Originally posted by the Eel recommend the YZ 250F over the WR?
I wasn't asked but (excuse me. please while) I'll butt in: I don't recommend the YZ, knowing your (our) type of riding. Here's why:
The main advantage (others below), WR over YZ, is the wide-ratio trans (thank me later ;). If you were doing mostly or exclusively MX, then I'd vote 4 the YZ. For your type of riding - enduros, trails, exploring - the WR comes better, more thoroughly equipped, unless you R of the mind to modify the YZ for desert applications (let's not go there now). The closer your next bike fits your application, the better off you'd B from the start.
Along that theme, a greater spread or spacing of gears found w/the WR (or any off-road specific (not-MX) bike) allows a granny gear 1st for rock crawling/trials-ish sections, & inclines (Arrastra Trail uphill anyone?) yet an overdrive 5th (or 6th in some) to wring it out in WFO stuff, which, come to think of it, is why your current steed has 6 - a gear for every situation, well tailored to it's tame power characteristics & limiting suspension.
Again, all enduro or cross country bikes come stock w/a good spread of gears (GGs, 200/400 E/XCs, & the KDX all have have 6; all larger 2-stroke KTM E/XCs (not M/XCs), my RMX, & the older Yammie WRs have a wide-ratio 5-speed boxes for a good reason, my fine & fast friend :). Otherwise - like stock MX bikes (where 1st is just not quite low enough for slow going, 5th not high enough for faster, open stretches - can U say buzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, buzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, buzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz) you'd be wanting/looking/inadvertently shifting in search of a hoped-for-but-not-available next lowest or highest gear. This always happens 2 me when I (infrequently) ride friends MXers here in SoCa, both dez & mountains. (Disclaimer: this does not apply to other DRNers who never see a huge variety of terrain, let alone experience the wide-open desert as we do in SoCa.)
:think: (For this very reason, IMS & Moose have made sold wide-ratio kits for CR & KXes. Some older CREs had WR conversions.)
Additionally, bikes w/close-ratios need to be up & downshifted more often than the wide-ratio models to stay in the best pulling/responsive part of the power curve; having to do that - @ least be always concious of it - takes away from your concentration & add rider fatigue (cramps on a long event/ride). It feels awkward to me (an old, lazy rider?) having to shift more often than I should normally otherwise have to; like I already have enough to do & stay on the trail. Having a good spread of usable (enduro? 4-stroke?) power alleviates this point somewhat; all the better to have something come w/a power spread & transmission configured for a wide-variety of conditions.
Moreover, the WR already comes with enduro-valved (not MX) suspension, 18" rear wheel (less flats & more flexible off-road), kickstand (goes w/o saying), lighting coil, heavier flywheel (less stalling, more hookup), bigger radiators (cooling), extra case saver; all the enduro/trail accouterments. (It's easier & certainly less $ to convert a WR to moto form/look than YZ to enduro form/function.) C'mon Eeler: say uncle: this is it!
A WR drawback is the bulky, humpback gas tank, of which there R two easy solutions: 1) IMS tank/seat; 2) OEM YZ tank/seat. The latter looks primo IMHO & has enough capacity (2 gal.) for most mongo loops, perhaps even an entire (novice) loop of 40-50 mi. (I can do ~50 on my 2 gal. smoker, whcih used more gas than a diesel.)
Originally posted by the Eel KTM - have actually thought alot and read alot about the 200 E/XC .. seems like a neat bike .. I sat on one and it feels good too ... but again it's a 2-stroke, which I'm not sure I am capable of riding effectively
You are quite capable; it's time. If any doubts remain, they can be easily tailored w/jetting & exhaust valve adjustments.
Originally posted by the Eel .. any recommendations on the most 4-stroke-like 2-strokes?
Ahhh: the GG EC300, like Kiwi & LT. Some have said the best of both worlds. Another must ride/buy...
Originally posted by the Eel 've seen the 200 in Mojave for $5,300
Not bad @ all.
Originally posted by the Eel Husky and Husaberg - and how is reliability ?
Don't know. Others?
Originally posted by the Eel Wildcards - CR 450F
:cool: , tho a lot of bike (focused, like the YZ426F) for play riding.
Originally posted by the Eel VOR
Nice, tho exotic & rare.
Originally posted by the Eel Displacement - the 400s seem to be less stretched out at this time ... it worries me about the horses they're getting out of the 250 rfs's - is this a legitimate thought ? I really don't want to find myself on a high-maintenance, high-strung, super-touchy race bike ... know what I mean ?
U R pushing the XR to it's limits now; the higher-performance models under consideration require less wringing-out/pushing to perform @ a like level, having a higher ceiling/limit built in, tho they are built to take it. Yes, they do require more maintenace, but perforem higher too. So U get what U pay for & put into it.
Actually, my old diesel required just as much if not more maintenance than my current smoker. Why? B/c I pumped the former up to perform like the latter! :eek:
Originally posted by the Eel Keep the good ideas coming ... I'll be on a new ride in no time with all this assistance ...
OK; U asked for it: Crapparal had a WR250F on the floor for $4.9k last month; there's one @ Redlands Yamaha, but they ask more...:D