OK EVO,it was your idea........

[ford832]

the reason the yz excels is due to that SSS suspension. Its really that good.  The yz isn't bad, its just not that good.

I'm sorry,say what now?Explain please. " title="Roll Eyes" class="smiley">

[factoryX]

Take away the SSS suspension and you have a basic bike that is straight from the 90's, especially at 44-46hp which is garbage(99 rm250 had 50hp!). If the 2012/13 250sx had the same suspension, it wouldn't even be a comparison.

[motox11]

as an AA rider that has scored pro-am points on two-strokes, I have ridden both. Both the yz and ktm are great 250's. Both have some unique charasteristics. I may not be the world's greatest test rider, but here is my take on things between the 2 when both are stock. The KTM has a harder hit for more experienced riders in stock form than the yz. Sure, you can adjust that with something as simple as disconnecting a wire or changing out the power valve spring, but in stock form the Yami is more user friendly to the average rider. The forks, no contest. The SSS is great stuff. The WP stuff has come a long way and isn't bad by any means now with the american spec spring rates. I feel like the KTM has surpassed the YZ in the handling department now just with chassis feel and the comfort level right away on it. In the motor department, you really can feel those extra 2-3 hp that the ktm has on the hills especially. Lastly, the transmission I would have to give the nod to the YZ. That close ratio gearbox is the cats meow IMO. Like I said both are good bikes. The yamaha is outdated as far as advancements go, but still a solid user friendly bike. If I had to pick one I would pick the KTM though because the motor is snappy, it pulls harder on the hills and just felt more comfortable to me. It corners like a dream while still remaining stable at higher speeds. Feel free to argue as I am just voicing my personal opinions about my adventures on both 

[Camstyn]

Take away the SSS suspension and you have a basic bike that is straight from the 90's, especially at 44-46hp which is garbage(99 rm250 had 50hp!). If the 2012/13 250sx had the same suspension, it wouldn't even be a comparison.

No way the 99 RM250 had anywhere close to 50hp, that generation RM250 was a complete turd.

[rlaj1004]

Well I just happen to have a 13 year old YZ and a 09 KTM both 250. Up till my recent upgrade to the KTM they both had similar upgrades, wheels, pipes, reeds. Power wasn't that different, they hit at different points but you ride them they way they need to be ridden. What I noticed was the KTM feels lighter. I know weird cus I don't think it is much.

I think we need a MXA type bike test shootout. Everyone switch out and grade them.

Ford is suppling the rum ( spiced ?? ) so I am good. I will bring my new KTM and my old uh (Jap stuff ) that just not politically correct Ford. LOL

[ford832]

Take away the SSS suspension and you have a basic bike that is straight from the 90's, especially at 44-46hp which is garbage(99 rm250 had 50hp!). If the 2012/13 250sx had the same suspension, it wouldn't even be a comparison.

You're just making this stuff up as you go along aren't you? My buddy had a 99 RM250 when I had my 125 and it was a roach.It's odd Suzuki hit 50hp in 99 but hung out with everyone else up to modern day at about 44-46.It's a shame they couldn't have figured what they did in '99. " title="Roll Eyes" class="smiley">
I guess I really need to defer to your studliness.I can't use all the "garbage" power my YZ makes.For that matter,I couldn't use all the power any of my 125's made.If anyone else on the planet can ride the same bike as me faster than me,then I'm not using what the bike has.
Kudo's to you for being one of the rare few who both need and can truly use a couple extra horsies and are terribly held back by something with a few less.The extra must come in handy when you're chasing down Knighter and Taddy at the WEC or when trying to reel in RV or JS in the sand at Soutwick.My hat's off to you.

Good post motox11.That's a good, honest, sensible  evaluation.That's sadly lacking on some here.Keep it up.

[cnrcpla]

No way the 99 RM250 had anywhere close to 50hp, that generation RM250 was a complete turd.

Yeah they did. Even the '95 rm250 made 51 HP.

 Specs for 1994-1995 Suzuki RM250

Overall Length: 2 167 mm (85.3 in)

Overall Width: 815 mm (32.1 in)

Overall Height: 1 250 mm (49.2 in)

Seat Height: 955 mm (37.6 in)

Ground Clearance: 360 mm (14.2 in)

Wheelbase: 1 467 mm (57.8 in)

Dry Weight: 98 kg (215 lbs)

Engine type: Water-cooled 249 cc single-cylinder 2-stroke, AETC.

Power: 51 hp (37,5 kW)/ 8,000 rpm, 47,5 Nm/ 7,000 rpm.

Transmission: 5-speed manual.

Front Suspension: 38mm Inverted

Rear Suspension: Full Float Single Gas Charged

Body Color: Yellow.

Frame Color: Gun Metal Grey.

[ford832]

Well I just happen to have a 13 year old YZ and a 09 KTM both 250. Up till my recent upgrade to the KTM they both had similar upgrades, wheels, pipes, reeds. Power wasn't that different, they hit at different points but you ride them they way they need to be ridden. What I noticed was the KTM feels lighter. I know weird cus I don't think it is much.

I think we need a MXA type bike test shootout. Everyone switch out and grade them.

Ford is suppling the rum ( spiced ?? ) so I am good. I will bring my new KTM and my old uh (Jap stuff ) that just not politically correct Ford. LOL

Bring whichever you like.Normallly dark or black for me but spiced is no problem either.

[ford832]

No way the 99 RM250 had anywhere close to 50hp, that generation RM250 was a complete turd.

Yeah they did. Even the '95 rm250 made 51 HP.

 Specs for 1994-1995 Suzuki RM250

Overall Length: 2 167 mm (85.3 in)

Overall Width: 815 mm (32.1 in)

Overall Height: 1 250 mm (49.2 in)

Seat Height: 955 mm (37.6 in)

Ground Clearance: 360 mm (14.2 in)

Wheelbase: 1 467 mm (57.8 in)

Dry Weight: 98 kg (215 lbs)

Engine type: Water-cooled 249 cc single-cylinder 2-stroke, AETC.

Power: 51 hp (37,5 kW)/ 8,000 rpm, 47,5 Nm/ 7,000 rpm.

Transmission: 5-speed manual.

Front Suspension: 38mm Inverted

Rear Suspension: Full Float Single Gas Charged

Body Color: Yellow.

Frame Color: Gun Metal Grey.

Unfortunately,not even close.Those specs are taken at the brochure.36-40 is far more reasonable.

[ford832]

but the main issue is that you have to spend more money to do so while you could have bought a purpose built bike to begin with.

I was about to go after this but then I clicked your username as I was curious what your background knowledge level was and if all your info was from experience or net surfing.Now I'm not going to bother with this argument anymore-'nuff said. Cheers.

[_X_]

wait! i'm a little slow on the draw these past days, as i'm trying to train and get my bike ready for this weekend. now, what i believe is that every year a manufacturer tweeks his bike to make it better, ok cool. they add a couple horse power here a hydraulic clutch there, flatten the seat, rake and trail, offsets, dampening, etc... it dosen't mean s#!t! if you are slow, you will be slow on what ever year bike you ride. if you are fast you will be fast on any bike you ride. if you are not winning you are an also ran. face it ford is right, he can win on his 06 yz and he can lose on his 06. just this past weekend i got beat by guys i am generally faster than due to mistakes and take-outs. ha! and i know that i would have finnished where i did regardless of what year machine i was on or how much hp it produced. Now about this drinking, that is where i would have to say i'm an expert and it does matter what your throwing down. thank you and good night.

[gpnewhouse7]

Wait I thought we were comparing bikes not coming up with excuse why we don't need the best.

In that case then my 90/91 yz 125 is the best bike ever made because when Ive fixed it I'll be able to get the same finish position on that as I could on my friends 2011 150sx.

Comparing bikes though and we soon realize that while KTM hasn't made any major advances with the two stroke (neither has anyone else since the late 80's for that matter) they have still tuned it each year to make the bike better and better and now after the yz's 6 year lack of development the KTM is now finally a better overall bike. So yes of course the yz can be made better and even get to the point where its better than the KTM why would you bother with this if you were buying a new bike?

but the main issue is that you have to spend more money to do so while you could have bought a purpose built bike to begin with.

I was about to go after this but then I clicked your username as I was curious what your background knowledge level was and if all your info was from experience or net surfing.Now I'm not going to bother with this argument anymore-'nuff said. Cheers.

And what exactly are you meaning by this? Is it because of his age that his opinion is invalid or something? In which case I'll just start skipping past any comments made by you in future due to how your too old to know what your talking about.

I have a lot of respect for you and all the other members of this forum but I have no time for those that think they are somehow above others, especcially when its because of something as stupid as that.

[_X_]

newhouse you get it and then you don't. what if all brands made  a new bike with the same features? which would be the best? see why its rider not bike, new or old its all opinion no matter the development.

[motoxr377]

Are we done d*ck measuring yet?

Come on, guys.

[_X_]

we haven't measured you yet motoxr.HA!