2000 CR250 Reviews

[mx702]

I'm thinking of purchasing a 2000 cr250. Does anyone know how good of a bike it was/is? How were the reviews? I heard they had a great engine that year. Any info is greatly appreciated.

 

[James]

It was the best bike in a few shootouts and the best bike ever in my opinion. I have been riding one for three years and love it.

 

[mx702]

Nice. Thanks for the opinion.

 

[Crash 142]

I had that bike. Great bike. The reviews said the motor was mid-range only. I half agree. The top end, if I remember, wasn't very free-reving. But I didn't experiment much with jetting or anything to try to improve the top end. I never had a problem with the bike in two years or riding/racing MX.

I do think that bike vibrated more than the newer CR250s (at least more than the 03 that I had).

I had my suspension re-valved on that bike and it made a big difference. Maybe bigger than on any other bike - but it may have just felt SO much better because back then I went way too long before having the suspension serviced.

I believe that bike has a Kehin carb. You'll find posts all over here saying that carb is great, and once Honda went to Mikuni the problems began. I can say I was playing with jetting on my 03 all the time. My Suzuki has a Kehin and it's been great. If I remember right, my 2000 CR was never finicky with jetting.

The next generation CR frame (02 - present) seemed better to me. It seemed less harsh, and vibrated less. Which would I rather have? The 03 - but it probably will cost more, and the engine isn't as rider-friendly / solid as the 2000.

 

[mx702]

Its a tough call. I guess in a perfect world you could have an '00 motor in an '05 bike... or whatever you prefer. I'm not looking to spend a huge amount on my first bike, since its been 10 years. By the way Crash 142, how is the 04 RM? I think if I could go newer, the 04 RM would be a top choice.

 

[James]

The 02 and up chassis isn't THAT much better than the 00. I'd rather have the 00 with some suspension work as opposed to paying more for a newer one.

Rumor has is that if you are going to buy newer, look at the Yamaha, or the 04/05 Suzuki.

 

[mx702]

If I decide to look at a newer 250, Suzuki would probably be the one. Even though it supposedly doesnt have the quality of Honda, it otherwise sounds like a killer bike. I just can't ride a Yamaha. I have ridden a few YZ's over the years and I could never get comfortable on them. I feel like I'm too on top of them. Doesnt feel right to me. I prefer the old RM feel where I'm sitting 'in' the bike. Guess I'm just picky.

 

[Crash 142]

My 04 RM 250 is great. The power is so smooth I was instantly jumping with more confidence than I ever did on my 2003 CR 250. Everyone says Suzukis turn great. Well, I don't disagree, but I think I turned better on my CR. I jump so much better on my RM, though. I think the smooth power that I can count on is the big difference.

My Suzuki has been totally reliable. Zero problems in over a year, and that's riding/racing MX every weekend. The bike really great in ever way, except...

After about three months the bike started to feel 'different.' I can't really put my finger on what changed - maybe the suspension broke in and the bike felt unbalanced, or maybe the steel frame 'loosened up' and got flexy. I really don't know. I've been playing wth springs - I think somehow the bike stinkbugs on me now going into corners, where it was PERFECT when I first got it. I'm kinda scratching my head on what changed.

So I feel like with the Honda, you get a frame that is totally consistent, and with the Suzuki you get a motor that is totally consistent. I don't know if this helps or not. Would I buy another Suzuki? Yes. It really is a great bike. And there is a chance this whole 'flexy frame' / unbalanced suspension thing is in my head.

Just to end on a positive note - MXA wrote there is something 'magical' about the Suzuki in flight. I have to agree with this. My Honda was a ballistic missile in the air, my Suzuki is a guided missile.

And mx702 - I agree with you on Yamahas. I never felt right on one, either. The Honda and Suzuki both feel right, so they're both good choices.

 

[mtk]

Have you changed the suspension fluids? I'd do that as a first pass.

 

[Crash 142]

mtk,

That's the first thing I did. That helped for one ride. Just one ride. Weird, huh? Then did a revalve, that helped for one ride. Just one ride. Weirder, huh?

Then I expermented with softer springs (I weigh 160-165). First went sofeter in back, then both front and back, then back to stock. Never felt like it used to.

Today I went to Glen Helen with a softer rear and stock fronts - first time I've had the softer rear on in several months. It felt better. I slowed the front re-bound, it felt worse. I went faster on the front rebound, and now... It looks like I'm on the right track. I think the suspension broke in months ago, and the front got soft (and the rear didn't). I think I've been stinkbugging for months. Today the bike felt great in the chop, and was turning perfectly.

I think Suzuki's are more sensitive to rider input, and they're also more sensitive to set up. I've heard this before and I have to agree with it. If I could have ridden any bike today it would have been the bike I was on. It really felt 'confident.'

Maybe on the next ride it will be back to weird...

And mx702 - the aluminum frame Honda's have a reputation for being sensitive to set up, too.

 

[mx702]

Thanks for all the input crash142. These are the little things I like to read about when I'm researching different bikes. True rider responses... not just shootout reviews after a single weekend of riding a bike.