125-200cc 165 with Stock 125 Pipe

[JRod4928]

I'm not sure I've read anyone's opinions on the 165 with the stock 125 pipe. Does anyone run this by choice?

 

[Motosportz]

I am running a 125 Doma pipe on my 165 right now. Works pretty good. You give up some bottom to the bigger pipes but works well. Mine has pretty nice smooth power which works for my riding style and slick conditions. No harm in trying it.

 

[JRod4928]

In general, do all the 125 pipes (short stinger) give you more top end vs. the fmf fatty 200 pipe that obviously resembles a 250 pipe?

I wish I had a pile of pipes laying around to test out like you, lol! If I had a stock pipe laying around I would back to back test the Fatty to a conventional 125 pipe. The stock pipe might not be ideal for the 165, but at least it'd give me an idea of what the delivery would be like.

 

[tnttimber]

My favorite pipe for the 165 is the stock pipe, has a ripping mid and top and decent on the bottom. For tight technical woods work the fmf200 pipe is better because it is very smooth and torquey.

My 165 got shipped to Walt today to be made a 177 so I'll be interested to see if my pipe preference changes any. Walt says he thinks I'll like the DEP200 pipe, so I might try that. I've sent some customers Walts way for the 165 but I always tell them to try it with the stock pipe then if they still want more bottom end take a look at the 200 pipe options.

 

[JRod4928]

My favorite pipe for the 165 is the stock pipe, has a ripping mid and top and decent on the bottom. For tight technical woods work the fmf200 pipe is better because it is very smooth and torquey.

My 165 got shipped to Walt today to be made a 177 so I'll be interested to see if my pipe preference changes any. Walt says he thinks I'll like the DEP200 pipe, so I might try that. I've sent some customers Walts way for the 165 but I always tell them to try it with the stock pipe then if they still want more bottom end take a look at the 200 pipe options.

Sweeeet - you'll have to tell me what you think of the 177 And if you decide to get rid of the stock pipe - let me know. What kind of riding do you do?

I'd love to give the DEP pipe a shot, but I can't fork out the cash for it since I had to get the 165 replated (previous owner had detonation issues). I think I could swing the extra cash for a stock pipe though.

 

[firedog55]

JRod-PM me with an offer, I've got a brand new take off '14 stock pipe and silencer. All of the parts taken off my new '14 CR125 are available to the guys here on Café Husky.
The bike was never ridden before the mods were made. See my post for the parts available:

http://www.cafehusky.com/threads/14-cr125-to-woods-weapon.39971/

Thanks

 

[Aviduser]

Never tried the stock 125 pipe on my 165. But I've used an fmf fatty and dep 200 pipe. The two are quite comparable IMO, with the dep leading just by a bit in overall power.

I haven't tried the fmf 200sx pipe yet, want to. But unless it adds a lot to the bottom to where you can ride it like a 4 stroke I don't think it would be my cup of tea.

Pretty happy with the dep for now. My bike needs a few other things besides another pipe at the moment anyway.

 

[JRod4928]

JRod-PM me with an offer, I've got a brand new take off '14 stock pipe and silencer. All of the parts taken off my new '14 CR125 are available to the guys here on Café Husky.
The bike was never ridden before the mods were made. See my post for the parts available:

http://www.cafehusky.com/threads/14-cr125-to-woods-weapon.39971/

Thanks

Awesome- I sent a PM for the pipe only

 

[JRod4928]

Never tried the stock 125 pipe on my 165. But I've used an fmf fatty and dep 200 pipe. The two are quite comparable IMO, with the dep leading just by a bit in overall power.

I haven't tried the fmf 200sx pipe yet, want to. But unless it adds a lot to the bottom to where you can ride it like a 4 stroke I don't think it would be my cup of tea.

Pretty happy with the dep for now. My bike needs a few other things besides another pipe at the moment anyway.

From what I hear, the FMF200 pipe does add a ton to bottom-mid, not sure if its quite 4T though. Try it and see?

 

[Zomby woof]

I tried my 165 with

KTM 200 FMF pipe

125 Fatty pipe

stock 2011 125 pipe

It was an abbreviated test due to the weather, but I found the 200 pipe to be more mid and top end biased, while I found the stock 125 pipe to be more low end oriented. Made sense to me. The 200 pipe is for a larger displacement bike, and is a bigger pipe. I expected the 125 Fatty to be the best for low end, but it wasn't. It was somewhere in between and not as good as either anywhere. Keep in mind, it's a 165 so it was strong everywhere, regardless of pipe, but I really preferred the stock 125.
I will try it again this summer, but I think I will be using the stock 2011 125 pipe for woods.

 

[JRod4928]

I tried my 165 with

KTM 200 FMF pipe

125 Fatty pipe

stock 2011 125 pipe

It was an abbreviated test due to the weather, but I found the 200 pipe to be more mid and top end biased, while I found the stock 125 pipe to be more low end oriented. Made sense to me. The 200 pipe is for a larger displacement bike, and is a bigger pipe. I expected the 125 Fatty to be the best for low end, but it wasn't. It was somewhere in between and not as good as either anywhere. Keep in mind, it's a 165 so it was strong everywhere, regardless of pipe, but I really preferred the stock 125.
I will try it again this summer, but I think I will be using the stock 2011 125 pipe for woods.

That's almost completely backwards from what I expected, lol - most of the thing's I've read suggest that the KTM 200 FMF (Fatty) pipe is a low/mid pipe. Did you have the Fatty or the SST?

 

[tnttimber]

That is just the opposite of my experience. I have not tried the fmf125 pipe but did try the pro circuit125 pipe and it had even less bottom than the stocker and a bit more on top.

I tried my 165 with

KTM 200 FMF pipe

125 Fatty pipe

stock 2011 125 pipe

It was an abbreviated test due to the weather, but I found the 200 pipe to be more mid and top end biased, while I found the stock 125 pipe to be more low end oriented. Made sense to me. The 200 pipe is for a larger displacement bike, and is a bigger pipe. I expected the 125 Fatty to be the best for low end, but it wasn't. It was somewhere in between and not as good as either anywhere. Keep in mind, it's a 165 so it was strong everywhere, regardless of pipe, but I really preferred the stock 125.
I will try it again this summer, but I think I will be using the stock 2011 125 pipe for woods.

 

[Motosportz]

That is just the opposite of my experience. I have not tried the fmf125 pipe but did try the pro circuit125 pipe and it had even less bottom than the stocker and a bit more on top.

that was my experience too. the cool thing is these motors can be tuned to whatever you like and run nice in about every configuration.

 

[john01]

I didn't run my 165 with the stock pipe but with the 125 Fatty pipe it just didn't pull nowhere near as hard as it did with the 200 Fatty pipe. I don't think you can make a 165 run bad with any pipe but you sure can choose your range/type of power delivery. Awesome kit the Waltster put together!

 

[johnnyboy]

Stock pipe works ok but all the after market 125 pipes worked better for me, The 200 fatty makes a fair more bottom and mid power than the 125 pipes.
As a comparison a 125 dep pipe on the 165 makes pretty good power but is a bit weak off the bottom, Take a dep sx 200 pipe and mod it to fit the 165 and although it only measures slightly larger around the fattest part of the pipe, The front part is almost idential and the end cone to stinger is just about identical to the 125 pipe it makes a fair bit more power across the range and losses most of the 125s pipe flatish bottom end and replaces it with a bit more pull, come the mid range and its making real strong power that then goes on to make some serious top end.
I think the larger volume is more in tune with larger displacment of the 165.
A stock 200sx pipe makes reall good low end to mid but falls flat a bit to early for my needs.
A 200 fmf Gnarly pulls real hard right from idle but has next to no top end what so ever.
Dep and HGS are pretty much the same with the nod going to the dep for me.
To my mind all the 200 types of pipes are a better bet and because they are so varied, you can have the power of your choice be it bottom end- mid range - or top end, the 125 pipes do not give you this option but as I said they do work with the 165 and are completely ridable just pretty much all the same as one another.

 

[Zomby woof]

That's almost completely backwards from what I expected, lol - most of the thing's I've read suggest that the KTM 200 FMF (Fatty) pipe is a low/mid pipe. Did you have the Fatty or the SST?

I would expect pipes for a smaller displacement motor to be stronger on the bottom end, not the top. Although I found the 125 Fatty weaker on bottom than the stock pipe. I hated the stock 125 pipe on my 144 because it was horrible on the bottom, so I expected the same on the 165. Such was not the case. However, it was an abbreviated test. I'll know more when I do it again in the summer. Maybe my results will be completely different. What I do know is that the 165 made awesome power in either configuration
I believe both my FMF pipes are fatty's.

 

[rockdancer]

Im confused . There are always a lot of variables when testing bikes so it needs to be a true back to back test to really know.
It is interesting to know that you can run a stock pipe without losing too much . Ive been running an FMF 125 fatty and I believe it would be better than stock but Id like it to run better.
Id like to try a HGS for more top end however I think that my bikes top end is reduced more due to running lower compression. Takes that bit of sting out of it

 

[john01]

It's a little strange to me too on the stock pipe thing but I think other things play a roll in how the bikes run/feel. For me the Fatty 125 pipe was better than the stocker for my riding style...read heavy rider who likes low through mid with some top end thrown in. When I went to the 165 with the 125 fatty the bike felt smooth but also felt like it was being held back; like a restriction. The KTM 200 Fatty removed the restriction . I could see woods racers wanting a few pipe options based on conditions and track layout. That to me is the beauty of Walt's 165; lots of options for the rider.

 

[JRod4928]

It's a little strange to me too on the stock pipe thing but I think other things play a roll in how the bikes run/feel. For me the Fatty 125 pipe was better than the stocker for my riding style...read heavy rider who likes low through mid with some top end thrown in. When I went to the 165 with the 125 fatty the bike felt smooth but also felt like it was being held back; like a restriction. The KTM 200 Fatty removed the restriction . I could see woods racers wanting a few pipe options based on conditions and track layout. That to me is the beauty of Walt's 165; lots of options for the rider.

I wonder if the KTM200XC is as versatile as the WB165/177 with a simple pipe swap. Remove the new '250' style pipe, and replace it with the '125' style pipe from 2004 KTM200SX's.. (think DEP200 from the 2004 KTM200SX's that some use on the WB165). Aside from power valve adjustments, I bet it would drastically change the characteristics too, much like the WB165 does with a pipe change.

Not knocking the WB165 at all - it's a great machine - I'm just saying that a 2 stroke engine is a 2 stroke engine, and a dramatic pipe swap such as this is bound to change it's power.

 

[john01]

Never had a chance to ride a 200 KTM but I would think you are right JRod.