Cycle News - Archive Issues - 1980's

Mini-shootout: . By Kit Palmer When we tested the Honda CR250R earlier this year, we were very impressed how well it performed. Although it was the first 1984 Japanese 250 we tested, we knew the Honda would be tough to beat. However, after te ting the Suzuki RM250E, we felt the RM has a chance at that honor. The double leading link front brake works mediocre. Maybe next year we will see a disc brake set up. 30 (Continued from page 27) end is that it is too stiff over small, squared-off bumps, but that problem goes away the harder the bike is ridden. The Suzuki shines over the gnarly stuff. The rougher the track, the better the RM handles. Landing off skyscraper jumps is smoothly accomplished; with over a foot of rear travel, touchdown is almost unnoticed. The forks work well but not as well as the rear suspension. At high speeds, the front end shakes a bit over mall bumps and becomes worse while braking. But that problem is only noticed on a grand prix-type course, not on most motocross tracks. The RM turns better than its predecessor, but is still more comfortable out in the berms. CUlling a turn tight requires the rider's weight transferred far forward, his shoulder over the handlebars. Braking isn't one of the Suzuki's strong points. The brakes can't be compared to competitive disc brake set ups. However, when it come to handling over braking bumps, the Lear _end.. doesn't hop mQund,., tIihe " , RM does chatter quite a bit because of the chain slapping against the nylon slider protecting the top of the swingarm. The stock Bridgestone tires work well. The bar/peg/seat relation hip feels a little awkward compared to most mid-size racers. The back end sticks up, while the front of the bike sits low, giving a "pre-endo" feel. Seat comfort is first rate, but the rear se tion is too thin. Thanks to the exhaust pipe, the Suzuki sends a vibration through the rider's arms, and it rattles heavily. The exha ust pi pe spri ngs aren't strong enough LO keep the pipe from dangling around inside the exhaust manifold. The noise is very annoying. All the controls are easy to find and use. The handlebars have a comfortable bend, and the grips held up well. The RM-E is by far the best 250cc motocrosser from Suzuki. Although the engine could use more power, the RM can't be considered slow. And considering its superb suspension, thecombination is very tough to beat i-.if not impos9ibJel , t , • f t t , o we decided LO ride the e two machines in a brief head-LO-head comparison. Both bikes were box stock and fairly used. Suspension was set at factory specifications. First impression is that the Honda is easier LO hop on and ride fast; the Suzuki takes a longer adjustment period. Even silling on the two, the Honda feels more comfortable because it sits lower and more level. The Suzuki stands tall in the back and low in the front. Off the line, the Honda has the advantage. It has more low-end power than the Suzuki. The Suzuki almost makes up for it when both bikes hit mid-range, the Suzuki gaining ground on the Honda. But just when the RM pulls alongside, the CR again starts pulling away. On a dry, and slick track, though, the underpowered Suzuki becomes a weapon. The power on the Suzuki is easier to manage exiting turns: It doesn't have the tendency to slide sideways, forcing the rider LO let off the gas. By the time the RM hooks up, the rider has already created enough momentum to keep the bike straight. The Honda like LO slide out as oon as the gas is applied. so throllie control and body English plays an important role, but that creates more fatigue. (Note: Both bikes had the same rear tire). The Honda's extra power means extra work on slippery tracks. But when there is plenty of traction, the Honda engine is plainly better. The Suzuki's suspension is yards better than the Honda's. When new, the Honda Pro-Link suspension works exceptionally well, but the Showa shock quickly wears out. Then the back end bottoms easil y and is unstable over rough terrain at speed. The ho k should be rebuilt after a few hard rides. The Suzuki Full Floater uspension workshetter new and old. When the going get rough, the Suzuki gives the rider much more confidence, e pecially at high speed. The ProLink is plusher and absorbs the smaller bumps beller. either machine turnsaJl that great. The Honda steers a litle more precisely,anditlike LOhugtheinsideof turns more than the Suzuki does. Kayaba fork are used on the Suzuki, wh iIe Showas are found on the Honda. Both work well out of the crate, but the Kayabas get the nod. Both need some wQrk but the Suzuki's are closer, stock. Without a douht, the Honda outbrakes the Suzuki. The Honda's disc front brake works much beller than the Suzuki's double-leading-shoe. Both bikes ha ve shoe rear brakes that work about the same, but the Suzuki handles the stutter bumps better: Hitting the same braking bump on both bikes, the Honda kicks higher than the Suzuki. When it comes LO jumping, the Suzuki is more predictable in the air. The RM doesn't do unwanted tricks, which comes in handy at Supercrossstyle tracks. Vibration is a problem on the Suzuki, and is non-existent on the Honda. This means there is less chance of the rider's forearms pumping up on the CR. These two bikes are opposite: The Suzuki is tall, the Honda low. The Suzuki's power is all in the midrange, while the Honda boasts downlow and on-LOp. The Suzuki handle best over large bumps, while the Honda's best over smaller bumps. The only thing these two bikes have in common is that they are both built in Japan and have blue safety seats. Choosing between the two is tough: The rider must trade one thing for another. Both bikes have been very reliable, but the Suzuki's suspension seems to work better longer. At first we liked the Honda best because it is easier to ride and has more power. However, the more we rode the Suzuki, the more we liked it. Deciding which one is better is a LOugh decision, but the key factor is choosi ng between hor epower or suspen ion - we chopse suspension. •

• Cover