Reguardless of my signiture, Honda's have always defined reliability for me. The CR's I have owned from the mid eighties until the early ninties were reliable even after motorwork was done. Thats why I don't have as much sympathy for the Blue ones. Those old two strokes (And new ones) can be built to the hilt and survive. My experience with green in the late seventies and early eighties wasn't as pleasent. But those KX500's seem to be as my Honda's were. Fast, Reliable, fun.:)
Blue Hand grenades
- Thread starter KWJams
- Start date
Irony: a guy who’s spent $1,500 on motor parts alone defending the reliability of his bike.
The YZF has more moving parts than a two stroke, we’re talking twice (or more) as many opportunities for failure.
The YZF is the single most popular bike at any (off-road) race I attend, that much better chance of you seeing one dead by the side of the trail.
I owned a ’99 KX 500, which I bought new, for about 8 mo.s and call it 40 hours. I took two long walks in the desert after that thing quit on me, but it was cheaper and easier to repair (broken detent spring and blown head gasket) than anything has been on my YZF.
So eight months, two walks, and say fifty bucks in parts, vs. 16 months, one walk, and fifteen hundred in parts.
If it weren’t for all the extra moving parts it would be a wash :D
The YZF has more moving parts than a two stroke, we’re talking twice (or more) as many opportunities for failure.
The YZF is the single most popular bike at any (off-road) race I attend, that much better chance of you seeing one dead by the side of the trail.
I owned a ’99 KX 500, which I bought new, for about 8 mo.s and call it 40 hours. I took two long walks in the desert after that thing quit on me, but it was cheaper and easier to repair (broken detent spring and blown head gasket) than anything has been on my YZF.
So eight months, two walks, and say fifty bucks in parts, vs. 16 months, one walk, and fifteen hundred in parts.
If it weren’t for all the extra moving parts it would be a wash :D
