98 KDX200 or 2001 KDX220R?

Got questions? We got answers....
Twysted
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: 05:39 pm Feb 10 2012
Country:
Location: Dublin Ohio

98 KDX200 or 2001 KDX220R?

Post by Twysted »

I have a choice, both are nice but I need to know what the main difference is besides cc's, and is one more reliable than the other? Either one have any major flaws? Any info would be helpful, Thanks!
Live life as it's your last day! Never hold back!
vaughnp
Supporting Member II
Supporting Member II
Posts: 24
Joined: 11:17 am Sep 10 2011
Country:
Location: VikingCountry

Post by vaughnp »

The 220 has to have the piston replaced if its still using the OEM one due to a flaw. Its like a timebomb, a friend replaced his right away when he bought the bike (used) and the old oem piston had a crack that was about to go anytime.

Heres a link to a comparison:

http://justkdx.dirtrider.net/200vs220.html

Hope that helps.
1993 KDX 200
1998 GasGas EC250
User avatar
Mr. Wibbens
KDXRider.net
KDXRider.net
Posts: 4884
Joined: 02:57 am Nov 07 2004
Country:
Location: Playing in the Poison Oak
Contact:

Post by Mr. Wibbens »

Lot easier to make a 200 run like a 220 than it is to make a 220 run like a 200
Warning! This member tends to use sarcasm as a regular form of communication. If a post seems offensive, before you panic and fly off the handle, re-read the post and imagine it being said with a sideways grin.
((Bike Profile))
((Pics))
FIVE OUT OF FOUR PEOPLE DONUT UNDERSTAND FRACTIONS
User avatar
kawagumby
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 927
Joined: 10:09 am Nov 30 2006
Country:
Location: California

Post by kawagumby »

It is not easy to make a 200 run like a 220 - the porting is different, the kips is different, the carb is different, the head is different. I've owned two 220's and they can be made to rev out more like a 200 fairly easily using the stock smaller carb - with the right pipe, jetting and reeds (plus the head mod adds some low to mid) -- on the other hand, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to get the kind of low end hit the 220 provides with a 200. I have owned three H model 200's and two 220's, the reliability is the same - well maintained they are bullet-proof. As noted in an above post, the piston can be a problem with the 220's (although I raced the heck out of one for years using stock pistons and never had a problem - but knowing what I know now, I'd always use wiseco's). Based on my experience with both models, if you are a good technical rider loving slower tight single track, or ride a lot of sand or mud, the 220 would be the better choice, on the other hand, if you like the kind of trails that stretch it out some, the 200 would probably be more fun with the longer useable rev-out.


edit: I just read the KDXer review referenced in the second post, and it is right on. My last 220 (sold about 2 years ago) had the FMF rev pipe mounted, which I preferred over the torque pipe - the writer of that review preferred the torque pipe but used a bored out carb. My bike used the stock carb, rev pipe, boyesen reeds, head reconfigured, and the thing still needed a flywheel weight to keep wheelspin down in most places. So go figure.... You can't lose either way.
1994 KDX200, Beta 200rr, yz125, yz250, kx100 modded for adult, gasgas contact 250.
Twysted
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: 05:39 pm Feb 10 2012
Country:
Location: Dublin Ohio

Post by Twysted »

Thank you for the info guys! I think I am going with the 200. I am leaving here in about a hour to take a second look at it and if all checks out I will be bringing it home. Ride on.........Twysted
Live life as it's your last day! Never hold back!
User avatar
Mr. Wibbens
KDXRider.net
KDXRider.net
Posts: 4884
Joined: 02:57 am Nov 07 2004
Country:
Location: Playing in the Poison Oak
Contact:

Post by Mr. Wibbens »

I've ridden a few 220's and they were dogs compared to my E series

220's are good for your girlfriend to start out on until she learns how to ride
Warning! This member tends to use sarcasm as a regular form of communication. If a post seems offensive, before you panic and fly off the handle, re-read the post and imagine it being said with a sideways grin.
((Bike Profile))
((Pics))
FIVE OUT OF FOUR PEOPLE DONUT UNDERSTAND FRACTIONS
KarlP
Supporting Member III
Supporting Member III
Posts: 1484
Joined: 02:26 pm Jun 29 2005
Country:
Location: Alabama

Post by KarlP »

aaahhhh...... the old 220 vs 200 thing.....

I've ridden a few 200's and they ran just like my 220 would if it had no bottom end.

Of course, a girl DID buy my 220.....
'08 KTM200xc
'99 CR/KDX Hybrid with that RB stuff done to it
KX100 for the boy
User avatar
skythrasher
Supporting Member I
Supporting Member I
Posts: 423
Joined: 06:24 pm May 16 2007
Country:
Location: NW Arkansas

Post by skythrasher »

Not this again. Every now and then the debate comes back up, I don't know why!

Everyone knows that Wibs is correct and that the 220's are for slow guys that can barely hang on due to the weak wrists and all. 200's are the better choice if you aren't a silly little crybaby.:butthead:

I have had both and I prefer the 200 for the over rev, but the 220 is plenty solid and will haul just fine. The tiny bit on bottom that folks say is not attainable with the 200 is a good trade off for the addition revs.

It is also a well known fact that the E models seem to have more power when measured by the seat of the pants method. Not sure what the dyno would say, but in the woods they feel more powerful.

My C model has plenty of low and plenty of rev ,but seems hollow in the middle. I figure that is due to the kips design.
My Gallery
2001 KDX200
1987 KDX200
2002 CR250R
2016 KTM 350XCF-W Six Days
Image
Oregon Trail
Member
Posts: 66
Joined: 01:19 am Nov 23 2011
Country:
Location: Jacksonville, Oregon

Post by Oregon Trail »

I've seen some video's of guys riding 200's and you can hear them 'huffing and puffing' in the video ....... :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
User avatar
marrk_us
Supporting Member I
Supporting Member I
Posts: 141
Joined: 02:18 am Nov 06 2007
Country:
Location: fountain, Colorado

Post by marrk_us »

Bought a '98 200, put kx forks on it and it handled better then my E-series but wasn't quite as strong down low. So I put a 220 top end on it with the 200 carb. Now it pulls hard down low, still revs out nicely, but not as much as it did as a 200. But mine came with a lever by the left footpeg, when she's about done revving i use it. :grin:

Then made a hybrid with the E-series and rarely ride the 98 anymore. I think the E-series is a nicer motor overall.

You can't go wrong with either bike.
User avatar
skythrasher
Supporting Member I
Supporting Member I
Posts: 423
Joined: 06:24 pm May 16 2007
Country:
Location: NW Arkansas

Post by skythrasher »

>|<>QBB<
marrk_us wrote:Bought a '98 200, put kx forks on it and it handled better then my E-series but wasn't quite as strong down low. So I put a 220 top end on it with the 200 carb. Now it pulls hard down low, still revs out nicely, but not as much as it did as a 200. But mine came with a lever by the left footpeg, when she's about done revving i use it. :grin:

Then made a hybrid with the E-series and rarely ride the 98 anymore. I think the E-series is a nicer motor overall.

You can't go wrong with either bike.
I have thought about doing just that. 200 top with a Rb'd 35mm carb. That would probably be just the ticket. The 33 carb is really the only thing holding the 220 back. I know why they did it, but it would take the engine from trail status a little closer race status. (notice I said engine, the suspension still sucks).
My Gallery
2001 KDX200
1987 KDX200
2002 CR250R
2016 KTM 350XCF-W Six Days
Image
User avatar
Julien D
KDXRider.net
KDXRider.net
Posts: 5858
Joined: 07:53 pm Nov 07 2008
Country: USA
Contact:

Post by Julien D »

You still have the 220's poor porting and head configuration to deal with. Ron can certainly take care of the head, but the 220 is definitely ported quite differently with the focus solely on low end throttle response. There's no easy fix for that. I firmly believe the 200 is a better base to start with if you ride more aggressively. If all you do is single track trail riding, or billy goat stuff, the 220 may suit you better. Personally short shifting all the time gets old, so I like to stick with something that has a bit more overrev to begin with.
Image
User avatar
kawagumby
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 927
Joined: 10:09 am Nov 30 2006
Country:
Location: California

Post by kawagumby »

Frankly, some of you guys don't seem to have a lot of experience modding or riding a 220. The 220 with a stock carb and the right pipe is perfectly capable of very good rev-out as noted in my post above and the linked kdx'r article. I used to race CC A level and can tell you, there is no short-shifting involved with a few inexpensive mods. Where you need good power in the low to mid rpms, such as any hilly terrian, the 220 flat outperforms a well-tuned 200 all other things being equal. The smaller carb and different porting allows the bike to carry higher torque in the lower to mid rpms where the larger carb would make it fall flat on its face (which is what happens with the 200). People could not believe my last 220 was only a 220 - I could climb huge hills right along with the 250's - my 200's couldn't do that.

I love both bikes and really don't have a preference - as I've said before, more open trails favor the 200 - but to say the 220 is only good for grunt situations is pure bs.

I live in hilly terrain, as do many of us, and can tell you that a properly setup 220 can make certain hills and stay at upper rpms right in the meat of the torque curve, where my 200 will fall off and quit - I've run virtually every combination of pipes, reeds, head mods on both bikes over the years - I don't rely on some internet dude saying he rode someone else's bike and it sucked, LOL.

Back in the day, the 220 was developed primarily by contracted american enduro riders specifically to handle rougher more technical terrain - they did a good job.

Juliend, if you lived where I do, you'd have a different perspective - most trails here do not have long straights, you are constantly shifting no matter what bike you are on - a simply-modded 220 gets you out of the turns harder and faster - a couple of years ago I was racing my 220 on such a course with a top vet A rider on a heavily modded CRF250X (CRF head, aftermarket power bomb , pipe etc... and my 220 with rev pipe, boyesen reeds, and head mod was pulling him out of the turns - it blew his mind.

No need to discredit a good bike because one might prefer the other for their own use - you don't want someone to pass up buying a 220 that may actually turn out to be a much better bike for their riding style and terrain.
1994 KDX200, Beta 200rr, yz125, yz250, kx100 modded for adult, gasgas contact 250.
KarlP
Supporting Member III
Supporting Member III
Posts: 1484
Joined: 02:26 pm Jun 29 2005
Country:
Location: Alabama

Post by KarlP »

Frankly, some of you guys don't seem to have a lot of experience modding or riding a 220.
Yup
The so called shortcomings of the 220 are mostly found on the internet.
'08 KTM200xc
'99 CR/KDX Hybrid with that RB stuff done to it
KX100 for the boy
User avatar
Julien D
KDXRider.net
KDXRider.net
Posts: 5858
Joined: 07:53 pm Nov 07 2008
Country: USA
Contact:

Post by Julien D »

Keep telling yourself that if it makes you happy. The two engines have very different power delivery. One engine may suit someone more than the other, for whatever reason, as I have already said. All the internet information or mis-information in the world doesn't change that.

As far as "If you lived where I lived". Pfft. I'm not sure how you can feel justified in making such a comment unless you have actually SEEN where I live. All the trails I ride are steep and winding, and mostly single track. Even so, I prefer the 2t feel of the 200 as opposed to the XR feel of the 220. With enough modding, sure you can get some overrev from the 220, but why? If that's what you want, start with the 200.
Image
factoryX
Member
Posts: 352
Joined: 01:33 pm Jan 22 2011
Country:

Post by factoryX »

LOL, which leads us back to making the 220 run like the 200.. Simply taking the 200 (which is already ported wider than the 220) and increasing the compression, small carb work, Pipe, and a set of reeds will more than turn this bike into tractor a and more.
Last edited by factoryX on 03:45 pm Feb 16 2012, edited 1 time in total.
Image
MadMax
Member
Posts: 90
Joined: 02:56 pm Feb 18 2011
Country:

Post by MadMax »

Wow. This has regressed into a "my dad can beat up your dad" kind of discussion. I love it.
MadMax
Jedi Master Team 5150
User avatar
marrk_us
Supporting Member I
Supporting Member I
Posts: 141
Joined: 02:18 am Nov 06 2007
Country:
Location: fountain, Colorado

Post by marrk_us »

I like's big bums...no,no....nice racks.....BIG BUMS...NICE RACKS .. :pop:
KarlP
Supporting Member III
Supporting Member III
Posts: 1484
Joined: 02:26 pm Jun 29 2005
Country:
Location: Alabama

Post by KarlP »

Heck, I'm still trying to figure out what oil to use.......

What was it the OP was asking? He's long gone, isn't he?
'08 KTM200xc
'99 CR/KDX Hybrid with that RB stuff done to it
KX100 for the boy
factoryX
Member
Posts: 352
Joined: 01:33 pm Jan 22 2011
Country:

Post by factoryX »

Doubt it, surprised he hasn't posted back yet. And if I remember correctly the title of the thread was "98 KDX200 or 2001 KDX220R?" So it is sort of a Boob vs. ASS thread..ha
Image
Post Reply