'02 KTM 400SX vs 520SX

[Camstyn]

I'm seriously looking at both of these bikes, for my next bike. I'm a two stroke guy at heart, but there are other incentives for me to make the switch. I figure if I don't like it, I can always go back.

Anywho, coming off of a KX250, will I be happy with the 400? I've heard conflicting reports about it being slow, and/or it outgunning any 250.

The main selling point for the 400, in my case, is the 6 speed. I do some cross country riding where this would be nice, but I do spend most of the time on the track.

There is about a $500 difference in retail price here between the two, which I certainly don't mind as I suppose I could go with a 450 kit if I felt it neccessary.

I rode a '94 KX500 for a few years, I liked it but the 250 suits me much better. I *love* riding 125s, but I'm a big fella, and a tiddler isn't a practical choice for me. I've never ridden a KTM before, but I imagine the 520 reminding me of my 500 which isn't the direction I want to go. Any insight?

 

[Strick]

I have my '02 400SX set up as radical (in a snappy sense) as any RFS I have ridden. A good friend who rides a 520exc, swears my bike is quicker than his, which I agree. That's until you get way up in the power band on that 520 then that gorilla takes over. He is now letting me set up his jetting so he too can experience the whiplash type of power the 520 will offer.

These bikes are not 2-strokes in the power band. A 2-stroke develops in maximum horsepower in 1/2 the rpms these bikes do (some speculation given here). I really don't know, if you are a real high level MX rider, that the 400 is enough. KTM is coming out with the 450SX in the fall (late August). That may be the bike for you (6-speed I am told).

FYI the 4speed 520 has the same final ratio as the CRF 450 with its' 5speed. What I am saying is top speed would be roughly the same on both bikes.

 

[Camstyn]

Thanks, Strick. The more research I do the more the 400 sounds like it's what I need.
As for the 520 final ratio, that's why I like the 6 speed. My KX250 is adequate in the woods, but when I get into the really tight, snotty stuff first gear is tall.
I'm not as concerned with how fast 6th gear will take me, as I may only see that once or twice unless I start getting into the desert racing.

I'm really not interested in anything that the 'big 4' offer, I'd just as soon keep my KX. I like it.. But, I've secretly been lusting after a KTM for the past couple of years and now is a good time for me to get one.

As for the 450SX coming out in '03, who knows how soon/late that will be. When the time comes, I could always trade in, sell, or bigbore the 400.:aj:

I keep hearing that the KTMs are tall bikes. I sat on one and it didn't feel especially tall, but I haven't ridden one. I'm 6'5, so the taller the better. Any comments? With anything Japanese, I need to change the bars / clamps / seat foam to feel comfortable. Any comments?

 

[Anssi]

I have a '02 520 SX that I have jetted correctly. I leave anything behind on the straights. The 400 is plenty fast enough to do well MX:ing at a pretty high level.

For my 520, I have gotten a taller seat (a complete official KTM seat that cost me about 80 euros) and got a friend machine some filler to get the bar up a bit (the KTMs have pretty well adjustable bar mounts). I will get stiffer springs. I'm 6'4", 200 lbs.

 

[Camstyn]

Anssi, how do you find the ergos compared to a Jap 250?
Huge difference, or in the ballpark?

How is the handling, compared to the YZ250 (?) that you had prior?

I wish I knew someone that had one to try out, I wouldn't have to ask all of these questions..

 

[Anssi]

The ergos differ a bunch from the stock YZ250. The handlebar relocation already is a big difference. The KTM's seat is flatter (even the stock) and the bike is very slim. Of course the bikes still have fundamentally the same dimensions, so it's not like moving from a crotch rocket to a Harley.

The handling is completely different, much due to the engine. When you get into acceleration bumps or whoops, it's much easier to keep the 4-stroke running cleanly (you don't have to keep it on the pipe to keep it from dying).

You can't throw the KTM around in turns like the YZ (due to the power delivery, not weight), but you can rail berms and flat turns like you wouldn't believe.

Bear in mind that I'm not very fast, and my skills develop all the time, so the comparison is not that straightforward.

 

[Bud-Man]

Cam,
I'm in a similar dilema to yours. I bought my friends '01 400 SX last year principly because of the 6 speed. I ride mostly offroad but occasionally MX and this bike could cover it all. I changed the jetting and lowered the gearing from 14/50 to 13/52. With these changes the bike is very powerfull and easy to ride. On several occasions I have outpower recent 2 stroke 250s....and it wasn't even close. Maybe it's the 4 strokes ability to put the power down, but even if they got the jump, I could real them in. With the gearing change, the bike will crawl along in first gear yet 6th is a good bit faster than any 250 I've ridden. Actually, with this gearing, my 5th gear is a little faster than my friends '01 cr250 with stock gearing....and I have 6th to go yet.

My dilema is that the friend that sold me the 400 is now selling his 520SX and I could get it at a good price. From what I remember, the 520 had a lot more power, but that was before I changed the jetting so I'm not sure how it would be now. The 520 had brute power but it wasn't overwhelming like a 500 two stroke. I've owned several CR500s and it's not even close. So don't be afraid of the 520 being like your old 500. I didn't notice it at the time, but the guy who has the 520 (and sold me my 400) swears the 520 feels heavier in motion. Maybe it's the crank inertia thing? One problem with the 520SX for off-road use is the gearbox. Stock the bike is geared to tall for tight woods work. I would need to gear it down like the 400. The problem then arises that you have a limited top speed with the 4 speed gear box. In my case it means installing 5th and 6th gear, which is about $300-350 in parts. If you are not so motivated to do it yourself, this could be an expensive modificaiton since the dealer was involved. So you can see that there are some pro's and cons to either bike. I think both will suit your needs. The 400 has the versatility and you can get them for a good price. The 520 has the motor of doom but it cost more and is limited with it's 4 speed.

As for the ergo issue...well that's always a matter of opinion. I love the way a KTM feels. It's SO narrow. But they are a little tall. I cut my sub-frame as I'm short (5' 8") and that helps a bunch. Turning is an issue for some people. I feel that the KTMs turn as well as any bike when they are properly set up. The only problem is that it's kinda tricky to get them set up. The suspension is drastically different than the average Japanese bike so you have to forget some of your previous rules of thumb when it comes to bike setup. Hppe this helps!

 

[Anssi]

Originally posted by Bud-Man
The 520 had brute power but it wasn't overwhelming like a 500 two stroke. I've owned several CR500s and it's not even close.

Maybe your buddies 520 needs some TLC. Mine is close to the CR5s we had (in power and speed, not in arm-ripping powerband), and I would think would outdrag the -02 380SX we have now. The 520 is so easy to ride if you do it the smooth 4-stroke way.

 

[Bud-Man]

Anssi,
Actually your spot on. The 520 is increadilbly powerfull. I was meaning the power delivery. It's not as bruteish as the 2-stroke 500's. That's the beauty of the 520. It's so smooth and easy to ride that it's decieving. If you crank the throttle you better be pointed in the right direction.....'cause you are going to get there in a big hurry!!!

 

[Bob Brooks]

Strick, how does the power of your 400SX compare to your old 300?

 

[rollingp]

Just for your info a stock geared 520 sx with the 4 speed trans will top out at
82 mph so the 6 speed gearbox is really only beneficial if you are a desert racer. For scrambles and mx the sx actually has some benefits with the 4 speed cuz you only use 3rd and 4th Unless you are slow.

 

[Coach in ND]

The best way to answer this question is to go out and ride both bikes if you can. Everybody has a unique riding style that suits a particular type of bike and there isn't a straight across the board answer.

I own a 400 SX but have spent quite a bit of time on both machines. For me the 400 works best. It's not that I don't like the power of the 520, it's a blast to ride, but my lap times for moto and HS are consistantly faster on my 400. No need for more power if it doesn't improve the bottom line!!!!

I ride the Intermediate class and have no problem staying ahead of pumped up 250 2-strokes, 450 Honda's, 426's or 520's on my "little" 400. Most of the time it's more the rider than the bike anyway...find out which bikke suits you style and skill level and go ride!!!!!:p

 

[Strick]

Originally posted by Bob Brooks
Strick, how does the power of your 400SX compare to your old 300?

I really thought I answered this question earlier. I must be losing my mind.

Guys did I post a response to this or not?

 

[Bob Brooks]

<<"I really thought I answered this question earlier. I must be losing my mind.

Guys did I post a response to this or not?"

Strick, if you answered that question earlier, I didn't read it. I asked you tht same question once or twice before and never got a response. I don't read all the threads and posts on this forum, but I read a lot of them. I've read a lot of posts from you about the 300, and many about the 400, but never any kind of comparison about the power delivery and power output. All I've read so far is that you remarked that the two-strokes rev faster. That much I know without riding the 400, I think that's as obvious as yellow snow.

I'm just curious how the 400SX compares to your 300 as far as power delivery and fun. I've ridden plenty of 520s around here, both the SX and EXC versions, but I haven't been able to score a ride on a 400. There aren't many 400s in my area. The concensus here is that the 400 is flat and not as much fun as the 520. But I personally like the idea of the 400SX with the six-speed transmission for versatility and I don't think I need electric start, but I don't know if the 400 is any better than the 300 or just different and newer, that's why I'm asking and you obviously have a lot of experience with both motorcycles so who better to ask? If my questions are redundant, my apologies, Strick. Geez, I know none of us like to talk about our motorcycles here! ;)

 

[Strick]

Bob - Sorry

But I think I have lost my mind. I know I typed a fairly long description of the differences yesterday, but must not have hit the submit button. I guess work got busy - imagine that!

I am going to post back my thought in a few minutes. Once I find my mind again. And once again - Sorry!

O.K., 1st the negatives. Engine braking is hard to get used to. It is heavier, but I only notice the weight difference when I have to pick up the bike.
Neutrals: same frame same ergo's basically. My '02 has 4 position bars, so there is a difference there. My 300 was in position #2, 400 I have in position #4, so the bars are farther forward now. So handling is very similar. Not the way you ride the bike in certain conditions, but true handling.
Positives - I think it is easier to ride the 4-stroke fast. I have no idea why, the power is just more forgiving or comforatable.

The total hp output of both bikes (300 & 400) is the same, around 41-43. Once you wake up the 400 with jetting and exhaust the bike really gets snappy - more like a 2-stroke. The front wheel lofts just as easy as the 300, but it is easier to carry it (for me). The best feature of the 400 (vs. 300) - hillclimbs, especially rocky hill climbs. The best feature of the 300 (vs. 400) sand riding, the 300 is better.

Best reason to get an RFS - you will probably be faster.
Worst reason to get an RFS - maintenance. One hour oil changes, and adjusting the valves every 500 miles or so. It is easier for me to do a top end on a 2 stroke, than adjust the valves on my RFS.

It took me 4 months to decide I liked the 400 more than the 300. I then sold the 300 to a very good friend, who previously rode a 200mxc.

This is just one guys opinion. There are many more opinions out there.

If you have specific questions I can answer post them. Now that I feel I am coherent again, I will answer.

 

[Bob Brooks]

Thanks, Strick! It's very interesting for me to read your comparisons of the two bikes.

 

[dp400]

Strick , would I be correct to assume that you went to the DMN needle?:p

 

[Strick]

DP400 who was the first person to post results from the DMN needle? Now you can't even find one! :mad:

 

[Coach in ND]

Strick,

Do you care to share some of your findings on the DMN needle. Love to hear how it works. I've been living under a rock and haven't seen any of your results posted on the web.

Coach
Mpk@buffalocity.net

 

[Strick]

Originally posted by Coach in ND
Strick,

Do you care to share some of your findings on the DMN needle. Love to hear how it works. I've been living under a rock and haven't seen any of your results posted on the web.

Coach
Mpk@buffalocity.net

You have not been under a rock. I deleted the results I posted on the 'other board'. I will shoot you an email.