Minimalist Touring Thread (250cc and under)

[NJ-Brett]

I think there is some variability in the power figures posted.
I know the TU250 gets a LOT better after its broken in at around 3000 miles, and if you dyno a new bike, its going to show a low output.
There is also the power curve, peak power vs broad power output, and the TU is very odd in that it has a lot of power (for a 250) starting at 4000 rpm building slowly to about 7600 rpm where it flattens out to the 8500 red line.
What that means in the real world is good speed on the road wiithout high rpm's.
Its also one engine you can do whatever you want with, without any concern about the engine.
The engine runs smooth and cool, so you can scream the thing across the US and back without worry or discomfort.
And even running at a low (for a 250) 5000 rpm you have no problems doing a real 70+ mph.
Even running at 85 and 7500 rpm is nice and the bike feels like it will do it all day for months.
Unlike some bikes, the TU seems to love heat, the hotter it is out, the better the motor seems to run.

Its NOT a dual sport though, and it sucks in the rough dirt, the forks and 18 inch front wheel do not like rough stuff at all, plus, the way the engine is made to get a lot of mid range power makes it impossible to get much if any more power out of the bike. Airbox and exhaust mods seem to do nothing, but the FI system works very well, not feeling lean even if you do mods.
For any off road use, its very risky, the brake and shifter stick WAY out past the motor, the gas tank is wider and tends to get dents, the headlight would break, levers snap off, etc.
That big headlight is the best I ever had on any bike for night riding though.
That is a shame, as the motor is great in the dirt, nice power curve, and the bike is fairly light.

When I had my xt250, I do not think I could get the bike much over 70 mph under most situations, and it did not like real high rpm's a lot. It did not seem happy at higher speeds, but was one tough bike in the dirt.

The XT250 motor sort of reminded me of the TW 200 motor, as not liking high rpms for long.

Originally Posted by Nanabijou

To back up some of the hp claims - here are some links to reviews and rear-wheel dyno figures.

Both the CRF250L and KLX250S produced around 20 hp at the rear wheel on Motorcycle.com's dyno.

http://www.motorcycle.com/shoot-outs/2013-honda-crf250l-vs-2013-kawasaki-klx250s-video-91483.html?page=2

The WR250X (which uses the same engine as the WR250R) produced almost 28 hp on the same dyno.

http://www.motorcycle.com/shoot-outs/quarterliter-supermoto-shootout-87985.html

The Suzuki TU 250X yielded a little over 16 hp from the rear wheel on Cycle World's dyno.

http://www.cycleworld.com/2009/06/15/riding-impression-2009-suzuki-tu250x/

The XT250 yielded about the same hp as the TU 250X on the same Cycle World dyno.

http://www.cycleworld.com/2008/07/15/frugal-fuelers-yamaha-xt250-first-look/

Mike

[Speedo66]

My son had a Super Sherpa, and after back to back riding both bikes (XT225), my impression was that the XT was lighter, and had much better brakes. Although the SS had discs front and rear, they just didn't do much. The rear brake actually seemed stronger than the front.
The SS had a nice digital speedo set up though.

Other nice things about the SS were there were no weak rear spoke issues, and no starting issues, both of which the XT has in spades.

[GlennR]

Originally Posted by Speedo66

Other nice things about the SS were there were no weak rear spoke issues, and no starting issues, both of which the XT has in spades.

The XT225's cold starting problems are easily cured by the "3 turns out" of the pilot jet screw that is common knowledge on the XT225 threads. Makes the bike very easy to start cold, and only needs about 15 seconds of choke, instead of the 5 minutes from the factory. It was an emmisions thing...

[JerryH]

Originally Posted by GlennR

Hey Jerry,

We need to compare milk crates somtime.

I got lucky and found a black one to match my black Bryan Swens rack. I wish it was a little bigger, because my chainsaw is a tight fit! I'd like to get something a bit fancier for road trips, but I mostly blaze the backroads & trails close to home. The milk crate is fine for trips to the grocery & hardware stores.


Brett,

You make a lot of good points about the various bikes. I don't really mind water cooled bikes, but that is what makes them heavier, and the FI too. Personally, I'm happy with simple air cooled & carburated engines.

Did they finally put electric starters on the KLR250? That's the same bike are the Super Sherpa, right? I have a buddy that recently bought one, but I haven't had the chance to ride it yet. Extra valves are a good way to gain some Hp. Yamaha even figured out how to shove 5 into a head.

I'll post a picture as soon as I find the cord for the camera. I got it at a place called The Container Store. There is one about 20 miles away, but it is a chain store, so there are a lot of them all over. It is an exact duplicate of the real thing, except it does not say "property of such and such dairy" My XT has a Reflex blue Clarke tank and side covers, and white fairing and fenders. I found a blue one that is almost an exact match. It's not fancy, but it was cheap, and you would be amazed at what you can put in and mount all over the outside of a milk crate. I put a bungee net across the top, and can tie my sleeping bag and tent down on top of that. I can also use a fairly large saddlebag on the left, but the pipe gets in the way on the right. I have never taken a trip over 1000 miles on it, and don't plan to. The XT225 is a great bike, but it has the same seat problem as all other dual sports, and I'm getting to old to spend several days in a row on it. I still plan to use it for several years for local trips of 200-300 miles back out into the desert, or the forest up north. AZ has thousands of miles of trails to ride on, and lots of good camping places.

[Keithert]

I'm in the market for a used Yamaha TW200 or XT225. Can't wait to try some minimal touring!

[CMS]

Klay,

Looking at an earlier post I see you have seen the GW250. Your the first one I heard to view the GW. Is it the same as the GZ? I 'm aware of the changes but the bike it's self ,smaller or larger? and the seating position is it a little cramped as the GZ? Old style maybe ,but I still put a lot of miles on the GZ,as you on your DR 200. I overlook the bikes limits and enjoy the ride. I value your opinion. I hope to see one at the upcoming bike show. CMS [Terry]

[Klay]

Originally Posted by CMS

Klay,

Looking at an earlier post I see you have seen the GW250. Your the first one I heard to view the GW. Is it the same as the GZ? I 'm aware of the changes but the bike it's self ,smaller or larger? and the seating position is it a little cramped as the GZ? Old style maybe ,but I still put a lot of miles on the GZ,as you on your DR 200. I overlook the bikes limits and enjoy the ride. I value your opinion. I hope to see one at the upcoming bike show. CMS [Terry]

The GW is completely different from a GZ. The seating position of the GW is more of a standard configuration, while the GZ is feet-forward cruiser-style. The motors are completely different...GW is a fuel-injected liquid-cooled parallel twin, and the GZ is a carbureted air-cooled single.

The GW has a bigger frame and doesn't feel small like a GZ does. I didn't like the seat on the GW, though...I could tell it would be cramped with my riding suit on. I'm back to looking at the TU250...I may buy one next spring.

[frog13]

Originally Posted by DYNOBOB

Very nice setup!


I setup the KLX for my 70yr old dad to go w/ me to CO/UT last Sept. Priceless memories. It will hopefully go to Prudhoe Bay in 2014.

Bolam Pass


Ophir Pass


Clear Lake Rd


American Flag Mountain


Heading to campsite on White Rim Trail


Potash Rd




Hardscrabble campsite on WRT after some serious muddy sand.







.

DYNOBOB.............looks like you had a great time.

[grubbie]

Originally Posted by Klay

The GW is completely different from a GZ. The seating position of the GW is more of a standard configuration, while the GZ is feet-forward cruiser-style. The motors are completely different...GW is a fuel-injected liquid-cooled parallel twin, and the GZ is a carbureted air-cooled single.

The GW has a bigger frame and doesn't feel small like a GZ does. I didn't like the seat on the GW, though...I could tell it would be cramped with my riding suit on. I'm back to looking at the TU250...I may buy one next spring.

Hope you have a dual sport to go with it, gonna need it for the DDSR rally next spring!

[Klay]

Originally Posted by grubbie

Hope you have a dual sport to go with it, gonna need it for the DDSR rally next spring!

I'm hanging on to all my DR bikes...200, 350, 650.

[frog13]

Originally Posted by NJ-Brett

I think there is some variability in the power figures posted.
I know the TU250 gets a LOT better after its broken in at around 3000 miles, and if you dyno a new bike, its going to show a low output.
There is also the power curve, peak power vs broad power output, and the TU is very odd in that it has a lot of power (for a 250) starting at 4000 rpm building slowly to about 7600 rpm where it flattens out to the 8500 red line.
What that means in the real world is good speed on the road wiithout high rpm's.
Its also one engine you can do whatever you want with, without any concern about the engine.
The engine runs smooth and cool, so you can scream the thing across the US and back without worry or discomfort.
And even running at a low (for a 250) 5000 rpm you have no problems doing a real 70+ mph.
Even running at 85 and 7500 rpm is nice and the bike feels like it will do it all day for months.
Unlike some bikes, the TU seems to love heat, the hotter it is out, the better the motor seems to run.

Its NOT a dual sport though, and it sucks in the rough dirt, the forks and 18 inch front wheel do not like rough stuff at all, plus, the way the engine is made to get a lot of mid range power makes it impossible to get much if any more power out of the bike. Airbox and exhaust mods seem to do nothing, but the FI system works very well, not feeling lean even if you do mods.
For any off road use, its very risky, the brake and shifter stick WAY out past the motor, the gas tank is wider and tends to get dents, the headlight would break, levers snap off, etc.
That big headlight is the best I ever had on any bike for night riding though.
That is a shame, as the motor is great in the dirt, nice power curve, and the bike is fairly light.

When I had my xt250, I do not think I could get the bike much over 70 mph under most situations, and it did not like real high rpm's a lot. It did not seem happy at higher speeds, but was one tough bike in the dirt.

The XT250 motor sort of reminded me of the TW 200 motor, as not liking high rpms for long.

Brett: With a Feet per minute, (NOT rpm) calculation of the TW engine,I think you may be mistaken on the not liking the high rpm thing. I could be mistaking what your saying however?. I'll try and find the FPM calc..

[ALinUTAH]

I've put 8500 miles on an XT250 in the past two summers. Some of that was highway cruising unfortunately. Thought I'd chime in about what it is and is not capable of on the highway.

Flat ground cruising along with no head wind I put the speedo between 65-70 and go for hours. The speedo is off 10% so that's an actual speed of 60 or a little more. Fine for deserted 2-lane blacktops. If there is any traffic you'll be getting passed or pulling off and looking at your map for an alternate. I plan my trips for dirt roads and smaller highways that I know don't have traffic.

On the mountain passes, or with a headwind, I downshift to 4th and put the speedo on 55, which is 50 actual. I've ridden like that for hours and the motor seems to just purr along, altho it will use some oil doing that. Not sure what the revs are in that situation but it's surely more than cruising in 5th gear at 60mph. In 4th gear I have looked down and found myself over 60 so it's not at redline yet. I would guess 7k.

I can't get it over about 75 indicated on flat ground. On a downhill I can get it to about 82-83 indicated. Most of the time I'm cruising forest roads in 3rd or 4th gear so it works for me just fine.

This is all with about 200 lbs of rider/gear and 50 lbs strapped on the back. Most of my riding is at high elev so I'm down on power a little.

It's a fun bike but not for people who are in a hurry. -al

[1994klr250]

Originally Posted by DYNOBOB

Very nice setup!


I setup the KLX for my 70yr old dad to go w/ me to CO/UT last Sept. Priceless memories. It will hopefully go to Prudhoe Bay in 2014.

Bolam Pass


Ophir Pass


Clear Lake Rd

Excellent pictures! I'd love to see that klx250 on a trip to Prudhoe Bay. I rode to Prudhoe bay this past summer on my F800GS. If I would of had the time I would of taken my klr250. Its great seeing little bikes on long trips. How did the klx250 do at altitude? Any starting or running issues?

[NJ-Brett]

Not sure why, but the TU with the same power, or less, will do 85 mph (actual) on the interstate in traffic.
I have done 50 miles at a time at that speed quite a few times.
The cars set up a big draft which pulls me along, and maybe tires come into play, you have to loose some speed with dual sport tires.
No traffic, no wind, 80 mph is likely tops, but the motor and the bike is very happy there, no oil use, no noise, low oil temps.
So the XT and TU sound close, with the TU having street tires, being lower (less wind drag?).


As far as the TW200 goes, it made noises at higher rpm's letting me know it was not happy.
It does not hold much oil, runs hot (not a plated bore), and an aftermarket oil cooler is a popular mod for people that run them hard.
Short bursts were fine, say in the dirt, but on the street I would get what sounded like ignition knock, and I had increased the main jet a step and shimmed the needle.

Originally Posted by ALinUTAH

I've put 8500 miles on an XT250 in the past two summers. Some of that was highway cruising unfortunately. Thought I'd chime in about what it is and is not capable of on the highway.

Flat ground cruising along with no head wind I put the speedo between 65-70 and go for hours. The speedo is off 10% so that's an actual speed of 60 or a little more. Fine for deserted 2-lane blacktops. If there is any traffic you'll be getting passed or pulling off and looking at your map for an alternate. I plan my trips for dirt roads and smaller highways that I know don't have traffic.

On the mountain passes, or with a headwind, I downshift to 4th and put the speedo on 55, which is 50 actual. I've ridden like that for hours and the motor seems to just purr along, altho it will use some oil doing that. Not sure what the revs are in that situation but it's surely more than cruising in 5th gear at 60mph. In 4th gear I have looked down and found myself over 60 so it's not at redline yet. I would guess 7k.

I can't get it over about 75 indicated on flat ground. On a downhill I can get it to about 82-83 indicated. Most of the time I'm cruising forest roads in 3rd or 4th gear so it works for me just fine.

This is all with about 200 lbs of rider/gear and 50 lbs strapped on the back. Most of my riding is at high elev so I'm down on power a little.

It's a fun bike but not for people who are in a hurry. -al

[DYNOBOB]

Originally Posted by 1994klr250

Excellent pictures! I'd love to see that klx250 on a trip to Prudhoe Bay. I rode to Prudhoe bay this past summer on my F800GS. If I would of had the time I would of taken my klr250. Its great seeing little bikes on long trips. How did the klx250 do at altitude? Any starting or running issues?

Thanks guys, it was a dream trip.

I switched the main from 120 to 115 and dropped the needle a notch. Even so, it got breathless/powerless at 12,500', but so did I. Always started easily though.


.