What's up everyone? I had an interesting thought that came to mind when I was looking up stats on my recent purchase of a 250F. I noticed a dry weight of 230lbs, and Hp/Torque figures that were south of 40. I also noticed higher compression ratios, and higher rpm for max hp and torque figures. 15-20 years ago, a 250F was barely over 200lbs dry, reached peak power figures at a lower rpm, lower compression ratio, and was carbureted. I understand that most modern FI bikes have a battery, more wiring, o2 sensors and E-start. But does all of that really come at a cost of 25lbs or more? Dare I say it, but is it possible that we went backwards for a little bit and now we are playing catch up again? Maybe I am missing something. Anyone out there? That is more knowledgeable on the subject than I, that could illuminate on what I cannot see? lol
So what makes you think they are "so slow" are you that core that you dont have enough power ?
You're smokin' heavily if you think the 250F's from 20 years ago are anywhere near the new ones.
As soon as I read this post, I thought no way are they that much heavier. I currently ride the lightest 250F, Triumph at 221 lbs. I went and looked up 03 YZ250F and 07 RMZ250 (both bikes I had back in the day) and they weighed 206 lbs and 203 lbs respectively. I actually did not realize the 250F's have put on weight over the years.
The extra weight of the e-start is 100% worth it, especially compared to the early yz250f.
The Shop
DeCal Works Huge Plastic Inventory of UFO and Polisport kits.
Free shipping: VITALMX
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
I rode a 5-valve 2003 yz250f in the woods this summer a few times. Took about 100 years to kick it over if I killed it, and abused the hell out of the relic hot start lever. We’re having fun.
I fully agree! I was just amazed they were that much lighter. Stalling those era bikes when they were hot was not fun.
They weren't that light. The spec sheets used to list the bike's dry weight. No oil, fluid, gas, etc.
The 2005 has a wet weight of 230lbs, the 2025 has a wet weight of 231lbs. The main differences are e-start, EFI and one was a time bomb and the other isn't.
Maybe it's "slow" because you too have added 25+ lbs over the years?
Modern chassis are more nimble than ever while in motion. An early YZ250f feels way heavier than a modern one.
Picking one up, or while in really tight single track, modern bikes feel heavy because they are. But while in motion, they feel light and nimble, so much so that the last 2 generations of Honda feel like a 197 lb 125. We're also talking 44HP instead of 36.
This can’t be a real post.
Remember checking valves every 20 hours and kicking that fucker til you were about dead because it wouldn't start? Fun times lol.
Although I did sink a 2004 Yz250f in a river in Moab and we got it back running that same day, that bike was pretty much a tank.
How much you think is “too heavy” for a 250F?
My 04 Honda, when I wanted to kill the engine I would do it by pulling the hot start lever. Any other way and it was an event to restart.
TM
Depends. I’m 195 w/o gear and as an old Vet rider a 250 is just right for me. Hammaker is too big at 189. I think the sweet spot is 140-160 or so if you are fast.
This happens every Friday night. 🍺😜
😂😂😂 that's actually a good one dude.
i rode a new KX250 4 stroke and its seriously as fast as a 2 stroke 250. Easily. Around 2020 250s started going from 38 hp to 44. I rode a full PC 2011 KX250 F before with like $5000 into the engine and a stock 2025 would smoke it
Pit Row
That title was to gain traction as well as help drive a great discussion on the topic of how far bikes have actually evolved. I see that it got your attention. Did some of the advancements infact cause some detriment to the performance aspect of bikes? Fast can be a simple formula when you look at it objectively.
Trade the 250 in for a 350 or 450 🤷♂️
Dry weight without gas for modern bikes put them in the 220-230lbs range. I am fully aware of how they weighed bikes back then. I owned enough of them over the years.
Being stuck at work on a Friday makes the brain wander and ponder lol
Lol, ill admit, I'm not as lean as I was 20 years ago. I was a teen back then. I'm training to get back to my old riding weight. Buying another 250f is going to be a tool to help me achieve my goals. I've got the 450 to haul my fat ass when I'm feeling lazy.
Focusing on peak HP is a bad move... much more to a bike than doing a dyno test.
I agree, let's expand on the topic. What other factors would you say are imperative to defining the evolution of the modern 250f when comparing to their predecessors? History shows that manufacturers have made mistakes and have gone backwards from time to time.
I wanted to also note, I love my 21 kx250f. But I've noticed that she's heavy. Heavier than what I remember my older 250f's being and not as flickable. I had a 04 yz250f, 06 crf250r, and a 07 rmz250 for reference.
My 01 yz250f may have been lighter on the scale but I’ll take my 24 KX over it all day long. Never at a lack of power and doesn’t feel as heavy as that 01 did. I’m 195 also and never have gotten off the track wishing I had more power. Fast and slow are relative terms in most conversations. “I was third gear wide open” is heard very often but throttle position data shows throttle never went past 57% at any point during the day…
Seth weighs 189??
Idk what to say here.
Bad post. Modern 250fs absolutely rip.
Post a reply to: Why are modern 250F's so slow?