Wold these fit on my ‘97 KX250?

Related:
Create New Tag

4/4/2018 5:27 AM

Stock length is 124mm, and these are 126mm. I called PC to ask them but they weren’t sure. Seems like they would help the bike squat down a little better. What do you guys think?Photo

|

4/4/2018 7:33 AM

If the bolts are the same size then they would fit.
Look up both bikes on an oem parts finder like on Rocky Mountians website. cross reference the bolts.

|

4/4/2018 8:18 AM

Sorry Jeff Emig you can’t go back to 1997 even with all those trick parts.

|

4/4/2018 8:38 AM
Edited Date/Time: 4/4/2018 8:41 AM

The 1997 & 2003 OEM part numbers aren't the same stock (97: 46102-1404 & 46102-1468 for the 03) but it doesn't mean it wouldn't fit but the bolts are different too:

1997:
BOLT,ROD,12X93
92150-1337

2003:
BOLT,14MM,L=99
92153-1133

2mm is quite a bit of change if they fit. It would bring the back of your bike down by 10mm.

My guess is that the 2003 pull rod will not fit a 1997... Both rockers aren't the same either...

If you want to check it out on your own, here is the 1997 parts numbers:

https://www.kawasakipartsguy.com/oemparts/a/kaw/500b24a6f8700223e478db12/rear-suspension

And the 2003:

https://www.kawasakipartsguy.com/oemparts/a/kaw/500b2791f8700223e4791fff/rear-suspension

|

4/4/2018 10:08 AM

crf250pilot wrote:

Sorry Jeff Emig you can’t go back to 1997 even with all those trick parts.

250pilot......oh yeah? What if I just so happen to have a time machine that no one knows about.

|

4/4/2018 10:10 AM

dv12.com wrote:

The 1997 & 2003 OEM part numbers aren't the same stock (97: 46102-1404 & 46102-1468 for the 03) but it doesn't mean it wouldn't fit but the bolts are different too:

1997:
BOLT,ROD,12X93
92150-1337

2003:
BOLT,14MM,L=99
92153-1133

2mm is quite a bit of change if they fit. It would bring the back of your bike down by 10mm.

My guess is that the 2003 pull rod will not fit a 1997... Both rockers aren't the same either...

If you want to check it out on your own, here is the 1997 parts numbers:

https://www.kawasakipartsguy.com/oemparts/a/kaw/500b24a6f8700223e478db12/rear-suspension

And the 2003:

https://www.kawasakipartsguy.com/oemparts/a/kaw/500b2791f8700223e4791fff/rear-suspension

Thanks DV, for the research. That would be a bit of a change in height.

|

4/4/2018 11:53 AM

The aftermarket KX pull rods didnt squat the rear down they jacked it up to change the geometry For better turning

|

4/4/2018 12:52 PM

lumpy790 wrote:

The aftermarket KX pull rods didnt squat the rear down they jacked it up to change the geometry For better turning

Hmmm.... That's interesting because my 03 KX250 seems to turn incredibly well and doesn't have stability problems either aside from the very rare occasionional headshake which I believe is related to suspension adjustment. The way it handled reminds me of the 1993 CR250 I had. I’ve searched and searched the Google machine and cannot seem to find ANY legitimate info on a test or review on the 2003 KX250, just 2 puff pieces on the “first impression” kawasaki had for the intro of their 2003 125 and 250 held at Washougal. The 2 i have found/read are by Transworld and Motorcycledaily.com ...... neither of which tell me any real info on the bike and i cant even find a 2003 250 shootout (when the premier class was still dominated by 250 2 strokes) from any publication thats posted online. Ive asked Tony Blazer if he could find me a link to a legitimate test a few times and he just hasnt gotten back to me and also asked Keefer if he had any info/notes on the bike but no response either. I realize the bike is kind of old by todays standards but ALL of the last generation 250 2 strokes are still very good and capable bikes for riding moto with modern frame geometry, the 48mm KYB open chamber forks arent half bad and the shock is impressive for not having a hi-speed adjuster setup. Motor is strong but very focused on the midrange only.

I had no idea anyone made a linkage for the bike to help with any kind of handling issues bec i dont notice any and LOVE the feel of that steel frame.

If anyone can post a link to a real test of the 2003 KX250 I would really appreciate it.

|

4/4/2018 5:47 PM

The 03 was the first year of the new frame (M series) Didn't the 03 onwards have a bit of a high rear, stink bug feel compared to the previous years?
Perhaps the pro circuit parts were made to lower the rear and balance it out a bit?
The 97 on the other hand, did not suffer from that. I know the pro circuit parts for my L series KX raised the rear to give it more turn ability.

|

"Nothing happens until something moves"

4/4/2018 5:50 PM

|

when in doubt, pin it out

4/4/2018 5:50 PM

04 is basically same bike

|

when in doubt, pin it out

4/4/2018 6:45 PM
Edited Date/Time: 4/4/2018 6:56 PM

Good plain common sense shootout. The RM and YZ ruled those years. It seems like everyone else was playing catch-up. It’s funny that JS simply dominated on the KX even though MXA gave it last place. And yes, the KTM still hasn’t figured out he front fender. cool

|

4/4/2018 8:05 PM

FCMX wrote:

Stock length is 124mm, and these are 126mm. I called PC to ask them but they weren’t sure. Seems like they would help the bike squat down a little better. What do you guys think?Photo

Kind of wanting to see pics of your 97 KX cool

|

4/4/2018 8:19 PM

gsxr6 wrote:

04 is basically same bike

not in regards to the rear swingarm and linkage
the 04 got the new set up which did not have dog bone links like the 03 and earlier,

the bodywork and frame are the same, the swingarm and linkage are very different, the linkage on the 04 mounts through the middle of the swingarm, the the 03 mounts on the bottom,

|

4/4/2018 8:21 PM

tempura wrote:

The 03 was the first year of the new frame (M series) Didn't the 03 onwards have a bit of a high rear, stink bug feel compared to the previous years?
Perhaps the pro circuit parts were made to lower the rear and balance it out a bit?
The 97 on the other hand, did not suffer from that. I know the pro circuit parts for my L series KX raised the rear to give it more turn ability.

see above, the 04 changed to a new system,

the KX65 and 85 still run the same dog bone type link as was on KX125/250's 03 and before , KX65's have 4 different options of links, the shorter link raises the rear end, the longer length lowers it,

|

4/4/2018 8:27 PM

gsxr6 wrote:

04 is basically same bike

No its actually pretty different.... the frame, the linkage dogbines are anchored to the frame, the swingarm is different, the engine had some pretty decent changes too the pegs were 6mm higher as was the seat.

|

4/4/2018 8:30 PM

tempura wrote:

The 03 was the first year of the new frame (M series) Didn't the 03 onwards have a bit of a high rear, stink bug feel compared to the previous years?
Perhaps the pro circuit parts were made to lower the rear and balance it out a bit?
The 97 on the other hand, did not suffer from that. I know the pro circuit parts for my L series KX raised the rear to give it more turn ability.

I dont notice the stinkbug effect on my 03 the bike actually feels very neutral and balanced thats why i was wondering why there were longer linkage arms made for the 03 and since i cant find any info on it im still searching for info on the 03

|

4/4/2018 8:45 PM

Guys....check out this 1997 Kawasaki KX250 I was at my buddys house, he has a small rather asic track in his backyard and this dude shows up with this 97 in pristine condition and yes, its all original!!! What a beautiful bike it was! He saw i knew how to ride a bike pretty well so i asked him if i could ride it real quick and he flat out said NO .... I was bummed he wasnt cool with letting me take it for a spin i was telling him how cool of a bike it was and how ive been wanting ro ride one for a long time bec i had a 97 CR and he wasnt having none of it ...kinda lame i offered to lwt him ride mine even before i asked ....the real kicker is he rolled it out and never rode it or even touched it. Yes he was the original owner too.

Photo

|

4/4/2018 8:57 PM

Damn, I don't remember exactly but for sure I ran shorter PC pull rods on my '98 and '01...and I think I had them on my '94. Liked my '98 with them (bike turned better) and fine tuned the balance with high speed on the shock and fork height. Over the years, backing out on high speed (start with 2 turns out) has been a good direction to go for me. Stayed lower and planted coming out of the corners, while not putting too much weight bias on the front coming into corners.

|

4/4/2018 9:41 PM

Lightning78 wrote:

Guys....check out this 1997 Kawasaki KX250 I was at my buddys house, he has a small rather asic track in his backyard and this dude shows up with this 97 in pristine condition and yes, its all original!!! What a beautiful bike it was! He saw i knew how to ride a bike pretty well so i asked him if i could ride it real quick and he flat out said NO .... I was bummed he wasnt cool with letting me take it for a spin i was telling him how cool of a bike it was and how ive been wanting ro ride one for a long time bec i had a 97 CR and he wasnt having none of it ...kinda lame i offered to lwt him ride mine even before i asked ....the real kicker is he rolled it out and never rode it or even touched it. Yes he was the original owner too.

Photo

My 97 KX 250 might be my most favorite bike ever. The motors were great with a low to mid hit that loved to be short shifted. Great holeshot grabber. You would've loved riding that thing.

|

4/4/2018 9:46 PM

Lightning78 wrote:

Guys....check out this 1997 Kawasaki KX250 I was at my buddys house, he has a small rather asic track in his backyard and this dude shows up with this 97 in pristine condition and yes, its all original!!! What a beautiful bike it was! He saw i knew how to ride a bike pretty well so i asked him if i could ride it real quick and he flat out said NO .... I was bummed he wasnt cool with letting me take it for a spin i was telling him how cool of a bike it was and how ive been wanting ro ride one for a long time bec i had a 97 CR and he wasnt having none of it ...kinda lame i offered to lwt him ride mine even before i asked ....the real kicker is he rolled it out and never rode it or even touched it. Yes he was the original owner too.

Photo

wildbill wrote:

My 97 KX 250 might be my most favorite bike ever. The motors were great with a low to mid hit that loved to be short shifted. Great holeshot grabber. You would've loved riding that thing.

I know all about how good it was my buddy had one and bought it the same time this dude did amd he always raved about it...i was really excited to ride it and was perplexed when the guy flat ass said no ....not like i felt i had a right to ride it but im no beginner and figured he wouldnt have a problem letting me take it for a spin

|

4/4/2018 10:04 PM

Fuck, I'd of let you race mine. They're just bikes. The 98's were also amazing. Suspension on both years was a bit suspect but the motors were the shit. I can see why Emig nailed an SX Championship.

|

4/5/2018 4:41 AM

FCMX wrote:

Stock length is 124mm, and these are 126mm. I called PC to ask them but they weren’t sure. Seems like they would help the bike squat down a little better. What do you guys think?Photo

burn1986 wrote:

Kind of wanting to see pics of your 97 KX cool

Photo

|

4/5/2018 8:15 AM

FCMX wrote: Photo

Jesus that is sweet

|

kcco

4/5/2018 9:55 AM

Thanks. I’ll post more pics in the build section.

|