ktm 350exc vs 500exc vs wr250r

[It'sNotTheBike]

Originally Posted by crazybrit

Ok, I hear what you're saying for your location but the OP lives in the "north coast of cali where we have a plethera of dirt connected by pavement". Seems like a very different driving environment than Raliegh or even Portland. Of course he would need the power to outrun the cartel employees manning the Humbolt County marijuana plantations

I think the OP needs a good map so he doesn't get too close to one of those cartel-operated grow-ops

People can disappear near such things. I was on Maui some years ago and was instructed by a local not to walk
down a certain trail because there were caves near the trail in which meth labs were operating, and the people
involved would have been happy to kill me and feed me to the wild pigs.

I hear you on the different environment where the OP lives. Maybe a WR-R would suit him just fine. But he has been
riding an XR-R so he is not entirely unfamiliar with having some power, and maybe he might want similar power
but less weight. But that's just speculation on my part. Of course only he knows what he really wants, and even then he
might not know until he goes through a few bikes. We've all done that, I reckon.

.

[It'sNotTheBike]

Originally Posted by Attico

I wish the 450 and 530 were more forgiving in the maintenance dept, I'd have one in a minute..

The real world maintenance on a EXC that is not being raced every weekend
is not as labor-intensive as some who have not owned one of the bikes seem to believe.
This has been debated endlessly and the people who have actually owned the bikes
seem to agree that when the bike is not raced it doesn't need to be maintained
like a race bike does. It is true that the WR-R needs less attention to the valves,
but other than that there's not a vast difference in the maintenance required for the two
different bikes, unless you consider a 20 minute oil change to be a big hassle.

What you get in exchange for a bit more maintenance work is a lot more power, and significantly
better suspension. You pays your money and you takes your choice, like the man said.

Honestly I do not understand why someone would be less "miserable" on a long paved transit
section when riding a WR-R instead of a KTM EXC. I have ridden both bikes and I don't
feel that there is a significant difference in comfort, provided the KTM doesn't have the stock
seat which is indeed horrible. If we are restricted to the bikes remaining 100% stock ( who does that ? )
then I would certainly give the nod to the Yamaha in the seat department. But I think stuff like whether your wheels
are balanced and whether the bike has a good steering damper makes a bigger difference in comfort than the difference
between the WR-R and an EXC on paved sections. Now, if I could have a magic bike which transformed into a 950
SM when I hit pavement and back into an EXC when I hit single track, I'd pay extra for that !


It will be interesting to see what the OP chooses.


I hope he lets us know.


.

[wizz]

typically the "cartell grows" are operated by immigrants who are tryin to make a better living than they could somewhere else, not hard core criminals of the juarez variety, so ive never found too much of a concern. if you stumble on a patch, turn around and leave. most people dont wont trouble. i was way more nervous in the north georgia backwoods. had some run-ins there i could have done without.
im sure the wr has plenty of power, but even here on the boondocks of the north coast having the abilty to easily roll on the throttle to pass logging/gravel/pulp trucks in order to avoid hazards that are constantly flyin off of said trucks is nice, plus its a nice feelin on the multi to always be able to grab throttle no matter the speed. the wr appeals because of long maintenance intervals, but i dont wont to downgrade from the xr. i wont a bike at least as dirt worthy if not more, is that the case with the wr. are oil changes the only real maintenace differnce between ktm and wr? i guess i keep thinking im really after a new dirtbike with a tag to replace the xr. thanks for all the replies.
itsnotthebike: you hit the nail on the head- similar power, less weight

[It'sNotTheBike]

Originally Posted by wizz

the wr appeals because of long maintenance intervals, but i dont wont to downgrade from the xr. i wont a bike at least as dirt worthy if not more, is that the case with the wr. are oil changes the only real maintenace differnce between ktm and wr? i guess i keep thinking im really after a new dirtbike with a tag to replace the xr. thanks for all the replies.

The oil changes are not the main issue. The main issue is checking the valve clearances. The Yamaha has
an amazingly long service interval for valve checks, and a longer interval for oil changes too. The KTM
intervals are much shorter. In practice the KTM valves do not always need to be adjusted, but it is important
to make sure you don't ride the bike much with the valves out of spec. If a KTM has
Kibblewhite ( aftermarket ) valves installed the valves tend to stay in spec for significantly longer than with the stock valves.


If you get a bike made in 2008 or newer the valves require a shim to
be changed as part of the adjustment procedure. A KTM with an RFS engine uses a screw and locknut for valve
adjustment, so you don't need to go buy some parts in order to adjust the valves.

I think you need to ride a KTM and a WR-R back to back. You'll know which bike you want to ride
home on within an hour. The Yamaha will be less hassle than a KTM, but the KTM provides a riding
experience that for some of us means we are willing to deal with a bit of extra maintenance. Only you
know whether the tradeoff is worth it for you.


Consider this : do you imagine you will sit back at the end of a day of riding and smile thinking about how little
work the bike needs, or is it more likely that you might sit back and smile thinking about how much fun you
had riding that day ? Now, if you ride both bikes and you decide riding the Yamaha will make you happy, then
it's a no-brainer and you should get the Yamaha. But the two bikes are different enough that you owe it to yourself
to ride them both.


.

[It'sNotTheBike]

Originally Posted by wizz

itsnotthebike: you hit the nail on the head- similar power, less weight

I didn't see your above sentence until just now.

If you want similar power you will have a project on your hands trying to
get it from the Yamaha and it will cost enough money to get there that you will be
approaching the price of a KTM which won't need engine mods to achieve even more power.

The KTM 500 EXC will have more power and a lot less weight. I think the KTM 350
power will be close to a bone-stock ( restricted ) XR650R engine, but might feel
like less because there is no replacement for displacement and that Honda
engine makes good torque, which is what we really feel when we ride a dirt bike.


Me, I might look for a nice 2007 525 EXC in order to save some money, because the
last of the RFS-engine KTMs are very sweet bikes and they are very reliable when they
have been properly maintained.



.

[Off the grid]

Originally Posted by It'sNotTheBike

The real world maintenance on a EXC that is not being raced every weekend
is not as labor-intensive as some who have not owned one of the bikes seem to believe.
This has been debated endlessly and the people who have actually owned the bikes
seem to agree that when the bike is not raced it doesn't need to be maintained
like a race bike does. It is true that the WR-R needs less attention to the valves,
but other than that there's not a vast difference in the maintenance required for the two
different bikes, unless you consider a 20 minute oil change to be a big hassle.

What you get in exchange for a bit more maintenance work is a lot more power, and significantly
better suspension. You pays your money and you takes your choice, like the man said.

Honestly I do not understand why someone would be less "miserable" on a long paved transit
section when riding a WR-R instead of a KTM EXC. I have ridden both bikes and I don't
feel that there is a significant difference in comfort, provided the KTM doesn't have the stock
seat which is indeed horrible. If we are restricted to the bikes remaining 100% stock ( who does that ? )
then I would certainly give the nod to the Yamaha in the seat department. But I think stuff like whether your wheels
are balanced and whether the bike has a good steering damper makes a bigger difference in comfort than the difference
between the WR-R and an EXC on paved sections. Now, if I could have a magic bike which transformed into a 950
SM when I hit pavement and back into an EXC when I hit single track, I'd pay extra for that !


It will be interesting to see what the OP chooses.


I hope he lets us know.


.

Very wise post.

For the record, my EXC was extremely smooth and comfortable on the road provided the wheels were balanced.

[crazybrit]

Really sound advice above re: KTM maintenance etc. It's a myth based in racing schedule that they are high maintenance. This said they do need more frequent oil changes due to lower capacity and if you're a remove one drain plug and one spin on filter type of person then the KTM may still not be your bag. I have friends like this. The valves on the rfs are a pain to me as the stock valves move a lot and the screw adjust process is imprecise. Even though the 08 is shim under bucket and thus seems like more work the valve clearances stay in spec much longer.

Internally balancing the rimlocks on my 07 solved the oscillation issues and the bike is smooth at 80 now plus with the 6 speed its a nice ride.

[rickypanecatyl]

Interesting 4 bikes to toss around (including your previous XRR).

Warning: The following opinion is designed to leave you just as stuck in the middle as before as I've endevored to praise and criticise each contender equally!

As you already mentioned, there's not a real big weight difference between the XRR and WRR. I think you'd find the weight the same with 1/2 the power and 1/3 the torque.

The positive differences would be: WRR even more reliable than the XRR with even futher maintenance intervals. Electric start, more electrical output, nearly twice the gas mileagle, easier mods for luggage.

The KTM's mentioned would be really lucky to make 1/2 the miles of your XRR with 3X the maitenance.

I'm sure if you rode the WRR and the 2 KTM's back to back there'd be no comparison; the KTM's would really stand out. And though the 350 might seem a bit more desireable in tricky situations I think the 500 would more than make up for that if you were ever on the freeway or open desert. What you wouldn't get from the test ride is how the WRR would kill either one long term reliability wise. I notice that kind of thing as I do 20-30,000 miles a year so it really matters! Tons of riders have a blast and never do more than 2,000 miles a year; I'd get the KTM if I was them.

Personally I think you could hone your riding skills better on either KTM. I used to erroniously think I would better my dirt skills by riding a "harder to ride" bike. I started riding off road with an already heavy KTM LC4 and it was super tough to hang with my friends on YZ125's. It was often in a shop that gave out loaner bikes and I often got a Suzuki DR800 which was nearly 100lbs heavier to ride for a few weeks. I'd try to ride the same jungle trails that were already tough on the 320 lb KTM thinking "If I can just master it on this, it'll be real easy when I get the KTM back." Never worked and in fact I found when finally borrowing my friends light motorcross bikes I learned more in a few hours than a few years and things were so much easier back on the heavy KTM - not compared to the MX bikes but compared to riding it before I had the knowledge of how I could do such and such a track on a light bike!

[It'sNotTheBike]

Originally Posted by Off the grid

Very wise post.

For the record, my EXC was extremely smooth and comfortable on the road provided the wheels were balanced.

I like to balance the wheels without tires on them and then once the tire is mounted I check the balance again.

That way if you have to install a new tire on a trip and you cannot find a spin balance machine you might have a better chance of the new tire and wheel assembly being close enough to properly balanced that it is tolerable until you
can get to a balance machine.



.

[It'sNotTheBike]

Originally Posted by crazybrit

The valves on the rfs are a pain to me as the stock valves move a lot .

Dave Hopkins engine work + Kibblewhite valves =


But you knew that already.

[crazybrit]

Originally Posted by It'sNotTheBike

I like to balance the wheels without tires on them and then once the tire is mounted I check the balance again.

This is a bit of a tangent but of course correct. Rimlocks are the issue and the phase oscillation that forms between front/rear wheels. Stick some weight *inside* the rim channel to balance the rimlock, never going to fall off. Tires are usually pretty close balance wise.

As for KB and djh yes. Just waiting till mine lose adjustment. Point was I wouldn't be scared of an 08 b/c of the shim under bucket, more so the separate oil supply migration issues.

[simonpig]

If you're truly not interested in trucking your bike to location and you intend to put upwards to 10K+ mileage in the next 2 or so year and beyond. Get the WR250R. It loves to be ridden and often. I did the complete TAT on it and it's a great bike for that.

I've personally done dualsports on the WRR where I've ridden solo 4 hours from NYC to PA, camped out, rode a couple days of technical singletrack, packed up and rode back as it was raining on the way home. I did it, but given the choice, I would've rather had it on the back of a truck and been warm.

Recently my WRR was stolen, so I'm sorta where you are. This time round, I think I'm gonna go with a more single track oriented bike that is street legal with the intention of trailering it. I too am tired of wrestling pigs on technical rides. I do have a big adventure bike as well, so that informs my decision.

That said, if the mood struck and I wanted to take a trip down to South America, I would buy a WRR (or the new CRF250L) just for that trip.

See my TAT report here:
http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=698330

[rickypanecatyl]

Originally Posted by It'sNotTheBike

I think you need to ride a KTM and a WR-R back to back. You'll know which bike you want to ride
home on within an hour. The Yamaha will be less hassle than a KTM, but the KTM provides a riding
experience that for some of us means we are willing to deal with a bit of extra maintenance. Only you
know whether the tradeoff is worth it for you.


Consider this : do you imagine you will sit back at the end of a day of riding and smile thinking about how little
work the bike needs, or is it more likely that you might sit back and smile thinking about how much fun you
had riding that day ? Now, if you ride both bikes and you decide riding the Yamaha will make you happy, then
it's a no-brainer and you should get the Yamaha. But the two bikes are different enough that you owe it to yourself
to ride them both.


.

If you don't already know this, it's important to know that the difference between "reliable" and "high maitenance" in the bike world is much greater than the car/truck world. For instance when shoping for a truck many years back and studying consumer reports reliability records I found that particular year the Toyota was #1 and I think Dodge ram was in last place. The Dodge seemed horrible compared to the Toyota but the reality was there was less than a 50% difference. Toyotas would average 220K miles and the Dodges 130K.

However in the bike world, bikes that make it 50,000 miles with no major issues are considered extremely reliable and those considered "high maintenence" might only make it 5,000 - or a 10:1 difference with double or triple the services in that same time frame. (By the way, in the KTM world, I think the "high maintenance" EXC's are more reliable than the supposedly reliable 690's - I was on my 3rd engine/9th fuel pump by 22,000 miles and constantly heard from dealers around the world similar stories with the 690.)

Many people never go over 5,000 miles in the years they own a bike and in that situation I'd see no reason at all to get a WRR over a KTM EXC. Maybe the electrical power, sub frame? I think those could be remedied but it wouldn't be easier to ride the WRR ecspecially with a throttle tamer on the EXC.

[It'sNotTheBike]

Originally Posted by crazybrit

This is a bit of a tangent but of course correct. Rimlocks are the issue and the phase oscillation that forms between front/rear wheels. Stick some weight *inside* the rim channel to balance the rimlock, never going to fall off. Tires are usually pretty close balance wise.

Hopefully the OP will forgive us for the tangent, for which I am somewhat
to blame.


While we are out in left field, I'd like to mention Talon rim locks
which are in my opinion in a class by themselves with respect to
quality and how they grip the bead of the tire. I have no affiliation with
the company or the distributors in the US. I am just a happy user of the
product.

.

[It'sNotTheBike]

Originally Posted by rickypanecatyl

However in the bike world, bikes that make it 50,000 miles with no major issues are considered extremely reliable and those considered "high maintenence" might only make it 5,000 - or a 10:1 difference with double or triple the services in that same time frame.

Indeed, bikes are not like cars.

I have wondered why bike engines cannot last longer than they do. I think some of the cause must be the wet
clutch which shares its oil supply ( and consequently its bits of friction material and steel from the clutch ) with the rest of the engine. Look at BMW boxer twins which have a dry clutch - it's common to see them exceed 100K miles without so much as a top end rebuild. Of course they might need a final drive


To the OP : we on this thread want to see a photo of the your new KTM, ok ?


.

.