Dirt Bike Magazine's Assessment of the WRR

December 2011 Issue...they call it their "2012 Buyer's Guide"

p. 78 (Dual-Sport Bikes section)

"A couple of years ago, Yamaha tried to make a big splash with the aluminum-frame, fuel-injected 250. It overshot the market with too much complexity and a high expense"

They don't explicitly say it's the WRR, but it seems implied....unless I'm mistaken. If they are in fact talking about the WR, seems like a load of crap to me. Too much complexity? Really. And it's funny that they would state that the XT 250 "makes up for it". Maybe they did this write-up thinking the WRR was being canned and wanted to look cool by spitting on its grave or something. Friggin' nerds.

I think that's just because they're called Dirt Bike magazine and not Dual Sport magazine.

I didn't read the article they originaly wrote on the WR-250R a few years ago, but it made quite a stink on this forum when it came out.
When they originally tested the bike, they basically gave it a thumbs down from what I heard.
Why?
From what I understand, it's because of the same ol' reasons:
Extra weight.
Choked engine performance and reduced throttle response due to EPA regulations.
Suspension that needs help due to cost-cutting and/or sloppy assembly at the factory (air in the shock oil).

Member SheWolf, if she reads this, can tell you first-hand because she wrote back to the magazine in defense of the bike, and she likes her WR-250R.
I liked mine, too, although I haven't owned one since September of 2010.

Well, until one of the other big manufacturers (Honda, Suzuki, Kawasaki, KTM) makes a fuel injected 250 dual sport, there's really nothing to compare it to.

Not sure if Husqvarna fits into Gus' "Other" list, but here's some 'other' competition.

http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/135/6307/Motorcycle-Article/2010-Husqvarna-TE250-Quick-Ride.aspx

Strictly from a rideability standpoint, at 234 lbs, the 6-speed Husky would be a hard to beat (on equal terms, and mostly on the dirt)

It would be difficult to predict any bike (regardless of cost) EVER being as reliable and all-round rider friendly (to include maintenance) than the Yamaha.

Not one bike fits all so as we can tell by the diversity of our forum, the bike invites all sorts of rider-friendly ergonomic and suitability adaptations (SuMo wheels, adventure components, seats, shields, performance mods etc) complemented by aftermarket manufacturers who saw an opportunity here and exploited it sufficiently to suit options and of course, we all have been creative in making the one size actually "fit all".

The question remains: Where's the big bore version ?

I would also agree with the "Dirt Bike" focus comment. It's not really a dirt bike. Always consider the source.

Oh man, that Husky looks amazing.
Give it a tiny bit bigger fuel tank and it's exactly what I'd want.

My only concern is the make. How reliable is it compared to the Yamaha, and how easy would it be to find a dealer when you're out on a trip?

X-Racer wrote:

It would be difficult to predict any bike (regardless of cost) EVER being as reliable and all-round rider friendly (to include maintenance) than the Yamaha.

Yea... It's got to be a great bike. The report cites the same power related ( "I need to loft the front wheel easier") complaints as they would comment about on any 250.

That's a 250. Get use to it. Riding a 250 requires more rider input to make it do what you want it to. Not sure why they even mentioned it.

There may be somewhat more stock capability suspension-wise, but you're paying for it up front.

To tell the truth, HP to weight ratio wise, the WR compared to my KTM LC4-E (almost equal weight), the LC4 obviously has a power advantage, otherwise, the WR (for reasons unknown) feels lighter (could be CG) .

From a buyer's satisfaction standpoint, long-term, I'd go with the WR.

>"Oh man, that Husky looks amazing."

Husky 250 is really nice, but 70 hour upper end rebuild (competition)... you'd maybe get 140 hours before a rebuild (dualsport)?
Same old story... ultra light weight vs a bit of mass.

Wait, what???
You have to rebuild the top end every 140 hours?

Screw that noise.

Back to my old stance: Until one of the other BIG, RELIABLE, JAPANESE manufacturers (Honda, Suzuki, Kawasaki) makes a fuel injected 250 dualie, there is nothing else out there.

Right... I don't know about that 140 hour rebuild number but just the same...

X-Racer wrote:
It would be difficult to predict any bike (regardless of cost) EVER being as reliable and all-round rider friendly (to include maintenance) than the Yamaha.

[quote="X-Racer"]

X-Racer wrote:

......To tell the truth, HP to weight ratio wise, the WR compared to my KTM LC4-E (almost equal weight), the LC4 obviously has a power advantage, otherwise, the WR (for reasons unknown) feels lighter (could be CG) .

From a buyer's satisfaction standpoint, long-term, I'd go with the WR.

+ 1

OMG Dirtbike Magazine again...I ripped a strip off the editor the last time and was commended by Yamaha for sticking up for their product. Fun times.