250 performance, the reality! Hahahahaha

**GrayWolf** · 6th August 2011, 13:58

Well I know us old guys rot on about how fast 250's are now, and most 250 riders tell us that Hyo's, etc are slow old dogs etc, etc.
This link is posted elsewhere, but I thought it would be worthwhile to read about the PERFORMANCE 250's I and many others here learned on, along with the dubious brakes/handling characteristics. EVen the 'bucket makes more power!!!!
And why we say the modern 250 sports bikes are not really learner material.

http://www.abacuscaralarms.co.uk/bik...t%20_test.html

**High_Voltage** · 7th August 2011, 17:23

haha nice 1 still compared to the late 80s 4 cyl 250s the modern 250s are still slow 0-100 in around 4 seconds is quick for its size

**tigertim20** · 7th August 2011, 17:37

nice find. It does seem to me that -bar the RS250 (is thatstill being made?) the 250's have reached their peak a while ago and have begun the descent in terms of outright performance.
Good read, last bike I had with the old drum front was, shit, maybe a suki mudbug?
I remember the other young guys in the neighborhood had no money for parts, so when the brake pads were low, theyd wind the brake adjustments right out, and jam the gap between shoes and drum with folded up alloy coke cans etc, and jam the fuckers back together and go riding

**dblancer** · 9th August 2011, 10:14

Interesting article. Love the excitement about drum brakes ( just as good as discs!) and the price of petrol ( haha )

Its seems to be that the modern manufacturers seem more focused on rideability and reliability as well as not having strung out rev crazy machines
I laughed when
I was comparing my 1987 250R versus a newer 2009 Ninja and the differences were quite stunning. Mine produced all its power at over 10,000rpm where as his was more accessible below this point. Still in a straight line I could cream pull away, however in corners he had me down due to better suspension and a lighter frame and better brakes.

I do like the old bikes, but mainly because I can afford them

**GrayWolf** · 9th August 2011, 19:31

yeh, drum brakes?
I owned a 'proper' Kwak' S1 250... I actualy think the later one WAS a bit 'safer' and more civilised. The twin leading shoe drums needed constant attention to keep to anything like good brake power, but then I also owned the RD250E-dx The discs were better, but not THAT much better in those days... god help wet braking when there were no sintered pads on the market back then....... along with the 'rustless' stainless steel discs Arrrrrrrrrgh!!!!!!!!!
But the joy we could have with those bikes... go to a local wreckers, buy a S/hand 350 top end........

**koba** · 9th August 2011, 20:31

Originally Posted by dblancer

however in corners he had me down due to better suspension and a lighter frame and better brakes.

I doubt that is the reason.

Your bike may be a bit hagged out or he may be willing/able to push harder.

**onearmedbandit** · 9th August 2011, 21:26

Originally Posted by koba

I doubt that is the reason.

Your bike may be a bit hagged out or he may be willing/able to push harder.

+1. New Superbike mag does a test between a ZXR250 and a new 'ninja' 250. The new one lost out on everything.

**Dodgy_Matt** · 10th August 2011, 14:49

Originally Posted by onearmedbandit

+1. New Superbike mag does a test between a ZXR250 and a new 'ninja' 250. The new one lost out on everything.

Not really surprising tho is it?

I still rate my old 91 TZR 250 3XV as one damn fast bike up to 100km's

**dblancer** · 10th August 2011, 16:11

Originally Posted by Dodgy_Matt

Not really surprising tho is it?

I still rate my old 91 TZR 250 3XV as one damn fast bike up to 100km's

Well the ZXR250 was an inline 4 and the Ninja 250R has been a parallel twin well always... I'm not surprised the ZX creamed it...ability to rev!!

I'm not saying newer bikes are better, but there are certainly some build advantages with the new toys, and maintenance benefits as well.

**imdying** · 10th August 2011, 16:31

Originally Posted by onearmedbandit

+1. New Superbike mag does a test between a ZXR250 and a new 'ninja' 250. The new one lost out on everything.

Bugger, even fuel consumption??!

**imdying** · 10th August 2011, 16:32

Originally Posted by dblancer

Well the ZXR250 was an inline 4 and the Ninja 250R

ZXRs are Ninjas too.

**nzspokes** · 10th August 2011, 16:59

Did they test the injected Ninja?

**SPman** · 10th August 2011, 20:33

The new 250's are aimed more at the beginner/commuter market - the "old" 250s (the 4s and 2 strokes), were full on sports bikes. The real old 250's (as in that test) were everything at once!

**GrayWolf** · 11th August 2011, 01:22

Originally Posted by dblancer

Well the ZXR250 was an inline 4 and the Ninja 250R has been a parallel twin well always... I'm not surprised the ZX creamed it...ability to rev!!
I'm not saying newer bikes are better, but there are certainly some build advantages with the new toys, and maintenance benefits as well.

Originally Posted by Dodgy_Matt View Post
Not really surprising tho is it?
I still rate my old 91 TZR 250 3XV as one damn fast bike up to 100km's

Thing is these are not OLD 250's...... they have modern design frames. engines and cycle parts... the OLD 250's that the test refers to are flexi frame?? low tech motors, VERY early disc brakes at best with crap suspension and tyres.

**imdying** · 11th August 2011, 11:19

Originally Posted by GrayWolf

Thing is these are not OLD 250's...... they have modern design frames. engines and cycle parts... the OLD 250's that the test refers to are flexi frame?? low tech motors, VERY early disc brakes at best with crap suspension and tyres.

Sure they are, they were new when I was starting out on bikes, so that's more than 15 years ago... The bikes in that test are just really old.