KX65 vs KX60

[Mad Max]

Is there anyone out there that can give me a good idea of the differences of these 2 bikes. My son is currently riding a XR50 and started last year racing MX and cross country pee wee. I want to move him up and I have been to several dealers trying to get an idea of which bike might work best for him. I have received little information other than what is in the brochere to that the bikes are identical ( I can see they are not ). What I guess I am most interested in is the powerband. I have been told that the 65 needs to be kept in the high rpm range to get the performance out of it and the 60 has a wider powerband and would make a better woods / mx bike than the 65. Can anyone confirm this? I would also consider another manufacturer if someone has some input from personal experiences.

Thanks.

 

[Vic]

The 60 has even less low-mid than the 65. Eric Gorr can give either one the powerband you want. The 65 is a better starting point.

 

[Junkie]

My son has an all stock 60 and talk about power band!
This bike flies. He is 8 and loves the power when he wants it.
If your son has never been on an MX bike, be carefull, the 60 realy has the power!
When I was lookin, I looked at the KX60, KX65 or the KTM65(heard bad things about the KTM). Thats pretty much it in that size MX bike.
I came across a great deal on a bairly used 99' model so thats what I went with.
We ride tracks and trails, he does not stay in the power band and it has yet to fowl a single plug(32:1 Yamalube on pump 92 octain)
The only differences(besides price) in the bike that I could tell is the suspension and the brakes. Theres not much difference in the motor. Ok, 5 cc's, not much huh?
The 65 has disc brakes and the suspension is set up like a larger KX, just on a smaller scale. Plus I THINK the 65 may be an inch taller, stock.
I would however recommend trying to find a used one, after all, how long do the kids really stay on the little bikes?
I am not at all disapionted in the 60, and neather is my son.
Let us know what ya decide.

 

[KTM CHRIS]

Everything Junkie says is true. The 60 can be lugged more so than the 65. The brakes on the 65 are disc but the 60 brakes don't suffer. The 65 is a inch taller but the suspension seems to sag a little more than the 60. The 60 has been made for many years without much change, therefore you can find them cheaper. The 65 has been produced since 2000. If he can fit on a 65 I would go that route for longevity of use and aftermarket parts availability. There really isn't much difference in the two.

 

[KXRider]

My Son had a 2000 KX65 and now has a 2002 KX65. We had Eric Gorr port the cylinder and MXTech do the suspension on the 2000. The 2000 bike was awsome, the 2002 has a much improved suspension and the motor willl get the same mods from Eric this winter. As for the KX60 I can tell you that it is a good yard and/or trail bike. My Son is a good little rider and normally places in the top 3 in the 60 junior class. When we pull up to the line one of the first things he does is count the number os KX60s, deducts this from the total number of bikes and then counts the number of KX65s and KTM65s.

Here is how my 9 year olds logic works. OK there are 12 KX60s and 10 KTM and KX 65s, so I need to beat 10 bikes to win. While I am sure a good rider wold do well on a KX60, he does not even count the KX60s as part of the race. Stock the 2002KX65 pulls the KTM on the starts and the supension is great.

 

[Vic]

Here is a quote from Eric Gorr's performance handbook which may explain differing opinions regarding the KX 60.

"All KX 60s are not created equal ! There exists big differences between the cylinders from bike to bike. For example, some bikes have transfer ports positioned too high in the cylinder,and the engine will run flat at high rpm. If the exhaust port is too high and the transfers are too low, the engine will run flat at low to mid rpm."

 

[Mad Max]

Great information from all of you and appreciated! Still shopping and still undecided but better informed thanks to you.