Common knowledge a flat ten horse power more!!??? the kx has 54 hp and the CR has 55 hp, THAT is common knowledge.

 

I've got an 87 YZ 490 and it hauls a$$! It has a few mods and it beat a perfectly stock CR500 9 out of 10 time in a drag race. The 490 has a boost bottle, Renthal bars, and an Answer pipe and silencer combo. Thats it and it hauls!

 

All I can say is that you are mis-informed. Kawasaki claims 62 horse right on their webpage.

I guess you are right in a way, though. The KX only makes a flat 7 more horse than a CR 500. Sorry, my mistake.

So, do you also contest that the Kaw has a power valve AND an electro-fusion coated cylinder while the Honda does not?

 

Mr. Manilow,

go here and click on learn more unless you WANT to continue to live in denial:

http://www.kawasaki.com/motorcycles/...oss/index.html

 

Your right Arman, since KAWASAKI says it has 62 hp then it must have 62 hp, I mean its not like they would be biased or anything!Go to the Sept.00 issue of Dirt Bike magazine and turn to page 62 unless you want to remain misinformed for the rest of your life, Boner.

 

Dirt Bike magazine wouldn't happen to be biased to its advertisers, would it???

 

I remember reading an artical about the KX500 vs the CR 500. I think I will try to find it. I wanna see who is really right (according to a magazine at least).

 

I give up. Whatever you say. CR's rule. KX's are slow. Kawasaki is biased in their SAE horsepower rating.

Nice talkin with ya's.

 

KXs aren't slow, who said that? Point is the CR makes 1 more hp.Dirt bike would be way less biased than Kawasaki themselves.I've heard that Crap*ss argument 100 times.Let me ask you this, if magazines were biased(lets say in this instance against Kawasaki)why would Kawasaki submit machines to the magazine to be tested?if they knew the mag was biased and they would lose in the face of millions of people across the country, why would they give them machines to be tested?

 

BarryManilow,

I think it is only you and I beating this topic to death - I commend you on sticking to your guns.

Actually, I got my 62 hp number from an old Dirt Bike magazine, also. I still have it at home somewhere - it was a shootout of open bikes back in 96 (when I was in the market for an open classer). It was between a KX, CR, Husaberg 501?, and a KTM 360SX. That is where I at least thought that I saw the higher hp number than the one you have found. I do remember that the old issue did claim the KX was faster because I bought one based on that magazine article since power was all I wanted back then. I haven't seen what the newer Dirt Bike article says but I believe you. I also have never ridden a CR500 and I don't have access to a dyno so who knows?

I also believe that the mags are somewhat biased although not to the point that they would fabricate hp numbers. Some are worse than others but if you read Motocross Action, Suzuki can do nothing right although Suzuki continues to send them new RM's for the shootouts. According to Dirt Rider, if it isn't red it is junk. Dirt Bike has always seemed the fairest to me in this respect.

Anyway, I will try and dig up that old Dirt Bike out of the garage just to be sure I am not going crazy.

Peace,

87r