Post by: TMKIWI on March 25, 2013, 10:03:33 AM
1.Yamaha YZ125?199 lbs
2.KTM 125SX?202
3.TM MX144?204
4.KTM 150SX?204
5.KTM 250SX?217
6.Yamaha YZ250F?218
7.Yamaha YZ250?218
8.Honda CRF250?222
9.Kawasaki KX250F?224
10.Suzuki RM-Z250?224
11.KTM 300XC?230
12.KTM 250SXF?231
13.Honda CRF450?231
14.Yamaha YZ450F?238
15.Kawasaki KX450?242
16.KTM 450SXF?243
17.Suzuki RM-Z450?244
Copied from another site.
Makes me want a TM144 even more.
Post by: VintageBlueSmoke on March 25, 2013, 11:06:05 AM
Personally, I prefer steel frames. All "perimeter" framed bikes "feel" fat to me. I lost the argument already with someone who provided numbers that proved them to be no wider than regular frames but you can't argue with "feel". I suspect that feel is the area between the knees and thighs (since the distance between the foot pegs is apparently the same).
Post by: fabbo on March 25, 2013, 01:08:01 PM
Post by: SachsGS on March 25, 2013, 02:57:14 PM
Post by: citabjockey on March 25, 2013, 03:01:59 PM
Post by: factoryX on March 25, 2013, 05:38:57 PM
I've been told the main reason for the switch was cost - CR steel was just getting too expensive. Production machinery developed for the aerospace industry further lowered costs.That's because it was. As for weight, a 125 two stroke today should not weigh more than 200lbs, 250 two stroke 210lbs.
Post by: Stusmoke on March 25, 2013, 11:44:26 PM
Post by: shanes on March 26, 2013, 07:33:47 AM
You can thank the linkage for the two strokes chub factor. Adds about 5 pounds. I haven't ridden a non linkage and linkage system back to front but I fail to see how it was worth it I really do. But then again, I think they only did it to please the public and we all know the public doesn't know whats best for them.
yes it is a strange one i love the way my 2010 rear end feels without a linkage , i would like to ride the 2010 / 2013 back to back to see the difference . i think its more to do with what people think is better and what sells . 90 % of people will never reach the limit of either but once they have an idea in their heads that is want they want , that is where they will spend their money
Post by: Stusmoke on March 26, 2013, 11:36:23 AM
Post by: cnrcpla on March 26, 2013, 12:18:52 PM
Post by: SwapperMX on March 26, 2013, 12:30:59 PM
Exactly. I've never ridden one back to back either and I dont understand the principles behind linkage but from what I've heard it helps with adjustment and gives the show a little more travel. But I just don't buy into it being worth 5 pounds. I think to really feel the difference you'd need to ride dungey and roczen style with a little bit of Cairolli mixed in. But like you said, the public demanded it so ktm did it. Whether it was worth it is a matter of opinion I spose.
It's interesting to read up on if you are even semi interested in suspension operation. You are semi right in saying that it helps with adjustment, in that once you start going semi fast with the no link KTM, you really had to have your shock settings close (both internally and externally) or the bike just will not handle correctly. With the linkage, that window is larger. It's great that KTM continue the development of their entire range of MX bikes.
Post by: gpnewhouse7 on March 26, 2013, 12:52:13 PM
Post by: Stusmoke on March 26, 2013, 10:12:16 PM
Exactly. I've never ridden one back to back either and I dont understand the principles behind linkage but from what I've heard it helps with adjustment and gives the show a little more travel. But I just don't buy into it being worth 5 pounds. I think to really feel the difference you'd need to ride dungey and roczen style with a little bit of Cairolli mixed in. But like you said, the public demanded it so ktm did it. Whether it was worth it is a matter of opinion I spose.
It's interesting to read up on if you are even semi interested in suspension operation. You are semi right in saying that it helps with adjustment, in that once you start going semi fast with the no link KTM, you really had to have your shock settings close (both internally and externally) or the bike just will not handle correctly. With the linkage, that window is larger. It's great that KTM continue the development of their entire range of MX bikes.
I've rode the 03 KTM back to back against the 04 Honda chassis (both 125s) and found there to be a huge difference in the way they handle. However I also have rode a 2011 KTM 150 back to back against a 2011 RMZ 250 and 04 KX 250 and an 02 SX 125 and the 150 was miles better than any of them, my friend owns the 150 and used to own the CR 125 aswell and he swears by the 150. So I'd say that the linkage was needed ten years ago but now its just been put on in an attempt to sell more bikes.
I asked an owner of a 2013 SX250 recently what he thought of hte handling and he said it was the most stable platform hes ever ridden on. Hes ridden freaking everything too, an older guy. Late 30s early 40s but he said it is wickedly stable at speed, doesn't hop around like alot of two strokes do under acceleration and it was almost four stroke like in the corners; just point and shoot.
Post by: riffraff on March 27, 2013, 06:01:17 AM
Post by: TMKIWI on March 27, 2013, 07:08:55 AM
an older guy.... late 30's , early 40's hahahaha
Kids today.
Post by: Stusmoke on March 28, 2013, 02:18:06 AM
Post by: riffraff on March 28, 2013, 04:16:39 AM
Post by: chump6784 on March 29, 2013, 05:25:42 AM
Post by: Stusmoke on March 29, 2013, 11:17:01 AM
In MXA's test of the 2012 ktm 250 sx they highlight the difference between the linkage and non linkage from 2011. Basically once both systems are set up for the rider/track they are on par with each other. It is just that most of the time the linkage system can be suited to the rider in a matter of clicks where as the non linkage would sometimes need a spring change, as swapper said, the linkage works better over a wider range of conditions where non linkage is more fussy to spring rates etc
If I had to guess, I would say alot of the above characteristics are due to the longer and shorter shock strokes respectively.