eightyopen

Member
Jul 23, 2001
12
0
I've only looked at the 250 in my local shop but I bought a 03 kx125 about three weeks ago. If the 250 is anything like the 125 you should really like it. I did a complete ride review on a different site but they've since went off-line. :ugg: In short I have no complaints with the 125 yet. Great handling, great motor and great suspension. Pulls strong, really fun to ride.
 
Last edited:

holeshot

Crazy Russian
LIFETIME SPONSOR
Jan 25, 2000
1,823
0
Originally posted by eightyopen
......In short I have no complaints with the 125 yet. Great handling, great motor and great suspension. Pulls strong, really fun to ride.

:thumb:

Have you played with the jetting? Mine seems to leave a lot a spooge, yet it runs well. I've put in a 37.5 pilot and will try dropping the needle (raising the clip). Or maybe I should just ride faster.

I can concur with you on the power - I took it hill climbing on Sunday and I can say that it's not slowed by deep dirt or hills. It's still only a 125 though, so I had to keep moving... ;)

There's also a steep learning curve going back and forth between a 426 and 125....
 
Last edited:

eightyopen

Member
Jul 23, 2001
12
0
Same with mine, lot's of spooge but runs good when you ride it hard, will load up if you putt much like during the break in. Mines definatly jetted too rich on low to mid but the main might be OK. Haven't had time to rejet yet but I think I'm going to start with one smaller pilot and drop the needle 1 notch. I'll let you know if I come up with a combination that works, please do the same for me. I've E-mailed a couple jetting and engine guys but no-one seems to have jetted one of these yet.
 

steve125

LIFETIME SPONSOR
Oct 19, 2000
1,252
0
The jetting i'm working with right now is: 400 main-needle 2nd clip from top-35pilot-air screw at 1.5 out. As a note these big carbs need to be a little richer in the low speed range than the smaller 36mm for a no-bog throttle response and good roll on torque. So you'll get some spooge if you trail ride it. Also 1 tooth up on the rear works well. Ive also lowered the stock foot pegs, this is a must for riders around 6ft.
 

jboomer

~SPONSOR~
Jan 5, 2002
1,420
1
One of the mags (initials start with an M ends with an A) did their ride on the KX250. They said it gives up like 4 hp to the CR. "Even worse, at 9000 rpm the Kawasaki KX250 makes 32.8 hp.....12 hp less than the '03 yz250." Do what you want with these figures. I know this will start some flames on "..use of the dyno," etc. But, I know everyone eventually gets around to spending money on increasing hp and my opinion is why start with something that's already behind? Other than the hp issue, this mag has a great review on the bike! Everything else is supposed to be awesome.
 

bigred455

"LET'S JUST RIDE"
LIFETIME SPONSOR
Sep 12, 2000
782
0
Originally posted by jboomer
One of the mags (initials start with an M ends with an A) did their ride on the KX250. They said it gives up like 4 hp to the CR. "Even worse, at 9000 rpm the Kawasaki KX250 makes 32.8 hp.....12 hp less than the '03 yz250." Do what you want with these figures. I know this will start some flames on "..use of the dyno," etc. But, I know everyone eventually gets around to spending money on increasing hp and my opinion is why start with something that's already behind? Other than the hp issue, this mag has a great review on the bike! Everything else is supposed to be awesome. [/QUOTE.....

It seems to me that the editor of mx action was taken out to town again from a yamaha rep.Surf and turf .. :think:
 

eightyopen

Member
Jul 23, 2001
12
0
Originally posted by jboomer
One of the mags (initials start with an M ends with an A) did their ride on the KX250. They said it gives up like 4 hp to the CR. "Even worse, at 9000 rpm the Kawasaki KX250 makes 32.8 hp.....12 hp less than the '03 yz250."

12hp is such a difference it almost red flags the numbers for me, I could see 3-5HP difference but 12 makes me think something wasn't right. There are a lot of if's though, if one bike happened to be jetted spot on and the other wasn't for example.
 

Rcannon

~SPONSOR~
Nov 17, 2001
1,886
0
I believe the bike is down on power. Kawasaki also advertises in the magazines. There would be no reason to lie.

The other mag tested one KX and did not believe the numbers. They claimed to try two other bikes and the first one was the strongest.

I dont believe everything I read, but if two sources say about the same thing, there could be some credibility.

This is a wonderful bargaining tool. You go into the shop and offer much less for the KX..."Its down on power!!!" You buy the bike and live happily ever after!
 

los36

~SPONSOR~
Feb 7, 2002
410
0
well, the KX has traditionally been a low-end motor. It's supposed to be like that this year. At 9000 RPM, that could very well be the case. What about the power at 5000 RPM?
 

jboomer

~SPONSOR~
Jan 5, 2002
1,420
1
The mag said its peak was at 42.9 hp --4 less than the CR. But, it didn't publish the entire dyno spread or the comparable CR spread. It did say however that the bike built power better at the low to mid ranges and basically fell flat on top. It may be comparable or even better (although I'm sure the mag would have published it) than the other bikes in the low to mid department, but who's to say without the actual dyno results. But, like I said, everything else about the bike (except for a couple little tidbits) was rated very well.
 

holeshot01

Member
Apr 22, 2001
48
0
hi,
i have a 03 cr 350, and i can say it's the first bike i've owned that the mags dont like. take some real advice, if you like kx's, do not hesitate to buy the new one, my cr is way way more than my old one which won bike of the year its a 01 model, so new technology is almost always better!! besides, if it's not a blue bike they wont like it!!!
 

Rockey5000

Mod Ban
May 6, 2002
293
0
Iv'e ridden the 03 KX250 and it is not underpowered. It is a short shift motor though, It seems to prefer that than being screamed. If you try to scream it hold on tight, its fast. Its no slower than a 03 CR250, thats for sure. The motor is exceptional, as is the suspension. Down on power? Thats funny. A 02 CR125 is down on power, not an 03 KX250
 

Matt_H

Member
Sep 13, 2001
365
0
A local pro around here just got his, and was testing at a track i was at and asked him what he thought. He said that it likes to be lugged around and run a gear high. But it was his first time on the bike and was just testing it out he never even got a chance to jet it right. But out of the hole he said it'll give 4 strokes a run for there money to the first turn.
 

bigred455

"LET'S JUST RIDE"
LIFETIME SPONSOR
Sep 12, 2000
782
0
Remember the sweet Honda CR250 engines of the past? (Yes, we know they weren't built by Kawasaki) The great motors Honda put out in the days of headshake problems? The engines were marvelous, but most riders couldn't get past the scary headshake. The first lap on the KX250 immediately brought back memories of those wonderful engines, only with gobs more overall power. The new KX motor has lots of controllable mid-range grunt and a very strong top end, making it possible to ride a gear tall if desired. Over-rev is nothing like the 125, actually a bit lacking, but acceptable for most riders. The KX250's smooth and controllable engine certainly packs a punch, so you'd better be paying attention when you twist the throttle.

The 250's ergonomics felt good indeed, everything as it should be. We had to work a bit to get the suspension package balanced for me; we finally found the magic spot at about 2 clicks out from the stock compression settings. We also took preload out of the shock, going from 100mm to about 102mm of sag. This made for a softer more supple ride, and provided me more control and gobs more fun. Expert riders later rode the same bike and said it felt a little soft, but well balanced.

The 250 puts out big-time power, making it both easier and harder to ride than the 125. The power has to be used in a more controlled manner, yet it allows you to instantly make corrections. The 250 ripped up the tracks big uphill, wheeling all the way if you liked. In the whoop section, the 250 with its instant power, was far easier to ride and control with a blip of the throttle. Even though these bikes share parts like the frame (less cradle portion), hydroformed swingarm, suspension components, and chain there is a 22 pound difference. The 250 feels considerable larger and heavier. Part of this has to do with the inertia produced by the larger engine. It's not a big thing, just quite noticeable. Out of the starting gate, the 250 was easy to control and provided good clutch feedback as did the 125.

The 250 cornered well, though with the machines added power it was a bit more difficult to hold the inside line compared to the 125. Air time was controlled and neutral, just like on the 125, but there was far more instant power to launch you to the moon.

Experts and pros really liked the KX 250. I liked it for it's hard hitting yet controllable power delivery and easy-to-ride characteristics. There simply wasn't anything not to like with the KX 250, it's a potent machine ready to tackle any task - Supercross or Motocross.


Just another side of a story.
 

Camstyn

LIFETIME SPONSOR
Oct 3, 1999
2,247
2
You know, I wouldn't doubt the 12 HP power difference at 9000 RPM. Kawis have always been known for having great bottom end power, with the tradeoff of top end power. Mine was like that (2000), every other one I've ridden was like that. 250's don't make peak horsepower at lower RPM's anyways, so you can't really judge it by numbers. Whichever bike has the most top end power will win the dyno wars, but that doesn't make it the best engine.
I rode my 2000 back to back with a 2001 CR250, the CR250 was a top end monster with way less bottom. I wouldn't say it was any faster, it definitely wasn't as easy to ride, but I bet it put out way more power at 9000 RPM than the KX250 did.. Probably had a higher peak HP rating, too. Horsepower charts aren't everything, torque is just as important, maybe moreso even.. All these things, combined with gearing setup etc. make seat of the pants testing way more useful than dyno charts, IMHO.
The 2003 CR250 is supposed to have the highest peak horsepower, as read in the Dirt Bike shootout between the CR/KX/RM/YZ. Funny however as it comes in dead last in both the sheer acceleration category AND the "powerband" category. The KX was the lowest on the chart but nobody came off of it feeling like it lacked anything in the engine compartment.
 

Rcannon

~SPONSOR~
Nov 17, 2001
1,886
0
cam, I actually looked at the 2000 shootout in an old dirt bike. The KX had a higher peak than anything that year ar 45.3. That is more than the 03 KX by quite a margain.
 

Rcannon

~SPONSOR~
Nov 17, 2001
1,886
0
One thing I would like to ask from the guys that get new motorcycles every year or two......Do the engines feel much different?

Looking only at paper, I think it would be tough to feel 2-3hp gain. The bikes have kept the same peak hp for years now. It is not like the 80's when I rode last. Then, it was not uncommon to gain 5 hp in one year, especially when Yamaha went with the powervalve.

My long winded question asks if there is a power difference you can feel between something like a 2003 KX and a 1997 or 98? I just picked the KX. Any bike will do.
 

Rcannon

~SPONSOR~
Nov 17, 2001
1,886
0
Oh, and one other thing, can you give up almost ten peak hp to the big four storkes without eating their dust to the first turn? I am a two stroke fan, so dont feel like you'll hurt my feelings. I will be slowere if it means an engine rebuild will take 45 minutes insterad of ten hours! No problem!
 

hoov165x

Member
May 31, 2002
106
0
I have owned 250's from each of the big 5 as I am not brand loyal and I want the most for my money. I buy 1-2 new bikes a year and I can tell you this- don't believe the dyno, it is the seat of the pants that counts. Power quality is always better than power quantity. Also you have to be comfortable with a bike's power and handling traits to make the most of it. There are significant differences between each of the big 5's packages, but what it really comes down to is rider preference.
 
Top Bottom