EXC 200 with a sx cylinder/pipe??
- Thread starter snullia
- Start date
socal scott
Member
- Nov 2, 2001
- 101
- 0
WHY? $$$$
Snappier power = lighter flywheel(-6oz.), DDK needle, advance timing past the advance marker (at least 2mm's).
Thinner base gasket and/or a VForce/RAD valve.
Better still is a programable CDI. This alone puts the power on a different level.
Minor tunning can get the snap you seek, I assure you.
Good luck
Snappier power = lighter flywheel(-6oz.), DDK needle, advance timing past the advance marker (at least 2mm's).
Thinner base gasket and/or a VForce/RAD valve.
Better still is a programable CDI. This alone puts the power on a different level.
Minor tunning can get the snap you seek, I assure you.
Good luck
- Thread starter
- #3
Thanks for the info. In fact a guy on another forum informed that the cyl. is the same on the 200 exc and sx. Strange since one would expect major differences in porting. According to him the main difference in engine performance is the pipe/silencer and flywheel. In fact I do not have a clue what to expect from a sx 200 but since the sx is only 50 cc less than a 250 MX bike one might speculate that the engine performance could be rather impressive. And the thought of a super lightweight WR 6 gear off-road bike with near MX 250 engine performance is not a bad one ... well it really is a overbore 125 after all.....isn't it.
marcusgunby
LIFETIME SPONSOR
- Jan 9, 2000
- 6,450
- 2
I think the igntion mapping is different on the sx as well.
socal scott
Member
- Nov 2, 2001
- 101
- 0
snu,
The ex/c is heavier than an mx/c and the mx/c is 10lbs. heavier than the SX. They still feel light due to low rotating mass and torque.
My mx/c is fast now, but still does not mimic 250 power. It is a 125 on steroids basically. I can get on the power in places the bigger bikes can't.
200's require less energy in the tight and more on hills or open areas.
I was all over a 380 this week-end for fun. The buddy is slower than I, but I wanted to see exactly what this 200 was lacking. I came away very pleased and we had a blast riding so close. More fun than roosting away.
Again, there's no 250 like power, it's 125 like. The ignition change is a must for anyone moderately talented on down. It may be better to detune an '03 250SX, very light. A standard 250 is simply easier to ride at ones given riding level unless it's slow woods riding.
The ex/c is heavier than an mx/c and the mx/c is 10lbs. heavier than the SX. They still feel light due to low rotating mass and torque.
My mx/c is fast now, but still does not mimic 250 power. It is a 125 on steroids basically. I can get on the power in places the bigger bikes can't.
200's require less energy in the tight and more on hills or open areas.
I was all over a 380 this week-end for fun. The buddy is slower than I, but I wanted to see exactly what this 200 was lacking. I came away very pleased and we had a blast riding so close. More fun than roosting away.
Again, there's no 250 like power, it's 125 like. The ignition change is a must for anyone moderately talented on down. It may be better to detune an '03 250SX, very light. A standard 250 is simply easier to ride at ones given riding level unless it's slow woods riding.
- Thread starter
- #8
Thank guys - excellent info. Scott - thanks for the replies. Good to hear from a guy with such a detailed knowledge. I probably will be taking a look at a 250 MX bike and simply live with the close ratio gearbox. After all most of the riding will take place on the 520 but still - one must have a nice two stroke to take for a spin once in a while : - )
