another 426 or 250

[selimdb]

My 01 426 ate 4th gear, had to unload cheap, now i'm ready for a new steed. I am hesitant to get another 4-stroke b/c of cost and maintenance (i just attempted to follow eric goors 450 top end procedure, wow) however the power delivery was priceless. I used to have a cr 250 that was for the most part uncontrollable, violent, scary, (fun in a straight line in a wide open field). I am fortunate enough to be able to afford most any bike I choose, however, I don't want to get bitten again. I understand the yz 250 is the more "mellow" of the smokers, with the addition of a flywheel weight would it be somewhat more controllable, any where close to the 426? Did I just get unlucky with my first 426? Honda 450 more reliable? Also, with extremely anal oil and air filter changing, what would you estimate maintenance cost for two vs four stroke over 2-3 years worth of weekend thrashing. I don't race, yet, mostly trails, woods, sand dunes, practice days at the tracks, etc.
:worship: thanks

 

[Shig]

I've owned and raced a 426, two CRF 450s, and six 250s (4 CRs, a KX and a YZ) over the past 15 years or so. In my experience, the CRFs have been the most reliable, best performing and cheapest to maintain. A valve check is a 30-minute job for a stoned monkey, and I've yet to have to replace a piston or a clutch in one. All I do is change the oil and clean the filter, which is about the same cost as buying good pre-mix for a 2-stroke. Its not like 2-strokes don't need oil changes either.

My last KX 250 needed six pistons, a barrel, a clutch, and a bottom end over an 18-month period of racing. My last CR 250 was a little better, needing only about four pistons and a clutch in a little over a year. My 02 CRF needed no motor or clutch work whatsoever for almost two full seasons. It was hard starting when I sold it, no doubt from worn valves, but it still pulled strong. My 04 has maybe 40-50 hours on it with no noticable power loss. The valves are still in spec too.

Although I'm a firm believer in the reliability of a new CRF, I wouldn't buy one used. It seems that they have about a 2-year span of reliability before things start getting sketchy. Lucky for you, getting a new bike every two years doesn't sound like a problem.

 

[selimdb]

that is a lot of jugs

why so many pistons? were you losing that much compression that quickly? that is incredible! what year's were your 250's and was the yz the more mellow? also where can i get a stoned monkey to turn wrenches? :laugh:

 

[Shig]

All of my bikes have had stock motors, but the 250s had aftermarket pipes. My 98 KX 250 ate pistons like a fifth-grader popping chiclets. Part of the problem with that model year was that the intake ports were so huge, that the piston was poorly supported. My first piston went in about a month, which the dealership covered because the power valve was hiting the piston. A tuner told me that Kawi cylinders and bottom ends are pretty much disposable items. Even when the cylinder problems were straightened out, the bike started losing compression very quickly after about 10 hours of running time. Prior to that, it was a rocket. At the time, I was racing 250 A MX. Even being only a few ponies down was a huge disadvantage, so I really had to stay on top of that bike.

The 2000 CR 250 was more reliable than the KX, probably because the motor was much slower (less aggressive porting is my guess). With the number of hours I was riding, a piston every three months was about every 25 hours of running time. That is way beyond spec than say a YZ 250, which should get a piston every 10 hours or so to be churning optimal ponies. Most A riders were replacing pistons and clutches much more frequently than I was. I'm bigger than the "typical" A rider, so going into a race with a tired motor was never an option.

The last YZ 250 I had was an 85, so I can't speak to the newer ones. My 426 was an 01. I got about 10 hours on it before breaking my leg, so I can't speak much to its long-term reliability. I can tell you that there is a night and day difference between a 426 and a CRF 450. The 450 feels much lighter, handles better, and has friendlier engine braking.

My 02 CRF saw five, Open Pro hare scrambles and lots of hard practice. Even when it was old and tired, it was still much faster than any 250 I had ever ridden. It could still pull me off the line in third gear after nearly two full seasons. Since it always ran strong, I took the ol' "if it aint broke, don't fix it approach".

Basically, all of the 250s I've owned have had a noticable drop in power and compression after about 10-20 hours of running time. You could probably continue riding a 250 until about 40 hours, but where's the fun in riding a bike that you know is at a power disadvantage. In my experience, you spend alot less time riding a tired motor with a thumper because the intervals between pistons are much longer.

I've raced my 04 CRF in one hare scramble and one mx, both in the Vet A class. Otherwise, I practice every week. For me, practice puts more wear on the bike than a day at the races. I'll typically put 1-2 hours on the motor in a practice, but only 30 mins to an hour in an MX race. I'll probably replace the piston this winter just for the heck of it, but it doesn't feel like it needs it.

Ask Gomer if he has any stoned monkeys lying around.

 

[selimdb]

maybe 450?

have you had any problems with either of your crfs? you make a very strong argument and i am extremly grateful for your insight. how does the 450 motor compare to the 426 from the drivers seat?

 

[Shig]

Apart from having to upgrade the airbox on the 02 (common problem with all CRs and CRFs that year), I had no problems with either bike. Even after sucking dirt into the motor for a few rides early in its life, the 02 ran flawlessly for well over 100 hours. It had the original plug in it when I sold it.

I thought the power delivery was smoother on the CRF compared to the 426. That's probably why MXA said " the CRF 450 accelerates like a Chrysler Mini Van compared to a 426". Personally, I think they both have great motors. The 02 CRF didn't corner as well as the 426 in stock trim, but my 04 turns better than my 426. The most noticable differences between the two bikes are the CRF's lighter feel, mellower engine braking and easier starting. I remember the 426 having so much engine braking that it could literally break the rear wheel loose coming into corners. The CRF freewheels alot better, which I prefer in whoops and rythm sections. Its a personal thing, though, because other riders at DRN have said that they like more engine braking in these circumstances. The 450 might only be a few pounds lighter, but it carries its weight so low that it feels like a significantly lighter bike in comparison. Hope this helps, good luck.
Sean

 

[biglou]

I was very unimpressed with both 02 CRF450's that I rode. Anemic powerband, IMO. Weak and linear. The second time I rode one, I wrung it out for all it was worth out in a big open area just to make sure I was getting everything available out of the motor. The 03-up are another story, however. Very light, snappy throttle, thick, torquey powerband. I like the YZF ergo's better than the CRF, but the CRF carries the weight lower and turns like it's on rails compared to the YZF, IMO.

 

[Shig]

I have to agree with Lou about the linear power band. I added a couple teeth to the rear sprocket on both of my CRFs to wake them up. Even my 04 had flat spots in the power delivery because it was geared too high in stock trim. First gear on a CRF feels like 2nd on a 250 smoker. Otherwise, the only mods I felt necessary for the 04 CRF were stiffer fork springs, a spare filter, a quality chain, and some Fastway bling.

Hey Lou, how does that YZF 450 compare to the 426 and CRF?

 

[biglou]

I'm a little biased, mind you, but I have to say that while smoother than the 426, the 450 pulls hard from bottom to top. I've got the Dr. D pipe with lowboy header which is supposed to help bottom end. I never rode it with stock pipe. I've never ridden a bike that hit as hard off the bottom as the 426. And for 05, Yamaha made a big marketing todo about smoothing the power out on the 450.

I think the red and blue 450's are comperable across the board for power. The difference is in the ergo's and the turning. If only I could make my blue piggie turn like a CRF...

 

[CR Swade]

If you are riding mostly trails, some dunes and some track I would look to the 250's...250 or 300MXC will do all of that and is lighter than most anything out there. Plus the 300 gives no quarter to a four stroke, and outweighs them by 20-40lbs, depending which four stroke. The KX seems to be a happy MXer that can be converted over trails also. Go for type of power, not quantity and you will have a well rounded bike.

The YZ450 and CRF are awesome bikes, but the power is really not suited to trails and woods. I've been able to make almost any woods bike go fast on a lcoal MX scene (my old 97 250EXC used to holeshot the 250 class quite a bit) then still have a bike that is trail happy.

On the other hand, the MX bikes have a hard time transitioning to the woods, unless you drop pretty major coin on them (done that also w/ my CR's)

 

[biglou]

I'd agree with Swade here. I borrow bikes for the limited woods riding I do. The 450 is a bit too twitchy for me so close to trees. Plus, it's a four-spd, so 1st is already a bit taller than most close-ratio tranny's 1st gear.