Thumpig For Everyone
Thumpig For Everyone
CW COMPARISON
Honda XR400R vs. KTM 400 SXC vs. Yamaha WR400F
JIMMY LEWIS
A FEW SHORT YEARS AGO, THERE WASN’T SUCH A THING AS A 400cc four-stroke. Everyone was stuck on 350cc, including off-road race organizers, who structured their classes accordingly. But leave it to KTM to throw an oddball-sized displacement into the fray. In the eyes of the Austrian company’s engineers, pure performance outweighed potential race results.
It didn’t take long for the likes of Husqvana and Husaberg to add 400cc four-strokes to their catalogs, either. And in 1996, the introduction of the Honda XR400 ushered the Japanese into the class. Of course, by this time race promoters had added a 400cc-and-under four-stroke class, and everyone was riding one of the new Thumpers that perfectly matched power and weight. So it was no surprise when Yamaha built the WR400F to complement the YZ400F motocrosser, filling the class further.
But what the class has evolved into is where the interest lies. Evertightening emissions regulations have everyone playing the Thumper game, trying ever so hard to make a lightweight, do-it-all dirtbike. So much so that on the World Enduro circuit, the 400cc four-stroke class is the most hotly contested, with most of the top manufacturers and riders. And with Cannondale, Suzuki, TM, Gas Gas and even KTM all set to have new mid-sized Thumpers in the very near future, the companies are paying close attention to what we’re buying.
Enter the players you can ride right now: Honda’s ever-popular XR400 is largely unchanged in its fourth year, but it is highly refined. KTM is back with a late-’99 release of its year-2000 400 SXC, an allnew direction in KTM Thumpers by way of a low price tag. And in its second year, the Yamaha WR400F sees a few updates, plus California availability as a competition-only model.
Honda XR400R
$5249
Alps Weight empty 273 lb. A Nearly indestructible Fuel capacity 2.5 gal. A All-day riding comfort Seat height..... 37.0 in. A Close to the perfect Footpeg height 16.4 in. trailbike Ground clearance .12.5 in. Wheelbase 57.0 in. Downs ▼ Cramped for larger riders ▼ EPA endcap robs the XR’s true ability ▼ Lowest ground clearancewatch those toes!
We tested these three Thumpers heavy on the trailriding side of the fence, but kept in mind that most owners slap on a dual-purpose kit to make the bikes street-
legal, and might even make a few competition visits. We ran them through our nastiest enduro sections, pinned them on whooped-out desert trails and logged miles on fireroads. All three are the kind of bike that you can do anything on, and do most of it well, even though each has a distinctly different character.
Honda’s formula for the XR line is to make a high-performance off-road bike with an even higher level of durability. A pure racebike it isn’t, but that’s not to say you can’t compete on it. For 1999, the XR400 was treated to new graphics, but the best update came in 1998 with revised jetting. The suspension received some tweaks, as well. And if you’re looking into the year 2000, the XR will only become redder.
KTM created the SXC by matching existing parts to make an all-new bike. Basically, the non-counterbalanced, longstroke, 400cc competition motor is placed into the current four-stroke frame and dressed with new plastic. Suspensionwise, the 400 is the first KTM to come with the new WP inverted fork, similar to the ones that will come on the Y2K MXers. In the rear, the fully adjustable WP shock is valved to match. The biggest news (and improvement) is the addition of a 40mm Mikuni CK59 carb and an ultra-quiet sparkarrestor/muffler that lets the bike meet certification requirements for even the stringent California green sticker. Also, production bikes will come with a natural-colored gas tank and a new digital electronic odometer/tripmeter, which were not present on our early-production testbike.
Yamaha’s blue WR shares many of the same updates that improved the ’99 YZ400F so much. Small changes inside the engine are aimed at durability, with the largest improvements in the carburetor jetting and suspension settings. This year, the WR also has a larger rear brake rotor and lots of small detail changes to drop a bit of weight; our testbike weighed 263 pounds, 2 pounds down from the last WR we tested. Unfortunately, the WR is sold in choked-up form, with its throttle limited and exhaust plugged-up, but we don’t know anyone who rides the bike like this. It’s a simple task to remove the muffler insert, but shortening the throttle stop to 16mm (measured from the bottom of the threads to the top of the stop) to allow full-throttle operation is a bit more of a chore.
Starting any of these bikes is a cinch, provided you know how to kick-start a Thumper. Each has a routine that anyone can get the hang of. Both the Honda and the KTM are jetted a bit on the lean side, and thus take a moment to warm up. Power-wise, the Yamaha is clearly on top, but that’s not the whole story. Its snappy engine builds revs much faster than the KTM or the XR in a non-traditional four-stroke way, preferring high-rpm revs over grunty torque. Stalling was a concern on the WR, as its light flywheel and pumper carb combine to make whipper-wristed riders suffer.
Deceivingly light on the power curve was the XR400. It lost in roll-ons and but
not by as much as it felt like it would. The power has a light, revvy feel to it, yet it will pull at lower revs, where you’d stall the WR. Side-by-side with either of the other bikes, the Honda isn’t really slower; the rider just ends up twisting the throttle a bit harder. The XR is right there till you get in an all-out power race, and then it will lose.
Reverse the table and tackle
the tightest, gnarliest trails, and the XR’s light helping of power makes it the easiest to ride and, in turn, the fastest. Funny how that works.
The KTM fits right in the middle in power and delivery. The slow-revving, traditional four-stroke feel of the motor is the torquiest off the bottom, but lacks snap. Like earlier KTM 400s, the SXC’s big power pulses will lift the front wheel with a helping of clutch; it feels more like a 500 than a 400. And it builds and builds and builds to a decent top-end pull; you’re definitely ready for it when it gets there. Credit the new carb for the precise jetting and the disappearance of the pop-stall off idle.
KTM 400 SXC
$5498
Weight empty . . . 272 lb. Fuel capacity .. . 2.3 gal. Seat height 38.2 in. Footpeg height . . . 17.6 in. Ground clearance. . 13.8 in. Wheelbase 59.0 in. 4Ups A Competitive price A All the best components A Solid performance from an EPA-legal (read: quiet) motor `~owns v Vibrates a bit much v Big-bike size v First-to-second-gear gap too wide
Holding form in the chassis department, there are three distinct flavors here, too. The Honda has a small, light feel not at all indicative of its 273-pound dry weight, the heaviest in this class. It is nimble and springy feeling in the suspension-not what you’d want in whoops or on the racetrack,
but on fireroads, over slimy roots or on loose, rocky trails, it is the call. The worse the terrain, the better the XR stays connected to the ground. It definitely turns the tightest and pulls the front end up the easiest-credit the short wheelbase. But the XR is cramped for larger riders, mostly due to its sweptback handlebar and rearset bar mounts.
In the middle of the equation is the WR. Size-wise, it’s just about right for all proportions of riders, just a bit bulky around the gas tank. Lightest on the scale at 263 pounds, it somehow feels heaviest on the trail, a good 20 pounds heavier-feeling than the XR. The Yamaha is as stable as anything, and the suspension settings are catered more toward the racer. Stiff initially to hold the^bike up, it tends to dance around a bit on loose rocks. Hit things like you mean business, though, and the WR will not disappoint, going where it’s pointed and never anywhere else. Its motocross heritage is evident in its solid chassis, but unfortunately it's hard to find the cause of the huge perceived weight difference between the WR400 and the YZ400, or the XR and KTM for that matter.
And for the biggest bike, we have the KTM. Tall and long works for larger riders who feel cramped on the other bikes. Those short of inseam were intimidated by the KTM. Overall, there is a lightness to the SXC’s handling, not the same as the XR, but lighter than the WR. This light steering
is deceiving because the stability is great, yet tight turns take a bit of effort. The fork is excellent with great bottoming resistance that unfortunately isn’t matched by the shock, which blows through the stroke quicker than we’d like. With some more time on the bike, we could surely dial that out.
So, with three distinctly different bikes aimed at the same buyer, the quirks make the call.
Honda has a trademark XR package: There is nothing second-rate on the bike except the tank graphics, which tear off in the wind. It has the best brakes, best clutch, perfect transmission ratios, no radiator/liquid-cooling problems (it’s air-cooled) and a minimal maintenance schedule.
Yamaha WR400F
$5899
Alps Weight empty 263 lb. Race-oriented with decent Fuel capacity 3.2 gal. trail manners Seat height 37.7 in. When the motor rips, the Footpeg height 16.5 in. motor rips! Ground clearance 12.8 in. Race-ready suspension Wheelbase 58.5 in. and chassis Y owns Either too corked-up or too loud No handguards-watch the fingers! Feels too bulbous and heavy
So, if you don’t have a number and you’re not over 6-feet-tall, you can’t go wrong with an XR. Just don’t get into a race with it.
The KTM suffers from a bothersome first-to-second-gear gap. Though the motor has the guts to pull it, we’d put a lower, 52-tooth rear sprocket on the bike and forget first gear. Also, left-side kickstarting is a feat some just cannot master. Vibration is another concern. Just when we’d forgotten what an uncounterbalanced Single felt like, the KTM reminded us. Rubber-mounted handlebars and softer seat foam would be on our list. On the plus side is the quiet muffler that really lets the bike work, and the slim gas tank and seat that allow the rider to attack on the bike. Plus, you get a tapered handlebar, flashy gold rims, a grippy seat cover and graphics that last. For a serious rider or racer, the KTM is a hardened choice that with a little polishing can be top-notch.
And as our pick for the winner, by the slightest of margins, the Yamaha WR-but not without some reservations. First, we are saddened by the detuned state the WR is sold in, and even more disgusted by the exhaust note of the uncorked version we tested. We wanted to put the KTM muffler on it! Second, we’d like it to feel 20 pounds lighter, more like a YZ400, if possible. And third, it assuredly takes some skill to ride the Yamaha through tighter, more technical trails. But it possesses so much race prowess (especially in the suspension and chassis departments) in stock form that we’re drawn to it. Its motor rips, durability is solid and even though it’s not perfect, it combines all the elements you need to have some serious fun.
Now Thump off! @
