KTM 300 vs Yamaha YZ250X

[Mapog]

I havent been on 2T engined bikes for years. Drove them as a schoolboy were they were dead until breaking loose and bolting.

Read that the 300 is great at low rpm and manageable when it comes into power.

I want to know how the 250X would compare low down? Do they also have the good low down torque and manageable power?

X is a much cheaper option than 300, hence my question?

Just asking out curiosity. Not able to buy now.

[Breekbeen]

Sub

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Serf]

I had a 300 ktm and loved it. Dont know anything about the 250x so cant comment on the differences.

Why dont you compare the 250x to a 250ktm?

Sent from my SM-J250F using Tapatalk

[goodtoogo]

As a sunday warrior get the 300. Us mortals cannot even start  to use a 300,s potential.  Hence it is bullet proof. It has far more talent than we will ever have. Massive overkill in design for amateurs. Interesting fact newer 4 strokes rev higher than the 300 by a longshot. 300 tips out at about 8500 newer 4 strokes anywhere up to 12000. You do the math on the internal loads. Oh and they have valves and chains and other  things that are followed by dollars signs. Make no mistake they are fantastic fun capable .
300 is just do forgiving

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[JacoM]

I had a YZ250 2T (not the X though) before the current 300. I loved the Yamaha simplicity, suspension and kick. However, it had the tendency to kill a plug , especially goiing slowly on a very long, steep downhill. Something to doe with engine character, angle of carb, etc..etc.
Just google and check if this was fixed with the X.
The 300 on the other hand is a purpose built enduro machine. I never had a dead plug ever with it. I work self on my bikes and it still surprise me the level of detail desig that can be found on every seal, clamp, etc.
The 300 xcw is truely an.amazing package

[Solo]

300xcw, level road, 2nd gear - what would the MINIMUM revs be for clean & swift acceleration?

[Sheepman]

As a sunday warrior get the 300. Us mortals cannot even start  to use a 300,s potential.  Hence it is bullet proof. It has far more talent than we will ever have. Massive overkill in design for amateurs. Interesting fact newer 4 strokes rev higher than the 300 by a longshot. 300 tips out at about 8500 newer 4 strokes anywhere up to 12000. You do the math on the internal loads. Oh and they have valves and chains and other  things that are followed by dollars signs. Make no mistake they are fantastic fun capable .
300 is just do forgiving

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Agree 100%.There's a good reason why the 300 Katooms are so popular with racers and weekend warriors 

[Rossdog]

I've had 2 YZ250 with weighted flywheels, 18" rear rims, reworked suspension, WR gearboxes, etc. Not quite a 250X, but similar.

Advantages of the YZ: Lighter, better suspension IF set up properly.
Advantages of 300: More torque = less stalling, electric start, hydraulic clutch.

For me, it's a no contest; 300 all the way, but I like extreme technical. I suppose though for more flowing stuff like GNCC, the YZ will be better.

[2StrokeDan]

300xcw, level road, 2nd gear - what would the MINIMUM revs be for clean & swift acceleration?

About 500 rpm. Serious.

Clint Reaper rides a YZ250X, and at our gruelling testing grounds, Nitrobay, [ of in die volksmond, Nietvoorbij ],  he rides all the obstacles on it that the 300's do.

Standing there watching, one can definitely hear that the YZ needs more delicate clutching as the torque low-down is not equal to that of the 300.

That is why the YZX should really be compared to the 250 EWC.

The 300 is in a class of it's own, but only just.

[Bill the Bong]

My friend's 250X is faster than my 300.  Pulls me 1/2 bike length per gear.  But less stable and the cockpit is tighter/more cramped.  I like the X, if I was smaller I'd have one.

[katana]

My friend's 250X is faster than my 300.  Pulls me 1/2 bike length per gear.  But less stable and the cockpit is tighter/more cramped.  I like the X, if I was smaller I'd have one.

Can't you fix that with gearing?     The 300 should have the torque.

[2StrokeDan]

My friend's 250X is faster than my 300.  Pulls me 1/2 bike length per gear.  But less stable and the cockpit is tighter/more cramped.  I like the X, if I was smaller I'd have one.

Can't you fix that with gearing?     The 300 should have the torque.

250 revs better, with porting slightly more MX orientated. They are quicker than the 300's.

[Mapog]

So, to go back to my original question, the 250 is more like old type 2Ts that want to rev and no, they dont have the good low down torque?

[Bill the Bong]

My friend's 250X is faster than my 300.  Pulls me 1/2 bike length per gear.  But less stable and the cockpit is tighter/more cramped.  I like the X, if I was smaller I'd have one.

Can't you fix that with gearing?     The 300 should have the torque.

On a 2T its more tricky.  Going from a 13 to 14 CS sprocket makes it too gappy to run a tight sand track.

[Bill the Bong]

So, to go back to my original question, the 250 is more like old type 2Ts that want to rev and no, they dont have the good low down torque?

No.  The only negative to a 250X is the powervalve vent that drips oil on your garage floor.  That is it.

[2StrokeDan]

So, to go back to my original question, the 250 is more like old type 2Ts that want to rev and no, they dont have the good low down torque?

No.  The only negative to a 250X is the powervalve vent that drips oil on your garage floor.  That is it.

From what I have seen in practise, I have to agree. Great bike the X, and well priced.

[LoopSoosStroop]

Some interesting points on this comparison in the Roof threads last year. One of the comments, the way I read it, was that the KTM's nowadays take much more effort and money to get "Roof Ready" than the YZ250X. This might be more relevant to faster riders than the weekend class. 

[Mapog]

Bill, dont blame the Yamaha for the Land Rovers leaks....

Ive seen it, that vaalgroen series...

[Mapog]

 

[Bill the Bong]