KX Riders

Maintenance & Technical => KX500 Original => Topic started by: KXFARMBOY on December 15, 2007, 09:23:07 AM

Title: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: KXFARMBOY on December 15, 2007, 09:23:07 AM
With the KX having a "square" bore and stroke,and the CR 500 having a much more "oversquare" bore does the KX feel a lot stronger than a CR at low rpm's? Also is peak power about the same? Naturally we're talking stock against stock, or piped verses piped.
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: stewart on December 15, 2007, 03:50:00 PM
two stoke theory i have read says  two strokes run best sqaure like same stroke as bore size i think the k 5 is right on
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: apple on December 15, 2007, 05:58:56 PM
I had an 89 CR500, and a buddy had an 87 CR500. I heard that they toned the motors down since the 80`s.
I know mine had a powerband like a 250 and if you weren`t on top of it while on the gas the bike would toss you if you didn`t pay serious attention. My buddy`s 87 was even sicker. That thing made my knuckles hurt from the pulling that thing did, talking about stretched knuckles. Plus those things had lots of headshake. The KX is tons better on the low end, plus top end seems pretty close to the 89 I had.
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: gowen on December 18, 2007, 12:37:13 AM
I've been looking for a mid 86-'87 CR500 for that very reason. I've ridden one and loved it.
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: Mick on December 18, 2007, 05:15:40 AM
The KX does make a hair more power right off the bottom and on top.  But having rebuilt both of mine now I was surprised how much lighter the CR's crank and flywheel are.  The old CR feels a good deal more nimble at any speed then does the KX.
And also the CR isn't as pipey as KX riders would like to believe.  True the KX is the king of broad power, but the CR is the only bike that can run beside it.
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: stock500 on December 18, 2007, 03:30:42 PM
I swore that a 500 was just too wild after riding my friends CR500.  It seemed like the second you touched the throttle the ass end was fish tailing out of controll.  However I got sick of riding 4-strokes in the dunes and getting left behind so I got the KX500.  My bike is a 2004, and 100% stock.  The power is smooth as glass as long as you don't stab it.  I love my bike and get a kick out of riding it in the dunes!
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: CR480R on December 18, 2007, 10:38:10 PM
As far as low end goes on my 98 cr500 ( I owned for seven years) and on my buddy Justins 88 and his 01 when you have a paddle on the bike in the sand you have to burn the clutch and push with your feet untill the bike comes up on a plane or It will die....    It could be because the cr500 is a pipey non power valve haveing back flipping piece of s**t.

Sounds to me like something may have been wrong with your bike... The '90 CR500 I had was neither pipey nor a clutch burner with a brand new 10paddle hooker... I havent had the chance to own or ride a KX500 yet, but I do know a properly tuned CR500 is far from being a POS... My only gripe was the headshake at speed, I could see one easily getting away from a smaller rider...
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: KXcam22 on December 19, 2007, 07:29:06 AM
My 87 CR500 was very pipey.  It was the only open class bike I ever owned that wouldn't do long controlled wheelies on a gravel road.  Either no wheelie or wheely over backwards.  I had to put a steahly on just to ride it.   In comparison, I put a friend on my K5 who has just started riding, normally an insane thing to do. KX is such a pussycat that he had no trouble riding it without dying. I must admit though, that my 1982 CR480 had about the best powerband going strictly for MX.  Cam.
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: Mick on December 20, 2007, 05:58:44 AM
Anyone that has a remote grasp on what a power valve is and how it works knows It's impossible to have good bottom end and good top end on a two stroke engine without one.

I agree. I wouldn't argue the CR doesn't come on sudden and can't scream like a banshee.  Your explanation of how a KX pulls your arms is also taken right out of my mouth.  I suppose I can't use my current CR for this discussion, but I'll try anyway.  I have a PC exhaust and 39mm carb and it pulls smooth off the bottom and runs similar to a KX on top.  It doesn't match a KX at any point but maybe the midrange...but it's "close".  In sand drags I have matched my '89 KX 50/50 every time.  The KX also has extensive motor work.  In my experience it's the CR's ability to rev quicker that benefits it the most against a KX.

Overall I'm impressed how linear and strong my CR is for not having a power valve.  And I still havn't had any motor work done yet.
I have never ridden a CR I thought was gutless or needed clutch abuse to get moving.  If that's been your experience I have to beleive the Honda's you rode were clapped out.
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: don46 on December 20, 2007, 09:07:40 AM
The Honda has a shorter stroke, smaller flywheel, and smaller crank webs, all this equals lighter quicker revving. So, In my opinion the Honda will rev quicker, but doesn't have the Torque of the heavier flywheeled, longer stroke K5 and thats power valve aside. I don't think the CR has any more top end than a KX, IMO on a stock bike it gets ther quicker. I have a modified 250 ignition that I would guarantee you will rev quicker than the Honda, I've had it on twice, now I'm trying to figure out how to tame it a bit right off the bottom, it way to viscious, way more so than the PVL. I'm thinking a programable ignition that I can retard the timing a bit right off the bottom, then advance it through the mid and retard again on top for the over rev.

Honda makes a good bike, they just aren't for me. This is one of things that will never be agreed upon, Honda riders will swear by it and kawi riders will swear at it. :-D
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: Mick on December 20, 2007, 02:15:30 PM
This is what Dirt Rider had to say about the '92 CR500.  (Nov 91, pg. 35)

"No one ever accused the CR500R of having a meek motor, but the new version is very easy to control.  Now it's even smoother than the KX500."

They didn't say "about" or "nearly as smooth".  They said "SMOOTHER" than the KX.  And the CR got wider gears in the year to follow.
All I'm saying is the 500 motors havn't changed much since '92.  And a properly running CR isn't pipey or hard to ride. I have to say something because my primary ride is a CR500AF.  And it's no slouch in the power department, in fact it doesn't give up much to my ported '89 KX500.

I like both motors.  If my KX motor was dressed in aluminum I might ride it more *shrug*  But as it sits the KX has a paddle tire that hasn't come off in 4-5 years.  But the CR gets ridden weekly on track and trail.
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: gowen on December 20, 2007, 11:36:43 PM
The Honda has a shorter stroke, smaller flywheel, and smaller crank webs, all this equals lighter quicker revving. So, In my opinion the Honda will rev quicker, but doesn't have the Torque of the heavier flywheeled, longer stroke K5 and thats power valve aside. I don't think the CR has any more top end than a KX, IMO on a stock bike it gets ther quicker. I have a modified 250 ignition that I would guarantee you will rev quicker than the Honda, I've had it on twice, now I'm trying to figure out how to tame it a bit right off the bottom, it way to viscious, way more so than the PVL. I'm thinking a programable ignition that I can retard the timing a bit right off the bottom, then advance it through the mid and retard again on top for the over rev.

Honda makes a good bike, they just aren't for me. This is one of things that will never be agreed upon, Honda riders will swear by it and kawi riders will swear at it. :-D

Do share? I don't see how you can get quicker than a PVL, when the flywheel basicly weighs less than my old '98 kx125s flywheel..
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: CR480R on December 21, 2007, 01:27:05 AM
This Is a good example of what Im talking about this is a cr500 under heavy load listen to the engine and how it labors when Its not on the pipe. watch the vid a couple of times and pay attention to how the engine goes on and off the pipe and  how abruptly the power comes on. Now imagine ridding that bike with a stock wheel base on steep mountain trails with rocks and shale Like where I live and you may understand why I do not miss that bike.
   
                              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHmBMSMXbUM

This video is a horrible example... Just because the guy fanned the clutch and got bucked off doesnt mean the bike is too pipey... I have seen many hillclimb vids of KX riders getting tossed like that too... To me it looks like the guy was either in the wrong gear or had too much tire... not to mention his riding sucks... And its hard telling what has been done to the bike...

What Dirt rider failed to mention was they detuned the cr500 because a lot of people got hurt on the earlier bikes and people were scared to ride or buy it and sales of the bike were dismal to the point they almost quit procucing the bike. Magazines will seldom strait up bash a manufacturers bike do to the fact companies like honda give them a lot of money to push their products. Smooth power delivery is a nice way of saying they took a bunch of compession out of the bike to soften the hit but that was a trade off that made the bike hard to start but I'm sure yours starts first kick every time though right.

From my experience the "Detuned" bikes start even better than the older ones... a stock '01 CR is a proven one kick wonder... My '90 had the compression bumped(190psi vs. 150psi) and it still didnt have any kind of rider ejecting "hit"... I dont doubt that the KX has a nicer powerband, but I think you are foolish to assume all CR's have the same problems yours did...
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: Mick on December 21, 2007, 04:20:41 AM
BDI I'm not arguing that the KX doesn't run stronger.  I'm just saying you obviously had a bad experience that anybody else would be hard pressed to share.  Your CR sounds like it needed a fresh piston...

Roger Decoster on the '95 CR500R (Dirt Bike '95 pg. 60)
"Right up front, I have to say this is my favorite motor...you can put it in a tall gear and let the revs drop to a point you can hear each power pulse...CR has gotten mellow over the years...on top the revs are choked off by chicanes in the silencer...most appealing aspect of the Honda motor is how civil it is...Honda was able to make the power delivery smooth without using excessive flywheel weight, which makes the bike feel surprisingly nimble."

Decoster on the KX, "comes on more aggressively than the Honda at first...in stock form, the KX should be able to outpull the CR on top...clumsy feel and slow throttle response...jetting the Kawasaki is a little rough...engine runs raspy off the bottom...shifting and clutch pull are good on the KX, but not as smooth as the Honda's."

I'm not biased towards one bike or the other.  I own and ride both.  But everybody should know the CR has got a darn good motor.

And yes my CR starts one kick  :wink:  Doesn't your KX?
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: don46 on December 21, 2007, 07:49:06 AM
The Honda has a shorter stroke, smaller flywheel, and smaller crank webs, all this equals lighter quicker revving. So, In my opinion the Honda will rev quicker, but doesn't have the Torque of the heavier flywheeled, longer stroke K5 and thats power valve aside. I don't think the CR has any more top end than a KX, IMO on a stock bike it gets ther quicker. I have a modified 250 ignition that I would guarantee you will rev quicker than the Honda, I've had it on twice, now I'm trying to figure out how to tame it a bit right off the bottom, it way to viscious, way more so than the PVL. I'm thinking a programable ignition that I can retard the timing a bit right off the bottom, then advance it through the mid and retard again on top for the over rev.

Honda makes a good bike, they just aren't for me. This is one of things that will never be agreed upon, Honda riders will swear by it and kawi riders will swear at it. :-D

Do share? I don't see how you can get quicker than a PVL, when the flywheel basicly weighs less than my old '98 kx125s flywheel..


The PVL rotor is lighter than the 250 flywheel, but the 250 ignition is way quicker than the PVL, the only thing that makes sense to me, the 250 is digital and changes based on rpm and throttle position ( I use the 250 carb) the PVL is analog. I use the PVL on a nitrous bike, the compression is closer to stock, when I tried it on a bike with High compression I couldn't get it started, don't think I could spin it fast enough to generate the juice needed. Any way this is a work in progress because its way to nasty in it's current state.

Since this is the KX forum maybe we should just ignore the KX vs. CR thing while everybody is still happy :-D
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: Mick on December 21, 2007, 10:25:59 AM
I let my buddy I grew up ridding with ride it for the first time at the dry lake bed with new tire It was not five minuts before he looped the bike out and he was not even trying to wheelie it. I went for a ride one day after it rained I came out of a sand wash on to a trail there was a loose spot followed by some rock I roled the throttle on the bike broke  loose reved to the moon hooked up when my ass hit the ground my feet were still on the pegs.

 :-D that's a funny story!!

Problem is there isn't a powervalve made that can fix stupid.  Bottom line is you'd better be smarter then the average bear to ride a 500 two stroke. Or you'll find yourself on your ass with your feet still on the pegs.

I'm glad your KX puts 70 horses to the ground.  That's a lot more then my KX or CR does at the crank.  But I can d**n sure ride the piss out of them both.  Sounds like you needed a flywheel weight, reed spacer and a 15 tooth on the countershaft.  They also sell 450s for guys who can't control that throttle hand thing.
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: Hillclimb#42 on December 21, 2007, 12:08:49 PM
 Easy BDI, everybody at least likes ripping the two wheelers. I can't see the Cr hitting harder with no powervalve and shorter stroke. It has to hit its max r's faster, but it seems that the kx would have higher rev limit. I'm totally guessing about that though.
 I know that the hillclimbers and recreational riders that I know all consider the Cr a more rider friendly bike. It has some pro's like easy to find parts, no powervalve to get carboned, and I always heard a more controlable bottom end and better braking.
 I personally throw all that out, because riding something everyone thinks is too fast to ride kicks ass. Now that the k5 is running awesome and set up like it is,(thanks to alot of you guys) I couldn't trade it straight across for a new 450 and think I got a good deal.
 When the k5 is on, it is the bike to have for brute force power.
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: CR480R on December 21, 2007, 12:47:34 PM
I'm sure it is a horrible video It does not support your argument and it shows how abruptly the power can come on. I must be a fool because I did not realize that my cr500 was the only one that honda made that did not have a power valve because that was the only thing wrong with It.

The only thing that video supports is a guy that cannot ride... And while it might not support my argument, it d**n sure doesnt support yours... IMO bogging a bike down to a dead stop with the throttle wicked and pounding the clutch is not an accurate display of power delivery...

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvcZfWjUAQ8
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=276Wks3KRDw

I guess KX 500's must be pipey too... lol...    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeGYgM3kovQ
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: don46 on December 21, 2007, 02:40:53 PM
I really hate to get into discussion about the CR vs KX, always it's an individual thing, we all tune our bikes differently, mine may run one way and somebody else's may run another. The 86 Honda was a brute, many friends quit riding because of that bike, after 86 there was a continual trend to make them more rider friendly (read detuned), not to say they were dogs, they were'nt 85's.I've ridden both, and in my opinion the cr will not run with a good running KX. As far as chassis go, I think the cr was better than the stock KX, but, you will note the BDI, myself and many others are using different chassis, now they handle like 250's,  additionally I've ridden Service  Honda's, Mine handles much better, maybe I spend more time on suspension.

Again at the end of the day, it comes down to rider preference.

So, all you Honda guys, maybe you need to go where you'll feel the love:  http://cr500riders.com/cgi/yabb/YaBB.pl

This is a KX site, period. sorry for the bluntness but I don't want to continue with the "mines better than yours" .

Lets talk about the good stuff, Stewart, how can I get some more HP, do you want to try my 250 ignition on the dyno?

I sure love my KX500's
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: Mick on December 21, 2007, 06:43:28 PM
I am a member of CR500riders.  The fact that I also ride a KX is why I come here.  Gotta find someway of making use of a good two stroke motor because a guy wouldn't get squat selling it.  Naturally having one AF I'd like a green one too. But I can't afford to buy another one of AJ's bikes without selling the one I got...which isn't happening.

Interesting thread.  I'm not looking to change anybody's mind,  or get burnt by some green riders.  I love the KX500.  It is the king of horsepower.  But it really isn't good for much but moving sand.  It can punish a sand dune better than anything...It's just that I'm a moderately competitive MXer, and you can't stay up front at the track these days aboard a KX500.  I'm sure those steel perimeter frames do help some.  If only GP riders like Paul Malin thought they were worth a darn maybe Kawasaki would have produced them?

BDI sadly I don't think we're gonna meet at the monkey bars after school.  The sand dunes I ride on are in Southern Idaho or the coast of Oregon.  If that's in your neighborhood then this should be good  :wink:  But I'm gonna take a stab at it and say you are in the South West??  Because that's pretty much all you do right?  Ride sand dunes?
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: kieran on December 21, 2007, 09:53:40 PM
This is cool. Someone just starts a thread labelled KX Vs CR, and everyone just gets to sit back and watch the fur fly!!! :-D :-D :-D
Mint!! :evil:
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: CR480R on December 21, 2007, 10:26:10 PM
What the hell are you honda lovers doing here anyway trying to figure out how to make your bikes fast? I think It's kinda cool normally I have to spend a bunch of money and drive all the way to the sand dunes to hurt some cr500 owners feelings but I can do it right here for free. :wink: What sand dunes do you guys go riding at anyway?  I sure would like to go riding with some top riders like yourselves maybe you guys could show me how to use some throttle control.  :-D :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I am here because my next big-bore is going to be a KX500 and I enjoy learning about them... I love green bikes and I already have a couple KX250 powered machines that I am workin on.. And if you think you are hurting anyones feelings by bashing Honda's you are wrong... It doesnt hurt me one bit that you had a bad experience with your CR... I just find it a bit rediculous for you to claim them as unridable and try to back it up with several videos showing nothing but rider error... Thats all... The way you guys describe your KX's makes me want one even more, I almost had one last month but I was a day late coming up with the cash... The time will come...

So, all you Honda guys, maybe you need to go where you'll feel the love:  http://cr500riders.com/cgi/yabb/YaBB.pl

This is a KX site, period. sorry for the bluntness but I don't want to continue with the "mines better than yours" .

Who said anything in this thread about CR's being better? Or even equal? So does having past experience with some CR's that were not back-flipping rider-ejecting unridable POS machines make a person into a honda lover all the sudden? Does someone thinking that the hondas are decent bikes somehow threaten you? Isnt this a CR vs. KX thread? Isnt the nature of a thread like this going to evoke a variety of opinions?
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: Hillclimb#42 on December 22, 2007, 04:45:31 AM
 Its all good. I think they are all pretty close. Kx's, YZ's, Cr's, KTM's, (maybe not RM's), but like Don says it is all about rider preference. Some guys might like to ride a moped thru the woods.
 This thread is all about comparing the two (Kx vs CR) and you have to have some CR experince to even have a comment. That doesn't make you a CR lover or hater. Everyone would have to expect that the Kx gets the thumbs up on this site and will get the thumbs down on the CR 500 site. It would not make alot of sense for guys dicussing kx5 mods to wish they rode a CR. Honestly, I have beat CR's and they have beat me. The same is true about mx's or street, ice circle trak or whatever. Again rider preference.
 The best point that I see so far is again by Don saying that everyone tunes and sets up their suspension differently. They kx's and Cr's design's may not have changed much since the 80's, but there is endless things you can do to set them up. Also you have to figure that rider skill level factors in to the equasion. We are kinda trying to compare apples to oranges, when generalizing like we are, but at least we have something interesting to comment to and read about.
 Thanks for geting this thread going guys, but we might as well debate politics or religion.
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: Mick on December 22, 2007, 06:06:09 AM
If you made one aggressive lap on a motocross track on my bike with out winding up in a wheel chair that would make you one bad ass mother.

I suppose I would.  On the other hand I can stay up front all day aboard my CR.  However the KX is quite the dune bike.  Maybe one day we can go head to head on our green machines?  But my 500s are two different bikes, different colors, and seperate purposes.

(http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f210/bigmickstar/badassbikes.jpg)
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: stewart on December 22, 2007, 06:37:24 AM
in  the past25years i have gotten to own and race agianst  sevral cr 500s yz 490 and 465s  and miaco 440 and 490 kx 420s and 500s  etc  ,  all were fun nothing like a big bore 2 stroke,,,but i think the k5 moter has proven the most reliable and able to be modifyed  to all types of ridding ..and i have yet to lose a drag race on one of my k5s  
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: FuriouSly on December 22, 2007, 08:31:32 AM
If you made one aggressive lap on a motocross track on my bike with out winding up in a wheel chair that would make you one bad ass mother.

I suppose I would.  On the other hand I can stay up front all day aboard my CR.  However the KX is quite the dune bike.  Maybe one day we can go head to head on our green machines?  But my 500s are two different bikes, different colors, and seperate purposes.

(http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f210/bigmickstar/badassbikes.jpg)

Hehehe.... ahhh turning green with envy and red with anger!  :roll:  Nice bikes bro...  that KX is a bit old for the track though, no wonder your CR feels better.

I am not sure of too many people that ran CR or KX 5's on MX tracks, either in the past or present...  not the arena for these bikes and if they did it was the minority.  Open desert/sand/hill climbing are their forte' it seems to me?? Or am I wrong??

I still am from the belief that the rider still seperates the bikes and the talk....  one of my friends recently schooled me at Dumont Sand Dunes with his '00 YZ250 and me on my '00 KX5.  This was close/tight MX style sand track riding and he is alot smaller/lighter than me... better rider on a smaller bike in its environment = me eating some roost....

Meaning?? If I could get my KX to make 100HP with the trickest powervalve system I should beat him....  don't think so...

KX has a nicer seat and a powervalve  -  CR has a decent seat and no powervalve but better geometry

I'm a better rider than you... he is a better rider than me...  any pro is better than us all...

By the way, I have one of each as well...

Sly

Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: don46 on December 22, 2007, 12:18:32 PM
I
  It's just that I'm a moderately competitive MXer, and you can't stay up front at the track these days aboard a KX500.  
 

Fact is you really can't stay up front on a perimeter framed 500 either, the new 450's will walk them on the track, doesn't matter whether red or green. You may get the holeshot, and hold on for a few laps, the 500's are to brutal for the track. The only Hondas I own are pit bikes, the rest are all green, they rip.
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: don46 on December 22, 2007, 12:55:19 PM
     I'm sure those steel perimeter frames do help some.  
An aluminum frame doesn't automatically make you faster, I'm on my fourth generation perimeter framed 500, and I think the 05 250f is one of the sweetest handling bikes.

Here's my Aluminum framed 500, I bet I  have alot less money in mine than you do. to insinuate that your Service Honda 500 is automatically better than the K5's on this site is a bunch of bull sh*t.  Don't get me wrong, you have a nice bike but it's not all that.
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: CR480R on December 22, 2007, 02:42:00 PM
Here's my Aluminum framed 500, I bet I  have alot less money in mine than you do.

That has got to be one of the sweetest looking green machines ever... How do the vibes in a AL frame compare to those of a steel framed bike?
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: CR480R on December 22, 2007, 03:57:28 PM
Let me get this strait you can't even afford a used Kx500 and the Kx dirt bikes you have don't even run. So you are just some wanabe Kx rider and your here talking s**t to me :x  Maybe you should concider posting when you have something useful to tell us about.

NO i was not talking s**t... I was simply calling bull s**t on your exagerated statements... I had the money one day too late... I guess living from paycheck to paycheck means I know nothing about bikes? And my KX powered machines are atvs... What do they have to do with my previously owned CR500? or yours? Does bashing my credibility in any way validate your BS posts? Since you are so desparate for something to post, why dont you just start a CR500 bashing thread?
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: CR480R on December 22, 2007, 04:31:47 PM
Thats a good idea Because cr500s suck ass. just like the jack asses that run around preaching how great they are.

Who posted on here preaching about CR500's being great? I merely stated that I thought mine was a decent machine, and Mick stated that his CR was nearly equal to HIS KX... Why are you are you so bitter about two people disagreeing with you? Do you lose sleep at night knowing there are people out there who dont consider the CR's to have a powerband like a mechanical bull? If so you might consider therapy...
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: Mick on December 22, 2007, 05:54:08 PM
I don't think Honda's aluminum frame makes anything faster.  It's taken them a number of designs now to finally get it working well.  I just don't recall Kawasaki's perimeter design in the '90s working well with the 500 is all.  I'm sure their current chassis works better.

Yeah my KX is a little dated, even by 500 standards.  Still runs like a locamotive though  :-D  But no steel framed 500 is really a pleasant ride once it gets serious.

Track conditions can make competing on a 500 difficult.  But I'm no Pro rider.  In the A / B classes there isn't any downside to riding a 500AF.  For those of you who do ride 500 conversions you should have an idea what it's like...my CR just doesn't cause as much gyro effect on the chassis as you're used to.

BDI I meant we could go offroading!  I've only recently started racing MX.  Trails are my bread and butter.  And the AF is quite the trail bike.  I guess you ride a Honda on the trails also.  I think that's great...I only ride my KX in the desert too.

I'm not sure way the topic has gone so far off base.  I've said it once and I'll say it again.  The KX is faster then a CR.  And is better suited for the dunes than anything else.  Maybe folks got confused because I said the Honda has a good motor?  I guess I like it because it makes a lot of juice in the mid range where I ride most and builds power as fast as I want it to.  The KX feels like an XR in comparison.  Just kind of sluggish and non responsive *shrug*  And then of course the KX will scream until the cows come home.  Something I don't think any CR could ever do.  As much fun as it is to do 5th gear wheelies at the dunes on the KX, the motor's combersome heavy gyro feel just doesn't go well with serious track or trail use.  And no steel or alloy perimeter frame in the world is going to fix that.

We don't need to get all hot and bothered under the collar over this.  We can all agree to disagree I guess.  I would much rather see some more brilliant ideas from Stewart on how to make my green bike go faster.  That is way I'm here...not to argue over how some guy's didn't have their CR's running for crap.
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: CR480R on December 22, 2007, 11:07:51 PM
No why do you take everything I say out of context If you read my post I said in seven years my bike looped on me four times. I blame that solely On the crapy design and power out put of the of the cr500. But I have two ass holes saying Im stupid I can't ride and my bike must be clapped out And then you say Im saying s**t I never said like the bike is unridable and it bucks like a mechanical bull and Im full of bull s**t like I just decided to make some s**t up If you go back to the first page other people said the same thing I did.

Actually BDI, I think it may be you that is reading into this too much... I have not posted one thing about you being stupid or unable to ride... I only said it would be foolish to assume ALL CR500's behaved the same as YOURS did... I also said the video links that you posted did not support your "pipey" arguement ... Not a big deal it's just a forum and that is my opinion... Its unfortunate that you view my posts as personal attacks rather than just a simple debate... If an experienced dirtbike rider had never ridden a CR500 before (like the guy that started this thread)heard your description of the CR they would most likely be afraid to ever get on one... The throttle doesn't open itself... Sure the lighter rotating mass allows quicker throttle response that could potentially cause surprising situations if being careless when traveling from sticky to slick ground with the throttle wicked...  But at no point in the rpm range with traction has any CR500 I have ridden ('88,'90,'95,'96,'01) had a rider ejecting hp spike or hit in the power delivery...Most CR's are in a very mellow state of tune...  I admit its very easy to see how the PV lacking CR with the port timing and compression alterations could become pipey(like the CR80 you used for earlier for comparison)and difficult to ride, or how the lack of a PV limits the potential broadness of the powerband... But how would a exhaust valve benefit the low-end power characteristics of a honda when the bike is already tuned for a low-mid range output to begin with? Variable port timing just allows more top-end power to made with out sacrificing bottom end. A PV isnt going to fix the characteristics caused by a light rotating mass... Did you ever try adding some flywheel mass to better suit your needs?
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: FuriouSly on December 23, 2007, 04:02:12 AM
Hehehe...  might need to give this thread a break if there is no real "new" info that pertains to the title...  CR5 power is great because I like the hit, similiar to a Yamaha Banshee - fun in the sand with some decent low end grunt and the bar/seat postion puts you a bit more forward to help with the geometry.  A CR5 is a better hillclimb/drag race motor because it creates power immediately like a Banshee (which is still king of the hill).

KX5 power is a bit weak/sluggish on the bottom developing great midrange and signing off about 7/8 throttle.  More like a Four Stroke powerband which is better for the track than a CR5 in my opinion.  You can build a KX5 motor for track in a newer Aluminum frame and work on the traction issue (tires, clutch, suspension) and have a very competitive nice handling piece of machinery.  You can also build a KX5 for the desert/sand and have a very ridable bike with a super manageable powerband.

CR5=drags/climbs/desert/open sand - very physically tiring powerband to the rider which needs more throttle/clutch control for tighter riding disciplines

KX5=track/tight and open sand/desert - more layed back stock geometry which makes it bad for the track but great for open riding.  Powerband is more user friendly for technical slow speed riding.

Granted modified motors and frames change alot of the variables but so does a rider.

Sly
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: KXFARMBOY on December 23, 2007, 09:33:58 AM
I am so sorry, I started this thread just looking for info on these two bikes, since I am interested in buying one of them. I did not mean to start a war, I'm really not a troublemaker. Please let this be the last post on this thread!
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: FuriouSly on December 23, 2007, 10:21:23 AM
I am so sorry, I started this thread just looking for info on these two bikes, since I am interested in buying one of them. I did not mean to start a war, I'm really not a troublemaker. Please let this be the last post on this thread!

Don't sweat it KXfb.  BDI likes to flex his forum skills from time to time.

It really depends on how you want to ride the bike.  Track, desert, sand, hills, trails/mountains, or just all around.  A 500 is alot of bike for just cruising around and is usually riden or built by more experienced riders that are tryin to fill a niche to its fullest.

A general question as vague as yours will always tend to have the thread go off in different directions, so keep your inquiries focused to get the answer you may be looking for.   :-D :wink:

On a side note:  the CR5 has "WAY BETTER" fit and finish than a KX5.  More refined with better quality control and design to its parts/manufacturing.

Sly
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: kieran on December 23, 2007, 02:13:10 PM
Oh this thread is entertaining :-D

Keep in mind that jetting has a lot to do with the power delivery. If you're boggy rich through the midrange, and  crisp and lean up on top, its really going to launch when you get to the band.
Especially if you don't have a powervave :wink:

Jetting could make all the difference between a  :lol: rideable :lol: cr500 and a backflipping widowmaker
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: Paul on December 23, 2007, 04:31:35 PM
BDI, cool it. I didn't start this place so people could come along and talk like sailors. It's my understanding David asked you once before to knock it off, I'm not going to ask you. I'm going to tell you to settle down and get your head on straight. I built this place with the simple idea of accumulating the highest level of knowledge and the best members around - that includes children and those with no interest in reading your cussing.

Last warning, step out of line again and kiss your access good-bye.

To everyone else, keep this thread civil or I'll close it - this type of thing can easily become a 'religious debate'.
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: gowen on December 24, 2007, 01:49:33 AM
Don, your aluminum frame KX is to die for. Very very very very nice.
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: don46 on December 24, 2007, 02:30:18 AM
Don, your aluminum frame KX is to die for. Very very very very nice.

Thanks, I wasn't going to do it but all the pieces kinda fell into place so I couldn't resist. It was fun building but now that it's done I'm wondering whats next. I'm thinking maybe an Aluminum 250 2t, guess I'll have to wait and see.
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: bigbellybob on December 24, 2007, 04:34:23 AM
on my little 380 i have only lost a race to a KX500. im still looking for a CR500 that will hang with it.
i will be @ dunmont presidents day with the little 380. let me know if you would like to put your cr500 in check.
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: doordie on December 24, 2007, 04:39:33 AM
BDI, cool it. I didn't start this place so people could come along and talk like sailors. It's my understanding David asked you once before to knock it off, I'm not going to ask you. I'm going to tell you to settle down and get your head on straight. I built this place with the simple idea of accumulating the highest level of knowledge and the best members around - that includes children and those with no interest in reading your cussing.

Last warning, step out of line again and kiss your access good-bye.

To everyone else, keep this thread civil or I'll close it - this type of thing can easily become a 'religious debate'.
AGREE!
Title: Re: Power delivery of KX verses CR
Post by: TheGDog on January 14, 2008, 02:12:50 PM
This Is a good example of what Im talking about this is a cr500 under heavy load listen to the engine and how it labors when Its not on the pipe. watch the vid a couple of times and pay attention to how the engine goes on and off the pipe and  how abruptly the power comes on. Now imagine ridding that bike with a stock wheel base on steep mountain trails with rocks and shale Like where I live and you may understand why I do not miss that bike.
   
                              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHmBMSMXbUM

Oh my GOD!!... What a freakin' Squid!!!  This guy was like Dog-paddling the whole 2nd half of the climb.. the nimrod couldn't get his feet back on the bike... that's why he flipped it.  Not having the feet on the pegs... his body naturally slides back and then at some point causes him to crank on the throttle when his arms are fully extended, unable to do anything about it.