yz250x Hope it comes our way!

[scott411]

Well said Scott the KDX250 from 90=92 cud be a dog ie slow , oval frame tubes were as the KX was square heavy etc you cud make them work but it cost dollars and time. the SR was a street legal version so even slower and heavier . The RMX Suzuki suffered a similar fate different versions for different markets etc. Honda's CRE and CRM same problem based on a CR250 but add oil injection, heavy pipe and muffler and road equipment . Blame the US/ Californian laws to kill a good 2 smoke . PE Suzuki's had tiny indicators, horn and battery back in the day to meet road regs but wud fail today.

i more blame the consumers for the decline of the 2 strokes off road, when the four strokes came out they outsold the two strokes 4 - 1, and when the GFC came and the manufacturers had to trim their model line ups, the ones that sold the least where dropped,

KTM bucked the trend, but I think it helped them having so little competition in the enduro/off road side of it, but they have been the only manufacturer putting the effort into development, and they are reaping the benefits now, although i struggle to see what husqavarna has brought to them, as at least when they brought husaberg they got the four stroke tech with it,

there is a line that the EPA of the USA did a deal that the main 4 manufacturers stopped bringing in so many two strokes, they would not put rules on competition bikes, this apprantly was done in the late 90's and KTM was not involved due to not being a major distributor in the USA at the time,

there are other gentlemens agreements in motorcycling, like the 299km/h speed limit on production road bikes, that was done do the European Union did not enforce something more draconian, and also there are some self imposed limits in ATV's in regards to weight as well,

[george formby]

Spotted that possibly misleading nugget of KDX 250 info here

At £3014, the 250 was to be about 600 quid dearer than the 200, but price wasn't the problem. The big 'un was a balls-out 58bhp motocrosser with lights, a serious piece of off-road psychosis with a seat height up in the heavens; the 200, on the other hand, was Mr Softee, 37bhp-worth of tame, rideable, reliable cleandirty underwear, if you see what I mean. You'd have to be good (or nuts) to make anything of the 250's potential; most off-road riders aren't that good, and they're not afraid to admit it. Bring back the 200.

Bit disconcerted with the post saying small, narrow indicators etc would not be acceptable now. Will be trying to get the CRM VIN'd in the near future. Could be a mish.

The KDX 250 (tin tank) I had was anything but slow, wheelied in every gear. Far to much for me trail riding.