It's not the bike, it's the rider......
Posted: 10:59 am Oct 19 2023
I enjoyed reading the posts here about everyone racing their KDX, some racing the vintage class, others not.
I raced my 2000 KDX 200 for many years in the local hare scramble series in the early 2000’s (ECEA Series). Then, as it does, life got in the way and I recently started getting back into it. I raced about 5 hare scrambles over the last two years – not for points, just for fun. Due to my many races over the early years, I got kicked up to the B class – recently, I have no business being in the B class (B 50+). I’ll look to be in the C50+ next year where I belong. I get beat up in the races and not finishing high in my class, which I attribute to the lack of conditioning and lack of practice.
Here is where the passionate debate starts. I get lots of attention and comments at the races “man, I loved that bike back in the day”; “what a bullet proof bike”; “thumbs up buddy”. But then the discussion starts: “you will do so much better on a current bike – KTM, Husky, etc. The technology is so much better”.
No doubt, the technology is tons better in current bikes, but I have nothing to compare it to. I haven’t raced anything else, ever, in over 20 years. I’ll often put up the argument of “it’s not the bike, it’s the rider”, but that discussion quickly goes south when riders start talking technology facts (suspension, power band, etc). Just curious where everyone lands on the argument of “it’s not the bike, it’s the rider”, for the weekend warrior? I’m a firm believer in it for someone not running the A class. Seems like there are a bunch of us here on the forum that still race the KDX, although I don’t personally see many out there in my experience (maybe one or two KDX’s in a 300 rider field at best – saw one last weekend at a race, but he was a track worker). I’ll keep an eye out for you in the Orange sea!
Thanks in advance!
I raced my 2000 KDX 200 for many years in the local hare scramble series in the early 2000’s (ECEA Series). Then, as it does, life got in the way and I recently started getting back into it. I raced about 5 hare scrambles over the last two years – not for points, just for fun. Due to my many races over the early years, I got kicked up to the B class – recently, I have no business being in the B class (B 50+). I’ll look to be in the C50+ next year where I belong. I get beat up in the races and not finishing high in my class, which I attribute to the lack of conditioning and lack of practice.
Here is where the passionate debate starts. I get lots of attention and comments at the races “man, I loved that bike back in the day”; “what a bullet proof bike”; “thumbs up buddy”. But then the discussion starts: “you will do so much better on a current bike – KTM, Husky, etc. The technology is so much better”.
No doubt, the technology is tons better in current bikes, but I have nothing to compare it to. I haven’t raced anything else, ever, in over 20 years. I’ll often put up the argument of “it’s not the bike, it’s the rider”, but that discussion quickly goes south when riders start talking technology facts (suspension, power band, etc). Just curious where everyone lands on the argument of “it’s not the bike, it’s the rider”, for the weekend warrior? I’m a firm believer in it for someone not running the A class. Seems like there are a bunch of us here on the forum that still race the KDX, although I don’t personally see many out there in my experience (maybe one or two KDX’s in a 300 rider field at best – saw one last weekend at a race, but he was a track worker). I’ll keep an eye out for you in the Orange sea!
Thanks in advance!