Yamaha WR250R Mega Thread

[wtiger]

Originally Posted by MoBill

First, what skierd said is true...there were some days where no matter what my ass woulda been killing me...

I think it was a 480 mile day, then 300, 300, 250, then on the way home like 250, 300 and 600. The mileage on the way home doesn't add up, because I reached Frederick MD and mutinied against myself.

a month ago we did a 1300 mile route, and i used for the first time sweetcheeks. it was a 30$ mod, one of the cheapest things i have done to the wr, and on the 500 mile last day, never once did i think of my ass. and it didnt bother me doing some rocky dirt roads etc...

something to consider...

[YamRZ350]

Originally Posted by Crawdaddy

I may have them re-do the top of my WR seat. I think I'd prefer a "non-gripper" top for dualsporting. May just have them use the same side panel material on the top.

That's sorta what I did with mine, they put the gripper on the sides and the carbon fiber looking stuff on top. It works well, kinda like the Stompgrip used on sportbikes.

I like the seat, but could do without the crown shape on top.

[justlookin]

My favorite long distance secret weapon. Such a simple device and I even wrap it in cloth and use it for a pillow camping.

[cug]

Hmmmm. How does that help? Is it just the thought of it? Less material == less seams? The urgent desire to go home and see those in real life?

Ah, just search for them with "motorcycle" attached to the query ... but that part is really boring now.

[NED RECK]

OH HELL,,,, LOOKS LIKE I'M A "C".

[wtiger]

Originally Posted by cug

Hmmmm. How does that help? Is it just the thought of it? Less material == less seams? The urgent desire to go home and see those in real life?

Ah, just search for them with "motorcycle" attached to the query ... but that part is really boring now.

hahahahahahaha

i wear the pink ones...

[Stormy Weather]

Originally Posted by cug

Hmmmm. How does that help? Is it just the thought of it? Less material == less seams? The urgent desire to go home and see those in real life?

Ah, just search for them with "motorcycle" attached to the query ... but that part is really boring now.

You just made my day! That.... is.... awesome.

[Cromoth]

Made a heat shield from tire spoons/irons to protect my Giant Loop Coyote.
http://advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=721573
Strong enuf to lift the bike.

Originally Posted by SR1

Yeah, I know about that mount. I even spoke to emerson.biguns a few weeks ago.

I guess I shoulda said "anyone know of a presently available left side Rotopax mount?"

BTW, I plan to use a Coyote bag, so the Wolfman racks won't work for me.

Thanks,
Steve

[Cromoth]

Here's my setup; works well so far. I think it's what you're describing. GL straps hold the drybag on. Any tail plate you want will work, modded to hold the Rotopax. Just bring another strap for stuff that goes on top of Rotopax. Another benefit is I still have my helmet lock & passenger pegs, which are both used.

Originally Posted by SR1

OK, I'm game for this discussion, so I looked at the setup on the Wolfman site and I'd still have to buy the Wolfman racks just to put this Rotopax plate on, right?

Again, I probably worded it wrong, it's not that it won't work, it's that I don't want to put the entire Wolfman rack on just for the luxury of putting a Rotopax canister on the bike. Please clear me up here, thanks.

[SR1]

Originally Posted by skierd

Yes to use the wolfman rotopax rack you'll need at least their left side rack. Why not just bolt the rotopax in the place where the rear rack normally goes like some others have done? Any reason other than the understandable one of price that you're not interested in the wolfman racks?

Skierd, as far as putting it on "where everyone else does" (I already have a plate on the rear fender I could attach it to), I really don't want to have 1-2 gallons that high up. the side mount moves it lower, and yes, the "understandable" reason is THE reason I'm not keen on adding the Woflman rack. More money thrown.

I may just switch to the 4.7 gallon tank and call it good. (prepping for TAT next year, don't want to run dry)

General concerns are:
-I plan to upgrade the exhaust prior to the TAT trip and won't have empirical data on fuel economy with my gearing (13/47),
-Basically I have to step off an airplane, spin the wrenches to finalize my WR for the trip, and get started in 3-7 days (its already close)
-I don't want the bike to become topheavy because I put a 1 or 2 gallon jug at the top rear of the bike on a plate
---Benefit to this is it makes lifting the front wheel over trees slightly easier.
-I don't want to pay for the Wolfman racks, I don't see a big need for that expense.

On the other hand, if I add the 4.7 gallon tank (essentially just for the TAT, then resell it), ability to lift the front wheel may be compromised some, but it does lower and center the additional weight...

Hmmm...

[Saltydog86]

Originally Posted by SR1

-I don't want the bike to become topheavy because I put a 1 or 2 gallon jug at the top rear of the bike on a plate
---Benefit to this is it makes lifting the front wheel over trees slightly easier.


Hmmm...

I use my bike on single track and dual sport rides with the 4.75 and notice no difference in the way it handles. Your already on a 300lb bike, and extra 15 is not going to be a problem.

On a side note...does anybody else run with the air box door off? I took it off for a ride yesterday and liked the bit of extra power from it.

[trav72]

Originally Posted by Saltydog86

I use my bike on single track and dual sport rides with the 4.75 and notice no difference in the way it handles.

Sorry, but I have to call BS on this statement. There is absolutely a noticeable handling difference with the 4.75. Especially on single track. Besides the increase in weight, the big IMS tank has VERY noticeable fuel sloshing that upsets the handling. If you are riding in more wide open spaces going straight, you'll be fine. But anything tighter or more technical, you'll use a lot of energy counter-steering against the sloshing. It got so bad, that I traded the IMS for a Safari. Iit handles much better now.

[Nice_Rumble]

Originally Posted by trav72

Sorry, but I have to call BS on this statement. There is absolutely a noticeable handling difference with the 4.75. Especially on single track. Besides the increase in weight, the big IMS tank has VERY noticeable fuel sloshing that upsets the handling. If you are riding in more wide open spaces going straight, you'll be fine. But anything tighter or more technical, you'll use a lot of energy counter-steering against the sloshing. It got so bad, that I traded the IMS for a Safari. Iit handles much better now.

+1. Sold the Safari. Replaced it with a 3.1 IMS while retaining the OEM looks. If I need more range I slap on a 2 gallon Rotopax on a emerson.biguns side rack.

[SR1]

Which is EXACTLY why I'd love to get one of those emerson.biguns side racks.

I have the 3.1 tank, I would just like to carry a Rotopax...low.\


Is there by chance a tank pannier option I could go with, and carry extra fuel there?

[GSBS]

Originally Posted by SR1

Which is EXACTLY why I'd love to get one of those emerson.biguns side racks.

I have the 3.1 tank, I would just like to carry a Rotopax...low.\


Is there by chance a tank pannier option I could go with, and carry extra fuel there?

Have you considered going to the larger 4.75-gallon IRC tank. I bet you could recoup much of the cost toward the larger tank by selling your 3.1.

I've had mine for a few months now and would never go back to carrying gas. It just seems silly to me now.

My low fuel light typically comes on between 175 and 200 miles and due to the different placement of the fuel pump/sensor, I've still got nearly 1.5 gallons when the light comes on with this tank. To simplify things I just plan on filling up every 225 miles and I have plenty of cushion.

The bike's handling is hardly compromised with the larger tank either. In fact, it's exactly the same size between your legs and only the wings stick out at the front.

To deal with the extra weight of the gas I just make sure I fill up at least a hundred miles before whatever trail I'm going to ride. Then the weight is about the same as with the stock tank filled up to 2 gallons.

Anyway, to me, carrying 1.5 or 2 gallons of fuel on one side using a rear rack is much more of a compromise in balance than the same amount of fuel in the fuel tank that is centered to the bike. And most of the additional fuel is carried low in the wings.

I couldn't be happier with the big IMS tank. It was the final missing piece of the puzzle to make this a great DS, do-anything, go-anywhere bike!

My 2¢