Honda TRX300EX or Yamaha Raptor 250?
#13
Honda TRX300EX or Yamaha Raptor 250?
I for one would not recommend a YFZ for basically a beginner.......but if you do lean that way the throttle adjustment screw is there for a reason.....to keep you outta trouble until you are comfortable riding at the level the machine is capable of. As for no reverse on the 300ex and the new 250....the bottom line is manufacturer cost.....thats why they don't come with it. Also on the comments about dragging a no reverse sport quad around, just cut the bars full tilt and spin the atv around...piece of cake. This works 95% of the time and the other 5% is when you are in a really tight spot.
#14
#15
Honda TRX300EX or Yamaha Raptor 250?
i am just your height and weight and i just got a ltz250 and it has plenty of power and speed.its nice not havin a clutch/i like semi auto/ like the raptor and the 300.if u ride trail that can get rough the manual clutch would be a pain.i suggest for u to get a z250 and also i moved up from a raptor 80 also and theres a BIG difference.
#16
Honda TRX300EX or Yamaha Raptor 250?
Autoclutches like on the Honda and Suzuki 250's are nice for beginners and if you ride a lot of more technical terrain, but for the full-on sport quad experience you have to get a fully manual left hand clutch!
The 250's are nice, but their shaft drive rear end limits the amount of suspension travel. The 300EX and Raptor 250 are chain drive and have real sport quad suspension. One advantage the Raptor will have is that is ways considerably less than the EX...making it less of a hassle not having reverse.
The 250's are nice, but their shaft drive rear end limits the amount of suspension travel. The 300EX and Raptor 250 are chain drive and have real sport quad suspension. One advantage the Raptor will have is that is ways considerably less than the EX...making it less of a hassle not having reverse.
#17
Honda TRX300EX or Yamaha Raptor 250?
at 313lbs, why would you need reverse? they both seem nice, but the 250 has a better displacement-to-weight ratio, and since they are both air cooled, sohc 2 valve engines with about 9.5:1compression, im guessing that they put out the same amount of power PER CC, which means the 250 will be faster than the 300 aka ?286? ?276? I know that the 300 isnt a true 300, its probably only about 286cc....
If you understand what im saying take this for example (THESE ARE NOT REAL HP NUMBERS, I MADE THEM UP TO HELP MAKE MY THEORY/REASONING CLEARER) Lets say that the 300(286)ex has 20hp. Therefore, it pumps out 0.06993 HP/CC. Since the 250 and the 300 have basically the same engine design, the 250 will also pump out 0.06993HP/CC. HOWEVER, the 250 has only 249cc, vs the 286 of the 300. Therefore the 250 would have 17.4HP. The resulting power-to-weight ratio's for these quads is as follows: 0.05563HP/LB for the 250 and 0.053619HP/LB (assuming the 300 weighs only 373lbs)
THEREFORE THE 250 will be FASTER than the 300. I repeat, THE 250 will be FASTER than the 300.
But remember that these numbers are fictional, the HP for the 250 will probably be 14 or 15, and the 300 is probably 17HP or 18HP
Thats all i've got to say
If you understand what im saying take this for example (THESE ARE NOT REAL HP NUMBERS, I MADE THEM UP TO HELP MAKE MY THEORY/REASONING CLEARER) Lets say that the 300(286)ex has 20hp. Therefore, it pumps out 0.06993 HP/CC. Since the 250 and the 300 have basically the same engine design, the 250 will also pump out 0.06993HP/CC. HOWEVER, the 250 has only 249cc, vs the 286 of the 300. Therefore the 250 would have 17.4HP. The resulting power-to-weight ratio's for these quads is as follows: 0.05563HP/LB for the 250 and 0.053619HP/LB (assuming the 300 weighs only 373lbs)
THEREFORE THE 250 will be FASTER than the 300. I repeat, THE 250 will be FASTER than the 300.
But remember that these numbers are fictional, the HP for the 250 will probably be 14 or 15, and the 300 is probably 17HP or 18HP
Thats all i've got to say
#18