The blaster accelerates quicker, has a faster top speed, and is better for the track than the z250. It is also a better quad for the money. 3000 v.s 3800. With the extra 800 dollars you save with the blaster you could make it a very fast quad.

 

I dont think people are looking for a fast 250 or 200 its the ride that counts most of the time. The Z250 has that beat all the way around. sorry to bust your bubble dude.

 

Yeah, sorry to burst your bubble. I have ridden both and I would definately choose a Z250 over a Blaster.

 

is that because you can't start it or you don't know how to use a clutch?

 

The Z250 is more enjoyable to ride imop, especially on the trails!

 

I can do both, start it and ride clutch. Sorry to burst your bubble. But I just like riding a Z250 better than a Blaster. IMO it handles better and has more ground clearance which for the riding I do counts more than the difference in price.

 

Come on (what the he!! is wrong with you???) The Z is by far the better all around bike....
Do you really want to be seen kick starting you blaster ????
Blasters suck,,,,
Tooo small-----------suck
Kick start-------------suck
chain drive-----------suck
Two stroke----------suck
Brakes---------------suck
Suspention----------suck
Soooooo as you can see Blasters really do suck....

By the way how aften does top speed really come into play ????(track or trail)....

 

Couldnt have said it better myself but you forgot one more thing. IT LOOKS BETTER TOO!! so go back to the yamaha forum and start your **** there. I will follow you myself. I like Yamaha but your wayyyy outa line here dude.

 

you guys are on crack. lol

 

To tell you the truth I wouldn't expect to win on either one of them at the track unless they were racing each other. I'd say the two-stroke is probably faster and definitly has more potential but I lot of guys don't like two strokes. I guess you could ride for fun on a track.