Page 1 of 1

agree or disagree....

Posted: 08:20 pm Oct 19 2006
by motorhed220
After acrful cnsideration, i have realises that if u tuned the KDX's suspension just right...it would be a formidable track bike...anybody diagree with that...and by tune i mean have KX suspension (rear shock, forks) From hat i have done, if it wasnt for my suspension, the KDX would be a great track bike, it has just the right amont of torque and not to much power to be overly zealous...who thinks im a nutcase or on the right track to getting the best of toh worlds....???

Posted: 08:42 pm Oct 19 2006
by Colorado Mike
You say "formidable track bike", formidable for who? the guy riding it? if so, I agree with you. But if you mean the guy that was smart enough to buy a race bike in the first place, I would have to disagree. Trying to race a KDX on an MX track puts you at odds with more than just the suspension. Weight, transmission ratios, brakes, engine output, ergonomics and general handling characteristics beyond just the boingers are all much better on a current MX bike than a KDX on the track. Why? cuz the KDX wasn't designed to do that stuff and works better in the woods than it does on the track.

Of course, I only say this stuff cuz it's my own personal opinion derived from modding a KDX and comparing it to a modern MX bike in both the woods and on MX tracks.

oh, and one more thing.. Does this mean that if Ricky Carmichael was on a KDX and one of us was on his works bike that we could keep him in sight? Uh, no. A great rider can smoke a mediocre one on a much lesser machine without much effort. But a great rider gets brandy new MX bikes given to him for free, so he would have no need to be on a KDX anyway. :rolleyes:

Posted: 08:53 pm Oct 19 2006
by motorhed220
see thats the thing...if im not mistaken, a KDX has a shorter wheel base then a MX bike, which means that it can make sharper turns, and it is a widly accepted fact that the KDX is one of the most nimble-est and most well handeling bikes made by Kawasaki....so i dont see how it makes it a less track worthy bike, te power is there, the gearing is more or less there, the handleing is definatly there.

The brakes, are as good as can be expected, and weight...well all i can say is:

KDX 220: 222 Pounds Dry...
KX 250 f: 209 Pounds dry...
KX 450 f: 220 Pounds Dry....

So as far as i can see, yea the KDX is a bit on the chunky and heavy side for a steel framed bike...Granted...But as a bike that you can take to the track and do fairly well...i can definalty see that happening, im not saying win championships or anything like that...But i am confidat this bike can be a lethal weapon if u tune it right for any kind of riding....

Posted: 09:01 pm Oct 19 2006
by Colorado Mike
well, maybe your tracks are different than what we have down here. If I get on my kid's YZ it will outright slaughter my KDX on a track, and feel way safer doing it. It's around 195 dry, and feels as light as a mountain bike when you're riding it. When I hit jumps it takes off like a sky rocket even with my lard ass on it, yet still lands like a cat. My point is, sure you can spend a lot of time and money converting a KDX, but at least for the tracks we go to, you'd still be better off with a YZ or KX , and be money ahead. 1 or 2 year old 2 stroke MX bikes are a dime a dozen around me, since all the kids want 4-strokes.

Posted: 11:27 am Oct 20 2006
by KarlP
I don't think the KDX frame geometry lends itself well to MX. A shorter wheel base and less rake are not necessarily a good thing on an MX track. I imagine a KDX motor in a KX frame would be a lot better, but than you'd be wishing you had more motor.
It can certainly be improved from stock and give you a good time


You should see how fast I can go in the woods when no one is around....... :lol:

Posted: 01:04 pm Oct 20 2006
by marco220
I think you could make the KDX a good track bike but not for the same money that you'd spend to get a purpose built MX bike. You could make a school bus go fast, stop hard and handle well if you throw enough money at it.... but why bother when you could just go out and buy a _______ (insert performance car of your choice) and improve on that foundation if you so desired?

Posted: 01:39 pm Oct 20 2006
by skipro3
If it were that easy to convert a bike built on 10+ year old technology, then a whole lot of R&D dollars are going to pot at the factories.

I've had both: a woods bike-kdx220 and an mx bike kx250.

It is much more likely that the mx bike can be made into a good woods bike (notice I don't say great woods bike), than the woods bike can be made into a good MX bike.
(does that make sense?)

Posted: 01:47 pm Oct 20 2006
by bradf
Makes sense to me. I have never seen a KDX on the MX track nor heard of it. I have seen a butt load of tweaked MX bikes tear up the woods.