Cycle News - Archive Issues - 2000's

2002 125cc Motocross Bikes (Left, below! The rumors are' true, the KTM f1at-out hauls you know what. (Above) The new KX is still one of the best handling bikes of the bunch. ~Q00[g)C2DU0DGou§[X]GJDUcf]DDDUill~on~d It's the suspension and handling departments that we feel the new Honda offers the biggest improvements over last year's CR. Honda designed the frame to be more compliant and giving than in years past, and we think they succeeded. The frame seems less rigid and more forgiving than before, and the suspension is also more willing to suck up braking bumps and jump landings. Out of the crate, the CR's suspension feels somewhat plush but firm enough to swallow up big bumps at speed. 0 The Honda also feels lighter, more nimble and certainly more stable than any previous CR12S, and the bike's natter layout and narrower profile improves rider mobility. Plus, the seat has just the right width and texture. 0 As far as suspension settings, we were quite happy with the stock "clickers: as we made very little changes to the shock and fork - just a click or two here and there. BOTTOM UNE: Feels light and stable. Best aluminum CR12S chassis yet. It's too bad so much emphasis is placed on motor in the 12Scc class, because the K)(12S's stellar chassis will probably get overlooked on account of its lackluster motor. It almost was by us. Almost. When we ignored the powerplant and focused on the bike's navigational prowess. we were impressed. The Kawasaki is its typically stable self, but it can still be guided into a tight, rutted comer line when the situation calls for it. Suspension action is smooth and compliant at both ends, but without harsh bottoming. True, the KX chassis may be getting a bit dated, but when you find something that works for you. why change it? only does this affect the KTM's overall ride, but it also affects the way it corners, as the KTM's stiff suspension simply refuses to let the bike settle down into the turns, which brings us to our third gripe - the seat. It's way too stiff for our liking, which doesn't help matters any when trying to get the bike to squat through the turns. As a result, the bike feels tipsy in the corners. On the flip side, however, the KTM's firm suspension does an excellent job absorbing the big hits, like flat-landing jumps and rolling whoops. 0 The bottom line is, the faster and harder you hit the bumps and jumps, the better the KTM works, making it a good package for the expert-level rider. But for the middle-of-the-road (or should we say pack) riders like us, the KTM just beats us up a bit too much. BOTTOM UNE: Rock-solid chassis - maybe a little too rock-solid for the general masses. 5uzulci The Suzuki's chassis, on the other hand, is anything but harsh. The RM's suspension feels soft compared to the other bikes, and we did bottom it on occasion, but that's the way we like it. Faster riders may want stiffer coils, but mortals will appreciate the bike's compliant. crossgrain-absorbing feel. On some bikes, you'll do anything to steer clear of a nasty hole, rut or bump on the track, but on the Suzuki, these things just don't seem to matter; you just plow through them as if they weren't there. On those rare occasions when the RM does swap or kick, the bike simply gathers itself back in as soon as the rear wheel touches the ground. 0 The RM also feels incredibly light, is very maneuverable and steers with pinpoint precision. This bike is almost telepathic in its ability to go where you want it to, and it's the most comfortable of all these units when navigating a tight, inside line. 0 Uke the KTM, the RM's seat is quite narrow, but unlike the KTM, very soft. At first we thought that the foam might be too cushy, but we soon came to appreciate how the soft seat keeps your butt planted when accelerating the hard-hitting Suzuki out of the turns. BOTTOM UNE: Awesome. BOTTOM UNE: Again, one of the best handlers of the bunch. Excellent suspension, front and rear. While we loved the KTM's mill, we weren't so in love with the KTM's chassis. We basically had three main gripes, the first being the KTM's noticeable high-rear feeling, which we at first assumed to be caused by excess shock-spring preload. Not so, however, as the sensation persisted ellen when proper sag was dialed in. We've heard that the KTM Red Bull team shortens the diagonal struts on its subframes (by cutting out small sections and rewelding with inserts), to help alleviate the problem. 0 Our second grievance involved the KTM's suspension, which, as a whole, is quite good but lacks absorption over the smaller ripples. KTM's linkage-less rear suspension system, while it does have its advantages, is simply not as sensitive over the smaller bumps and square edges as the other four bikes in this comparison that have linkages. The KTM's suspension, as a result, feels somewhat harsh and stiff. Not 22 AUGUST 29, 2001 • a U c I e n __ lIS Judging from what we've been hearing at the local tracks, the trendy complaint of the season will be that the YZ's frame is overly stiff. Bull. Yes, the results of Yamaha's chassis reinforcements are noticeable, but we approve of the change. The bike was a bit "loose-feeling" before, so it benefits from a bit of extra material here and there. The only thing that is perhaps "too stiff" about the Yamaha is its seat. 0 The Yamaha has always been applauded for having top-notch suspension, and that won't change in 2002. The YZ is just as plush as the RM through the first few inches of travel, but after that, things quickly stiffen up - up front. We managed to adjust out that somewhat sudden transition from soft to firm but could never get the forks to work quite as well as the Suzuki's. 0 The back end, however, is just as good as the Suzuki's - just set the ride height and you won't have to fiddle with the shock again. 0 The YZ comers well, but takes slightly more muscle to initiate the turns and keep it leaned over than the king of comers, the RM. BOTTOM UNE: Handles great. but isn't as nimble as the Suzuki.

• Cover