Honda Crf 250L

[taninthai]

If you are planning to use the bike for off road and the OZ specs are true, then the KLX is the bike to get. 148kg and 258mm ground clearance is pathetic for a bike that you supposedly can take off road, as a beginner you would struggle to handle a 148kg bike on anything but a gravel track.

Why are you so determined to prove the CRF is better trail bike when the specs (if true) clearly show it is not. The engine may be more powerful but that is only a small factor for an off road bike. Weight, suspension and clearance are VERY important.

Hi madjbs

As I have said many times in this thread I am not trying to say/prove the crf is the better bike I have said I fully expect the klx to be better as it is 30-40 k more expensive what does annoy me is people slagging this bike of because it's 147 kg and yet the klx is supposedly a great bike just because it's 9 kg lighter, I'm not interested in getting involved in the which is better discussion I read enough of that in cbr/ninja thread and it ended up like little children bickering and crying over spilt milk.

I'm not one off these people that has to have the best all the time just a bike that suits my budget and needs ,obviously if I wanted the best trail bike I would not be buying the klx or crf

No one knows what the CRF250L will sell for and anyway, regardless of the MSRP that AP Honda might publish, we've all seen with the new CB'r' that the dealers are free to price gouge as much as they like so it's anyone's guess what the new CFR250L might actually sell for.

Why do you only focus on the weight difference, which is clearly in the KLX250's favor? Not only is the KLX lighter than the CRF250L, but it's also got more clearance, better suspension, proven reliability and TONS of aftermarket parts.

No doubt the Honda will be cheaper and more fuel efficient. IMO the Honda is aimed at a different market segment than the Kwacker.

No need to take offense- it's great that a new bike is coming to the Thai market! As for which bike to get, it all depends on what you want to use it for.

Probably shouldn't talk about suspension yet as we don't know what's on the crf

So let's stick to facts the klx is 9 kg lighter and has around 25 mm more ground clearance on these facts some people are claiming the crf is only good for gravel and cannot go the places a klx can....ridiculous assumptions on a bike that no- one has even rode yet.

Perhaps I'm looking at the completely wrong bikes maybe I should buy 1 off them syms 200 motard after all that's only 130 kg so will be easier to handle on dirt......lol

[madjbs]

So let's stick to facts the klx is 9 kg lighter and has around 25 mm more ground clearance on these facts some people are claiming the crf is only good for gravel and cannot go the places a klx can....ridiculous assumptions on a bike that no- one has even rode yet.

The facts speak for themselves. The CRF-L wont be able to go the same places as a KLX can, if the specs are true. Sure you could take it on more difficult trails but..... good luck with that!

The XR650R was 138kg and had 50hp, test riders at the time claimed even that was far to heavy for anything more then light trails and fireroads (and now think of the CRF-L being 9kg heaver, 1/3 of the power and 50mm less clearance).....

On the other hand the CRF-L's predecesor, the XR250, was 108kg with 315ml of clearance and at the time was seen as a good bike for technical trails. Honda are taking one step forward and two steps backwards it seems....

For road riding and very light trail work the CRF-L looks like it might be a decent bike with a good engine, but, as a proper trail bike, no!

[dave_boo]

So let's stick to facts the klx is 9 kg lighter and has around 25 mm more ground clearance on these facts some people are claiming the crf is only good for gravel and cannot go the places a klx can....ridiculous assumptions on a bike that no- one has even rode yet.

The facts speak for themselves. The CRF-L wont be able to go the same places as a KLX can, if the specs are true. Sure you could take it on more difficult trails but..... good luck with that!

The XR650R was 138kg and had 50hp, test riders at the time claimed even that was far to heavy for anything more then light trails and fireroads (and now think of the CRF-L being 9kg heaver, 1/3 of the power and 50mm less clearance).....

On the other hand the CRF-L's predecesor, the XR250, was 108kg with 315ml of clearance and at the time was seen as a good bike for technical trails. Honda are taking one step forward and two steps backwards it seems....

For road riding and very light trail work the CRF-L looks like it might be a decent bike with a good engine, but, as a proper trail bike, no!

If the CRF650 was the same weight as the KLX is now, does that restrict the KLX to the same 'light trails and fire roads'? And on those type of surfaces how much is the loss of ground clearance and extra weight going to affect the ridablity of the CFR-L?

**edit**

The light trails and fire roads are in quotes because I am not quite sure what that terminology means. Obviously understand it means no felled trees (?) and rocks as big as Honda Fits...but what is it exactly? Would be helpful if it was defined.

[madjbs]

If the CRF650 was the same weight as the KLX is now, does that restrict the KLX to the same 'light trails and fire roads'? And on those type of surfaces how much is the loss of ground clearance and extra weight going to affect the ridablity of the CFR-L?

XR650R, not CRF650 (no such thing).

Pretty much they are both restricted to light trail work, although you will be able to push the KLX a bit further. The bonus with the KLX is that you have a good base platform to improve upon. You can strip off 10kg (20kg if you remove e-start) and increase the power substantially, it already has pretty decent suspension for a trail bike and just about enough clearance. If you do those mods then you should be able to use it on more serious stuff. The CRF-L is going to be limited by a lack of clearance and suspension, and excess weight (even if you get rid of 10kg) all of which can't be changed easily, and there are nowhere near as many other upgrades available either, as its new.

I would say that for roads, fire-roads and gravel tracks (I would take a 650 for those anyway!) it won't make much difference what you have, but if you plan to upgrade and do more difficult stuff then the KLX has advantages for sure.

[wana]

i think everyones missing the point here ,most people who buy these things are not going to be jumping over tree trunks , boulders ,rivers or doing any hardcore shit with them

most off them is probably gonna be like bought for fashion accessorys and some gentle trail riding on forest paths or in farmlands ,similar to people who drive giant 4x4' s to commute to work in the office from their gated community in a western suburb

nobody needs a 6 litre 4x4 with off road tyres to bring the kids to school in london ,new york ,los angeles but people like a vehicle with rugged "go anywhere" looks and style

[taichiplanet]

if the 250L does not meet one's criteria, one can always buy the CFR250R for THB310,000

weight 104.9 kg, ground clearance 322mm, seat height 951mm,

http://www.aphonda.c...gbike/s_crf.asp

If i buy the L it will be used as a motard, as although it is a fat pig by off-road standards it is svelte compared to the CBR250

[dave_boo]

If the CRF650 was the same weight as the KLX is now, does that restrict the KLX to the same 'light trails and fire roads'? And on those type of surfaces how much is the loss of ground clearance and extra weight going to affect the ridablity of the CFR-L?

XR650R, not CRF650 (no such thing).

Pretty much they are both restricted to light trail work, although you will be able to push the KLX further. The bonus with the KLX is that you have a good base platform to improve upon. You can strip off 10kg (20kg if you remove e-start) and increase the power substantially, it already has pretty decent suspension for a trail bike and just about enough clearance. If you do those mods then you should be able to use it on more serious stuff. The CRF-L is going to be limited by a lack of clearance and suspension, and excess weight (even if you get rid of 10kg) all of which can't be changed easily, and there are nowhere near as many other upgrades available either, as its new.

Thanks for the reply. I don't know much about trail riding, so I'm trying to learn before I get in way over my head. Luckily there's a lot of fabulous trails where I live and some good hospitals within 30 minutes. I assume that second part is going to be a prerequisite. I hadn't looked at it before, but the CRF-L doesn't have a kick start so removing the e-start is a no go.

[madjbs]

If the CRF650 was the same weight as the KLX is now, does that restrict the KLX to the same 'light trails and fire roads'? And on those type of surfaces how much is the loss of ground clearance and extra weight going to affect the ridablity of the CFR-L?

XR650R, not CRF650 (no such thing).

Pretty much they are both restricted to light trail work, although you will be able to push the KLX further. The bonus with the KLX is that you have a good base platform to improve upon. You can strip off 10kg (20kg if you remove e-start) and increase the power substantially, it already has pretty decent suspension for a trail bike and just about enough clearance. If you do those mods then you should be able to use it on more serious stuff. The CRF-L is going to be limited by a lack of clearance and suspension, and excess weight (even if you get rid of 10kg) all of which can't be changed easily, and there are nowhere near as many other upgrades available either, as its new.

Thanks for the reply. I don't know much about trail riding, so I'm trying to learn before I get in way over my head. Luckily there's a lot of fabulous trails where I live and some good hospitals within 30 minutes. I assume that second part is going to be a prerequisite. I hadn't looked at it before, but the CRF-L doesn't have a kick start so removing the e-start is a no go.

Neither does the KLX but luckily the KLX250 (e-start) uses the same engine as the off road only KLX300 (kickstart). So it's quite simple to swap the kick start from a KLX300 to a KLX250 and then remove the e-start.

[madjbs]

most off them is probably gonna be like bought for fashion accessorys and some gentle trail riding on forest paths or in farmlands ,similar to people who drive giant 4x4' s to commute to work in the office from their gated community in a western suburb

I think that is besides the point. They should still be good at what they are marketed and intended for. If the majority of people don't use them for their intended purpose, it is besides the point. A top of the line Range Rover is still a very good off road car even if hardly anyone uses them off road.

[madjbs]

if the 250L does not meet one's criteria, one can always buy the CFR250R for THB310,000

weight 104.9 kg, ground clearance 322mm, seat height 951mm,

That is a full on motocross bike. It would also need extensive modification for trail riding and would also always require a LOT of maintenance. i.e new oil every ride, check valves every 15 hours, new piston+valves every 100 hours etc...

[wana]

most off them is probably gonna be like bought for fashion accessorys and some gentle trail riding on forest paths or in farmlands ,similar to people who drive giant 4x4' s to commute to work in the office from their gated community in a western suburb

I think that is besides the point. They should still be good at what they are marketed and intended for. If the majority of people don't use them for their intended purpose, it is besides the point. A top of the line Range Rover is still a very good off road car even if hardly anyone uses them off road.

it comes down to consumer research and marketing ,

how many "mountain bikes " have ever seen a mountain ?

why do they still outsell road bikes in the city ?

simply because the hardcore users get a hardcore vehicle ,the people who wil buy a 100-150k dirt bike will probably use it for going to work

because it looks cooler than a honda wave or something like that

[madjbs]

Yeah but good ones (not just expensive) still work on a mountain don't they, even if people buy them to use in the city. Just like a rangerover still works very well off road, even though they are all used in the city. Once you take away the thing that originally made them trendy (off road ability), then they are nothing but a purposeless pose machine, like a Harley. Hence why you shouldn't buy one if you are actually going to use it off road.

[BigBikeBKK]

if the 250L does not meet one's criteria, one can always buy the CFR250R for THB310,000

weight 104.9 kg, ground clearance 322mm, seat height 951mm,

http://www.aphonda.c...gbike/s_crf.asp

If i buy the L it will be used as a motard, as although it is a fat pig by off-road standards it is svelte compared to the CBR250

Just out of curiosity, if you're looking for a 250cc motard why would you choose a CRF250L over a D-Tracker (KLX250SF)?

You'd need new wheels and tires for the Honda while the Kwacker is ready to go-

I'm planning to get a set of D-Tracker wheels for my KLX for city riding and so that I can race it in future MiniGP D-Tracker events.L

Let the Good Times ROLL!

Tony

[taninthai]

Well based on many peoples views here the

Ktm 640 endure bike must be a crap off road bike as I belive it's around the same weight as the crf

[taichiplanet]

if the 250L does not meet one's criteria, one can always buy the CFR250R for THB310,000

weight 104.9 kg, ground clearance 322mm, seat height 951mm,

http://www.aphonda.c...gbike/s_crf.asp

If i buy the L it will be used as a motard, as although it is a fat pig by off-road standards it is svelte compared to the CBR250

Just out of curiosity, if you're looking for a 250cc motard why would you choose a CRF250L over a D-Tracker (KLX250SF)?

You'd need new wheels and tires for the Honda while the Kwacker is ready to go-

I'm planning to get a set of D-Tracker wheels for my KLX for city riding and so that I can race it in future MiniGP D-Tracker events.L

Let the Good Times ROLL!

Tony

Haven't made my mind up yet. But yeah, whether the CRF or KLX t is a good idea having 2 sets of wheels.

[craigt3365]

A post and an associated reply have been removed from view. Please abide by forum rules and ONLY post in English, unless in the Thai Language forum.

[madjbs]

Well based on many peoples views here the

Ktm 640 endure bike must be a crap off road bike as I belive it's around the same weight as the crf

What bike is that?

[madjbs]

I'm guessing you mean the KTM 690 Enduro-R?

In which case, it is a big bore trail bike made for riding fast on open trails and through the desert etc.., which it is very good at. It also has very high tech suspension.

The CRF-L doesn't have the power for that kind of riding, but it still has the same weight.....So I'm not sure what your point is.

[yannic]

... for my KLX...

Tony, did I miss something, did you buy a KLX already? Where did you buy it from Kawasaki Real in Ramkhamhaeng or Motoaholic in Thonburi? I thought you wanted to wait for the CRF-L?

[taninthai]

I'm guessing you mean the KTM 690 Enduro-R?

In which case, it is a big bore trail bike made for riding fast on open trails and through the desert etc.., which it is very good at. It also has very high tech suspension.

The CRF-L doesn't have the power for that kind of riding, but it still has the same weight.....So I'm not sure what your point is.

Sorry it was just in relation to your comment that said quote "148 kg is pathetic for a bike that is supposed to be used off road"

so it is alright for some bikes to be this heavy and they can be great bikes but in the case of the crf it makes it a complete useless off road/trail bike.

Again people seem to compare this bike to a full on motocross or enduro machine it is not built to be jumpin over table tops or going over huge rocks/trees and yet without riding it or seeing a full spec sheet people here are able to make full judgement against the capabilities of this bike I'm as disappointed about the weight of this bike as everyone else , I was neverexpecting it to be some superlight go anywhere machine and amstill confident it will serve it's purpose forcwhat I want to do with it.

[madjbs]

Yes, my statement was in the context of it being a 250cc machine.... Try and find another 250cc trail bike from the last 20 years which weighs more than this CRF-L...

It is not ok for a 250cc bike to be 147kg, that is waaay heavier than average for a small bore bike.

It is ok for 690cc bike to be 147kg, that is pretty good for a 60+hp big bore bike,

Quite simple isn't?

Nobody is comparing it to a full on motocross or enduro machine, just the KLX, which on paper it doesn't seem to compete with in terms of trail riding ability. The comparisons to the KTM and XT (also trail bikes, but in a different class) were to show you how overweight the CRF-L is for it's size, I wasn't saying it's a competitor to them as it clearly isn't.

[Sydneycraig]

Any 4x4 except the range river is pretty crap off road (going on that top gear episode where none could get up a wet hill) but as someone said its all about the looks and cool factor .... I reckon the crf will get a lot of sales for 90% road use with a few dirt tracks... That would be my usage anyhow !

[BigBikeBKK]

Well based on many peoples views here the

Ktm 640 endure bike must be a crap off road bike as I belive it's around the same weight as the crf

No idea what a "KTM 640 endure" is...

Perhaps you're talking about the KTM 690 Enduro R that I was riding with yesterday?

Would you believe that a stock KTM 690 Enduro R weighs LESS than the new Honda CRF250L and about the same as a KLX250S?

But of course the KTM LC4 engine is a 64 Nm beast, and the Enduro R comes with Brembo brakes and top class WP suspension.

How you can try to compare the KTM 690 Enduro R against bikes like the KLX250 and CRF250L is a mystery to me...

[BigBikeBKK]

... for my KLX...

Tony, did I miss something, did you buy a KLX already? Where did you buy it from Kawasaki Real in Ramkhamhaeng or Motoaholic in Thonburi? I thought you wanted to wait for the CRF-L?

Ha ha! I got tired of waiting and when a KLX with Bill Blue 351cc Big Bore Kit and pumper carb showed up in the classifieds I jumped on it!

In addition to the big bore kit and carb it's got a ProCircuit full system, ProTaper bars, bash plate and handguards- and with only 6000km on the clock it's about as perfect a KLX as I could ask for.

Now that we know some basic facts about the CRF250L such as it's heavy weight and it's lack of ground clearance I'm even more happy to have scored the KLX. Fun fun bike, but I'm brand new to dirt bikes and it's going to take a while for me to learn how to play this new game!

Brilliant fun and man, what a workout!

Happy Trails!

Tony

[taninthai]

Wasn't comparing them just asking why 1 bike is considered totally unsuitable for off road at this weight and yet other bikes are considered great for off road use at the same weight your mate looks like he has no problems with a bike at 147 kg I really don't see how you can completely write off a bike that you have never ridden and because it's 9 kg heavier than it's nearest competition

[BigBikeBKK]

Wasn't comparing them just asking why 1 bike is considered totally unsuitable for off road at this weight and yet other bikes are considered great for off road use at the same weight your mate looks like he has no problems with a bike at 147 kg I really don't see how you can completely write off a bike that you have never ridden and because it's 9 kg heavier than it's nearest competition

Where did I "write off" the Honda CRF250L?

This is what I said:

You'd have to define "better" before you declare the the KLX is the better bike

If "better" means, less weight, more clearance, better suspension and more available mods then yeah, I think the KLX has a definite advantage.

But if you you define better as cheaper and more fuel efficient then the Honda CRF250L is probably the "better" of the two.

For my intended use the KLX is clearly the "better" bike. That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the CRF250L (though I still the the weight is rather shocking)...

[madjbs]

really don't see how you can completely write off a bike that you have never ridden and because it's 9 kg heavier than it's nearest competition

Well the KLX was already pushing it weight wise for my liking, It was borderline whether I wanted one or not. So yes, a bike which is 9kg even heavier is written off in my books. If you are not bothered about off road performance, go ahead and get one.

If I was buying a dirt bike which was 140kg+, I would expect it to have 600cc+ and 50hp+ for ripping up open trails and fire roads.

[taninthai]

You obviously are looking to do a bit more hardcore off roading than myself buy the bike that best suits your needs and above all have fun,fun,fun

[madjbs]

Exactly!

I am all for using what you have got, but if I have the choice of buying new, I would rather pick the right tool for the job.

I used to ride trails on a XT600 I had bought for an off road tour, I took it up some fairly difficult stuff but it was extremely hard work and tiring. If you make one wrong move on a big heavy bike on anything slightly technical it will have you off in an instant, and it will hurt! It was fun at the time but I certainly wouldn't have bought one just for trail riding.

[deemon]

Today I have the opportunity to drive the GPX zf 250 on the Moto-X track.

It was a really good bike compere to price, the suspension work like a dream and the power was explosive compare to the Kawasaki KLX. I have no clue how the bike can be so much quicker when the (compression is lower than the Klx) LOL.

To make it clear the Klx is to drive a buss compare to the GPX.

I do 1.43 with the Gpx, 1.59 with Klx(330cc kit and WP) and 1.41 with my crf 250-2010(Öhlins)... just for the records.

I am looking forward to take the crf250f to the test.