Is my pipe bent? 1988 WR250.

[RTM]

Hi guys, my first post on cafe husky.

I purchased this WR as a box of parts a while ago. Threw it back together as I had a fabrication project to be started and didnt want grinding grit getting over the exposed parts.

I runs fine, gear selction is a bit stiff but probably due to me using instant gasket rather than a gasket on the clutch cover.

But I am concerned about the exhaust being so close to the water pump and its hoses. The pipe looks to be in good shape, it has a ding in the bottom from but nothing dramatic. But surely it should not be this close to the hoses.

If it is bent, how do I straighten it?

 

[RTM]

 

[justintendo]

if its bent, its very slight....pretty normal for it to be very close...aftermarkey pipes are supposed to be a bit farther away here

 

[WayneL]

For years I had lived in fear that my exhaust pipe would rub through the water hoses, aways trying to tighten the pipe to sit up and away from them, then one day I thought why dont I trim the water hoses down a little & push it onto the housing all the way, then hey presto I now have clearance! It might solve your issue?

 

[oldbikedude]

Looks standard to me, aside from the minor dings.

 

[ruwfo]

I'd agree looks stock... I put an extra half moon of thicker rubber on the pipe side on my h2o bikes attached with zip ties for any extra layer of protection.. or go with braided hoses..
Husky John

 

[fran...k.]

Every time I put those hoses on it seems necessary to look at the pictures in the owners manual. Try getting the one that comes out vertical to be as tight to the cylinder base as possible, lap them opposite what you have top to bottom where they touch. Mine in this picture isn't the same model and I think that is an 1986 ae 430 pipe but note how close to the frame my pipe has become. I could have trimmed one a bit I seem to recall doing that though It has been quite a while since I put the one in the picture together and sure wouldn't remember what I did to that one.

Ok so you want to fix that here is how I have done it to that pipe in my current avatar. I do have a spare pipe but that is the origional one. Fabricate a metal piece that attaches to the frame with u bolts and comes close enough to the pipe to braze it on. Weld or braze a metal piece, I used a piece of half inch square tube with one side cut off, to the front of the pipe. Add something like a lifting eye to the center of that. Put a chain around the center web of a concrete block and the eye. Slam away. Remove the u bolted piece and the lifitng eye thing but leave the five inch or so stffener described for next time. I forget exactly what to do to the exhaust end of the pipe but it has to at least be secured towards the center of the bike.

 

[RTM]

Thanks for all of your replies chaps. I will try trimming back the hoses a little and cross them over as shown above in Franks posting.



The hose which passes across to the far side bottom radiator hose, is that supposed to pass between the frame and the engine? As it is also damn close to the exhaust. Water cooling was certainly an after though with these early water cooled husky’s.



Otherwise my WR seems quite together and ready to ride in a local endure event.



I already have an 83 CR250 I use in the odd twinshock motox. Its pretty flat outside of the power band so I am guessing (as not yet ridden) the WR is the same? Unless it has different porting etc? The compression is certainly down on my CR or that could be due to the fact I didn’t bother putting in a new ring.

 

[ruwfo]

The power bands are way different from the XC & WR & CR in the later years (mid 80's), my recently sold 83 XC had fairly smooth power, my newest 250
a 83 CR are night & day different & is much more pipey. If you look the CR pipes there a straight section right after the 1st bend when it comes out of the
head , this add to the top end.. So yeah they run completely different.. Husky made awesome WR's in the 80's ..look at how many Enduro's/ISDT ISDE
they won in a row back in the day if you were not riding a Husky you were not in the top 5 at almost any woods event..

Husky John

 

[RTM]

Very pleased to hear that. I purchased the WR to use in hare scramble and road trial events. I currently use a CRF450R which I am finding a bit of a handfull these days. The WR came at the right price, would probably have gone for something more modern but this WR attracted me for some odd reason. - It sure wasnt for its looks mind you !

 

[fran...k.]

The hose which passes across to the far side bottom radiator hose, is that supposed to pass between the frame and the engine? As it is also damn close to the exhaust. Water cooling was certainly an after though with these early water cooled husky’s.


.

If I understand your question right here is an answer. The far or right side hose goes down from the radiator and between the engine and frame. It leads to a three way splitter which on mine it seems I have positioned the screw part of a hose clamp to bump against the exhaust piece on the engine. That is where things are close on what I have to look at at this time and place.

Afterthought or whatever. On other places on this site ktm gets blamed for overheating but if you have seen the size of those impellers compared to these ones...................... and our radiators are smaller unless perhaps the four storke ones of this section.


Fran

 

[RTM]

I tried trimming my hoses a 1/4", switched which passed over the top. tried all sorts but still they touched. Eventually removed the tank and released the frame clamp which holds the pipe to the frame. the pipe now touches the cylinder head but I do have a mm of clearance between the pipe and the hoses.

 

[RTM]

The bike is nearly ready for its first enduro event this weekend. Just a trials tyre left to fit.

 

[jimspac]

I have a Dirt Bike test article that spoke about the 1984 WR 250. They mentioned it had less low end that the previous years and a bit more top end. They said the 82/83 WR 250 engines were more tractable compared to the 84. I have 2 1982 cylinders and a 1984 cylinder. I do not see any noticeable difference in porting between the cylinders. The difference may be in the expansion chamber. A shorter head pipe would make the engine pipier while a longer one will develope better low and mid range

 

[RTM]

Well guys the husky performed well. The forks (see other thread) were way too soft so hard riding was a big no no, I even wiped out in on a forest track as I just couldn't hold a line. The perished inlet manifold (see other thread) failed causing the bike to misfire and generally run poorly at low revs. Duck tape and cable ties saw me through though. Otherwise I loved it ! very tractable indeed, especially for a non power valve machine. The power band did catch me out a few time though but its not a hard hitting machine as it has plently of bottom end grunt. The data I found on the 88 WR250 stated they are only 17 bhp, well that must be wrong its was knocking out 30 at least. Very pleased, my regular enduro tool (Honda CRF) is now advertised for sale as the husky will be my main enduro bike.

 

[2premo]

I have a Dirt Bike test article that spoke about the 1984 WR 250. They mentioned it had less low end that the previous years and a bit more top end. They said the 82/83 WR 250 engines were more tractable compared to the 84. I have 2 1982 cylinders and a 1984 cylinder. I do not see any noticeable difference in porting between the cylinders. The difference may be in the expansion chamber. A shorter head pipe would make the engine pipier while a longer one will develope better low and mid range

comparisons of pre 84, are not correct to this, so, the pre 84 was air cooled, to make them liquid cooled was nothing more than removing the fins and adding a jacket, 85 they changed the piston, not sure exactly what as they can actually be inter used, in 85 they made different port configurations for application and seemed to carry over to 86, 87 saw a new albeit remodeled engine, they stroked it for torque, it really worked out well as it flattened the power band and gave it rideability
most of the magazines were promoting Japanese machines and poorly reviewing ANYTHNG European, so while the Jap bikes were getting power valves the Euros were making REAL enduro machines, had a Yamaha 400 back then as it was street legal, what a slug compared to the Husky of the same era, according to the magazines the Yamaha was a better choice

so take everything you read with a grain of salt, they make more than 17 hp, when you see the numbers and ride them I don't get the numbers
maybe they mean rear wheel and the others are at the crank, I am certain my '87 Husqvarna CR250 is as fast as anything available in it's day, only problem was the lack of rear disc, had an 87 XC250 also and it was similar but the power valve on the CR flattened the hit a little bit

 

[jimspac]

My 1984 250WR is indeed air cooled and as far as to Dirt Bike's attitudes toward Husqvarnas, they were quite favorable. They loved the 250WR in a multi brand comparison and proclaimed the 400WR liquid cooled that year the best enduro bike to date. They certainly did not knock the Husqvarnas for still being twin shock because the only single shock better was the Suzuki Full Floater system.

As far as my point about expansion chambers that is proven science regardless of air or liquid cooled