Motocross At Its Best

MOTOCROSS AT ITS BEST

CW COMPARISON TEST

FIVE 250cc MOTOCROSS BIKES, THROTTLES TO THE stops, engines screaming, rear knobbies clawing at the hard-packed starting hill, charged toward Turn One. Forty-five minutes-and innumerable starts-later, there still wasn't a clear-cut winner in the drag-race portion of Cycle World's annual 250cc motocross comparison.

Our first test session with these five contendersHonda’s CR250R, Kawasaki’s KX250, KTM’s 250SX, Suzuki’s RM250 and Yamaha’s YZ250-was a portent of things to come. This was the closest group of 250cc MX racers we’ve ever tested, and picking a winner was tough. After break-in runs, every rider in our 11-man test crew thought the Honda CR250 had the most power, but it had no clear advantage at the start line. Every bike in this group won its share of sprints to the first turn.

This equality quickly vanished, however, on a fast GPstyle course: The CR250 roosted the other bikes as easily as it if it were a CR500. The next fastest in this contest was the bike from Austria, the KTM 250SX.

While having the most powerful bike on the track is always nice, power alone won’t win many races. How that power is transmitted to the ground is much more important than sheer horsepower. A dirtbike with a wide, smooth powerband is less tiring to ride than is one that hits like a cannon. And while all of our riders were wowed by the Honda’s potent engine and its ultra-wide powerband, the CR’s 500cc-like midrange charge intimidated less-experienced riders. They found it great fun when play riding, but difficult to control on the track. Pros, however, loved the CR s massive power and its mega-midrange hit.

Honda CR25OR vs. Kawasaki KX250 vs. KTM25OSX vs. Suzuki RM250 vs. Yamaha YZ250

The Kawasaki KX250’s powerband is nearly as wide as that of the CR250, but its power is produced so smoothly and fluidly that the bike almost feels slow. Every rider, from Novice to Pro, found the KX less tiring to ride than the CR. “I could run the fuel tank dry and not get tired on the Kaw,” said one of our Pros.

KTM s 250SX and the Yamaha YZ250 have very similar power characteristics: Both have fairly smooth powerbands that are less intense on the top end than those of the CR and KX. The KTM has more bark off idle than does the YZ, and its midrange is a little stronger, too. Both engines are powerful and easy to control, regardless of track conditions.

Sudden-and-short best describes the RM’s power delivcry. There s not much low-end, but the quick-revving, light-flywheeled engine rips into its midrange quickly! then shrieks into a short-lived top-end rush. On a sliceand-dice, full-throttle-or-nothing supercross track, this engine might be great for a Pro. Outdoors, it requires constant shifting and 100-percent rider concentration.

The RM’s handling mimics its engine. Line changes are only a thought away; blitzing a turn only requires a twitch from the rider. But get a bit tired or careless, and the RM250 can bite back just as quickly. This is especially true on high-speed straights: The RM shakes its head.

Honda’s CR250 has been cursed with headshake for several years, too, but not to the extent of the RM. With a steeper rake and shorter trail for ’92, the CR, surprisingly, is more stable at speed than before, though it’s still quick and light-handling in tight corners. The CR250’s new frame is narrower in its middle, and this bike is quite a bit lighter than the others in the group: Minus gasoline, our CR weighed a feathery 217 pounds. The next lightest, the YZ250, is 8 pounds heavier, at 225. The heaviest of the five bikes, the light-handling, light-feeling RM, weighs 230 pounds. The KX and KTM are in the middle at 227 and 226, respectively.

The KTM and YZ share handling characteristics. Both are neutral handlers that go where they’re pointed and hold a line well in turns. At higher speeds, they don’t get twitchy, and are not likely to spit you off should you become tired or lose concentration for a moment.

Kawasaki’s 1992 KX250 is light years better than the ’90 and ’91 versions. Company engineers finally got the KX’s rake and trail dialed in, tamed the engine’s vibration and narrowed the bike’s mid-section. The KX steers precisely, corners confidently and doesn’t feel top-heavy as it has in the past. And it exhibits the high-speed stability of a bike that was designed to win desert races. Even more astounding is the feel that’s transmitted through the handlebar: The rider knows exactly where the front tire is and what it’s doing at all times.

At least part of that can be attributed to the KX250 s excellent suspension. Well-balanced, and with spring and damping rates that seemed perfect for every one of our riders-Novice to Pro-the KX smoothes small ripples and absorbs sky-shot landings without a whimper.

Most of our test riders also liked the suspension action of the KTM and YZ. But neither machine worked quite as well as the Kawasaki, each displaying minor midrange suspension harshness.

Honda has had a tough time trying to get an inverted fork to work as well as its vaunted 1986-87 Showa conventional cartridge fork. A couple of months after the 92s became available, Honda issued a suspension-update flyer that recommended lowering the oil level and installing the next-rate-stifler fork springs on the CR125/250/500 models. We had ridden our CR250 a couple of times with the original-spec springs and oil level, and although an improvement, the new unit wasn’t overly impressive.

We asked Honda to install the optional, stifler fork spring ($44) and to lower the oil level 10mm, as per the update. This made a tremendous improvement in the CR’s fork. Every rider agreed that the updated fork, in conjunction with a carefully adjusted rear suspension, was perfect, with the only complaint being an occasional rearsuspension kick registered by one of the Pros.

Still, everyone agreed that the Kawasaki’s suspension was the best of this group. At the other end of the scale, the Suzuki was unanimously chosen as the worst. The RM’s main problem is in its fork; the rear suspension works fine. The fork is stiff on small bumps, and it pounds the rider during midrange travel. This initial and midrange stiffness results in a front end that darts around while the bike is accelerating on rough ground. It also hops entering rough corners under hard braking. The only situation where the RM fork earned praise was in its ability to soak up the jolts of landing from killer jumps.

Comparing the brakes of these contenders produces more uniform results. Every bike in the group has more front and rear brake than the average rider will ever need. All have progressive engagement, good feel and feedback, and they take a lot of abuse. One bike, however, is a notch above the others in brake strength and overall feel. That’s the CR250. Honda has always had a unique ability to make hand and foot controls that feel just right, with brakes that let the rider know exactly what’s happening.

The CR slightly tops the others in the shifting and clutch-action departments, too. Again, the difference between the five bikes is slight. All have clutches that proved strong, durable and squawk-free. Transmission ratios are well-matched to the engines’ powerbands, and only the YZ had any shifting problems—several riders missed upshifts during the heat of competition.

Picking a winner from the newest, trickest batch of 250cc motocross bikes is never easy, but this year’s judging proved more difficult than ever. From day one, the CR and KX were favored by the majority of our test riders, and when the riders’ votes were tallied at the close of testing, the KX and CR were still running neck-and-neck at the head of the pack.

In the end, the Kawasaki won by the narrowest of margins. Unlike past KX250s, the '92 model runs smoothly and no engine vibration reaches the rider. Its progressive powerband lets a rider go fast without exerting a lot of energy, and its clutch, transmission and brakes are excellent. The KX's suspension works great regardless of the rider s abilities, and the KX250 is the most balanced, most forgiving, easiest-to-ride bike in this bunch.

Right on the heels of the KX250 is the Honda CR250. Its awesome power and potent midrange hit brought smiles to everyone’s face, though Novice riders were humbled by its Open-bike charge. With its world-class brakes, a narrow frame, good high-speed stability, light weight, and precise steering and cornering, gathering fans to the CR’s corner was easy. If you plan on buying a new CR250, or have already, be sure to order stiffer fork springs.

KTM’s motorcycles have been getting better at an amazing pace. One ride on the new 250SX is an eyeopener. This bike is fast, easy to ride, stable at speed, and blessed with good suspension and brakes. We rate it a strong third, the highest a KTM has ever finished in a CW motocross comparison.

Last year, the Yamaha YZ250 topped the field in our 250cc MX shootout. But despite many significant updates for 1992, the competition has it outgunned. Fourth place.

Fifth place goes to the Suzuki RM250. Its longer, more stable chassis can’t make up for a fork that feels as if it was valved for a different type of riding. Adding further to the RM’s woes is an explosive engine, narrow powerband and too-quick handling, though Pros and talented supercross riders could do well on the Suzuki.

Choosing which motocross bike to buy always comes down to personal preference, with brand loyalty, riding style, track preference, price, aftermarket support and dealership service all playing a big part. Any one of these five can be a winner. But if the choice were ours, we’d go with the Kawasaki KX250. 0

HONDA CR25OR

$4149.

KAWASAKI KX250

$4199

KTM 250SX

$4325

SUZUKI RM250

$4099

YAMAHA YZ250

$4199