ADVrider (
-   Thumpers (
-   -   Can't deside....Buy Both (

ggamster 08-12-2012 06:23 AM

Can't deside....Buy Both
Justed wanted those in the CRF250L and WR250R debate to be aware I am taking delivery of both this month. I will be giving side by side comparison as soon as they come home.

AustinJake 08-12-2012 07:02 AM

Isn't there a near $2000 difference in these 2? The Honda's rear shock has no adjustment for anything? Is this even a contest?

kirbi69 08-12-2012 09:12 AM

i bet he likes the honda better :)

Off the grid 08-12-2012 12:12 PM

Basically the same most Japanese bikes are.

ggamster 08-15-2012 11:07 AM

Ok, well judging from some of the above post I can see some of you think this is a stupid comparison. However I feel that this is an acceptable one. The WR was a 2008 model built in Japan (I think) and designed to fill a gap in a market which it did and they knew the price point they had to meet. Along comes Honda with there version. Made in Thailand. This gave them cheaper manufacturing expense pull the use of the CBR250 engine already in use and developed vs Yamaha's single bike power plant. Again lowering the cost. They defiantly used cheaper suspension and frame material. Hitting this $4500 price point.

With that said. I now have both bikes in my possession. 0 miles on the Honda and 110 on the WR Here is what I have to say thus far.

The Honda:
Has a much higher level of fit and finish. The plastics fit better. The quality of said plastics seam to be higher. The controls are much more modern looking and have better feeling as well as the instrumentation. I like the head light better as well as the grips and feel of the seat. On the road I think the Honda will be a better bike, but will save that report until I have 600 miles on both. I can say the the Honda feels lighter than the WR when lifting it off the side stand.

The Yamaha:
We know most of the things about this bike already, but basically all of the off-road bits are nicer. I think the WR will win in the off-road department for sure. I love the aluminum frame and the suspension. It has better tires for DS and overall the WR just looks way cooler IMHO.

I will report back after a little riding on the Honda tomorrow.

bobfab 08-15-2012 12:19 PM


Originally Posted by ggamster (Post 19366599)
Ok, well judging from some of the above post I can see some of you think this is a stupid comparison.

Absolutely not. Myself and i am sure many others are interested in hearing comparisons about these bikes from the same individual rider.

Very interested.

ggamster 08-16-2012 06:53 AM

So in the middle of my review my computer shuts off and I loose my whole review of last nights rides. Now I have to do it all over again.

I rode both bikes now. I have 125 miles on the WR and 39 miles on the Honda. I took both bikes out back to back over the same little trial coarse I have at the house. This consist of a field with 3" chunks of hard clay. It is one of the roughest things I have ridden. It also includes a large creek crossing, double track, black top, and gravel. The landscape is rolling hills.
I will brake down the positives and negatives of each bike thus far then give my conclusions on the bikes as of now.

Both engines are unique. The WR feels more like a woods bike dirt bike engine but tuned down. You have a lower RPM performance and an upper RPM performance. As the RPMs the power of the engine ramps up. The Honda is different. It sounds like an electric motor and runs like one as well. This is the quietest engine of this displacement I have aaaaahhhh not heard? The power delivery is much more linear. I would call it user friendly. It isn't my style but it will be great for a beginner that could get a bit intimidated by ramping engine out put. The WR feels tough and the Honda feels civil. You can basically not give the Honda any gas and just dump the clutch and the bike will start to go where as the WR will just shut off. At higher speeds the WR's engine is much better. It feels more alive. The Honda has some torque but I just don't feel the horsepower. I will say the Honda seems to pull better at slower speed but I think if ridden hard the WR will walk away, not run but walk away.

Both bikes shift incredibly well. I have no complaints about ether one once underway. However I have noticed almost every stop I came to and put the bike in neutral. When I wanted to go again and tried to put the bike in first, I would have to let the clutch out, pull it back in, then push it down into first. I couldn't ever just pull the clutch in and down shift.

Front Suspension:
Again there is a big difference in the feel. The Yamaha feels stronger/more subsatantal, like it is tough. The Honda feels "nice". On the clay balls at slow speeds the front of the honda was so smooth. On the road at all speeds the honda was so smooth. Through the creek at slow speeds the honda was so smooth. On the clay slow speeds the Yamaha was a bit ruff. On the road at all speeds the Yamaha was a bit rougher. Through the creek at slow speeds the Yamaha was a bit ruff. Up the speeds a bit and things change. The Yamaha when attacking the terrain is smoother and just feels more planted and ready for more. The Honda kind of felt like "thanks, that was fun, but can we be done with this".

Rear Suspension:
Now much to say here. On road the rear suspension of the honda just rides much smoother. Off-road the rear suspension just...well...SUCKS! The Yamaha is rougher on the small bumps but on anything big is is much nicer. Don't jump the CRF please!

Yamaha brakes worked great when I left the dealership and always perform perfect. The brakes on the Honda when I first took it out for the ride just didn't work. As I have been riding it and working them over they have gotten a little better. I still can't lock up the rear on gravel but it is getting stronger. I don't think they will ever compare however.

No contest. The Honda has this all the way. The display is larger and easier to read. There is a fuel gauge. It look more expensive overall and I just like it better. With that said neither bike has a tach and that drives me nuts. No gear indicator ether. When you are at speed over fifty and you can't hear the engine, you don't have a tach, you don't have a gear indicator, it gets frustrating trying to remember/count your gears all the time. That is going to be on of the things I get for both bikes

Fuel Economy:

This will be somewhat subjective due to size. I am 6'1" and 190lbs so that is what I have to go by. The Honda is much more cramped. I feel all bottled up on the bike. I am sure it would be great for someone a bit shorter just for my long arms and 35" inseam I feel like I am riding a kids bike. My feet are much further forward on the Honda. The seat is much more comfy on the Honda but that stupid strap going over the seat in right on my butt bones. I will be cutting it off but it has horrible placement. I love how the bars are higher in relation to the seat on the Honda. I am always putting risers on my dirt bikes and I don't think I would on the Honda. The Honda overall feels like you are setting in a chair where as the Yamaha feel like you are on a comfortable dirt bike. The Yamaha is in an attack position where as the Honda is in a nice position.

I can't tell much difference. The ergonomics is what I notice much more than the weight. I would like to note that the exhaust can on the Honda is huge. It looks like it weighs 8 lbs more than that of the Yamaha. Also the Honda carries an extra .5 quart of oil. The tail section of the Honda is a monster. If you were to switch out the cans and do a fender eliminator I think the weights would be within five lbs. Even if you don't I don't think you can tell much difference.

I notice the WR feels more planted. It 60mph the Honda has the "Dumb and Dumber" wiggle if you rock side to side shifting your weight or anything. I think lowering the bike of the bike will help this but it can be a bit unnerving.

The Honda is a "nice" bike. Kind of like a pinky up type of lets go ride Margo type of bike. It will get you there. It will be comfy. It will get there cheaply. The WR wants to be ridden more aggressively. If you are a smaller rider and most of what you ride will be street, gravel, fire roads and mild double track. The Honda is your go to bike. If you are tall, conversation is over. You have to get the WR. If you ride hard and are not sure of what you will encounter you have to get the WR. If you want to attack you have to get the WR.

Eflyguy 08-16-2012 07:15 AM

Great stuff, thanks for posting the comparison!

SBG 08-16-2012 07:44 AM


Originally Posted by kirbi69 (Post 19342063)
i bet he likes the honda better :)

Not if it's about performance. Honda wins price, that's about it.

byron555 08-16-2012 07:55 AM

This is what I wanted to know
Thanks for the write up... My dad had a WRr, and a CRF230L (he's 61 years old) and sold me the WR (which I love) He really wanted something in between the two. FI with good hwy and better off road, but lower seat and broader power characteristics in the motor.

I had a feeling that weight wise, the bikes would feel similar... For 2k less it sounds like honda has a winner... In a new purchase comparison. The WRr does feel tough, I've put it down several times, gone over large jumps etc, it just takes it. ( please note, I am not as aggressive at the KTM level )

ggamster 08-17-2012 06:39 AM

I took both bikes on the single track last night. I did about 10 miles on each. The honda did better than I thought. It is no WR but if you don't mide to go works. The WR was amazing for a bike that you can put thousands of miles on. I took it in the real off-road. The only problem is the tires. They do ok but could do better. 606's when these wear out. I was shocked about the CRF. I didnT think it would make it but no problems. Just washes out a bit at speed.

Subaru297 08-17-2012 01:33 PM

Does the WRR have any mods on it yet that would affect the engine comparison?

Thanks for the write-up!

kirbi69 08-17-2012 02:13 PM

but neither one of theese bikes would come close to comparing with my street legal xr600r. which has double the hp and 2.5x as much torque and weighs 20 lbs less

joec63 08-17-2012 02:15 PM


Originally Posted by kirbi69 (Post 19384266)
but neither one of theese bikes would come close to comparing with my street legal xr600r. which has double the hp and 2.5x as much torque and weighs 20 lbs less

Straw man

8gv 08-17-2012 02:33 PM

Dibbs on the one you don't want to keep.

Times are GMT -7.   It's 01:59 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2015