Cycle News - Archive Issues - 2000's

the RM, and then the KX. I would pick the YZ first out of these three because the motor is so smooth and controlled and the bike is pretty stable and agile. You can feel pretty confident on it and get aggressive on it and know how the bike will react. The RM just barely edges out the KX for me, primarily due to its comfortable cockpit. Being tall, I like a good amount of room and nice seat height, which the RM has and the KX lacks a little. The RM also has an awesome motor, turns wonderfully and is light, f1ickable and just all-around maneuverable. The KX is a great bike, but because of the lower seat and slightly tight bar position, it left me feeling a Httle cramped. The motor on this bike is great and the bike, overall, handles well and is really quite stable - quite a bit more stable than the RM. The KX doesn't turn as quick or feel as light as the RM, though. All three bikes work really well, as I said before, and I feel I could race each one if need be. Sitting just a very small step behind is the KTM. This bike is an all-around 24 JANUARY 12, 2000' D Y pretty good bike. It doesn't shine in any one area; however, the motor, which is really strong, ranks up there with the rest. My main drawbacks on the KTM were that it wasn't as quick and sharp through the turns and not as light and nimble in the air. The suspension worked pretty well and the bike was pretty balanced and stable overall, but it was just a little harsh through the rough sections, not even superplush on the small stuff. Although a small step behind the rest, the KTM was good - a fun bike to ride, and I know I could race it competitively. to handle the choppy stuff as well as the big landings. And it would be nice to have a 250 that comers like a 125. WeIJ, that's what the RM250 did for me, It does almost everything the way I like it. The YZ was a very close second. In my opinion, the Yamaha has the motor and suspension, but it just missed in the handling category. The Honda and the Kawasaki tie for third in a class of great overall bikes. The CR is greatly improved over last year, but it just didn't have enough of everything to catch the leaders for a bike that could be a title contender. The KX falls a bit short for me. If Kawasaki could make the bike feel lighter and refine th.e overall package, it would have ranked higher with me, The KTM is a fun and competitive bike, with some very good qualities, but other qualities of the KTM were kind of off the pace of the other bikes, like the motor and f1ickablity. That's just my opinion, but I hope it will help you pick the bike you'll like. -Tim Sharp - Chris Sprenkel Name . .... .Tim Sharp Weight .......... 175 Ibs. Height ..... .6'2" Age ... Occupation Riding ability ....27 .Mechanic ......... .Pro Choosing a winner is pretty simple for me. I want a bike that does the important things very good. I like a strong, broad, usable motor, I like suspension n e _ s Die A WORD FROM OUR NORMAL TEST RIDERS Name Matt Freeman .155 Ibs. Weight Height ,... . . . . . Age. . Occupation. Riding ability . .5'9" 26 Editor Novice- Intermediate MXI Expert Off-road racer The other editors in the Cycle News office often accuse me of being an angry youth, very argumentative and hating a lot of things. Shootouts are one of the things that I hate, and here's why. The 2000 250cc motocross shootout was the sixth shootout with which I have been involved over the past three years. Every year the bikes get better and better (naturally, because that's the law of evolution) and more competitive, which makes it harder and sometimes nearly impossible to distinguish the elite. I also hate shootouts because every year I have to pick. a winner and a loser, which to me is like having to choose between your mother or father during a divorce. Participating in a shootout is like voting. You can vote for a candidate that you have carefully studied throughout his campaign, but you never really know how or if the candidate may screw you in the long run if he or she is elected. Granted, we spent many days riding each bike and got way past the first-impression stage, but there are always skeletons in every closet. That opinion comes from the pessimist in me. The optimist in me says this: Give me anyone of the five machines that we tested and in time, I will ride and race the bike to my full potential. My full potential on one bike is just as good as my full potential OR another. Sure, the KX may be faster overall than the YZ, but the YZ corners better for me, and what I may lose in top speed to the KX, I make up in comering speed on the YZ. The way I look at it, it all equals out. I also believe that if a guy buys a 2000 250cc machine and he can't make it work for him, he is either not practicing enough, not testing enough, not patient enough, not knowledgeable enough or not experienced enough to be racing, much less riding. However, my job is not to preach, it is to provide you with the honest truth and the facts, and if I were to race motocross (and nothing else) at Sunrise Cycle Park and Glen Helen Raceway Park, (we rode the bikes at Perris Raceway as well, but not with any assistance from the manufacturers, so, technically, it was nat part of the official shootout) I would race the RM first. I like the great overrev of the motor, I like the plush fork, I like the way it turns, and I can overlook the fact that it vibrates rather badly. The CR is my second choice on the two tracks that we tested on. It han-

• Cover