Rockymountainatvmc.com - Dirt bike & ATV parts

RECENT POSTS


Older bikes as fast as the new bikes ?

Joined
May 17, 2004
Messages
808
Likes
0
#31
There's a guy at a local track here that rides an 87' KX125 and he races in 3 or 4 classes in one day...Ubfortunately he doesn't do very good but he does beat guys on newer bikes.

I talked with him the other day because I was impressed with the condition of the bike being that he races it so much and it's so old...

Get this, he's done 1 top end job on the bike and that was 3 years ago and he hasn't had any problems with the motor whatsoever...I'm sure a full rebuild might help performance a bit, but that's impressive durability.
 

nephron

Dr. Feel Good
Joined
Jun 15, 2001
Messages
2,552
Likes
0
#32
I've got a brand new dinosaur (hasn't changed since 88) and it's faster than the 05 cuz' there isn't one. ;) Seriously, people have forgotten about these bikes. Yesterday, all the putz's on the 4 stroke 4 wheelers hitting their rev limiters at 6000 rpm would just stop and look....I can't use all the power in dunes/bowls let alone on a track. It does 'ok' on bigger tracks, but tighter tracks are prohibitive. Plus, it doesn't matter where you are, this thing takes a tremendous amount of energy to be able to ride it all day long. However, I've never ridden anything that gives me smiles like this thing does. There's something really good about the roar under the seat and the constant threat of disaster. Point? Technically, the older bikes are more powerful because (excepting Service Honda) they don't make them anymore.
 

cnielse5

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
428
Likes
0
#33
this is an interesting thread. now going by numbers I would say that the newer Bikes are far more powerful. I heard once that a cr 500 made 51 hp in it's last conception. I read some where that the 05 CRF 450 makes 55HP, and I Know a guy that works at the KTM plant in ohio and he told me that the 03 SX 250 made 53 hp. so going buy the numbers the newer bikes are much better. :nod:

In my own experience I have had 3 diffrent CR's I had a 93 cr250 that was supposedly the best cr motor ever. I have a 97 cr250 and i have an 03 cr250. Which one is fastest? the 03 for sure. I am much more confident and comfortable on the 03. I would say the 97 is next fastest and the 93 is the slowest. The motors of the 3 bikes are very diffrent. the 93 would hit super hard in the mid range and demanded to be ridden in the powerband. THe 97 had a good hit in the low-mid range but sucked on the top compared to the 93 and 03. the 03 is smooth all around and has no real "hit" to the powerband, but it is still the faster bike.

I think the hp ratings are fairly close on these bikes but I don't know the numbers. I'll take a new bike over an old bike anyday.
 
Joined
May 27, 2005
Messages
268
Likes
0
#34
Jeff Howe said:
Find something on the 85 YZ 250 if you can. I recall reading that it busted out like 40-42hp and I think that came from a Dirt Bike Magazine test article.
The '85 was a good engine but it didn't make that much HP. In 86 they lost some lower end and added to the top. In 1987 the motor was again more like the '85. As I recall around 34-36 hp for the 85 and 87 (I rode the '85 and '87, can't speak personally about the '86).

My '06 YZ250 is definitely a lot more powerfull (and user friendly) than the 85,87 or my last YZ the 89 one before getting back into it late last year.
 
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Messages
1,842
Likes
2
Location
Missouri
#35
Remember the early 70's Suzuki TM400? Probably not real impressive hp numbers, but the "monster hit" hurt a lot of people.
 
- a d v e r t i s e m e n t -

cnielse5

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
428
Likes
0
#36
Anybody ever ride an IT 465? My dad Had one an 83 I think and that thing was a beast!! when the power hit you had better be holding on for dear life.
 

nephron

Dr. Feel Good
Joined
Jun 15, 2001
Messages
2,552
Likes
0
#37
cnielse5---don't know if it's overblown or what, but Kawasaki claims(ed) the KX500 makes 65 at the crank. The 51 for the CR500 was probably at the rear wheel? At any rate, riding side by side with 450F's, there's no comparison. Doesn't matter to me if this thing only makes 40hp, it still makes me smile a lot. :)
 

Lissa

"Am I lost again?"
Joined
Apr 28, 2002
Messages
562
Likes
0
#38
The biggest difference I notice between the old motors and the modern motors isthe power delivery. The older engines, especially the pre-power valve motors were very peaky, just like a light switch. These newer motors in comparison are so broad and smooth since they make their HP everywhere and is not just concentrated to a narrow rpm range.
 

cnielse5

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
428
Likes
0
#39
nephron said:
cnielse5---don't know if it's overblown or what, but Kawasaki claims(ed) the KX500 makes 65 at the crank. The 51 for the CR500 was probably at the rear wheel? At any rate, riding side by side with 450F's, there's no comparison. Doesn't matter to me if this thing only makes 40hp, it still makes me smile a lot. :)
Never ridden a KX500. I have ridden a 99 cr500 and a 91 cr500 (I know same motor). I have also ridden 450fs. On the track I would take the 450f's any day. I rode both Cr500's on a track and they wore me out fast (and beat me to death). on the track I would much rather have a 450f. but put me on the sand dunes and I'll take the 500 any day.

However the 250 is still my favorite of both. :fft:
 
Joined
May 17, 2004
Messages
808
Likes
0
#40
this is an interesting thread. now going by numbers I would say that the newer Bikes are far more powerful. I heard once that a cr 500 made 51 hp in it's last conception. I read some where that the 05 CRF 450 makes 55HP, and I Know a guy that works at the KTM plant in ohio and he told me that the 03 SX 250 made 53 hp. so going buy the numbers the newer bikes are much better.

Going strictly by the numbers doesn't tell the whole story especially when comparing bikes of different displacements..

A 500cc 2 stroke making 51 hp is going to feel alot different from a 250cc 2 stroke making 51 hp...There is a much bigger difference with TORQUE numbers..That is a the true measure of an engine's actual power...HP is determined by a formula of taking torque numbers multiplied by a given RPM.

The 250 will make its HP with RPM and will be more linear because it takes a massive ramp up in RPM to make those numbers...A 500 will be quicker, faster, and more violent with the same amount of throttle application and less revs.
 
- a d v e r t i s e m e n t -

Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
369
Likes
0
#41
http://www.suzukicycles.org/RM-RMX-series/index.html?RM250-RMX250.shtml~isoraami

This site provides some interesting info regarding RMs (I am not sure how accurate it is). It looks like the mid 90s RM250s put down 51 HP, until 98, then they dropped to 40hp?? Could that be right?? The 2004 lists 55hp. I am not sure why a 98- would be so much lower, unless there was some stupid emissions law or something that went into effect that year?? My guess is that they rated the HP at the crank VS the wheels??

btw, how would late 90s bikes compare to todays 250s???? Seems like a lot of the technology has sort of peaked (water cooled, power valves, etc, etc...) now it just seems like they continue to fine tune (evolutionize VS revolutionize).
 

Rcannon

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 17, 2001
Messages
1,886
Likes
0
#42
The late 90's bikes were all around 40-45 hp. The Yamaha's like mine (97-98) were a bit down in power. The Kawasaki's were more powerful that they are now (not including the 05 and 06)

Motorcycles changed a lot during the mid 80's to the early 90's. After that it was changes like new bodywork that made them feel better.

As far as power goes, the 99 yz uses the same engine as the 06 is using. There are minor porting changes, but nothing to write home about.

I still think the 99 KX 250 had one of the best engines ever made. You coudl make the same arguement for the 2001 yz 250.

Weight dropped slightly on most all of the bikes during this time as well. Some would say the older honda cr 250 engine is better than what Honda makes today.
 
Joined
Jun 27, 2004
Messages
81
Likes
0
#43
cnielse5 said:
this is an interesting thread. now going by numbers I would say that the newer Bikes are far more powerful. I heard once that a cr 500 made 51 hp in it's last conception. I read some where that the 05 CRF 450 makes 55HP, and I Know a guy that works at the KTM plant in ohio and he told me that the 03 SX 250 made 53 hp. so going buy the numbers the newer bikes are much better. :nod:

I'll take a new bike over an old bike anyday.
I've got a 89 CR500 that is a beast. It will keep on singing right past a CRF450. An article in Dirt Rider stated they made a "modified" CRF 450 with 53 or 54 to the rear wheel. The test riders complained they could not handle it. My 500 makes that power stock....how about a port job......pipe and after market reed block. Now I am pushing around 62 hp and at a fraction of the cost to modify a CRF. The 86 CR500 was the hardest hitting CR500 produced. It was hard to hang on to. Honda spent the next 10 years detuning the CR500. My bone stock 2001 CR500 is a blast to ride... very fast with nice boingers. Even tho, I feel my 89 500 (even when it was in stock fashion) hit harder than my 01. I definately feel faster on my 89. But on the flip side, I have had to have my 89's suspension worked over. All the hp in the world and your suspension holds you back...kinda pointless.
 
Last edited:
- a d v e r t i s e m e n t -

Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
369
Likes
0
#44
rob129 said:
I've got a 89 CR500 that is a beast. It will keep on singing right past a CRF450. An article in Dirt Rider stated they made a "modified" CRF 450 with 53 or 54 to the rear wheel. The test riders complained they could not handle it. My 500 makes that power stock....how about a port job......pipe and after market reed block. Now I am pushing around 62 hp and at a fraction of the cost to modify a CRF. The 86 CR500 was the hardest hitting CR500 produced. It was hard to hang on to. Honda spent the next 10 years detuning the CR500. My bone stock 2001 CR500 is a blast to ride... very fast with nice boingers. Even tho, I feel my 89 500 (even when it was in stock fashion) hit harder than my 01. I definately feel faster on my 89. But on the flip side, I have had to have my 89's suspension worked over. All the hp in the world and your suspension holds you back...kinda pointless.
why would Honda want to detune its engine??

Also, why don't they make 500s anymore???
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
369
Likes
0
#45
any thoughts on this??

I picked up my RM250 97, from getting fixed (engine/exhaust, headset bearings and adjustment, etc....). WOW, I never have had my bike feel this fast!!!!! I rode it at the shop it was fixed at on the street, tire was coming off the ground in all of the 3 gears I was in, the thing felt sooo fast. When I got back, the guy who worked at the shop said that I should be "right there" with straight line speed VS even the NEW YZ, which surprised me when he said that. I asked "so, what has changed on the late 90s bikes compared to todays 2 strokes?" He said that the power is gonna be about the same, but most of the improvements people notice is gonna be in the handling. The wts aren't that much difference (2 pounds??) but it is where the wt is placed and the geometry that makes the new bikes faster on the tracks. I was surprised that he said that the power isn't much different. I can't wait to take my RM out now, I am sooooo happy this thing is moving like it was supposed to. In the course of 1 day I went from thinking that I wanted to save up for a used CRF250, to maybe saving for a used YZ250, to wanting to keep my RM250 and NOT waste my money (I don't race, so the slight advantage I might get with a new yz250 wouldn't be worth the price it would take to get into one for me and my skills and my budget). Thank goodness for a good mechanic!!!!

thoughts???
 
- a d v e r t i s e m e n t -