No doubt there are riders all who don't see the point of in-depth testing of 250cc four-stroke off-road machines. After all, they're suitable only for lightweight wimps and chicks, right? Not even close!
Sure, machines such as the $6199 Honda CRF250X work great for lighter riders, and we are including an opinion from a female rider in this test. But we have a point to make.
The 2004 bike stayed in my garage, and I'm the staff heavyweight and an acknowledged horsepower junkie. Actually, I go where the grins are, and the CRF250X would rip the axle out of any dyno that could measure fun factor. Even in the Dirt Rider stable, filled with a relatively vast array of choices, the 250X accumulated more riding days than any other bike. Some of those days were spent with small, light or even female riders aboard, but the majority of the miles were added on by grande or at least normal-sized serious off-roaders. We'll probably leave the '05 at home for the Billings Hillclimb, but it has game for any other ride we can imagine. The 250X is astonishingly able in any terrain and capable of dumfounding the most-hardened veteran.
So a year down the trail, here we are with the Honda CRF250Xs. Both models-the smog-friendly California version and the 49-stater that meets federal standards for sound but not California emission levels-are back with only graphic updates. We thoroughly tested the '04 bike, including putting in enough hours to wear out the piston and valves, but aside from a day with the California model, we didn't have back-to-back time on the two renditions. We arranged for one of each 2005 X and started riding, concentrating on areas and conditions that we ignored last year. Instead of limiting our outings to terrain that suited low-powered bikes, we merely went to all of our normal riding areas in the company of big and fast motorcycles. As it turned out, weather made this a very different test, since with the 2004s we encountered dry and dusty conditions while we had plenty of rain and cold weather when we rode the 2005 models. The weather conditions changed how well the bikes performed in stock form.
Our big discovery, though, was we had been discriminating against the little bikes more than we should. It was surprising how well the Xs can hang-even when the going is steep, sandy or fast. Here's what we found.
Motor
Our first order of business was to put in some hard days without changing one detail of the engine. We rode them without messing with the jetting, opening the exhaust or doing anything else. For dry and mild conditions, both bikes run exceptionally well. They have excellent torque from right above idle, have the best meat through the midrange then finally make the most power when the engine is turning speeds that would intimidate a blender. Keep the rpm up and stir the gearbox, and acceleration is brisk. When we traveled to our usual high-desert haunts, we were shocked at the hills either X would climb. We're talking hills that have an XR400R struggling. When the ground is hard and the traction is limited, it is difficult to discern any performance difference between the two models. When the rain came and we got into sandy hills out in the desert, the 49-state model felt a bit more muscular. A bigger problem was that the rain came with cold temperatures, and lean jetting that was appropriate in normal conditions caused some hesitations and bogs. Even at a fairly high altitude, when the bikes should have been a little richer, they still were lean. The problem shows up sooner on the California version, but we experienced the same thing in the cold rain with the 49-stater.
The key differences between the two models are a leaner needle (NCYU for the 49-state bike, versus a NCVT for the Californian), a milder cam and an air pump on the California model. The on-bike performance variations are subtle on rocky or packed soil, and hard to quantify even in back-to-back comparisons.