Whats a better trail bike 2008 onwards Wr250/300 or Yz250

Started by jarvo_325, Jan 26 2012 07:23 PM

19 replies to this topic

jarvo_325

Posted 26 January 2012 - 07:23 PM

Hey I know I'm asking this in a Husky forum so I know you guys are probably a little biased in your preferences but that’s cool.
The reason I'm asking it here is because some of you may have made this change or at the very least know how well your machines operate.

Most of my riding is done on the trails, which is a mixture of everything including rocky hill climbs.

I want to upgrade my 2005 Yz 250, I'm kinda tossing up between a newer Yz250 with some minor trail mods or a Husky but I don't know much about them.

I know the Husky’s motor hasn't changed much since 1999, so would you guys still think its a better trail bike over a Yz?

Are there any quirks to the bike?

Are parts hard to find or more expensive? (Live in Aus)

I appreciate the help.

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

varesecrazy

Posted 27 January 2012 - 05:38 AM

Hi again,
probably one of the biggest questions,
are you physically LARGE..??,

the 250 / 300 Husky is a TALL bike,
if you're on the shorter side it may be TOO tall for technical riding,
However - it's a VERY stable chassis - developed for enduro NOT mx..,

I would think a good used Husky will be 60% of the cost of a similar YZ too , as Husky resale values are lousy..,
it's down to many factors,

the "unknown" being one of them,

do a good search on here, there are LOTS of good informative posts - probly best to put Wr300 in the subject line , as that will be the era of husky you're looking for..,
Charlie

Mikel.Laundry

Posted 04 February 2012 - 01:22 PM

i am looking at the husky too! i am going to buy new tho. but i cant find a hp rating anywhere? i saw one at my dealer and it is really tall alomost like its on a pedistall. wich it should be compared to other bikes

troffer88

Posted 05 February 2012 - 08:36 AM

Hp wise it has as much or more than anything in its class, great solid bike

ben williams

Posted 06 February 2012 - 09:48 AM

I have an 11 wr300 and now that it is jetted properly I can say that it is a LOT faster than expexted. I am coming off an 08 KLX450 that was uncorked and this is way faster except for top speed. I have gone up one on the countershaft and gps'd it at 82 top speed and cruises on the fire roads comfortably at 50. First gear is still plenty low for where I do most of my riding. (Desert) The few time I have been in technical stuff, I was amazed by how well it chugged off the pipe. I am a happy camper.
(these are my opinions only. No warranty expressed or implied)

hershez

Posted 06 February 2012 - 09:21 PM

You can't go wrong with either bike. The YZ's make exceptional trail bikes and the WR's are amazing as well. I have an '06 WR250 and it's been the most amazing bike I've ever owned (came off a YZ250F). Parts are a little tougher to find but everything is reachable and reasonable price wise. Good luck on your decision, either bike will be a great choice.

Doug the head

Posted 08 February 2012 - 04:36 PM

i can pick up a left over 2011 wr300 for like 5700. its very intriguing to me that they are so freakin low priced. id kill to own a new bike at this point and have always wanted a husky since the 80s

ben williams

Posted 08 February 2012 - 05:12 PM

They have cheap financing too. Mines 2.99 %

letitsnow

Posted 12 February 2012 - 11:54 AM

I have spent som etime on both and can say that the '06 + YZ would be my pick. The '05 isn't bad, but the forks seem to work better on the '06 + models. The motor, suspension, carb are tough to beat! Put a kickstand and bigger tank on the YZ and ride.

HuskyRips

Posted 13 February 2012 - 04:32 PM

#10

letitsnow, on 12 February 2012 - 11:54 AM, said:

Dan, the WR250 and the WR300 are much easier to ride than a YZ250 is. Not just that but both come stock all ready to ride in the woods where you have to mod the YZ. Yes the YZ is a nice bike once you dump an extra $1000 into it... so that it work in the woods, but with the Husky you get all the woods stuff for thousands less and it's pretty woods ready right out of the box. And one other thing.... Husky parts are cheaper than Yamaha parts.

As Zeke would say... JustSayen

jarvo_325

Posted 13 February 2012 - 07:10 PM

#11

HuskyRips, on 13 February 2012 - 04:32 PM, said:

Hmm its a tuff one, I would like a enduro type bike.
The Huskies in Australia are normally more expensive to a comparable YZ.

Dwight_Rudder

Posted 13 February 2012 - 10:58 PM

#12

I believe the Husky would be a LOT better offroad bike than the YZ and easier to work on too. Very stable in handling. I have a WR150 that I am amazed at what it can do.

letitsnow

Posted 14 February 2012 - 04:51 AM

#13

HuskyRips, on 13 February 2012 - 04:32 PM, said:

Dale,

They are both very good bikes, but I put more work into my Husky to make it what I wanted than I had to put into the YZ.

jarvo_325

Posted 16 February 2012 - 01:56 PM

#14

Dwight_Rudder, on 13 February 2012 - 10:58 PM, said:

I believe the Husky would be a LOT better offroad bike than the YZ and easier to work on too. Very stable in handling. I have a WR150 that I am amazed at what it can do.

Hey so are the Huskies fairly easy to work on? I just thought being European it would be a little more difficult than the Japanese bikes. I guess the parts would be more expensive tho?

Dwight_Rudder

Posted 16 February 2012 - 11:53 PM

#15

jarvo_325, on 16 February 2012 - 01:56 PM, said:

Hey so are the Huskies fairly easy to work on? I just thought being European it would be a little more difficult than the Japanese bikes. I guess the parts would be more expensive tho?

I think you would be surprised at how affordable a Husky is. And the parts. Not a lot of difference in parts prices and sometime cheaper.

letitsnow

Posted 18 February 2012 - 07:08 AM

#16

letitsnow, on 12 February 2012 - 11:54 AM, said:
I have spent som etime on both and can say that the '06 + YZ would be my pick. The '05 isn't bad, but the forks seem to work better on the '06 + models. The motor, suspension, carb are tough to beat! Put a kickstand and bigger tank on the YZ and ride.

I should add to this -

If you like a heavy flywheel/slow reving motor - I'd go with the Husky. The heavy flywheel affect is made worse by a crappy stock carb that helps keep the motor from winding down quickly.

If you like a lighter flywheel/faster reving motor - I'd go with the YZ.

The jap bikes are lighter, but I really can't tell any difference while riding, as far as weight goes.

I now ride a Honda CR250, and after adding a YZ250 carb (CR comes with the same crappy carb as the Husky), big tank, V force 2, re-valved suspension, pipe, auto clutch, etc.... All bikes need work, but you can make them into anything that you'd like to.

eroseme

Posted 21 February 2012 - 10:51 AM

#17

I have 2005 YZ250 2 stroke and a 2005 KTM 200 EXC. The KTM is so much better on single track trails, especially tight woods stuff. The YZ is of course hard to beat on a motocross track (for fun), and works fine on more open trails. Gearing changes and a FWW on the YZ will improve the trail experience, but you've still got the close ratio gearbox.

Why would you replace a 2005 YZ with a later model (2 stroke)? I thought they just put different stickers on the tank every year since '05 (aluminum frame).

jarvo_325

Posted 21 February 2012 - 02:25 PM

#18

eroseme, on 21 February 2012 - 10:51 AM, said:

I have 2005 YZ250 2 stroke and a 2005 KTM 200 EXC. The KTM is so much better on single track trails, especially tight woods stuff. The YZ is of course hard to beat on a motocross track (for fun), and works fine on more open trails. Gearing changes and a FWW on the YZ will improve the trail experience, but you've still got the close ratio gearbox. Why would you replace a 2005 YZ with a later model (2 stroke)? I thought they just put different stickers on the tank every year since '05 (aluminum frame).

Cause I do not want a 4 stroke

There was some changes to the YZ after 05, most notibly the SSS forks in 2006.

2005 - first year of the aluminum frame, which is 5 lbs lesser than the steel frame

2006 - speed-sensitive system forks (SST) introduced, a new stock pipe and a shiny cylinder

2007 - some internal changes on the forks, Pro-Taper handlebar from the usual Renthal, N3EW needle on the carb from previous N3EJ, back to the dull-colored cylinder, 1-lb lesser than the '06

2008 - Wave rotors, yet again some internal fork valving changes, 4mm shorter forks, almost 2 lbs lesser than the '07

2009 - 1-lb lesser than the '08, new DID gold chain, new front tires. The "YZ250 sticker" in the rear fender is no longer there :smirk:

Huskywoodsman

Posted 05 March 2012 - 11:00 PM

#19

letitsnow, on 18 February 2012 - 07:08 AM, said:

I should add to this -

If you like a heavy flywheel/slow reving motor - I'd go with the Husky. The heavy flywheel affect is made worse by a crappy stock carb that helps keep the motor from winding down quickly.

If you like a lighter flywheel/faster reving motor - I'd go with the YZ.

The jap bikes are lighter, but I really can't tell any difference while riding, as far as weight goes.

I've been on both models this pretty much says it all......I'ld go Husky!!!

vsekvsek

Posted 07 March 2012 - 08:06 AM

#20

If anyones questioning reliability...My wr 300 i have beat to chit and it seems to run stronger the harder i hammer it. 2 yrs on it and the only issue was a bolt backed out of the linkage and chewed up the linkage arm. That could happen on any bike though as i should have been better about tightening things down. I suspect i could run ths bike as a back up bike for another 10 yrs easy at this rate.