When I first started riding, I didn't use my front brakes much. But I found myself using them much more as my riding skills developed, I needed to stop faster, as I was driving much faster in general. It's all about modulation when applying the brakes, practice it a lot, and after a while you instinctively do it without giving it any thought. One things for sure, using both front and rear brakes together will bring you to a stop faster. Not to be critical, just advice from my own experience. Disk brakes are great. One needs to get the muscle memory in order, so you never instinctively just mash them (especially the front), even in more intense situations. I was a bit surprised to recently learn that my uncle (mid 50's) does not use his front brakes, and this guy rides a lot and has been a regular trail rider for many years.
Mark! Great input i appreciate it. I believe depending on the years of experience and the right break set up the disc are they way to go. Unfortunately on the bikes I’ve had they either bight too hard without grabbing hard or they stop like a drum. But then again my nx250 works great and I’m comfortable with disc on that bike.
XR250s did go through engine changes throughout their run: 84,85: 75mm bore × 56.5mm with dual carb and no oil cooler. In healthy form these are known animals revving better with breathing from the dual carbs adding to that performance package. Hard on oil life….. 86-95 are the longest run of no major changes to the bore, stroke, and CAM profiles. 73mm bore × 59.5mm stroke tractor with 30mm compromise carb. Officially a play bike engine. 96-04: This was certainly considered a reasonable redesign. 73mm bore × 59.5mm stroke (same as 86-04) Reduced rotating mass crank and flywheel which is a notable improvement in the engines response. Other engine/tranny not so obvious over 86-04: -Decompression mech moved to cam in 96’ -Carb slide cutaway more aggressive -Carb cable/slide mech better movement with linkage change and larger return spring (PDG1) -Swingarm pivot THROUGH the engine. There are many new charges to the rest of the bike in 96 worth it being the best of the run: -Oil in Frame (I don’t like that…) -Larger piggyback rear shock with knobless adjustment (❤) -Front cartridge forks with compression adjusters which went away in 90. Also higher fork body to ground clearance. -Detachable rear sub frame for easier serviceability -Share same steering neck length as XR400 for easy fork swap to those better forks Well, there are other notables but I will leave that to parts lists and 20 years of a ThumperTalk.
Just brought another xr400 2003 had pro taper bars forgotten about these torque beast's need rotor s pads put braided brake line. Bigger Jets cleaned up header pipe went 50 rear sprocket haven't spent big money on it just Cleaned up The old girl start s well getting harder to find now
Appreciate the content. I find it funny when I listen to fast XR pilots. I mean folks that have successfully raced those play bikes back when they could be such. Things have changed. Nobody should race old suspension and kick start 4 strokes unless vintage and/or veteran classes for fun. Refrains I hear from FAST riders: -Throttle range is near valve float or on the brakes -Stock suspension with flexing frame is just fine with proper SAG -Whoops are just position and WOT It is clear for this not-fast rider they are a play bike. I am never near valve float and think I can find speed in suspension. In the end it seems I just need to ride more and work on my skills.
The 400 does have really nice power. Unfortunately it does weight a lot more than an xr250r. I think fun can be had at any cc but moving down from 400 to 250 might be the right move considering the weight.
Last thing…. All the XR250s were about the same weight. The heft in the XR400 is mostly in the engine internals from what I gather. The front forks and wheel assembly between the 250 and 400 is 1lbs heavier on the 400. What makes the 400 the winner for larger riders seems to be the engine displacement and very much improved suspension. As a small and short (5’5” @140) rider the 250 is acceptable in power and weight. The 400 would be near impossible for me to ride.
DrZ250 really lol those things are even more gutless turds than the early xr250s. Now the drz400 I'd agree on as they are an awesome bike I almost got the dual sport version but ended up getting a xr650l for my dual sport at times I do regret not having the lighter more nimble drz400 especially when things get sandy or muddy. Its not fun wrestling a xr650l through that stuff. Although stiffer springs on the xr650l do help combat a lot of the issues I was having in the sand with speed wobbles at all speeds didn't matter whether you went slow or tried to go fast and keep the front end light. And then there was the time I hit a sandy patch on a dirt road doing 65-70mph trying to outrun a severe thunderstorm and get home before it hit. But I hit that sand patch as I came over a slight hill and instant head shake probably the worst if ever experienced. But after installing the stiffer race tech springs in the forks it has seemingly fixed that issue.
![17 DAYS on One Of North America's Most Legendary Routes | WA-OR BDR [E-1]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/R5Etf21a_4c/mqdefault.jpg)
When I first started riding, I didn't use my front brakes much. But I found myself using them much more as my riding skills developed, I needed to stop faster, as I was driving much faster in general.
It's all about modulation when applying the brakes, practice it a lot, and after a while you instinctively do it without giving it any thought. One things for sure, using both front and rear brakes together will bring you to a stop faster.
Not to be critical, just advice from my own experience. Disk brakes are great. One needs to get the muscle memory in order, so you never instinctively just mash them (especially the front), even in more intense situations.
I was a bit surprised to recently learn that my uncle (mid 50's) does not use his front brakes, and this guy rides a lot and has been a regular trail rider for many years.
Mark! Great input i appreciate it. I believe depending on the years of experience and the right break set up the disc are they way to go. Unfortunately on the bikes I’ve had they either bight too hard without grabbing hard or they stop like a drum. But then again my nx250 works great and I’m comfortable with disc on that bike.
Having owned multiple of both the xr400r is where its at between the two
Power and weight go hand and hand
Sub to the channel to be entered into the drawing for a Custom xr200r
XR250s did go through engine changes throughout their run:
84,85:
75mm bore × 56.5mm with dual carb and no oil cooler. In healthy form these are known animals revving better with breathing from the dual carbs adding to that performance package. Hard on oil life…..
86-95 are the longest run of no major changes to the bore, stroke, and CAM profiles. 73mm bore × 59.5mm stroke tractor with 30mm compromise carb. Officially a play bike engine.
96-04: This was certainly considered a reasonable redesign.
73mm bore × 59.5mm stroke (same as 86-04)
Reduced rotating mass crank and flywheel which is a notable improvement in the engines response.
Other engine/tranny not so obvious over 86-04:
-Decompression mech moved to cam in 96’
-Carb slide cutaway more aggressive
-Carb cable/slide mech better movement with linkage change and larger return spring (PDG1)
-Swingarm pivot THROUGH the engine.
There are many new charges to the rest of the bike in 96 worth it being the best of the run:
-Oil in Frame (I don’t like that…)
-Larger piggyback rear shock with knobless adjustment (❤)
-Front cartridge forks with compression adjusters which went away in 90. Also higher fork body to ground clearance.
-Detachable rear sub frame for easier serviceability
-Share same steering neck length as XR400 for easy fork swap to those better forks
Well, there are other notables but I will leave that to parts lists and 20 years of a ThumperTalk.
Great INFO!
Just brought another xr400 2003 had pro taper bars forgotten about these torque beast's need rotor s pads put braided brake line. Bigger Jets cleaned up header pipe went 50 rear sprocket haven't spent big money on it just Cleaned up The old girl start s well getting harder to find now
They are getting hard to fine especially nice ones
Appreciate the content. I find it funny when I listen to fast XR pilots. I mean folks that have successfully raced those play bikes back when they could be such. Things have changed. Nobody should race old suspension and kick start 4 strokes unless vintage and/or veteran classes for fun.
Refrains I hear from FAST riders:
-Throttle range is near valve float or on the brakes
-Stock suspension with flexing frame is just fine with proper SAG
-Whoops are just position and WOT
It is clear for this not-fast rider they are a play bike. I am never near valve float and think I can find speed in suspension.
In the end it seems I just need to ride more and work on my skills.
Heck yeah man
I have xr400 I'm 6 ft 200lbs. I love Honda and want a lighter bike but worried I won't be happy about power.
The 400 does have really nice power. Unfortunately it does weight a lot more than an xr250r. I think fun can be had at any cc but moving down from 400 to 250 might be the right move considering the weight.
@@SubscibeBikeGiveaway yeah I want light weight. Power is not as important as weight. Hows the crf250f
@@outlawpat8038get a 2 smoker for lightweight power
Are you guys into the Honda ATC three wheelers by chance?
If something comes along we would be tempted to work on it
@@SubscibeBikeGiveaway Nice
Do you guys have any info on getting supermoto wheels for my 2001 xr250r? Been looking around but nothing says it specifically for my model bike
Honestly I don’t know as I’ve never done it. From what I’ve seen warp 9 works on 400 and 650r can’t see why not on 250
do a comparison with the xr 200
Will do 400 vs 200
XR400R отличный мотоцикл 🎉🎉🎉
Thanks!
Last thing….
All the XR250s were about the same weight.
The heft in the XR400 is mostly in the engine internals from what I gather. The front forks and wheel assembly between the 250 and 400 is 1lbs heavier on the 400.
What makes the 400 the winner for larger riders seems to be the engine displacement and very much improved suspension.
As a small and short (5’5” @140) rider the 250 is acceptable in power and weight. The 400 would be near impossible for me to ride.
Love it thanks Shane!
Hi mate,
I am 5.9" 190lbs(86kg).
Shall I go for xr250r or xr400r ?
@@JustMe-yy7uc I would say xr250r. but depending on your needs a 400 with a lowering link might work as well. i have a lowering link on my 400.
@@SubscibeBikeGiveaway
Thanks for the reply.
Where l ride there are lots of hills.
I am going to ride on the open hills and countryside roads.
@@JustMe-yy7uc I would suggest the xr400r it would be perfect for your area.
Suzuki DRZ250 and DRZ 400. Everything that Honda did not do and should have done. Much better bikes than Honda XRs.
I would agree at least with the drz 400 because Honda should have made a street model. But the Xr250 holds a better value.
DrZ250 really lol those things are even more gutless turds than the early xr250s. Now the drz400 I'd agree on as they are an awesome bike I almost got the dual sport version but ended up getting a xr650l for my dual sport at times I do regret not having the lighter more nimble drz400 especially when things get sandy or muddy. Its not fun wrestling a xr650l through that stuff. Although stiffer springs on the xr650l do help combat a lot of the issues I was having in the sand with speed wobbles at all speeds didn't matter whether you went slow or tried to go fast and keep the front end light. And then there was the time I hit a sandy patch on a dirt road doing 65-70mph trying to outrun a severe thunderstorm and get home before it hit. But I hit that sand patch as I came over a slight hill and instant head shake probably the worst if ever experienced. But after installing the stiffer race tech springs in the forks it has seemingly fixed that issue.