Since I bought my first KX250, I've often been asked if I had any regrets about
switching from a purpose-built woods bike to a motocross bike for woods racing.
The answer is relatively simple, actually: my 2002 KTM 300MXC, while still parked in
my garage, continues to gather dust next to the KX. But it is a valid question – what
do I like better, and why? As with most of the important issues in life, there is no
simple answer. There is no right or wrong. They are both good, but often in
different ways. As much as you may wish me to provide a definitive solution to the
conundrum of which to buy, Japanese 2-stroke motocross bike or European woods
bike, I cannot, because I am not you. What I can offer is my opinions on how my KX
and my KTM perform under various conditions and rider styles. After reading these
thoughts, you may still have questions. You may still have uncertainty. But such is
life, young grasshopper.
General Overview- KTM
I’m in my 8th year of KTM ownership, and had I not attempted the KX woods
conversion I would have been satisfied with orange for a good long time. The 300
motor is suitable for just about any skill level and no matter how experienced the
rider, most can adapt their riding style to the low-end grunt that this engine is
known for. There’s no unfriendly hit in the powerband, just smooth power from
bottom to top. With its low-end muscle, climbing up a steep, technical hill can be
accomplished with less use of clutch than your average 2-stroke bike. Bigger-bore
4-strokes may be the kings of smooth power delivery, but the KTM 300 is the
thumper’s closest oil-burning rival.
Since both of the KTM’s I've owned were purpose-built woods racers, they came
pretty well set up for hare scrambles and enduros. Suspension on both bikes has
been excellent, with the exception of the 43mm forks on my ’02 (a do-it-yourself-
revalve helped a lot). Both KTM’s came with lighting coils and even though the
MXC didn't have an odometer like the EXC, its front wheel can drive a mechanical
odometer by simply attaching an OEM odometer drive. Fuel capacity is just over 3
gallons, which is long enough to run a 2+ hour hare scramble without stopping for
fuel. O-ring chains and 18-inch rear wheels are stock, as are kickstands. All of
these things make riding in the woods just a little more enjoyable.
General Overview- KX250
Since it was engineered for motocross, the KX is far from race-ready in the woods.
However, I must diverge from our topic here and mention that no bike – not a
single one – is race-ready out of the crate. Forget what the magazines say about
KTM’s. I’d never race one without a skid plate, hardened wheel spacers, rear rotor
guard, heavy duty inner tubes, handguard mounts on the triple clamps, and of
course a steering damper. So no matter what bike you get, if you plan on racing it
in the woods, you’re going to do some stuff to make it suitable for woods riding.
Now back to our topic. Motocross engineering involves specially tuned engines
that are made for sprinting, basically, and the suspension is tuned for hard
landings. Think of it as the difference between running the 200-meter hurdles and
the 5,000-meter steeplechase. The guys who run those races might look similar in
that they generally have two arms, two legs and usually some cool shoes, but
inside they’re tuned differently. Woods riders need an engine with smoother
power for tight, twisty trails and suspension that soaks up smaller, choppy bumps.
In stock form the KX250 is by no means smooth in the woods, but what it lacks in
trail-friendliness can be bought in the aftermarket. I started with the suspension by
sending it to W.E.R. Racing for a revalve. Softer springs, front and rear, also
helped make the ride comfortably plush. I then added an 11-oz flywheel weight to
smooth out the engine. The toughest part about riding a stock KX250 in the woods
is that it wants – demands, actually – nearly constant throttle. Before he switched
to an RM250, I used to give fast guy Zach Bryant some good-natured ribbing about
never letting the throttle on his RM125 slip under the halfway point (ever), but
that's the way MX bikes must be ridden in order to go fast. Unfortunately, it’s hard
to be smooth when the bike is screaming at 8,000 RPM’s in a tight, first-gear
section of trail filled with loose, baseball-sized rocks. The extra inertia contributed
by a flywheel weight keeps the engine RPM’s from quickly dropping off to next-to-
nothing when you let off the throttle. It also gives more lugging power at lower
RPM’s.
Other necessities for the KX250 are a 3.1-gallon IMS tank and an RK X-ring to
replace the non-O-ring chain. Its 19-inch rear wheel aside, in this state the KX is
moderately equivalent in hare scramble readiness to a KTM out of the crate (the KX
would still lack some enduro-readiness, however).
The KX in the woods is not entirely comparable to the KTM, however. It is a
different beast. While the KX probably generates similar horsepower as the 300’s,
it delivers that power in a distinctive way. Since it was bred as a motocrosser, the
KX likes to be ridden aggressively. It shines when you’re on the gas with the rear
wheel spinning. The KX loves to turn, which makes it cut through tight, curvy trails
with ease. Stopping power is excellent, with a strong front brake that can halt the
bike quickly. At speed, the KX is remarkably stable.
What the KTM Does That the KX Does Not
If I’m nearing the end of a long, tough enduro, there’s no bike I’d rather have than
the KTM 300. Late in the race, when my energy level is running on empty and the
race organizers have saved the roughest, most technical trails for last, the 300 lets
me to be lazy. The KX, on the other hand, does not reward lethargic riders. If I am
fatigued, the KX tires me more. Also, KTM’s EXC and XC-W models have wide-ratio
transmissions, meaning a higher top speed for those rare occasions when you
need to drag race through a wide-open trail (the MXC’s transmission is very similar
to the KX’s). Since 1999, the 300’s have come with Magura hydraulic clutches,
which I feel are superior to cable clutches in terms of operation. The action is
smooth and always feels the same, no matter how much you heat up the clutch.
What the KX Does That the KTM Does Not
At a race pace, the KX generally feels more confidence-inspiring, starting with the
front brake. Where the KTM often leaves me wondering if I’ll get stopped in time,
the KX can be late-braked without fear of overshooting a turn, thanks to a very
strong, firm front brake. It also feels more stable at higher speeds. Both KTM’s
were prone to headshake when the throttle was opened up in 5th gear, but not the
KX. The engine has a substantial hit in its powerband, which can be useful on
bermed grass tracks. Throw the KX into a berm with a healthy dose of throttle,
dump the clutch and hang on. I've also been a little more satisfied with the linkage
rear suspension in terms of tracking, versus the PDS linkage-less shock on the
KTM.
The Conclusion
So which is better? Again, there’s no definitive answer, but here’s what I think:
- The KTM 300 is a great bike for all abilities, but probably more so for
beginners and intermediate skill levels. The engine is extremely forgiving
and the low-end grunt means less clutch work and less wheel spin. It’s also
simpler (and more economical, sometimes) to set up for riding/racing.
- Aggressive riders may get more out of the KX and converted motocross
bikes in general. I don’t think it’s an accident that so many of the top GNCC
guys ride 250 two-stroke motocross bikes (Rodney Smith, Barry Hawk, Jason
Raines, and Fred Andrews, to name a few). Even Mike Kiedrowski switched to
an RM250 after a couple years on Suzuki’s DRZ 4-stroke. Clearly there are
exceptions to this, as Juha Salinen, David Knight and Mike Lafferty have
proven. But for a guy who’s in good physical shape and can ride hard for
hours at a time, a converted motocross bike seems to be the woods weapon
of choice.
- From a strictly monetary perspective, the KTM 300 will probably cost less to
make ready for racing. But not always. As I found with my last two KX250's, a
leftover Japanese MX bike, adequately discounted, can sometimes be
bought and modified for about the same cost as a KTM 300. However, if you
plan to ride enduros and need lights, then in almost every case the MX bike
becomes more expensive to convert to woods use.
In summary, a KTM 300 is probably the best value for an all-around bike, with the
300EXC or XC-W even more so because of its enduro-readiness. But if you’re an
aggressive rider, in good physical condition and want to specialize in hare
scrambles and GNCC’s, a converted motocross bike just might be slightly better.
Again, these are just my opinions...yours may vary.