Will an ex-MX'er be happy on a KDX?

[WFO]

I'm looking for an alternative to MX that will allow me (at 5'-9" and 185 lbs) to chug hills but occasionally still rip a berm and do some jumping (all for fun-not competition). In a previous post I got lots of recommendations for the KDX. I also saw some remarks that could use some clarification.
1. First...WILL it rip AND chug?
2. Will it require mods to do both? I saw some responses that said "..if you add a pipe and get suspension work done..". Is the suspension that bad, or is this just a "competition" type necessity? Same question for the pipe.
3. How does the KDX handle in the "nimble and flickable" dept.? Weight?
4. I saw one recommendation that said "..stay away from the 220 and stick with the 200..". Is this personal preference, or did the 220 have problems? If so, what?

Any info is greatly appreciated!

 

[dirt bike dave]

The KDX is a good combination of power and handling for many riders. It's all about what is fun and what works best for you on the trail, so you are going to have to try one for yourself to see if it works for you. Like every bike, its going to benefit from being well set up.

Once jetted properly, the KDX200 has enough low end to crawl up very nasty trails, but it does not have anywhere near the lowend 'chug' of a properly tuned bigger bike. Make a mistake on a nasty steep trail and you may be stuck in first until the trail levels out, where a bigger bike can recover momentum and up shift. Even after the usual mods, top end power is a few ponies shy of a good 125 MXer. But peak power is not relevant on many trails.

Unless you are a featherweight, the front forks are too soft for any kind of serious jumping.

It is nimble in the woods, but weighs more than most 250 MXers. Feels light and fairly flickable, unless you are used to a 125. Easy to ride all day - has good fuel range.

I think it is personal preference about 200 vs. 220. I had one old KDX bored out to 240, and IMO it was more fun as a 200.

 

[Robcolo]

I just went from 2 KXs to a KX and a 220 KDX. I did this because on the last 2 rides I'd gotten caught out after dark on the KX [no lights] and couldn't find a wide ratio gearbox for the newer KX. The DX sounded like the perfect solution --not. With a little bit of engine work - cleaning up the ports, shaving the head, FMF pipe and boring the carb the "wimpy" 220 engine came alive and is now almost as strong as the KX. The 220 overheats and boils if you go slow. Unfortunately, you have to go slow as the suspension is nowhere near as good as the KX's. The bike is a real handfull to ride at speed. If you are into slower trials like riding - rocks, roots, tight trails, it's delightful - much more nimble than the MXers. Just keep the CRE for those days when you want to go fast.

 

[MN KDXer]

What Rob said! The KDX is a great trail bike, and does an excellent job at what it is good at. Unfortunately, the KDX's time as a racebike was several years ago, and today, it is simply no match for a 250 MX bike, provided that the 250 has a flywheel weight and revalved suspension. I hung out a LOT of time & coin to make a 99 220 about as good as could be expected, but yet, as soon as I switched to a RM250, it was like shifting up a full gear and grabbing some throttle. HUGE difference, IF you are a faster rider.

Slow and medium speed guys will want to note that a 250 MX bike is not for the faint of heart at times, but overall, if you are a fairly good rider, the strong points of a 250's suspension and handling will far exceed the short comings. A 250's short comings include- harder power delivery, smaller tank, no lights. The lack of odometer & side stand are actually GOOD things, as the KDX odometer is forever wrong, and the sidestand only weighs lbs & gets caught on stuff. Plus, those WatchDog computers are TOTALLY cool, and the lack of one is an excellent reason to pony up. ;)

Also, some other very good options would be to consider 250EXC and GasGas 250.

Good luck with the decision!

 

[canyncarvr]

1. First...WILL it rip AND chug?
***
A 200 will be better at ripping and less at chugging...the 220 vicey versa.
***
2. Will it require mods to do both? I saw some responses that said "..if you add a pipe and get suspension work done..". Is the suspension that bad, or is this just a "competition" type necessity? Same question for the pipe.
***
Forks won't do for 185# imo. Having ridden oem and 'fixed' bikes one after the other down the same trail, I'd say it's a necessity. The oem was flat scarey! Pipe is a BIG wakeup for either bike.
****
3. How does the KDX handle in the "nimble and flickable" dept.? Weight?
***
Pretty steep rakeº and short wheelbase makes it handle pretty quick, but still stable at speeds > 70mph. Weight? Compared to what? Ride a kdx and a 200exc back to back and you'll wonder where they put the lead in the kawi.
***

4. I saw one recommendation that said "..stay away from the 220 and stick with the 200..". Is this personal preference, or did the 220 have problems? If so, what
***
The 220 has known piston problems. Tend to crack. Usually not a problem with stock engines. It should be replaced if you do much in the way of engine mods. The 200 port timing is more aggressive and has a 35mm carb stock (33mm on the 220). For that reason the 200 will spank a 220 on the top end. Also why you can't MAKE a 220 run like a 200 with bolt-on stuff..the cylinder is different!

It can't reasonably be said that one is better or worse than the other. They're different. A 220 will out-tractor a 200, but will also run pretty flat up top. Mods (-30 pipe, carb bore) can help that. A 200 won't pull like a 220 on the bottom. Mods (-35 pipe, reedvalve change, carb mod) can help that.

The most important thing to do with either of them is rejet! Way too rich to start.

cheers!

 

[MADisher]

This is MHO and you know the saying about opinions.

The KDX is a great bike if you buy it for what it's intended for. An ex MXR looking to just cruise some trails and chill behind some smaller machines (read kids) it's fine and perhaps outstanding for that.

If you're used to a great MX suspension and smack in the back of head when you 'rip it' you'll be sadly dissapointed on a KDX. Consdier also the price point. $2k on average used vs $4k used for the same general year. (with mods etc). That $2k buys you something.

Power, suspension, etc. I think coming from an MX bike vs. coming from a rather tame 4 stroke like an XR or DR, you'd not be happy. You'd be better off, dulling down an MX'r and making it more ridable (fly wheel weight, gearing, etc). You'll get the 'flicakability' you want, manable power, yet have power on tap when you want it.

On the other hand, if you are coming from a 125 MX bike, you can think of a KDX as a woods capable 125. It's like a 125 with torque, at least I'd put the power (HP) output in the same ballpark as a 125.

But again this is just another data point and where I sit at the moment with a 98 Freddetted KDX for sale, looking for an MX bike :eek:

-MD

 

[WFO]

This is kinda what I'm thinking....given the info here. Plus, the ONLY bikes in the paper are MXs: not a woods bike in sight!
Thanks for all the input!

 

[MTRIDER]

WFO, The kdx is what you make it.....I myself just bought an MXr so if your ever in Dallas I'd let you ride mine and you could even buy it if you like it...

 

[kc]

WFO, i'll be entering my first ever MX race next week (@ Southwick). I've ridden woods forever but have always wanted to try mx. I'm using a 01 kdx200 w/FMF pipe and silencer, bike rips but doesn't handle (like a 125). I'll stiffen the forks this week.