Quote from first test of the Tecate 4 in the May '87 Dirt Wheels: " When compared to the Honda Fourtrax 250R's powerplant, the Kawasaki's low-end powerband seems weak. The mid-range hit is excellent, the true meat and potatoes of the Tecate-4's motor. It will rev out on top but falls a little flat on the very top end."

The test of the 1989 LT 250R in 3 & 4 Wheeler Action had the quote I already stated.

I purchased and rode quads starting in 1985. Our first quad was an LT250R. We've also owned a Tecate 4. We STILL have a Tecate 3 wheeler, which was a very fast scoot, even in basically stock form (it's currently receiving a KX500 engine). We STILL own 3 Honda 250R's (my husband's 86, my 88 & 89). We also own a Banshee.

Our Kawie and Suzuki quad 250's went up for sale very shortly after they were purchased becuase they just couldn't keep up with the R's in the sand, even after installing a pipe and rad valve.

In 1987, Suzuki sold more 250R's than Honda. Suzuki also built the LT for many years after Honda ceased production. However, on any given weekend at Glamis or the Oregon dunes (the only areas I am intimately familiar with), you will see 100 Hondas for every Suzuki, and even fewer Tecate 4's.

I'm sorry if I've stepped on any toes. The Suzuki and Kawasaki 250's can be made to be fast, and I'm sure there's riders out there who own a few that can beat some Hondas. All I'm saying is that in STOCK form (which is what we're talking about), the Honda 250R was a faster powerplant.

The modern powervalve design is a good option. It has allowed better low-end power on the Banshee and for the FL-cylindered TRX 250R's. Back ten years ago though, it was still problematic and maybe not the best option for a quad powerplant.

 

I think pretty much everyone by now knows you can't believe anything dirtwheels say anymore. I remember back in 86 when they wrote that the 86 LT250 was better than the 86 trx250R. And everyone knows today the the LT wasn't even close to Hondas 250R. In the real world things are quite a bit different.

 

Pam,

First off let me say that I really liked your torque explanation analogy of the 250lb guy on the CR80 and XR250 - that was great and I will be stealing that for the future.

Like Samson though, I have never heard anyone say that a stock 250R was faster than a Suz Qracer or a Tecate 4. Better? Yes. Faster? No. I have heard that the Tecate 4 had a dismal chassis and that the handling of the Qracer was not up to par with the Honda, but I have always heard that both were faster than the Honda in a straight line. I have also heard that the Tecate had a monster motor in it with WAAY more power than a TRX250R.

These are just the common consensus of opinions I have heard though - nothing I have experienced firsthand.

 

<< These are just the common consensus of opinions I have heard though - nothing I have experienced firsthand. >>



Thanks for your honesty [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]

We've owned all three. Truely, the Tecate 4 was a huge disappointment, especially since we already had a Tecate 3, and that thing ripped (it was a 250R beater!). We really expected great things from the 4.

The Suzuki wasn't even in the running. Everyone raced the LT250R for the first year or two of quad racing, then they all switched to the TRX. Although the handling characteristics were the main reason, the power of the TRX was better, and had more overrev than the LT.

There will always be people out there who believe that their Tecate 4, or their LT250 is faster than any TRX, but all you have to do is look at what's still out there winning. Since aftermarket chassis are available (and have been for the last 8 years), don't you think Laeger and everyone else would be building a chassis for these other engines if they were a faster, better option than the TRX?

 

Pam,

I am not disagreeing with you since I own an 87 250R and wouldn't trade it for anything. I was just not that awfully impressed with the power it made when I first got it and it was stock although it would still beat a stock 400EX. My other bike is a 2000 KX 250 and you can't even compare the power between the two - I guess that is what 13 years of technology will do. I don't think it has much to do with the power valve (like you said earlier), but more to do with the Nickasil coating on the cylinder walls of the new 2 strokes.

Another thing: it is fairly easy to make any 2 stroke faster (my R is worlds faster now than it was stock) but it is pretty hard to make something handle better .. ie change the frame geometry. That is why Laegers, Lone star, etc, etc, etc all use 250R geometry in my opinion.

 

Q]My other bike is a 2000 KX 250 and you can't even compare the power between the two - I guess that is what 13 years of technology will do.[/i] >>



ALL two wheeled m/x bikes were quicker than their four wheeled counterparts. Even if you had a 1986 KX, you'd find it was quicker and harder hitting than your 250R.

Only the 2nd &amp; 3rd year Tecate 3 wheeler had a true m/x engine. To save money, Kawasaki basically just shoved their KX engine into a three wheeler chassis. It was fast, but broke lots, and the gearing was weird.

For some reason (lawsuits by ATV'ers are the first thing that come to my mind), the manufacturers trusted their dirt bike purchaser with more speed and performance than their ATV purchasers. That is still true today.

 

Pam,

Why don't the manufacturers trust ATV'ers?

Go check out the post elsewhere in the Honda section that asks whether or not the yellow EX is faster than the red one. That to me speaks volumes about the intelligence level of many of our fellow ATVer's. That could have something to do with them not trusting us with high horsepower machinery.

How did you get to know so much about bikes anyway? Do you have a sister?

 

Pam, the reason why the aftermarket companies use the Honda motor more, is because eveyone has Honda 250R quads. Honda was making them from 86 till 89 like there was no tommorow. I wouldn't be surprised if Honda made more that Suzuki and Kawi combined. I've seen way more 85 and 86 LT 250's than I have 87 and up. They seem to be pretty scarce around here.

As for the way you described the Tecate 4 powerband, it seems to be WAY off from what other owners of Tecate 4's have described it. They claimed that the Tecate 4 had an incredible top end pull that could hang with a stock banshee, and would waste the the Honda 250R. Is it possible the Tecate 4 you owned was a lemon?

 

&lt;&lt;They claimed that the Tecate 4 had an incredible top end pull that could hang with a stock banshee, and would waste the the Honda 250R. Is it possible the Tecate 4 you owned was a lemon? &gt;&gt;

Nope, rode more than a few before we bought. We knew the bike was slower than an R in stock form, but thought there'd be more options for the power-valved Tecate as far as the aftermarket stuff went. We were wrong! I read that same article in 3&amp;4 Wheel action. Thought the part about the Banshee was pretty funny, since a STOCK 250R can also beat a STOCK Banshee ('cause the OEM pipes on the Banshee were so bad)In fact, there's not much that can't beat a stock Banshee -- our theory is that Yamaha did that on purpose so the bike wouldn't kill so many idiots [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-tongue.gif[/img]

&lt;&lt;I wouldn't be surprised if Honda made more that Suzuki and Kawi combined.&gt;&gt;

Yup, the numbers were higher for the Honda, but not by much more than the Suzuki. But only becuase Suzuki had about 5 more years worth of production. The Kawie was way behind, but Kawasaki never produces big numbers of anything for release here in the states (for instance -- the KLX 300, only 2,000 are released every year here, pretty dismal!).

Oh, BTW, do any of you know when the last 250R was actually produced?

 

hohohohahahahehehe. A Stock 250R beating a stock banshee. Now I'm the one wiping the tears from my eyes. Even a piped 250R won't take a stock banshee, I've seen this personally. I own a 99 banshee that has LRD pipes and silencers, and much other stuff as well. And I can easily say that the stock pipes are very restrictive, but not so bad as to have a stock 250R beat it. But the 250R may beat the shee if you put some bad gas into it and flattened all the tires [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

Anyway this has gone on long enough. Lets just agree to disagree ok?