Posted By: LMJ123
Yamaha XT225 compared to Kawasaki KLX250S - 10/15/08 05:39 AM
Resources area of the board look a little bare, so I'll add a post. Here you go Scott. I have to get to bed, but here's what I was able to pound out in a few minutes.
Yamaha XT225 compared to Kawasaki KLX250S
Based on my experience with my '96 XT and 2006 KLX. Comments should pretty well be valid for '92-2007XT, and 2006/2007 KLX. Kawasaki made changes to the 2009 model and introduced it in 2008, so there's no official 2008 model. 2009 model is lowered slightly with reworked suspension (less travel) and has a shorter 6th gear so the stock 250 can pull it. 2009 also has wave brakes and thicker spokes than '06 and '07.
The two bikes are intended for slightly different markets, but compare favorably to one another. The XT is a go-anywhere bike that should run forever with a minimum of maintenance. The XT weighs around 238 pounds, while the KLX tips the scales at around 280. The lower seat height of the XT and the rear grab bars are nice features. The KLX does have a rear rack included, which provides a hand hold to pick the bike up with, but it's not nearly as substantial as the grab bars on the XT. They both offer passenger pegs. The KLX is more technologically advanced with four valves, liquid cooling, and 11:1 compression ratio. The XT has a more substantial frame and I think probably is actually stronger than the Kawasaki's. The rear disc and extra power of the KLX are nice. The low seat height, durability, and maintenance requirements of the XT make it quite appealing. I was primarily interested in the Kawasaki because I wanted a bike that had a rear disk and more power or potential for power. I also wanted a bike I could ride on the highway and off highway. I didn't feel comfortable doing this on the XT because I could gear it for one or the other, but not both. The Kawasaki is more comfortable on the highway and still has enough for off highway without changing the gearing.
Maintenance
XT wins hands down. Easier to work on, better access to carb. Two valves to adjust with a wrench, as opposed to four to adjust with shims. The spark plug is easily changed on an XT, You have to remove a radiator shroud and possibly the gas tank depending on your tools on the KLX to get to the spark plug, and it is tucked way down into the cylinder head. You have to remove the seat to change the KLX's air filter (9 fasteners total), you have to remove the side plastic on the XT (4 fasteners total). Oil change is easier on XT, as you remove one bolt on the down tube to pull off the skid plate and get to the drain plug. On the KLX you have to remove four allen heads on the bottom of the bike to get to the drain plug.
Gas mileage
XT 75MPG is no problem, with anywhere from 60 to 100 typical depending on terrain and rider.
KLX 58MPG so far over 227 miles that didn't include any technical riding. Plus the speedometer/odometer isn't accurate so even 58 is slightly inflated.
Range
XT 2.2 gallons and better mileage
KLX 1.9 gallons and worse mileage (not much range)
Aftermarket Accessories
XT Tail rack, pegs, bars...
KLX Tail rack, pegs, bars, some plastic, three larger capacity fuel tanks
Aftermarket Performance
XT Not much, air filter, 225 to 250 if you want to spend $550 for 10% increase in displacement, TM33.
KLX Lots more options for the KLX as it's based on the KLX300. Lots more, air filter, up to 300, 331, 340cc's with no machining for around $450. Steel braided brake lines. Bill Blue TM33, or TM36.
Longevity
XT Likely edge to XT as it is air cooled, 9:1 compression.
KLX Liquid cooled, could easily damage radiator hoses and radiators in a wreck. 11:1 compression.
Power
KLX has broader powerband and revs up to 10,500. XT has a better low-end. The Mikuni CVK on the XT is not one of Mikuni's
better efforts. The Keihin CVK on the KLX is not a pumper, but compared to the Mikuni one might think it is.
Shifting
Most XT's I've ridden (let's say five up to model year 2007) on have what I would describe as notchy shifting. In other words, you don't want to wait until your stopped to try and punch it down from 6th to 1st gear. I've always tended to downshift my XT through each gear because of the behavior. In other words depress clutch, pop to 5th, release clutch, depress clutch, pop to 4th, etc. I've tried Rotella T dino, Rotella T synthetic, and over the past two years Mobil 1 V-twin 20w-50 synthetic. The Mobil 1 has worked the best, but the KLX shifts so much more smoothly and has more positive action. Keep in mind I'm comparing primarily my '96 XT to an '06 KLX, but still have ridden 2005, 2006, and 2007 XT's and didn't feel they were particularly smoother.
Brakes
No comparison, KLX has discs front and rear. XT only up front, and on my '96 a single pot.
Suspension
KLX has superior suspension. It's sprung for a 165 pounder from the factory, so perfect for me. The XT suspension is comfortable in town and for trail riding, but can be bottomed on any rough terrain at speed. The KLX has firmer suspension and is more comfortable both on or off road.
Load carrying
XT Holds quite a bit on it's steel frame. Spare gas on the rear of an XT is no problem.
KLX Holds 5lbs on its rear rack, common reports of cracked rear subframes from carrying any more than 5lbs.
Skid Plate
XT comes with a decent aluminum skid plate, at least it's all I've ever needed. KLX really doesn't have much of a skid plate, really needs an aftermarket one to protect bottom/sides of case and radiator hoses.
Forums
www.xt225.com is of course excellent because of the caliber of contributors. There's also a nice long thread on adventure rider for the XT. As for the KLX, I've found kawasakiforums to have lots of information as well as the long-term KLX thread on adventure rider. The drawbacks of course are that you have to wade through all of the flame wars on the other forums, something that is refreshingly absent from this forum.
Yamaha XT225 compared to Kawasaki KLX250S
Based on my experience with my '96 XT and 2006 KLX. Comments should pretty well be valid for '92-2007XT, and 2006/2007 KLX. Kawasaki made changes to the 2009 model and introduced it in 2008, so there's no official 2008 model. 2009 model is lowered slightly with reworked suspension (less travel) and has a shorter 6th gear so the stock 250 can pull it. 2009 also has wave brakes and thicker spokes than '06 and '07.
The two bikes are intended for slightly different markets, but compare favorably to one another. The XT is a go-anywhere bike that should run forever with a minimum of maintenance. The XT weighs around 238 pounds, while the KLX tips the scales at around 280. The lower seat height of the XT and the rear grab bars are nice features. The KLX does have a rear rack included, which provides a hand hold to pick the bike up with, but it's not nearly as substantial as the grab bars on the XT. They both offer passenger pegs. The KLX is more technologically advanced with four valves, liquid cooling, and 11:1 compression ratio. The XT has a more substantial frame and I think probably is actually stronger than the Kawasaki's. The rear disc and extra power of the KLX are nice. The low seat height, durability, and maintenance requirements of the XT make it quite appealing. I was primarily interested in the Kawasaki because I wanted a bike that had a rear disk and more power or potential for power. I also wanted a bike I could ride on the highway and off highway. I didn't feel comfortable doing this on the XT because I could gear it for one or the other, but not both. The Kawasaki is more comfortable on the highway and still has enough for off highway without changing the gearing.
Maintenance
XT wins hands down. Easier to work on, better access to carb. Two valves to adjust with a wrench, as opposed to four to adjust with shims. The spark plug is easily changed on an XT, You have to remove a radiator shroud and possibly the gas tank depending on your tools on the KLX to get to the spark plug, and it is tucked way down into the cylinder head. You have to remove the seat to change the KLX's air filter (9 fasteners total), you have to remove the side plastic on the XT (4 fasteners total). Oil change is easier on XT, as you remove one bolt on the down tube to pull off the skid plate and get to the drain plug. On the KLX you have to remove four allen heads on the bottom of the bike to get to the drain plug.
Gas mileage
XT 75MPG is no problem, with anywhere from 60 to 100 typical depending on terrain and rider.
KLX 58MPG so far over 227 miles that didn't include any technical riding. Plus the speedometer/odometer isn't accurate so even 58 is slightly inflated.
Range
XT 2.2 gallons and better mileage
KLX 1.9 gallons and worse mileage (not much range)
Aftermarket Accessories
XT Tail rack, pegs, bars...
KLX Tail rack, pegs, bars, some plastic, three larger capacity fuel tanks
Aftermarket Performance
XT Not much, air filter, 225 to 250 if you want to spend $550 for 10% increase in displacement, TM33.
KLX Lots more options for the KLX as it's based on the KLX300. Lots more, air filter, up to 300, 331, 340cc's with no machining for around $450. Steel braided brake lines. Bill Blue TM33, or TM36.
Longevity
XT Likely edge to XT as it is air cooled, 9:1 compression.
KLX Liquid cooled, could easily damage radiator hoses and radiators in a wreck. 11:1 compression.
Power
KLX has broader powerband and revs up to 10,500. XT has a better low-end. The Mikuni CVK on the XT is not one of Mikuni's
better efforts. The Keihin CVK on the KLX is not a pumper, but compared to the Mikuni one might think it is.
Shifting
Most XT's I've ridden (let's say five up to model year 2007) on have what I would describe as notchy shifting. In other words, you don't want to wait until your stopped to try and punch it down from 6th to 1st gear. I've always tended to downshift my XT through each gear because of the behavior. In other words depress clutch, pop to 5th, release clutch, depress clutch, pop to 4th, etc. I've tried Rotella T dino, Rotella T synthetic, and over the past two years Mobil 1 V-twin 20w-50 synthetic. The Mobil 1 has worked the best, but the KLX shifts so much more smoothly and has more positive action. Keep in mind I'm comparing primarily my '96 XT to an '06 KLX, but still have ridden 2005, 2006, and 2007 XT's and didn't feel they were particularly smoother.
Brakes
No comparison, KLX has discs front and rear. XT only up front, and on my '96 a single pot.
Suspension
KLX has superior suspension. It's sprung for a 165 pounder from the factory, so perfect for me. The XT suspension is comfortable in town and for trail riding, but can be bottomed on any rough terrain at speed. The KLX has firmer suspension and is more comfortable both on or off road.
Load carrying
XT Holds quite a bit on it's steel frame. Spare gas on the rear of an XT is no problem.
KLX Holds 5lbs on its rear rack, common reports of cracked rear subframes from carrying any more than 5lbs.
Skid Plate
XT comes with a decent aluminum skid plate, at least it's all I've ever needed. KLX really doesn't have much of a skid plate, really needs an aftermarket one to protect bottom/sides of case and radiator hoses.
Forums
www.xt225.com is of course excellent because of the caliber of contributors. There's also a nice long thread on adventure rider for the XT. As for the KLX, I've found kawasakiforums to have lots of information as well as the long-term KLX thread on adventure rider. The drawbacks of course are that you have to wade through all of the flame wars on the other forums, something that is refreshingly absent from this forum.