Posts
27442
Joined
7/22/2007
Location
St Helens, OR
US
I know that KTM and Husky produces a 350 , but it revs like a 250F and produces something like 56 HP or something like that. I also am not sure why they designed the motor to be like that? It produces 4500 rpm " More " than a 450 , and it produces most of that hp at the very peak of the rev's. I know their great bikes....just don't understand the reasoning behind the power curve?
250F - 40hp
450F - 55-60 hp
I always wondered why that gap is so big? Also seems like a logical gap to fill in the 4 stroke power range , wouldn't you think? A 50 hp - 210lbs - 220lbs 4 stroke sure seems like it would fit a lot of riders.
250F - 40hp
450F - 55-60 hp
I always wondered why that gap is so big? Also seems like a logical gap to fill in the 4 stroke power range , wouldn't you think? A 50 hp - 210lbs - 220lbs 4 stroke sure seems like it would fit a lot of riders.
"I ride the big fuckers.
You know ? Big ones.
The really big fuckers. Yeah."
"Vincent Black Shadow.
We're with the, uh, factory team."
The Shop
I assume you mean a detuned 350? Depends on what you are after. Probably a great play and trail and practice bike, but not such a great race bike. I'm sure you are confused as to why the power curve is the way it is, but KTM spent years and big $ to develop what is now their top selling power plant size. You could always convert it to an EXC engine and have what you want.
I bet it's in that ballpark
I reckon it would cost a pretty penny, but it's not like the option isn't there. It's all about how you want to spend your money.
A 2017 FC250 makes 44.38HP, throw in a Full Factory 4.1/Yosh, VP, a head job, and you're probably right at 50HP.
another buddy has an '15 rmz450. the '17 350 is noticeably softer right off idle and a little softer off the bottom. in the mid it is also a little weaker. top end feels as good or better than the yellow bike.
these are not just my opinions but also the opinions of the owners of the red and yellow bikes. the friend that owns the zook has a deposit on a '17 husky 350
don't ride the 350 as high in the revs and it does exactly what you are asking..... its is literally right in between a 250 and 450..... and that "extra 4500rpm" is what makes the bike feel like it has a power band that is twice as wide as most other bikes. it is crazy how long that bike will pull for and literally never falls on its face till it hits the rev limiter (something i don't find often).
don't tell me you are already unhappy with that 125 of yours.... if you wanted 50hp without 13,500rpm you should have bought the quarter liter smoker.
The 50hp 4 stroke question was just that...a question. I wasn't sure why they produced a motor package like that. I have a couple friends with 16' KTM 350's , but I haven't ridden one yet. They still feel wide , even compared to the Husky to me though.
@gjBruny....No I am not sick of the 125 , as I just picked it up Saturday and haven't been able to even ride it yet. And....my plan is to still get the TC 250. I just couldn't get one through motosports at this time. Who knows , I may not be able to wait until August for a 2018....I may get a 17' from a different shop if I feel I need one right now. Or spend most of the summer re-learning the 125's again. I change my mind 3 times a week.
nothing sounds like a pissed off 125. not sure if you made it to washougal this last summer but that 125 race brought back so many memories. crowd was louder at the start of that race than any race i think i have ever been to.... don't think i have ever seen a crown with as many wall to wall smiles either when those bikes were screaming around the track.
Pit Row
To me though, I seem to agree. I don't want the power of a modern 450 and a 250f is not enough, and KTM's 350 is just tuned the opposite of the way I'd want it. I guess that's why my 250 two stroke is the perfect answer to this question.
The first KTM 350s, were around the 50HP mark. Not good enough, it was deemed. And it wasn't, given that it was a rev box with not enough down in the rev range where the average buyer of them wanted to ride. Now they seem to have a accepted (among tests/ dynos)level of around 56/ 58 HP at, of course, fairly high revs. That's what smaller 4ts depend on, Revs, More Revs, and Effing More Revs.
The KTM 350 is not a particularly short stroke engine, at, somewhere around 58/ 58.2mm stroke. I honestly thought they, KTM, might end up bringing them to the 400 level. Hasn't happened, and they've kept that marked distinction between the 350 'screamer', and the now very light weight 450. They cover most bases with those two.
Honda, with their 'easy to use' policy, had their recent 450s around the 51/ 53 HP mark, according to most tests/dynos. They seemed to get crucified for being too mellow. I found them quite a lovely engine, for my Off Road use, bar the piss poor clutch, and their interminable bloody 'flame out' issues. How they didn't sort that out as std, is beyond me, but Honda do seem to be Masters of the fuck up.
It appears with the '17 450 they've got up into the El Bruto level, while still being a 'nice' engine - but still have a sus clutch and a bit of a 'burping' issue still. Que cera, cera......
As others above have said, the 50HP 250F is a reality for even the great unwashed, with the right Bikes and Money to splash about. But it's a delicate, expensive thing. Moto3 in GP Road Racing is showing that low / mid 5Os HP levels at reasonable rev levels can be achieved with 250fs, but it's never going to be cheap.
The company that would make a genuine , semi big capacity( as against just the overbored 250s that 300s are), modern 2T, could sell quite a few. It could be easy to use, easy to tune to be 'nastier' for those that want a 'hit', and reliable. But that, seems to be too logical a thing to do. A few brands have shown that there's sales success to be had, with Bikes that ostensibly have no class. I wish someone would be a bit brave(r) in their marketing. Then we really might have all bases covered.
Oh yea, forgot, IMHO.
Edit: On a side note, I had a 1990 RM250 years ago that I had ported to provide much more bottom and midrange than stock, added a 12 oz. flywheel and that bike was the smoothest 250 I had ever ridden. Power and torque was so linear that it WAS like an electric motor. Wish I still had it.
If you make it bigger like MXA has talked or more of a torque motor you may lose the magic that it has.
If you want 50hp just rev it to 11,500 instead of 13,000.
I'm reading all I can on the 2017 yz250XF or yz 250X and transitioning into the off road / single track stuff and moving away from pure moto, maybe the occasional ride day.
I rode a 150sx on a tight indoor sx track last night and it may work also....
One thing I know, I've bought my last 450.
Post a reply to: Why no 50hp 4 strokes? 250 450...big gap.