Old Riders With Full Floater Experience

[DCR]

I rode for about decade from the mid seventies to the mid eighties, and raced some in the intermediate class, my last bike was a 1982 rm250Z. In about 2005 I decided start riding again, and because the last bike I had was a 250 motocrosser I figured, even though it had been a couple of decades since the last time I swung a leg over anything, I needed another 250. I wanted early ‘80s Full Floater, but at the time I couldn’t find one, so I bought a 2000 with Pro-Action suspension. I figured that the suspension had improved over the years, but I didn’t think the power would be that much different, because my 82 was so fast for it’s time.

Well I was surprised to find that this 2000 was much faster, and the suspension is a total disappointment. Troubleshooting it’s overly harsh ride, I discovered the air pressure in the tires was 35psi, the springs in suspension were more suitable for a rider of 240lbs, so I changed the springs to ones from 125, I checked the bushing in the forks they are good, I made sure there is no binding in the forks from either overly torqued triple clamps or fork legs improperly positioned on the front axle, and set sag in the back, and I replaced all the bearings in the back end. The rear suspension seams good now but the front doesn’t have any sag when I sit on it until I bounce then I get about an inch to inch and a half. Regardless of the hit the front end transfer a shock to my 50 year old carpal tunnel syndrome hands.

It also has the typical clutch problems these bikes have. I have gone to KX250 disc and Amsoil and its much better, but it’s still the worst clutch I have ever used.

Most of the riding I do at this point is following my daughters and wife on their JR50, DS80, PW80 and my wife’s XR100, so I have geared the bike down and have the jetting as lean as possible, and now my throttle response is insane so when I have chance to hit some jumps I can’t modulate the throttle properly so sometimes I land to heavy on the front and some times to heavy on the backend.

I know I could send the motor to Eric Gorr to port it to my needs and send the suspension for a revalve as well, and buy a Hinson clutch, but these are not in the budget.

Finally here is my question I am thinking of dumping this bike and getting an ’84-’85, RM250 and possibly adding a set of cartridge forks from an ’87-’88. The ’84-‘85 had the Full Floater rear suspension, about 8hp less, and a steeper steering angle within a half a degree of my 2000 which does handle great.

What do you guys think good idea or am remembering my old Full Floater with rose colored classes. Feel free to suggest other bikes, but the budget is about the used value of my 2000 RM250, so probably around $1500 or less.

 

[whenfoxforks-ruled]

Carpel tunnel is no fun. And so are old used mx race bikes. Playing catch up on neglected maintenance is never ending! Especially with no parts available! I have a 2000 CR250 I am setting up for my race bike. I love the Huck valve from MX tech, good bye to harshness COMPLETELY. I have heard tell he is busy with something similar for the rear shock. My oldest son had the 2000 RM250 for a minute. Once set up it was not that bad, for what year it was. Those forks are about the same thing you would get for 1500 dollars today, basically. I have the 83 CR480 for fun. If I was serious, and had 1600 dollars to drop for an Ohlins shock, the forks and frame are still unknown. I get a good laugh out of the brakes, they are actually not bad. No more cranks though. But that is the Hondas. Suzuki of any year, you are a bigger glutton for punishment than I am. I started this return with a pile of RM's from 76 to 79, then the top ends and rods disappeared from parts availability, so they sit. Its just money, and my dream new dirt bike sits at 13,500. KX500AF from Service Honda. So my way is a lot cheaper! Vintage Bob

 

[jsantapau]

might want to just look for a kdx 200,xr400 or comparible...... nice quiet ,reliable a lot more suited to trail riding with family than a motocross bike

 

[DCR]

might want to just look for a kdx 200,xr400 or comparible...... nice quiet ,reliable a lot more suited to trail riding with family than a motocross bike

I appreciate the suggestion, but they wouldn't do as well when dad gets to ride without the kids.

 

[DCR]

Carpel tunnel is no fun. And so are old used mx race bikes. Playing catch up on neglected maintenance is never ending! Especially with no parts available! I have a 2000 CR250 I am setting up for my race bike. I love the Huck valve from MX tech, good bye to harshness COMPLETELY. I have heard tell he is busy with something similar for the rear shock. My oldest son had the 2000 RM250 for a minute. Once set up it was not that bad, for what year it was. Those forks are about the same thing you would get for 1500 dollars today, basically. I have the 83 CR480 for fun. If I was serious, and had 1600 dollars to drop for an Ohlins shock, the forks and frame are still unknown. I get a good laugh out of the brakes, they are actually not bad. No more cranks though. But that is the Hondas. Suzuki of any year, you are a bigger glutton for punishment than I am. I started this return with a pile of RM's from 76 to 79, then the top ends and rods disappeared from parts availability, so they sit. Its just money, and my dream new dirt bike sits at 13,500. KX500AF from Service Honda. So my way is a lot cheaper! Vintage Bob

Thanks for your reply, but I didn't catch where you had any experience with Full Floaters? You think my forks are worth a thousand? You can have the whole bike for that. As far Suzuki's go I have had many and I haven't ever had any trouble with any of them except the clutch on this 2000.

 

[Rich Rohrich]

What do you guys think good idea or am remembering my old Full Floater with rose colored classes.

It certainly appears that way. They were great bikes for the time, but that time has long since passed.

You said you changed the springs but doesn't sound like you addressed the valving of the forks. You could even make a 2011 CRF250R feel horrible if the valving and spring package were far enough off the mark.

Buying a used bike with suspension modified for someone else is a real crap shoot. It will be difficult for you to know how good or bad the 2000 is until you get the suspension set up properly for your needs.

 

[whenfoxforks-ruled]

The full floaters was miles ahead of the rest of the bikes, back in the day. Thanks to Rich and Eric Gorr. This was the beginning of production water cooled and single shock linkage era. Against a modern bike would be a joke. Vintage racing is pretty big, and probably the budget also. Check for top, bottom end, and the linkage parts. Check through Wiseco and Service Honda for parts. Vintage Suzuki is a good source, sadly though, mostly stickers. The 2000, If you have been good on their clutches, then once you go through and replace the beat parts, you should be good. A ton of riders have been happy with atf fluid and change often.

 

[DCR]

Maybe a youngster can make use of the extra power my 2000 has and get it to the ground, but I am pretty sure I am not any faster then I was on my 1982 back in the day. I definitely can't ride hard as long as I could back then because of the pounding I get from my forks, and a another thing I am sure of I have worked on my clutch on this 2000 more than I use to change plugs. For the gearbox I have tried ATF, synthetic ATF, Castrol GTX, Rotela T, Synthetic Rotela T, Mobil 1, and Amsoil. The Castrol GTX was the best nonsynthetic. Synthetic Rotela T, and Mobile 1 were better and the Amsoil has been the best so far.

 

[whenfoxforks-ruled]

I abuse gtx still, its cheap! That 00 can be smoothed out a lot easier than the 82 would ever see. Personally, I am still not jumping big, and may not at all. Landing short on jumps is ruff! Its not what was, as much as just wanting to ride comfortable again. Riding slow is just that, boring.

 

[julien_d]

I appreciate the suggestion, but they wouldn't do as well when dad gets to ride without the kids.

If the 250 has too much go juice for ya, I think the KDX would actually do you just fine. It's plenty fast enough to be fun, and even be competitive in off road racing. It's certainly a softer ride. Like a cadillac compared to that mx bike.

 

[2strokerfun]

What is the specific complaint(s) with the clutch??

 

[DCR]

What is the specific complaint(s) with the clutch??

Do a search there are several post about crappy late model RM clutches. Basically the clutch chatters if you try pull away slowly. It's like it's digital it's either engaged or disengaged no slip in between, and once your going if you try to stop the clutch won't disengage completely even to the point of killing the bike when you stop with clutch fully pulled in.

What I have learned is you can't have any slack at the lever or the clutch won't disengage. If you go beyond zero slack the clutch gets hot and chatters and gets worse. I personally think it's because the hokey actuating lever inside the mag cover isn't long enough. KX 250 plates and slick synthetic oil help.

In comparison I have had a Hodaka steen, 1974 Tm100, 1977 RM125B, 1979 RM250N, 1980 Maico M1 440, 1982 RM250Z and all of these where as smooth as silk and I never once had to work on any of them ever.

 

[racer921]

i had a 1990 Rm 250 with full floater suspention. It road awesome.

 

[_JOE_]

I've had a 77rm125, 92rm125 and an 02rm250. The 77 was the only one with a decent clutch. Seems no matter what you do the clutch is on/off unless you go with a Hinson setup.

As far as suspension......you're going to have to send it out to be revalved and sprung for you and you're riding type.

 

[MXKyle]

I spent 10 years racing Suzuki during that era. The '82 was bashed by the magazines has having 'pro only' power. I don't know about that but I did pull holeshots in the local money class against open bikes. In '83 I moved up to a RM500 and that ranks high on my 'best bikes ever' list.

The full floater did work pretty good but the forks pretty much sucked. Over the years the suspension has gotten a lot stiffer with much larger diameter forks. With the larger forks we lost a lot of flex that actually reduced some of the shock transmitted to our hands.

Don't get me wrong the new forks are still much better. Riding styles have changed a lot over the years. In 82 you learned to keep the front end light and ride the back wheel through rough. Today's bikes have heavier front ends and are designed more for the rider to keep the bike neutral over the bumps and crash the front tire right into the obstacle. We have all seen the top riders just skimming across the tops of the whoops.

In order to actually make that work the forks have to be set up differently than they were back then. It is also a matter of the fact that the motocross bikes are designed to be ridden aggressively. They simply are not designed to go slow. If you ride aggressively the forks of current bikes perform much better that those of yesteryear.

Forks can be revalved to suit one riding style but in order to make them feel good cruising behind a kid they probably wont work well trying to go fast on a racetrack.

--KT--

 

[DCR]

I think you have hit the nail on the head. I just bought a 1982 to restore and ride and looking at it side by side with my 2000 it is very clear the newer bike is designed for much bigger and harder landings. I think a lot of the problem I have with my forks isn't even the valveing as much as stiction. From what I have learned I believe the 2000 forks are the largest diameter they made, and as the diameter goes up seal surface increases and so does stiction. No big deal landing form 20 feet in the air, but a lot more noticeable at 2'.

I remember my 1974 TM100 the suspension was so bad a new rider would be better than it's capability in no time. After 4 decades of engineering trying to concoure the demands of supercross, motocross bikes have evolved to the point where unless your riding at a level approaching supercross the bikes aren't much fun other than turning I love the way my 2000 turns.

Well we will see how it goes with my 1982 RM250Z I just bought. It's pretty rough, so it's going take a few months to get it going, but it's all there and a lot of it is still in good shape and I didn't pay hardly anything for it. I am going to start out rebuilding all of the mechanical system cosmetic stuff I'll will worry about later. My daughters are already planing on buying the plastics for it for Christmas. They have named it Frankenstein because somebody broke the rear fender right down the middle and then drilled holes on either side of the break and zip tied it back together, so it looks like one big incision. :laugh:

 

[pesky nz]

The clutch problem you describe sounds like grooves in the basket to me, and to get rid of your excess power (or rather tame it to your comfort zone) extra flywheel usually helps. You fit a steel cluch basket and cure both at once ( made by steehly I think) and to soften front forks without killing them I have had success with fitting an extra shim after the crossover shim (or by fitting just a crossover shim if you have single rate damping) the fork mod is very trail friendly on small square edges so easy on wrists and very suited to riders who like to steer the bars rather than brake slide. I'm also 50 and can ride this fork setup many days in a row and can still handle a sensible sized jump

 

[DCR]

Clutch basket was grooved and that was part of the problem and going to KX clutch disc and Amsoil helped about 30%, but the problem is still there. I think when it was designed their criteria was start of race when the clutch is dumped and they didn't concern them self with trail riding.

I am sure there are many things I could do that would make the bike suitable for the riding I do, but I have spent a lot of money already, and to go out have the suspension revalved and a brand new aftermarket clutch would cost more than the bike is worth, so I am going to put my efforts into my 1982.