KLX300R Comparison

Introduce yourself, what you ride, post pics, seek or offer help, general chit-chat.
Post Reply
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 1217
Joined: May 02, 2016

KLX300R Comparison

Post by 4Strokes » Mon Jun 06, 2016 7:01 am

Topic: KLX300R comparison
Author: JCBrewer
Posted: 01/29/2007 9:19:33 PM

I'm currently riding a '94 XR250R. It was a good starter bike but I'm looking to upgrade this year. I really like the KLX300R but I hear that it is far inferior to the WR250 and the CRF250X. Can anyone here elaborate on the KLX300R and if it is up to the most modern standards? I live in North Alabama, with lots of mud, rocks, tight trails and steep climbs. I want it for trails and enduro riding as well as some light track work. I'm not planning on doing any track racing but will be entering some enduros. Though I do enjoy a good romp on a track from time to time. I know it doesn't have electric start but that isn't huge with me, though it would be nice. Any rumor of Kawasaki adding electric start next year? Thanks. John in Huntsville

Reply by b_king on 01/29/2007 9:51:38 PM
Look at it this way, the KLX300R is a bored out KLX250R, with the same technology. The KLX300R came to be around 1996? I think, so it is somewhat dated as is the RFVC motor. Though still a strong and reliable bike, it isn't anything like a WR-F or CRF-X. Those are strictly motocrossers gone enduro. The KLX250S has electric start and is a little step up from an XR250R. With 11:1 compression and all the true dual sport goodies, it's a wise choice for some. I think it would be perfect for your application. I actually considered the 300 when I was looking for my XR400R. You don't need to worry about the high revving 2 stroke replacements just yet. The reliable 4-stroke offroad thumpers still have a place. Good luck!

Reply by JCBrewer on 01/30/2007 10:26:00 AM
The lights on a true dual sport wouldn't last any time at all with the kind of riding I do, constantly sliding against trees and scrambling over muddy rocks. Appalachian riding is, IMHO the most difficult riding anywhere. The mountains are not real tall, but they are very steep. The trails, winding through heavy forest, are usually littered with rocks and because it rains a lot, the rocks are usually coated with slick mud. to make matters worse, the muddy rocks are often covered by leaves which are also slippery. So, you can't see the slippery rock. Not a place for a dual sport if you like your turn signals.

Reply by ikarus1 on 01/30/2007 12:18:29 PM
I rode a '99 KLX300 which was almost flawless, before I finally settled on my TTR250. My impressions of this bike (used) were:
  1. Handling and brakes are near-MX level, near flawless
  2. Engine would be great with another carb. CV carbs are not for dirt.
  3. Easy to start (but for how long)
  4. the overall bike COULD be something awesome with a bit of work because power to weight rivals the 400 trail-bikes (XR and DRZ) with better "flick-ability"
Now, this bike cost more and was a bit older ('99 vs '01) than the TTR, which were factors. Also the fact that it is/was kickstart-only. However, the thing that did it for me were details that would cost! The kickstart idler gears are prone to breaking, due to the decompressor assembly on the pre-2003 bikes timed incorrectly. Puts too much stress on a weak gear and POP you might bust the case. The opposite of durability in stock form. Check on planetklx.com for the fix. Involves removing the exhaust cam and re-clocking, plus replacing the idler gear for reliability.

Also, the tranny popped out of gear while I was test riding the bike. Not good for my confidence for something I am going to ride in the mountains with. This too, can be fix for an $80 part + installation.
I wanted something I could thumb and go with very little maintenance, and that is what I wound up with. Plus I am a Yamaha fan. But if I were to come across an '03 or newer for under 2 grand, I'd buy it.

PS. This bike doesn't hold a candle to a WR250F of any year!

Reply by JCBrewer on 01/30/2007 8:31:49 PM
I've heard the WR250F is a little tall in the seat. I'm vertically challenged (5'8 1/2") and the 1/2 helps.

Reply by XR4DEZ on 01/31/2007 6:18:36 PM
Wife likes her KLX300, it's easy to pick up but even she says the power is lacking. I'd ride the KLX300 in slop before I'd take my XR650R. The KLX300 is a couple of inches lower than the WR or the CRF-X. The wife is 5' 9" and touches easily with the KLX300 and the motor lugs real well.

Reply by Tough Guy on 02/03/2007 10:11:28 PM
I rode an 03 WR250F in the mountains this summer a couple of times. Its a great bike, it has nearly the power of an XR400R. The wide ratio trans makes it great for steep ugly terrain. I ride in similar conditions to what you described and the WR will do it gracefully. The push button starts should not be under-estimated. Chris

Reply by Greenstreak on 04/29/2007 10:54:32 AM
I can tell you from 35 years of desert riding that the KLX300 is almost a perfect dirt bike in modified form. I have a '97 with suspension mods, pumper carb, hotter cams, big gun exhaust and lots of protective plates on it. I have all of the suggested mods done to this bike. It has good power, is very reliable and does not run hot in the Arizona desert. I am able to ride it faster longer than I did my last bike (Honda CR500). I keep it maintained perfectly since I am a certified motorcycle mechanic. I would suggest this bike to anyone that will do the mods on it. Stock the bike is not so great, but put some time and money into it and it is super. I have had 74 motorcycles so far, this is my favorite.

Reply by rogersj on 04/29/2007 12:26:36 PM
Why don't u look at Suzuki drz400s they're one amazing bike.

Original URL: 4strokes.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=25713 © 2016 4Strokes.com

Post Reply