it's a great bike today, not just in it's time period,  I do not like any of the alloy frame CR250's

Edited by MrBlahh, 15 April 2012 - 11:38 AM.

SandMantis, on 14 April 2012 - 12:10 PM, said:

Have to agree on this one:=)!

I wouldn't call it !!GREAT!! in a head to head comparison with other bikes on the market, so for me, *good* is a better relative reality.
If it was 1993, I would be with you in that relative reality ...

Alloy frames are everywhere now, both street and dirt, so I'm part of that crowd too, I don't have a reason to be biased with my preference.
Steel frames are cool because you can weld them .... and they flex more, so that is good if you are not relying on precision ...
But I've never had to weld an aluminum frame, so the advantage is null.
Subjective stuff.

I switched brands to avoid alloy frames, I hate riding them and I hate working on them,   I was a honda/yamaha guy

I have never seen anyone with such an aversion to alloy frames before??

after owning a few my opinion of them changed

i find it easer to work on my 02 then my 96. i can pull the motor in my 02 without taking the cylinder off. you cant do that on a steel frame. i was all YEA STEEL FRAMES ARE THE BEST! till i actully logged a tone of seat time on my 02. not i love it, and couldn't imagine going back to a steel frame.

I tried more seat time and i still hate them,  too much vibration feedback to the bars, too wide between the pegs,  feels more like straddling  horse,  and way too hard to work on them

I bled honda red until the aluminum frames came out

Edited by MrBlahh, 15 April 2012 - 03:40 PM.

vibration? i think you were on a bike that ws set up bad. my 96 use to vibrate the shit out of me. and it was 100% set up right and sound. the 02 has minimal vibration. and thats only at idle.
the steel frames are wider then the alum frames....i even measured it.

I'm with you ct ... the flex of the steel is nice for a vague handling experience, but as far as vibes or width, there is no real noticeable difference for me. A two-stroke has its own unique vibe, and I've never had any reason to be concerned over vibes on either frame. As a matter of fact, if it did transfer vibes you would be more in tune with when/if the engine/drivetrain is acting up.

Too narrow on the saddle and it is harder to hold the bike with your knees without juicing your peach-meat.

2strokes4me, on 15 April 2012 - 06:03 PM, said:

MR50 would kill all the XR75s back in the day.

Would agree that my 02 CR250 vibrates less in the bars than my 04 KX250 steely.

Bwop   Braaaap Bwop Vroooom ta-ting-ting-ting-ting   Holy &%$#@! !  !  !  !  !  !  !  !

mynewcr250, on 15 April 2012 - 07:31 PM, said:

Gotta make room for the orchard.

shrubitup, on 15 April 2012 - 07:43 PM, said:

But the XR75 vibrated less.

Hey Shrub, what area of Washington do you live in? I'm in the Federal Way area ..... nice score on the KX, I saw that smokin' deal you got!

I'll be the 3rd vote for the CR500.

I've owned several, IMO they are the best all-around two stroke Honda made.
No power valve, no TPS carb, plenty of power on tap, super reliable & versatile.

My 2004 CRF250R / 1997 CR500R home made conversion:




My 1997 CR500R:

2strokes4me, on 15 April 2012 - 10:14 PM, said:

I'm in Kitsap.

2strokes4me, on 15 April 2012 - 06:03 PM, said:

I can't tell the diff in handling but they feel different,  the ally Honda carry the weight higher or something.  I do not like them at all and I have owned a few and rode many

They feel wider i ride standing and I can't get comfortable on a newer honda.

Most think they are gods gift,  I prefer the steel framed 250's and I have yet to ride one that would change my mind.

I don't care how old a bike is if it works it works

Edited by MrBlahh, 16 April 2012 - 03:08 AM.

atleast someone remembers the odysseys!! those things are beastly!! especially the fl350, took a little zip in one, got out and was like "friggin rights!!how much yah want fer it?!?!".... wasnt for sale

MrBlahh, on 16 April 2012 - 03:05 AM, said:

I have never ridden them back to back, but I too found there are width differences between CR gens, even amongst alum.
But nothing I couldn't adjust to within the first 5 minutes of riding them.
However, if I did feel bothered by the width I wouldn't like it either ... but I'm not ... so it doesn't mean much.
I'm more concerned with the peg to seat to bars triangulation rather than how narrow or wide a single cylinder dirt bike is.

I guess because I'm used to riding street bikes (which are noticeably wider) all of these dirt bikes are small in comparison and width differences are insignificant.
Maybe because I'm a pretty good sized dude, the widths don't relate to drastic change to me??
Don't know, but my '01 is wider than my '98, yet the "triangle" ergonomics are what makes the '98 a more naturally comfortable bike for me.
Maybe everything made since '97 just didn't fit your body as well as the '96-down?