Why would you ever need more than a 250?

[puddytat]

I asked this question a few pages back, but no-one seems to want to answer it.

If a 250 is all a rider needs then why are there none entered in the TT2000?

Well I have an excuse, mines in race trim...

[Gremlin]

Hmmmm, 1400 Connie: less than 6L/100km over 62,000km - all riding scenarios...

Have had the beemer as low as 5.2L/100km, but I was stuck behind traffic dawdling at 80kph into town. Rapid pace, around 5.7-5.8L/100km with luggage on.

Not bad for bikes in the 1-1.5L bracket huh?

[Gibbo89]

I asked this question a few pages back, but no-one seems to want to answer it.

If a 250 is all a rider needs then why are there none entered in the TT2000?

You supply me the petrol, I'll bring the bike and camera

[onearmedbandit]

I only know roughly how much my bike uses, and that's only because it is just over 200km to Springs Junction from here, and I need to top up there. So I know with slightly spirited riding I get about 200km per tank. Otherwise, I ride bike, bike needs fuel, I put fuel in, I give card to man, man gives card back, I ride bike. Repeat over and over again.

[banditrider]

Have had the beemer as low as 5.2L/100km, but I was stuck behind traffic dawdling at 80kph into town. Rapid pace, around 5.7-5.8L/100km with luggage on.

Not bad for bikes in the 1-1.5L bracket huh?

Yep, I won't mention the VTR's economy...

[Owl]

I've had my S3 to 5.2L/100km and it's uneconomical for an S3. Normal riding sees about 6.2L/100km. Stock or modified factory fuel maps are far more economical.

[RiderInBlack]

For my old GSXR250 to go 100kph it was doing 10,000rpm. For my VFR750 it was going 5,000rpm and my GSX1400 is well under 3,000rpm at 100kph. Therefore the 250 was having to do twice the motor distance than the 750 and over 3x the motor distance of the 1400. That meant it needed more regular engine maintenance and repair than the bigger bikes. Which is something that is un-practical for someone like myself that rides long distances. It's not at all about who can go faster, or get their knee down for my type of riding. Sure I could make a 250 do the job but it would not do it comfortability, nor would it last as long doing it.

[racefactory]

06 ZX6R 4.4L/100km with 80- 100kph cruising plus some overtakes.

[racefactory]

For my old GSXR250 to go 100kph it was doing 10,000rpm. For my VFR750 it was going 5,000rpm and my GSX1400 is well under 3,000rpm at 100kph. Therefore the 250 was having to do twice the motor distance than the 750 and over 3x the motor distance of the 1400. That meant it needed more regular engine maintenance and repair than the bigger bikes. Which is something that is un-practical for someone like myself that rides long distances. It's not at all about who can go faster, or get their knee down for my type of riding. Sure I could make a 250 do the job but it would not do it comfortability, nor would it last as long doing it.

That's true but still, the MC14 engines on the cbr250rr family will do well over 100,000 of abused kms. I wouldn't say that's too different from any big bike.

[RiderInBlack]

That's true but still, the MC14 engines on the cbr250rr family will do well over 100,000 of abused kms. I wouldn't say that's too different from any big bike.

The GSX1400 are good for over 200,000. I've personally had to re-motor my GSXR250R after 50,000km, and yet when working on my old CBR1000FL @ 50,000miles (80,000km) the engine bores still showed the machining marks from the day it was made, so next to no wear in the bores by then. It obvious when ya look at the difference in average working engine speed.
The 90's Racing 250's where made for racing & to get around the common Learners "250cc Max" rule, not for distance and durability. Most countries have dropped that for a more sensible "power to weight restriction" instead now. NZ is on the way to adopting the same rule. So the days of the Screaming inline four 250cc bikes are numbered. Not seen any new ones for a while now.

[ducatilover]

It's simple isn't it? My fathers FJ1200 had over 200,000km on it and it still ran very well. My Bros650 had 27 on the clock, which I don't believe at all and I sold my 250 with 150,000km on her, It will do many more, only because it was serviced very well.
I'd like a big twin, no stress, lots of torque and noise. (Not a hardly gayvidson though)

[avgas]

Have had the beemer as low as 5.2L/100km, but I was stuck behind traffic dawdling at 80kph into town. Rapid pace, around 5.7-5.8L/100km with luggage on.

Not bad for bikes in the 1-1.5L bracket huh?

May be fuel economy is proportional to HP and fun then not engine size

[avgas]

I asked this question a few pages back, but no-one seems to want to answer it.

If a 250 is all a rider needs then why are there none entered in the TT2000?

Some of the people whom enter that spends $$$$ on bikes, and have years and years of riding skills.

Its just not fair if you turn up on a 250 and kick their arse. You could hurt their feelings.

[Jantar]

I love having my feelings hurt.

[RiderInBlack]

Some of the people whom enter that spends $$$$ on bikes, and have years and years of riding skills.

Its just not fair if you turn up on a 250 and kick their arse. You could hurt their feelings.

If ya going ta turn up to the TT2000 or the Grand Challenge on a 250 (it's been done on the GC), it pays to have years & years of riding skills and good sound mechanical know-how, as well as having ya 250 in tip-top mechanical condition, because the only feeling ya will hurt are ya own. Turn up to the Rusty Nuts GC with any ill prepared bike and it is your arse that would be getting kicked (back home with ya tail tucked between ya legs).

PS: By the way the TT2000 Rusty and the Nuts GC are not about "Winning" or "Kicking Arse", they are about making it back home safe having achieved the Challenge.