WORST 250 Motors Ever

K

Kevin003

Member
Jul 5, 2005
237
0
Well there were a few of you who wanted to go there so here is is :)

In my opinion im going to say 98CR250 man that thing was a TERD.
 
R

Rcannon

~SPONSOR~
Nov 17, 2001
1,886
0
Stock 97 yz 250 yamaha. No bottom, no mid, and no top. Other than that, it was perfect.

An honorable mention must go to any pre-powervalved 250.
 
J

jrg

Member
Nov 25, 2001
48
0
i had a 97 yz250 i used for cross country and loved it, with some cylinder work the bike would fly
 
R

ruffryder19

Member
Sep 14, 2005
33
0
out of all the bikes I had owned, and ridden, I would say the 2004 CR250 is the worst 250 motor, but I never really drove anything older then a 1998.
 
M

motometal

LIFETIME SPONSOR
Sep 3, 2001
2,680
3
'97 and maybe '98 RM250 (can't remember for sure which year was the dog), and '02 CR 250. The RM had about 38 HP on the dyno, and both the '02 CRs I rode sure felt like no more than about 40 regardless of what they would actually pull on a dyno.

I'm talking just stock motors with no mods besides jetting. I'm sure there's all kinds of potential with hop ups, porting etc. I'm pretty sure for example the '03 (and possibly newer) cylinder fits on the '02 CR.
 
W

WhiskythrottleKeit

Member
Sep 2, 2005
56
0
Ohh god someone said the 04 CR250 was a dud... Yeah i just rode a 04 CR250 today that has a total of 5 hours on the bike and it was the slowest 250 i have ever rode. theres no bottom no mid and it does rev but yet still no power up stairs. I dont know why honda let them roll out of japan. I think i have rode faster 125s no kiding. My brother had a old 83 YZ250 that would walk all over that 04 CR. No joke that 83 had better bottom mid and top.. WOW im still shocked on how bad that bike is. I was happy to jump back on my 01 YZ250
 

ellandoh

dismount art student
~SPONSOR~
Mi. Trail Riders
Aug 29, 2004
2,958
0
87 maybe 88 , dont remember yz250
 

mx547

Ortho doc's wet dream
LIFETIME SPONSOR
Nov 24, 2000
4,784
103
Kevin003 said:
In my opinion im going to say 98CR250 man that thing was a TERD.
Click to expand...

funny, that's my all-time favorite motor. i was the holeshot king on that bike. i bet i holeshot 80% of the motos i entered and i know i won over half of them. it was so good, i left it stock except for a pipe (after i dented the stock one). i wish i had that motor now on my current bike.
 
R

Rcannon

~SPONSOR~
Nov 17, 2001
1,886
0
The 98 rm 250 was a weak one. Good low end, no mid, and even less top. The perfect trail bike.
 
A

adrenaline420

Member
Feb 17, 2005
68
0
Air Chunk said:
I would have to say the 2000 cr 125 ..
Click to expand...

My last bike was the 2000 CR125, and I agree that bike was a slow piece of crap. I almost had 85's beating me in drag races :| . no bottom, mid, and dear god it may had some top end. Once you let of the throttle, it bogged, and needed feathering of the clutch.
 
M

mxneagle

Member
Jan 7, 2001
320
0
Of all the 250's I've owned I'd have to say the '97 cr250 was the worst, it was a light switch. Good thing I ran an E.G. 300 big bore in it.
 
M

mattb348

Member
Aug 2, 2005
204
0
Man the weakest POS I ever rode was 1995 KX 500! no bottom, no mid, no top, and I swear to god that the top speed was 20 mph, and people on friggin MOUNTAIN bikes were riding wheelies past me!

LOL j/k couldn't resist.

I haven't ridden anything good other than my 2002 kx 250, and it seems to have ALOT of power low mid AND high.

It wheelies awesome in all 5 gears (5th isn't that great though). Also, I did happen to ride an 04 RM 250, and my bike had ALOT more snap than that thing had. And my bike is all stock and the RM had a PC pipe. The RM wasn't that bad though, just not as snappy as my KX.
 
2

2-stroke diehard

Member
Aug 26, 2005
93
0
For me, an engine would only truly be a turd if it would not respond to mods. I've heard people say the '03 CR250R wasn't so hot, but I bought my bike piped and jetted and consider it to be fantastic, so perhaps the bone stock package was strangled, but it cleans up very nicely with basic mods, so whatever. :nener:
 
E

ETS

Member
Apr 13, 2000
82
0
91' CR250. I had a 91' KX and a bud had a 91' CR and it was no contest. I still wish I Had that 91' KX. One of my all time favorites.
 
R

rodH

Member
Aug 17, 2005
369
0
motometal said:
'97 and maybe '98 RM250 (can't remember for sure which year was the dog),
Click to expand...

From what I have read in different sources, the 97 is one of the BEST RM motors. The 96, 98-2000 were similar. The exhaust valve on the non-97 bikes weren't as good; durability wise, power wise and drivability wise.
 
M

Malinois

Member
Jun 8, 2004
18
0
the 97 is one of the BEST RM motors
Click to expand...


In McGraths book he called his 97 RM250 an RM175 because it was so slow. They tried everything to get power out of that motor. I heard from many people it was a dog.
 
D

DLHamblin

Member
May 27, 2005
268
0
ellandoh said:
87 maybe 88 , dont remember yz250
Click to expand...

I think it was 1986, the '86 had lousy low end, in '87 it was more like the '85 (good low end) but with decent top as well.
 
M

motometal

LIFETIME SPONSOR
Sep 3, 2001
2,680
3
Malinois said:
In McGraths book he called his 97 RM250 an RM175 because it was so slow. They tried everything to get power out of that motor. I heard from many people it was a dog.
Click to expand...

I don't know what happened. The 95 and 96 were decent enough, then the 97 was a pooch. Ran like a strong 125. The one sent to one of the mags for a shootout had like 38 hp while all the others had 43 or more (yes I know the magazines are full of it sometimes, I think this time they were right though)
 
R

rodH

Member
Aug 17, 2005
369
0

Weird, so it was the 97 that was the bad one?? Interesting, from Gorr's book it doesn't sound like that is the case. Although, you guys are referring to stock engines, perhaps mine has just enough aftermarket parts to make it feel much faster.

I rode my buddies 05 YZ250 with FMF Silencer and pipe and my bike on the same day, I didn't notice much of a difference. I have played around on fireroads with my buddy on his CRF450 and another guy with his CRF250 with white bro exhaust and I hung with them just fine. The only mods my bike has is a Pro X piston, Bills pipe (and proper jetting for that pipe) and Bills short silencer, oh, also the exhaust valve was filed down a bit, something that Eric Gorr mentions to do in his book. Would those few mods be enough to put this "pooch" where it is supposed to be???

The other weird thing is that my mechanic had a 1997 RM250, he said he loved that bike, one of his all time favorites. He raced on it for a few year because he loved it so much and said that it was faster than the bikes a few years after. Is that just BS???
 
S

Sawblade

Timmy Timmy Timmy!
Sep 24, 2000
1,491
0
DLHamblin said:
I think it was 1986, the '86 had lousy low end, in '87 it was more like the '85 (good low end) but with decent top as well.
Click to expand...

The 86 and 87 motors were pretty much the same but didn't have the hit or pull of the 85 engine. In 88 the YZM inspired style was put into production and the engine was made more to mimic the 85, but with less breath. I rode a 86 for two years and loved that bike. Pulled a lot of holeshots and beat a lot Hondas that by the magazines had the better motor. :blah: :blah: :blah:

I guess its like one mans junk is another mans gold. ;)
 
P

PAULRY

Member
Mar 17, 2004
50
0
Either the 1991 RM250, no bottom and no top, or the 2001 CR250, no bottom with loads of top end power. I think I will give it to the 1991 RM250, since the word handling could not be associated with the bike and the frames would not hold together. A complete dud. The last Suzuki I have ever owned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar Topics

H
Help Rmz 250 2014
Replies
0
Views
2K
hammer00
H
M
Getting into the sport
Replies
2
Views
2K
Okiewan
R
New Member
Replies
0
Views
126
RandyB478
R
S
jetting 2001 rm250
Replies
3
Views
4K
RM_guy
J
Help 1998 RM250 no spark woes-new parts
Replies
4
Views
3K
joshcr250
J
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…