I have ridden the KLX250 KLX300r and the old XR250r and the WR250r has a bit more HP over them but the power is made way up on the moon in RPMs. The WR250r has nothing down low where as the XR and KLX's are more low end for grunt and punch. The WR250r came from a R1 which because it has 4 cylinders and that they rev to the moon it kicks but. Take away 3 cylinders and you have a rev happy motor with no guts which in the end only makes for an OK 50/50 bike. I feel you need punch off and on road and the WR250r is too smooth like a sewing machine with no thrill and no fun but it does get you there. I even tried to change the gearing on the WR and it did not help.
I also had the DRz400s with all the mods done and it was great 60/40 bike with loads of torque which is why you need displacement on the older bikes to get the torque you need.
My new bike is light has fuel injected open air box that hits like crazy with instant MX like throttle response which you can rev to the moon but is geared low enough to pull wheelies all day down low. The fun 82 MPH 2008 TE250. It sucks on the street but great off road a pure 20/80 bike.
Compare the DR to the WR... The DR650 is like whisky and the WR250r like a wine cooler they both get the job done in the end but they are much different.
Originally Posted by Kommando
The 690 tends to be smoother than the 640s. The gearspread is a bit wider too.
IMO, the WRR and DR do a lot of similar things well, but with a different bias. The DR is a tractoring packmule that is smooth on slab. The WRR is a revvy chunk of a dirtbike with lights and a smooth motor. Riding solo on rev-friendly terrain, I'd lean WRR. Riding heavy/2up, and/or in torque-sucking terrain, I'd lean DR. Either bike will do both, but you'll notice a definite bias.
ohenry screwed with this post 12-09-2012 at 11:14 AM