Can anyone hear give me a review of the KDX 200? I've been pricing them lately for next year when I want to get a new bike. I've ridden 125s that have great power for open woods, but my trails are extremely tight and a 125 would probably struggle to keep in the powerband. The KDX seems like it would have a lot more low end and it probably would be geared more towards trails. But how reliable is the engine itself. Will I need a new top end every year like a typical racing two-stroke, or is it more durable? I'm probably going to be looking around for a 97-00 next year, or whatever I can get for less than $3000.
KDX 200 opinions?
- Thread starter jaypro55
- Start date
I've had a 94 KDX 200 for about 2 years. It's been totally reliable. A very fun bike for tight trails. I just recently bought a 00 YZ 250 to take to the track and have had a lot of fun with it on the trials as well. The KDX is more "cushy" for long trail rides but I love the "grunt" of the YZ but admit I can't last quite as long or go quite as fast...but then again I love the grunt on the low end and pulling wheelies in 4th gear!
I think I would go with a KDX 220, 95 and later (perimeter frame, etc.). It doesn't rev as fast as the 200 (more like a 125) but will give you more bottom end for hills, etc. If you find a 200 you can do a 220/225 kit and then you've got a 220. Either way, you can't go wrong.
If you haven't posted this on the JustKDX board I'd do it.
PS. If I were to go with a 200 because of the "flickability" and weight factor, I'd personally go with an KTM MXC 200. My neighbor accross the road just bought one...it's sweet! Lots of low end grunt, almost like a 250 but very light and easy to throw around. And it's fast! But then you've got to think about what you opinion is about riding a "pumpkin?" Good luck!
I think I would go with a KDX 220, 95 and later (perimeter frame, etc.). It doesn't rev as fast as the 200 (more like a 125) but will give you more bottom end for hills, etc. If you find a 200 you can do a 220/225 kit and then you've got a 220. Either way, you can't go wrong.
If you haven't posted this on the JustKDX board I'd do it.
PS. If I were to go with a 200 because of the "flickability" and weight factor, I'd personally go with an KTM MXC 200. My neighbor accross the road just bought one...it's sweet! Lots of low end grunt, almost like a 250 but very light and easy to throw around. And it's fast! But then you've got to think about what you opinion is about riding a "pumpkin?" Good luck!
I have a 1995 KDX 200. The only things that have ever been replaced out of necessity are the chain/sprockets, tires, and a tail light. It still has the original piston and rings, and runs great. I will probably rebuild the top end this winter, but that's only because I plan to have the engine apart anyway for some port work. I have already added Pro Circuit exhaust and boyesen reeds for more power. The bike does have good lowend grunt stock, and has good power through the rest of the revs. However, some exhaust and engine modifications really wake it up. The stock suspension is OK, but the forks tend to be way to soft for most people.
In my opinion, you would be very happy with a KDX. You should be able to find one that is relatively inexpensive. The bikes are virtually identical from 1995 on up, other than graphics, so if you find an older model in good shape, you should be able to save some money for upgrades. Good luck! :)
P.S. There really is no "flickability" and weight factor between the 220 and the 200. They are the SAME bike, other than the 220's larger piston and smaller carb. In stock condition, the 220 has more bottom end and the 200 has more top end. The 220 has more displacement though, and therefore more "hop-up potential." The 220 was first produced in 1997. Compared to the KTM 200 MXC, there is no comparison. The KTM 200 is a much more modern bike. It has an up-to-date suspension, chassis and engine, whereas a new KDX is based on late eighties/early nineties technology. It takes a lot of work to get the KDX into the same league with the KTM. However, KDX's are allot cheaper to buy than KTM's, so you have more left over to play with on the same budget if you buy a KDX. Also, I doubt you'll be finding a KTM 200 for under $3000.
In my opinion, you would be very happy with a KDX. You should be able to find one that is relatively inexpensive. The bikes are virtually identical from 1995 on up, other than graphics, so if you find an older model in good shape, you should be able to save some money for upgrades. Good luck! :)
P.S. There really is no "flickability" and weight factor between the 220 and the 200. They are the SAME bike, other than the 220's larger piston and smaller carb. In stock condition, the 220 has more bottom end and the 200 has more top end. The 220 has more displacement though, and therefore more "hop-up potential." The 220 was first produced in 1997. Compared to the KTM 200 MXC, there is no comparison. The KTM 200 is a much more modern bike. It has an up-to-date suspension, chassis and engine, whereas a new KDX is based on late eighties/early nineties technology. It takes a lot of work to get the KDX into the same league with the KTM. However, KDX's are allot cheaper to buy than KTM's, so you have more left over to play with on the same budget if you buy a KDX. Also, I doubt you'll be finding a KTM 200 for under $3000.
I think you would be very happy with the KDX 220. There is alot more hop up potential over the 200. I have a 97 KDX 220 and I am very happy with it both in the woods and on the track.
I have put an FMF pipe and silencer on .. Big Improvment
I have stepped up the carb to a KX 250 carb. (PKW 38 over the stock 33)
BIG IMPROVMENT...
put a Nogolgy hot wire on, another big improvment
V-Force reeds... Very big improvment
and put a Scotts Damper on.... another very big improvment.
and had Racetech suspension added... very big improvement
The 220 is a great bike right out of the box as well. Very dependable and has very useable very ridable power. Lots of bottom end for those big hills yet it has a very strong powerband as well.
You can get into one pretty cheap and work on the improvments a little at a time. Its kinda like building your bike to what your needs are..
I don't think you can go wrong with the KDX myself but there are alot of opions out there. Good Luck with your search...
MotoXnut
I have put an FMF pipe and silencer on .. Big Improvment
I have stepped up the carb to a KX 250 carb. (PKW 38 over the stock 33)
BIG IMPROVMENT...
put a Nogolgy hot wire on, another big improvment
V-Force reeds... Very big improvment
and put a Scotts Damper on.... another very big improvment.
and had Racetech suspension added... very big improvement
The 220 is a great bike right out of the box as well. Very dependable and has very useable very ridable power. Lots of bottom end for those big hills yet it has a very strong powerband as well.
You can get into one pretty cheap and work on the improvments a little at a time. Its kinda like building your bike to what your needs are..
I don't think you can go wrong with the KDX myself but there are alot of opions out there. Good Luck with your search...
MotoXnut
The original comment I made regarding "flickability and weight was in response to my YZ 250 vs. my KDX 200. I realize, as probably does any half wit, that the 200 and 220 are identical bikes other than cylinder disp., flywheel weight.
And yes, I've seen the ads in the Cycle Trader for brand new KDXs here in Oregon for $2999. But then there's usually a jacked up price for set up, delivery, etc. fees adding up to around $500-700 more. Still not a bad deal.
Good luck,
DP
woods_rider1
Member
- Sep 27, 2001
- 355
- 0
I agree with LUTZ, there is no comparison to a KTM. I have owned a few KDX's over the last 11 years and even with over 1500.00 in motor and suspension mods on my last one, it doesnt even come close to a stock KTM! The stock KTM comes with most of the goodies you would pay extra for. The suspension is amazing, and with the proper jetting the motor is MAGIC! I just went to a single taper needle on mine and it pulls like a tractor in the slippery stuff. I loved my KDX while I had it, and maintained it religously, but after one ride on my new KTM, I WILL NEVER GO BACK!!! It is simply that much better in EVERY aspect.
Brian~
'01 KTM 250
Brian~
'01 KTM 250
dont forget to look at the GasGas 200, (as long as you are comparing the KDX and the KTM, you might as well look at the other only 200), out of the two euro bike's I would lood at the GG first, only becuase of the smoother motor, and better turning abilities. Here in CA parts are no problem for any of the bike's, but I have heard of some back order problems with the KTM here and there. I spoke to the local GG dealer and he said that if he doesnt have the part you need in stock and he has to order it, the part is FREE!
I like KTM's, they have hung in there when it wasnt cool to have one, I had a 84 250 mxc and it was a nice bike, just didnt have any brake's. I wouldnt have a problem owning another KTM. The funny thing is that KTM didnt want to make the 200, said there is no market, just a bunch of silly Yank's, now it is one of there best selling bike's ! The GG is really coming on strong, they have been showing up at alot in the race's winning circle's.
COME ON KAWASAKI, IM TIRED OF SELLING GASGAS BIKES FOR FREE, GIVE ME A RACE WORTHY BIKE NOW !!! PLEASE:p
I like KTM's, they have hung in there when it wasnt cool to have one, I had a 84 250 mxc and it was a nice bike, just didnt have any brake's. I wouldnt have a problem owning another KTM. The funny thing is that KTM didnt want to make the 200, said there is no market, just a bunch of silly Yank's, now it is one of there best selling bike's ! The GG is really coming on strong, they have been showing up at alot in the race's winning circle's.
COME ON KAWASAKI, IM TIRED OF SELLING GASGAS BIKES FOR FREE, GIVE ME A RACE WORTHY BIKE NOW !!! PLEASE:p
Timr
LIFETIME SPONSOR
- Jul 26, 1999
- 1,972
- 6
The motor was really sweet. Made great power for a non-powervalve engine. I had a dyno-port pipe on mine. The bike handled very well and had pretty decent suspension.
I did get better performance out of the back brake by manufacturing my own return spring for the lever. After I did that, the rear brake performance allowed me to brake slide better, but it chewed up pads pretty quick.
My '84 KTM was VERY reliable. I never had any trouble out of that bike. I kinda miss it now.
I did get better performance out of the back brake by manufacturing my own return spring for the lever. After I did that, the rear brake performance allowed me to brake slide better, but it chewed up pads pretty quick.
My '84 KTM was VERY reliable. I never had any trouble out of that bike. I kinda miss it now.
The KDX 200 is a great bike. One of the greatest of all time. Some people will talk about buying a more modern bike like a KTM 200 or Gas Gas 200 but these are people that can afford it, and are concerned about having the newest and most modern thing to keep up appearances in the dirt bike community. People who just want to have fun and not impress anybody ride KDX's. It will become one of your most prized possesions and your best buddy on the trails. You will like what it does for you, so you will feel guilty when you don't maintain it and will want to take as good care of it as it does to you. I have a 95, and it has been a great first "real" bike for me. I wish I had a new 220 though. The 220 is a better bike. The low-end is great, and the hop-up potential is better. My bike has FMF exhaust and a RAD valve with carbon fiber reeds and a 51-tooth rear sprocket, and I still wish I had that 220 grunt down low. If you are going to race this bike, people will talk about having a 30cc disadvantage because you have to race 250's...big deal, most people can't ride their bike to its fullest potential to begin with. You can certainly beat people on 250's with this bike if you can ride. I have ridden a 97 and 98 220, and liked both of them better than mine. The 97 had an FMF exhaust, and the 98 had an FMF pipe, Boyesen reeds with the stock cage, and was ported. That 98 is the best woods bike I've ridden. It was stronger down low than stock, and the porting made it pull as hard in the mid to top as my 200 does. Get a 220, I think you will stall it less. You can short-shift it and chug along. Anybody who talks bad about the KDX like it is an outdated beginner bike that is just for your wife can go to hell and die. It is very reliable and also a great value; the only bike that would be more reliable would be a XR 50 or XR 250. I have taken it to many a backwoods Georgia trail and don't bring any tools along, and I haven't been stranded yet, except for when I do something dumb like drown it out or get stuck in a rut with really thick mud. Even then, I was still able to get it started. I haven't had any engine failures except the occasional spark plug fouling and a couple of frayed cables, but that is more of a lack of maintenance on my part. (I now own a cable lubing tool.) The KDX is a kind of bike where if you spend a little time the night before your ride doing some maintenance to it, you will know it will do well for you all day the next day without any problems. If you have been researching into KDX's already, then you're probably already sucked in by it's charisma and what everybodty has been writing about it, so you might as well join the club. You won't regret it.
Well, I couldn't tell you too much about the KDX200, but I've ridden a KDX220 (A '98 I think, its not mine) for most of the season. I got lucky, my riding brothers buddy is whipped (Crazed house wives!) and so never gets to take his bike out, so I get it all season every year, and he does all the matenence. NICE DEAL! Anyways, the 220 has some serious low end grunt to it, thats what it was built for. It's not too pipey, but it does have a deffinate powerband. It's a pretty heavy bike though, and feels it every time you drop the stupid thing. Another point to short riders is that the KDX is pretty tall, I'm 5'8" and sometimes have a hard time getting a foot down when I need to. But as far as reliablility, the bike is awesome. Starts a little hard when it's cold, but never fails to start. Hasn't fouled a single plug since it was bought. A great bike overal, maybe I'll buy it from that guy some day! :p
Another point I just remember about the KDX220 that seems a little weird is the handling. Not the cornoring, they do that beautiful, but they are extremely light in the front. I doesn't take nothing to wheely in third and fourth gear on that bike. I'm mainly base this comparison against a 2001 YZ125 that I've ridden a bit this season, and from other bikes in the past. And while each bike is different, none of them had such light front ends. The 220 I ride wheelies constantly, kinda scary till you get it mastered, then it's cool. In comparison; when I exit a cornor on the MX track with the YZ125, I get mad wheelspin, then it hooks and goes. With the KDX220, it spins very little, hooks up, then lifts the front end up coming of the berm. It's wicked cool, and I really like it now that i've mastered it. :p The bike jumps beautifully too, it's very controlable on the face up the jump, it does what you tell it to, nothing more. I think it's wheely tendencies are a compilation of its taller height, shorter wheelbase, heavy weight, and torque. It's a fun bike though, and I love it dearly.
Bryan Kimsey
Member
- Sep 10, 2001
- 53
- 0
I bought a used (barely) '96 KDX200 a few months ago and I really like it. My previous two bikes were a Yamaha YZ250WR and a new '96 XR250. The KDX seems to combine the best of both of these with none of the problems. The handling is great and there's been numberous times when I know I wouldn't dropped either the XR or WR and the KDX just soaks it up and goes.
I dropped the front sprocket to a 12 tooth, opened the airbox, put on Devol rad guards, installed an FMF K-35 torque pipe and the bike does everything I want in a play/trails/desert/woods bike. Can't vouch too much for the reliability yet, but by all appearances, this bike is still on the stock piston (but then it had very low hours). I'll be opening it up this winter to clean the KIPS, but I checked it and it does seem to be working fine.
Best bike I've ever had for what I like to do.
I dropped the front sprocket to a 12 tooth, opened the airbox, put on Devol rad guards, installed an FMF K-35 torque pipe and the bike does everything I want in a play/trails/desert/woods bike. Can't vouch too much for the reliability yet, but by all appearances, this bike is still on the stock piston (but then it had very low hours). I'll be opening it up this winter to clean the KIPS, but I checked it and it does seem to be working fine.
Best bike I've ever had for what I like to do.
KM Burgess
Member
- Oct 30, 2001
- 32
- 0
KDX200
I owned a 97 KDX200 here in Australia (the road registered "J" model), it was a great bike but I ended up making many mods to improve it, first thing I did was rip off as much of the road stuff I could bearing in mind that I would be putting it back on later, by the time I had finished it was nothing short of sensational. Some of the mods included:
Cylinder Porting: I cleaned up all the casting marks in the reed housing, I enlarged, shaped and angled the transfer ports and I cleaned up and matched the exhaust port to the pipe.
I also fitted the following items: an FMF fatty torque pipe and power core muffler, Boyesen reed valve with pro series carbon fibre dual stage reeds, a Wiseco pro lite piston kit, Barnett heavey duty clutch, Race Tech gold valves front and rear with USF1 oil, swapped the light .35mm/kg front springs for Race Tech .42mm/kg units. Fitted Renthal bars and sprockets (14/48) with Regina o-ring chain. Works Connection frame guards, radiator braces and MX glide plate. I fitted Dunlop rubber front and rear, a One Industries seat cover and graphics kit. Removed the air box snorkel & fitted an NGK racing plug (BR8EGV). The carby was set at 48 pilot/165main/standard needle in the 3rd clip position. It was run on Premium unleaded with Shell VSX2 synthetic premix at 40:1
Believe me when I say that this bike really hauled arse, handled fabuliously and was a pleasure to ride, wheelies were easy as the front end lofted easy, it had a huge mid range hit and a strong bottom that could be lugged. It was very reliable (never failing me mechanically in the 3 years that I owned it). Sadly I had to sell it to make way for my KTM520 (I wanted to get away from premix fuels).
Cheers
I owned a 97 KDX200 here in Australia (the road registered "J" model), it was a great bike but I ended up making many mods to improve it, first thing I did was rip off as much of the road stuff I could bearing in mind that I would be putting it back on later, by the time I had finished it was nothing short of sensational. Some of the mods included:
Cylinder Porting: I cleaned up all the casting marks in the reed housing, I enlarged, shaped and angled the transfer ports and I cleaned up and matched the exhaust port to the pipe.
I also fitted the following items: an FMF fatty torque pipe and power core muffler, Boyesen reed valve with pro series carbon fibre dual stage reeds, a Wiseco pro lite piston kit, Barnett heavey duty clutch, Race Tech gold valves front and rear with USF1 oil, swapped the light .35mm/kg front springs for Race Tech .42mm/kg units. Fitted Renthal bars and sprockets (14/48) with Regina o-ring chain. Works Connection frame guards, radiator braces and MX glide plate. I fitted Dunlop rubber front and rear, a One Industries seat cover and graphics kit. Removed the air box snorkel & fitted an NGK racing plug (BR8EGV). The carby was set at 48 pilot/165main/standard needle in the 3rd clip position. It was run on Premium unleaded with Shell VSX2 synthetic premix at 40:1
Believe me when I say that this bike really hauled arse, handled fabuliously and was a pleasure to ride, wheelies were easy as the front end lofted easy, it had a huge mid range hit and a strong bottom that could be lugged. It was very reliable (never failing me mechanically in the 3 years that I owned it). Sadly I had to sell it to make way for my KTM520 (I wanted to get away from premix fuels).
Cheers
Similar Topics
