 minutes a lap, in a 2 hour race that's 16 minutes.

i personally set my rekluse up with low RPM, hard engagement, meaning it act's basicly as an anti-stall device with no slip once it's slightly above idle.

sure if you don't like them that's fine, other's dont, you dont have to argue your point until your blue in the face.

personaly for a 250 2T mxer i'd be adding a base gasket to increase bottom end, putting a flywheel weight on and a hydraulic clutch, but i'm not going to say the rekluse is a bad idea either, it will make you life easier.

Edited by Ttoks, 09 February 2012 - 04:18 AM.

Ttoks, on 09 February 2012 - 04:15 AM, said:

im not forcing it down everybody's throught. i simply said i didnt like the auto clutches because of their lack of reliability and control. the minute i make this comment people jump all over(melk-man, and now you). I also said why i dont like the FWW. but if everone reads the whole post befor jumping on me the would understand better. i love the FWW on a 2T mx bike being converted to woods.
thus answering the OP.
he asked for recomendations on a set up. i told him he should run a FWW and an auto clutch and gave him my reasoning. and of course someone(melk-man) jumped all over that basicaly telling me i didnt know what i was talking about and that i was not a credible source because i dont have one in my bike. little did he know ive ridden bikes with both of these products and worked on bikes with both of them.
Making me just entitled to my opinion as he is. if not more.
Then there is you blind siding me in this post telling me im shoving it down peoples throught.

rpmxtreme03.. its because i have repeatedly stated they are not for everyone, you are proposing nobody should use em..and "feel nobody needs em especially a four stroke". but myself (A class leading harescramble rider) and MANY others in offroad riding will not race without. The flip side is I have talked with TOP GNCC racers on KTM that do NOt use them, but those bikes have hydro clutches. Much easier to modulate. Ever pull the clutch lever of a kx450 or crf450r for two hours??
I assure you im not slow, and ride 20 hours a MONTH on two nearly equally prepared crf450's. I rode for YEARS on these bikes with no autoclutch. The day i got an exp2.0 (and recluse urged me to get the expensive core for offroad racing) i was friggin in heaven after 15 mintues of getting used to it. So much so i only rode my 2nd bike 1 time before getting another auto clutch for that bike.

I have long known Dwight Rudders dislike of the auto clutch, and with multiple ISDE championships that is difficult to argue with, BUT there tens of thousands that DO use an auto clutch. If you took a moment to look around at the next harescramble you do, you will find this out. Over half of the first row that i race on (A class) use auto clutches.. THAT is hard to argue with too! Some like em, some don't. But your idea that everyone you know that has one burns them up and breaks fiber clutch plates is silly. They are not "magic", you can't run around 2mpr ultra tight woods in 4th gear with it, and not expect it to roast the clutch or worse.
And as Ttoks said, it makes riding EASIER if you get used to them. How many new riders do you see get discouraged when riding due to stalls? lots. The auto clutch is an amazing tool that CAN work for every rider, teatoteler to hard core racer.

Edited by MELK-MAN, 09 February 2012 - 08:23 AM.

rpxtreme03, on 09 February 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:

i,ve read your replies.in several of them you equate useing a flywheel as giving up horse power or torque.you think running a lighter flywheel gives more power?it actually changes the output of the motor?time for a re-think,me thinks.