Cycle News

VOL. 52 ISSUE 9 MARCH 3, 2015 P55 Neither bike left the assem- bly line with skid plates, but at least the FX already has mounts built into the frame, waiting for a Genuine Yamaha Technology Racing (GYTR, Yamaha's acces- sory division) skid plate to be bolted on. The Yamaha also has a lower rear disc brake guard, the KTM does not. The KTM's chain guide is made out of mostly plastic and the Yamaha's aluminum; some feel plastic is better since it will take a fairly hard blow and return to its origi- nal position, while the aluminum could bend and detrail the chain, and that can get ugly. One big advantage the KTM has over the Yamaha is fuel ca- pacity and filling efficiency. The KTM's tank holds 2.4 gallons and the Yamaha 2.0 gallons, which we feel is sufficient for most riding, but more is almost always better when it comes to fuel capacity and off-road riding. Plus, refilling is quicker on the KTM, since the FX's cap is concealed under the seat. This could be a deal-breaker for some. IMS, however, does offer a 2.9-gallon tank for the 2014 YZ250F, which we assume will bolt right on to the FX. IMS also makes a dry-break quick-fill sys- tems for the big tank but requires permanent mods to the seat. It's also much easier check- ing fuel levels with the KTM than it is the Yamaha because of the KTM's translucent plastic; the Yamaha's is all black and non- see-through. Speaking of black, the KTM comes with black rims and the Yamaha silver rims, unlike the 2015 YZ250F's rims which are black. Black rims tend to show more wear and tear than silver rims. Air filter service is fairly simple for both bikes, and neither bike requires tools to get to the foam. The Yamaha's high placement of the filter should make it better protected from the elements and deep water crossings. T H E V E R D I C T Both the Yamaha and KTM are very capable motorcycles that do what they're designed to do quite well and, like we said earlier, we'd be very happy living with either one. The KTM seems a little better-suited for the tighter and more technical trails, while the Yamaha seems to generally prefer the more open trails, but both bikes can tackle either situ- ations just fine. In review, the KTM has a very linear power delivery, mellow off the bottom, then gets stronger as it goes into the mid and top, and carries its power further than the Yamaha. The XC-F also has softer suspension and a less rigid frame, making the KTM more forgiving in un-friendly terrain, and we love it for that. At low speeds, the chassis does have a lazy feel, but when the speed picks up and things get dicey, the KTM has better overall stability. The KTM's brakes are better, too, and the bike is more comfortable to ride. The XC-F would be good for an off-road enthusiast or racer who spends a lot of time in the saddle on rough trails, rougher the better. The Yamaha, on the other hand, has a more aggressive power delivery, stiffer suspen- sion and an aluminum frame that is noticeably more rigid. Rac- ing is in this bike's blood and is well-suited for WORCS-style racing that incorporates moto- cross obstacles, and we really liked the FX on moto tracks, as well. Although we feel the FX doesn't handle roots and rocks as well as the XC-F, it did have a better overall suspension package, quicker steering and was easier to maneuver on tight trails. In stock form the power delivery might be a tad aggres- sive for some riders but the more advanced rider will appreciate the lively power and aggressive nature. Yes, both bikes are good, just different. But if we had to chose just one, it would be hard to pass up the Yamaha. Yes, the KTM might be a few pounds lighter, and have a larger fuel tank, more power, hand guards and deeper off-road racing roots, but the Yamaha is also a solid-per- forming overall package that is $700 cheaper and comes with a back-up kickstarter. Sometimes that's all it takes to come out on top. CN

• Cover