Honda Cr250r Vs. Kawasaki Kx250 Vs. Suzuki Rm250 Vs. Yamaha Yz250
HONDA CR250R VS. KAWASAKI KX250 VS. SUZUKI RM250 VS. YAMAHA YZ250
CW COMPARISON TEST
ALL GOOD, ONE GREAT
PURCHASING A NEW MOTOCROSS BIKE BASED ON A brand’s past performance could be a big mistake. Last year’s star can easily become this year’s alsoran. And vice versa.
To find out how 1993’s crop of 250cc motocrossers shakes out, CW assembled its MX test crew of 11 riders-ranging from Pro-level to rank Novice-at Southern California’s Perris Raceway for the start of Day One. Present was a production bike from each of the Japanese Big Four; Husqvarna doesn’t market a 250 MXer in the U.S.A. this year and KTM was in the process of revising its 250, which will be tested at a later date. Using such a large number of riders for four motorcycles insures that every bike gets maximum track time during the day. Adjustments to the bikes’ suspension and controls, the refilling of fuel tanks, rider changes and the onset of darkness would be the only interruptions.
By sunset, our YZ, RM, CR and KX had each consumed several tanks of premix, and the riders were dog-tired-but no clear favorite had emerged from the pack. “Picking a winner is going to be hard this year,” confessed one Pro. “All of them are really good.”
Opinions started forming on Day Two at DeAnza’s hilly MX track near Riverside, California. Where all of these powerful 250s put their power to the ground well at Perris, DeAnza’s hard-packed surface promoted wheelspin. The Honda’s potent engine was at its best on the soft terrain of Perris; at DeAnza, however, all but the Pros found the CR’s responsive power rush right off-idle too demanding and tiring. Otherwise, excellent throttle response and plentiful power are present at virtually every rpm throughout the CR’s wide powerband. Faultless shifting and clutch action further enhance the Honda’s engine.
Suzuki’s hard-hitting, quick-revving, midrange-intensive RM250 engine can be a handful on a slippery track, too, although not to the extent of the CR. The RM has substantially more power and a much wider powerband than past Suzuki MXers, and its soft low-end output makes the RM easier than the Honda to control at lower engine speeds. The tricky part is keeping the RM out of its explosive midrange while in a tight turn. Making quick time in other parts of an MX track requires a lot of shifting and clutch action to keep the engine in its sweet spot, but the Suzuki’s superb shifting and clutch make the chore easy.
The 1992 Kawasaki KX250-winner of last year’s Best Motocross Bike in Cycle World's Ten Best Bikes awards-had a smooth power flow from bottom to top that has been altered for the worse in ’93. There’s a dead spot right off-idle where little if anything happens. When the power does start building, a lighter flywheel lets the revs charge into the midrange, where there is a distinct surge that carries over into a decent top-end rush.
Rear-wheel traction, while not as good on slippery ground as was the ’92 model’s, is still plentiful.
Some riders liked the new KX’s powerband, but most complained about difficulty riding around its bottom-end flat spot-the Pros had trouble with the engine bogging after landing from jumps; Novices ran into the dead zone mid-turn. Sometimes a quick pull at the clutch would persuade the engine into power-making mode, sometimes the bike would require a downshift. And though the KX’s clutch action is light and its transmission shifts well, it lacks the refined feel of the RM or the CR.
Everyone from Pro to beginner raved about the Yamaha YZ250’s engine and broad, smooth powerband. Immediately off-idle there is a short void that’s only noticed when taking off slowly, then the engine charges through its
powerband. This engine will rev to a zillion, yet will pull strongly when intentionally left in too tall a gear, and it will explode the bike out of turns with a stab at the clutch lever. And its just-right flywheel effect lets the rear tire grab traction when the rest of the bikes are spinning.
Yamaha shares the honor of best suspension with the Kawasaki. Although set up slightly stiffer than that of the KX, the YZ’s suspension is well-balanced and comfortable. Smacking into ledges doesn’t jolt the rider or knock the bike off line, landings from jumps are absorbed smoothly, and the YZ puts its power to the ground well when accelerating across choppy ground. And it does all of this with any classification of rider on board, with only minor damping adjustments needed between riders.
Equally well-mannered is the KX’s suspension. The KX is actually a little more plush-riding than the YZ, a trait some of the Pros didn’t like, although every one else loved it.
A step or two behind, the CR and RM suspensions need some help. We replaced the fork springs on our CR250 with Honda’s optional heavier-rate springs (the only bike in this comparison that required a spring change). But even with the fork-spring change and fine-tuning of the damping adjusters, the CR’s suspension, especially its fork, drew complaints from every rider. The Honda’s suspension is harsh over small bumps, its fork has a mid-stroke spike and the bike is very busy when on the gas across medium-sized chop. When ridden at Pro speeds and jumped from nose-bleed heights, the CR works better, but it definitely doesn’t perform as well as the YZ and KX.
Fork harshness, especially at mid-travel, severely affected the newest RM250’s handling, too. The fork never appears to come close to using its full travel; this causes the front wheel to hop across medium-sized bumps, creating a loss of stability. The compression adjustment for our RM fork was set on the softest position, so internal revalving (or possibly lowering the fork-oil level significantly) will probably be necessary to correct the problem. Some riders felt that the rear end of the RM didn’t track as well as the other bikes in this foursome, others didn’t notice any problem. All agreed that the RM’s suspension was poorly balanced-the front end was much stiffer than the rear.
250 MOTOCROSS COMPARISON
Suspension quality has a strong influence on a bike’s handling, as does wheelbase, rake and trail, weight, weight distribution, footpeg placement, engine power and several other factors. With so many things affecting handling, developing a motocross bike that turns well, stays straight at speed and is neutral in the air is no easy job.
Some companies don’t even try to meet all of these objectives. Past CR250s and RM250s have been notorious high-speed headshakers, and the ’93 models retain those traits. Getting into, and out of turns in an eye-blink is where the Honda and Suzuki specialize. For 1993, both of these bikes have stiffer frames that result in less severe shaking at speed, though both are still spooky in rough terrain above 60 mph. But guys who ride tight, jump-infested courses don’t care. The RM and CR will effortlessly zip through tight corners, and their super-responsive engines accelerate quickly-just the ticket for supercross tracks. And both are easy to maneuver while in the air.
Building on a reputation of high-speed steadiness at the cost of being a little slower handling in tight turns, the Kawasaki and Yamaha are less intimidating to ride than are the CR and RM, and are better suited to GPs, enduros and play-riding when off the MX track. And whether due to revised geometry or stiffer frames, both the YZ250 and KX250 have become quicker-turning than before.
Although all of the bikes have their own distinctive feel, every rider adapted quickly to each model and voiced no complaints about handlebar bend, footpeg location, riding position, control placement or operation. The KX feels larger than the other bikes, its ser. foam is still too soft and its engine vibrates, but none these complaints were considered major. The RM and CR are about the same size, although the RM feels lighter and more agile than the CR. Part of that feel is due to the RM’s sudden, 125like midrange power delivery and part is due to the slimmer shape of the new machine. The YZ doesn’t feel as small as the CR or RM, nor as large as the KX. Like past CRs, the Honda offers the best fit and finish.
When it was time to cast votes for the finishing order of these four bikes, we were worried about multiple ties. There’s not a loser among them. But while the ballots were being counted, a surprise was in store: a landslide victory for the YZ250. All 11 riders chose it as number one.
Why? The riders’ comments were similar: “The best out-ofthe-crate bike in the group, race-ready without modifications. Great suspension. Easy to ride. Versatile enough to be used for off-track riding. Powerful engine and a wide powerband.
Second, third and fourth places weren’t as unanimous. But they finished so close that we almost had a three-way tie for second place. The RM250 had a two-point advantage on the CR250R, with the KX250 only three points back from there. The RM and CR are in need of suspension work (figure on spending $150-$200) to bring their handling up to levels of the stock YZ and KX. With properly working suspensions, the CR and RM would be contenders on tight tracks.
The KX250 won’t need any suspension modifications, but it will need engine work to eliminate bogging right off idle. With that glitch cured (price unknown, but it could be substantial), the KX could be a winner. Or a buyer who wants a better KX could simply buy a leftover or used ’92 KX250, a model that doesn’t need modifications.
If a new 250cc motocross bike is your quest, but spending $4500 on a bike that requires modifications before it is competitive doesn’t sound appealing, buy a 1993 Yamaha YZ250. All it needs is a tank of premix and a willing rider. □
HONDA CR250R
$4349
KAWASAKI KX250
$4349
SUZUKI RM250
$4299
YAMAHA YZ250
$4449
