X or R? That is the question, but does it really matter?

Back in the spring of 09 my youngest daughter flew the nest to college and the promise to not ride motorcycles until the girls grew up was fulfilled. I had a blast completing the MSF course and then deployed and spent the summer floating around West Africa reading ADVrider and stumbling onto the WR250 mega thread. My thoughts of a BMW 650 now were firmly fixed on a WR250R. Then along came Rydnseek with his X and its fat tires. That intrigued me and his commentary about how well it worked and was a lot like a mountain bike with its fat tires made me open to the idea.

I have been mostly lurking here and on ADVrider for 2 and 1/2 years, another West Africa deployment and a transfer from Cape Cod to SoCal. 2012 will be the year though. I now have boots, pants, jacket helmet. Going to get the gloves and a Leatt brace this week. ATGATT since I work in medicine and know the consequences.

I predict that I will be a slower and reasonable rider (enough years and time working the ER to realize that I am breakable and mortal) and I have been thinking that the fatties Rydnseek and a few others have touted for their excellent adventures , would be a good choice for increasing my chances of surviving my inevitable encounters with sand. I would rather not have to just lean back and roll on throttle as the only option.

So.... for a 43 y/o basically new rider in SoCal who is going to have to ride about 60 miles of pavement before hitting any trails on a Saturday, what do you think will work better, An X with dirt tires or an R?

I also understand that the benefit to a 21" front tire is the increased ability to roll over obstacles, but does it make that much difference?

The way I see it I get an R and put on a MT43 or 606 and something else up front or an X and put on Shinko 244 or MT-21s.

All thoughts appreciated and especially would like to hear from anyone who has ridden both setups and has some real comparison.

Jonathan

PS: I would love any leads on a WR250? within about 4 hours drive from San Pedro, CA in the 3000-4000 price range.

To me, sounds like you want an R.

As your plans do include off road make it an "r", easy to spoon on a less agressive tire for street use and still be good for mild off road stints.

jkstehn wrote:

I also understand that the benefit to a 21" front tire is the increased ability to roll over obstacles, but does it make that much difference?

HUGE difference in stability and tracking off road. Not a big penalty on the asphalt. Look at the KTM Adventurer and how much tarmac milage they're used for. And... I had a BMW 650. The WR2 is twice the bike. Good choice.

So so you think the size of the 21" rim affects the stability while rolling and makes it easier to balance the bike on the rough stuff or it is just more stable because the wheel has an easier time rolling over stuff?

I think it has more to do with the increased gyroscopic effect of the larger wheel. Nothing to do with rolling over stuff.

Thanks, that is good info about the larger front wheel. I have noticed the same thing with a 29" wheel mountain bike vs a 26" wheel. Just seems smoother and more stable with a slight penalty to maneuverability.

Jonathan

Here is my spin on the X vs R. I have an X, mainly because that was the only one available at the time I was looking to buy. My plan was to buy a 21" front after first trying out a 17" knobby. It's been a year now and I still have the 17". If you are a intermediate to expert, fast rider, then I'd go for the 21". I usually ride with guys on CR450X's XR650's, and KTM 450-525's, keeping up is not a problem, only my ability is. I also have a KTM 525 that I ride at about the same speed. I'll take either bike for a ride depending on what mood I'm in.
The biggest drawback for the 17" for tail riding is the extra weight, also if the air pressure is too high the wheel bounces a lot. 8-10 lbs seems to work the best. The tire tends to float more in sand and is a little harder to ride at slow speeds.
I guess the bottom line for me is that if I didn't have the 525 I'd probably get a 21" front, but for relaxed trail, single track riding, dualsporting, and definitely street riding, a WR250X would be a good choice.
You can't go wrong with either!

Another thought to consider is the suspension. The WRX is tuned more to street with a little less travel. The WRR is tuned more for the dirt. If you are wanting to ride off the beaten trail, I would buy the WRR.

IAmABug wrote:

Another thought to consider is the suspension. The WRX is tuned more to street with a little less travel. The WRR is tuned more for the dirt. If you are wanting to ride off the beaten trail, I would buy the WRR.

This is incorrect. The suspension between the X and R is the same. The only difference is the color on the front forks and the factory settings on the exact same suspension.

Last time I checked at a site with parts, the rear shock has a different part #, and the forks have a valve that is a different part #.

It's an R!

Picked up a 2008 R tonight.

Thanks all for your thoughts. I hope to be riding the backroads and trails of SoCal as soon as I can get the registration done.

Jonathan

Gratz. You won't be disappointed.

i have nearly only rode 21 inch wheel bikes on the road since 17 years old. I don't know what the hype is, regarding my X, sure its quite cool to look at, but at 41 years old, I seriously don't need it.

I only have the X as I don't have the opportunity to ride trails anymore, if I rode the trails, I would have no doubt and have the R (or KTM EXC, or Honda CRM etc etc)


Geoff.

Not quite the same.

jefmad wrote:

IAmABug wrote:

Another thought to consider is the suspension. The WRX is tuned more to street with a little less travel. The WRR is tuned more for the dirt. If you are wanting to ride off the beaten trail, I would buy the WRR.

This is incorrect. The suspension between the X and R is the same. The only difference is the color on the front forks and the factory settings on the exact same suspension.