I was out at a local mx track practice session on Sunday and was beating 2 LTZ400s, and 2 YFZs...all with mods. True I have a lot of work done to my R but c'mon, we're talking about a machine that was engineered 19 years ago. Age doesn't matter, its the quality of the engineering and most would agree that for racing you can't beat the chassis geometry of an R... not to mention the light weight. The YFZ's would run me down on the straights, but as soon as the track got technical there was no comparison. It takes more than a motor to win a race.

 

30 at the crank maybe, about 23-25 rwhp.

 

Well i don't know for sure... but i know that for a fact that stock for stock the 250R will kill the 2001 400ex i had both of them and i will put my $$$ on the 250R n e day of the week

 

Hey but i think the 86 250r's were gear diffent then the 87.. thats what i hear!

 

In stock form, the 87 LT250R is faster than the Honda 250R in a drag. The 250R is a great quad, but not as fast as the 450's until it has some $$ put into it. At least that is my experience.

 

The Lt250R was faster than the TRX250R and the Tecate was faster than both of them. But quads, dirtbikes and trikes were not built for straight-line performance. If they were they wouldn't have 8-9 inches of shock travel. If you want a drag bike buy a Banshee....the drag modifications possible for them are endless. But if you want the lightest, best-handling, most feared quad ever built, ride an R. The 400ex is a "trail bike" without extensive mods and the new 450s are bad to the bone, but expensive. Basically, the 250R is the only quad you can buy for the money that will keep up with or beat a new 450R or YFZ.

 

I have a 1989 250r .20 built by FTZ. I smoke all 450's
The only thing that runs close with me is a built banshee.