My almost new TC250...

[oregonsage]

I could be wrong but I think Bill fills his bikes with AV-Gas because is is a lot more stable. At least I think he told me that when I bought my 06. You might just want to start fresh before you do any jetting.

Not a bad idea to put in fresh gas. I had a CRF450X that would barely run if the gas was a couple months old, since then I dump my bike gas into the motorhome after the weekend and buy new for the next event. I dont think Bill commonly uses AV gas these days as Ive heard him carting his cans to the Chevron station a half a block from his shop.

 

[NumberCruncher]

So how many peak hp do these slow TC250's make? I don't think I ever saw the dyno chart. Disappointed by what these guys had to say about the 2012.

http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/135/11107/Motorcycle-Article/2012-Husqvarna-TC250-First-Ride.aspx

NC

 

[racer726]

Mine was less than desirable, and I had all the updated parts along with some head work done. Even with an aftermarket exhaust it was still slow. I went back to my 125. Just too much fun.

 

[water racer]

I am not a motocrosser so I don't know what it is supposed to feel like, but it has great power for the woods and really would not want anymore.
GP

 

[vntgmx]

I had a 2010 TC250 and now have an 2011 TC250 and the '11 has a bit more then the '10 but neither one is as strong as the Jap 250s well except for the YZ250F maybe , but for the average weekend vet warrior the engine is fine and it's a great handling platform that I find puts the fun into riding....
If you're a fast A rider then I'd say the lack of engine is a hinderance otherwise forget what the mags say and just be honest with yourself and your abilities and enjoy the most excellent platform that the TC250 is in spite of the engines lack of class leading power...
In case your wondering I've been fortunate to ride the other 250Fs so I have some real life experience for comparison sakes but this is just my opinion yours may vary....

 

[boisedave]

Kelly -- How do you think your new scoot will do up in Gifford? I would imagine it would be awesome in Bend, but I'm curious how you think it would do in super technical type stuff. Rocks, ledges, switchbacks and the like -- We have some pretty gnarly stuff up here and was curious if you think it has enough poop to get the job done on when you are cruisining around on the pilot jet.

 

[Motosportz]

Kelly -- How do you think your new scoot will do up in Gifford? I would imagine it would be awesome in Bend, but I'm curious how you think it would do in super technical type stuff. Rocks, ledges, switchbacks and the like -- We have some pretty gnarly stuff up here and was curious if you think it has enough poop to get the job done on when you are cruisining around on the pilot jet.

Absolutely. Pulls loads and hills fine. Was actually pretty surprised how low it would pull from and it has instant snap from about anywhere. Short stroke and quick reving means it will pull out of about any rpm with the flick of the wrist. Feels like a KTM200 motor in some ways. Very 2 strokish. first gear is low and will pull up anything. I would say it would be a good technical bike for a good rider. A no so talented rider might struggle with the abrupt power delivery / lively. It is overall a very active riding bike both the motor, the quick handling, the stiff suspension, the STRONG brakes. Not a EZ calm trail machine but a active ripper like a 150/200 2 stroke kind of gig. I love the motor for tight woods work. FUN, like a 125.

I rode a KTM 350 XC back to back with my bike and was surprised the 350 did not feel much stronger in the woods. I think my TC was quicker between the corners as it pulls QUICK, it is real fast reving bike. The 350 for sure had more bottom and was EZer and more forgiving but a good rider would be just as fast or faster on the TC250 in the tighter woods. The TC also feels 20 pounds lighter and handles better. The 350 felt almost like a light 450 with less power and I found it worked well but was kinda boring. I liked the FE390 more than the 350 mainly due to the better power of the 390.

 

[NumberCruncher]

I'd love to see a dyno chart. That will answer questions. The same goes for a 2011/2012 TE310.

NC

 

[boisedave]

Absolutely. Pulls loads and hills fine. Was actually pretty surprised how low it would pull from and it has instant snap from about anywhere. Short stroke and quick reving means it will pull out of about any rpm with the flick of the wrist. Feels like a KTM200 motor in some ways. Very 2 strokish. first gear is low and will pull up anything. I would say it would be a good technical bike for a good rider. A no so talented rider might struggle with the abrupt power delivery / lively. It is overall a very active riding bike both the motor, the quick handling, the stiff suspension, the STRONG brakes. Not a EZ calm trail machine but a active ripper like a 150/200 2 stroke kind of gig. I love the motor for tight woods work. FUN, like a 125.

I rode a KTM 350 XC back to back with my bike and was surprised the 350 did not feel much stronger in the woods. I think my TC was quicker between the corners as it pulls QUICK, it is real fast reving bike. The 350 for sure had more bottom and was EZer and more forgiving but a good rider would be just as fast or faster on the TC250 int he tighter woods. The TC also feels 20 pounds lighter and handles better. The 350 felt almost like a light 450 with less power and I found it worked well but was kinda boring. I liked the FE390 more than the 350 mainly due to the better power of the 390.

Thanks for the info -- that's good to know. I'm curious to ride the 2012 and see how that works too. A part of me thinks that would be the perfect mountain bike [assuming the EFI is sorted out].

I rode a 350XC up here on some pretty technical stuff and wasn't impressed with the motor. Bottom was softer than my 250XC-W; thought it pulled a bit harder [but not much]. Felt like a 350 [softer than a 250; weaker than a 450]. I thought the motor migh be really nice for desert/open stuff [like Idaho city]. I was impressed with the chassis though -- thought the linkage chassis with the two stroke might be the way to go. I also could feel that the 350 felt heavier than I expected when doing rock crawling/low speed stuff.

I am drawn to a 250 four stroke because of the light weight and long pulling motors. That being said -- the new 310 TXC really has me thinking -- might be a great substitute for my 250 two stroke. Really interested in trying that bike out. I'm a two stroke guy, so it has to be really good to get me to switch. It might though. Then again, there are promises of a redesigned two stroke....

 

[Motosportz]

I'd love to see a dyno chart. That will answer questions. The same goes for a 2011/2012 TE310.

NC

Kinda, I never worried about dyno numbers much as how the bike delivers the power and how it actually feels makes more difference to me than power figures.

 

[Motosportz]

I am drawn to a 250 four stroke because of the light weight and long pulling motors. That being said -- the new 310 TXC really has me thinking -- might be a great substitute for my 250 two stroke. Really interested in trying that bike out. I'm a two stroke guy, so it has to be really good to get me to switch. It might though. Then again, there are promises of a redesigned two stroke....

Bingo. I think you hit the head on the nail and that's going to be a great bike.

 

[water racer]

Absolutely. Pulls loads and hills fine. Was actually pretty surprised how low it would pull from and it has instant snap from about anywhere. Short stroke and quick reving means it will pull out of about any rpm with the flick of the wrist. Feels like a KTM200 motor in some ways. Very 2 strokish. first gear is low and will pull up anything. I would say it would be a good technical bike for a good rider. A no so talented rider might struggle with the abrupt power delivery / lively. It is overall a very active riding bike both the motor, the quick handling, the stiff suspension, the STRONG brakes. Not a EZ calm trail machine but a active ripper like a 150/200 2 stroke kind of gig. I love the motor for tight woods work. FUN, like a 125.

I rode a KTM 350 XC back to back with my bike and was surprised the 350 did not feel much stronger in the woods. I think my TC was quicker between the corners as it pulls QUICK, it is real fast reving bike. The 350 for sure had more bottom and was EZer and more forgiving but a good rider would be just as fast or faster on the TC250 in the tighter woods. The TC also feels 20 pounds lighter and handles better. The 350 felt almost like a light 450 with less power and I found it worked well but was kinda boring. I liked the FE390 more than the 350 mainly due to the better power of the 390.

Not sure about the stiff suspension part, it is very compliant but feels a little soft to me and I only weigh 165. This is the first bike I have had that I turned clickers to stiffen it up instead of the other way. That being said, Kreig had the forks done but I can't imagine they softened it up because they used it for MX.
I agree power down low is plenty and quick, it must be up top where they say it is weak, I never make it there in gnarly single track.
GP

 

[R_Little]

If you need any parts, let me know. I've got the updated CDI, updated cam and a complete rocket exhaust. I parted out my 2010.

You just sold me your exhaust.

Do you have the spark arrestor screen?

 

[Motosportz]

Not sure about the stiff suspension part, it is very compliant but feels a little soft to me and I only weigh 165.
GP

I am riding it in rocks and roots and weight 40 pounds more than you. The extra weight i carry will actually make the suspension harsher for me as it will sit lower int he progressive part of the stoke. It needs stiffer springs (which will actually make it plusher for me) and i want less high speed damping for gobbling up roots and rocks. I knew it was sprung and valved for a 150 MX dude and I am far from that with my use. Richard from House of horsepower will be getting the suspension soon to do his magic as he owes me one.

BTW I mostly cured the starting issue. Needed a large pilot. Went to a 42 might like a 44. starts with in 5 kicks hot now where before it would not hardly start at all. 30 kicks and then push it down a hill sucked. That's over I think. Seemed to gain some low end and roll on power too.

 

[ray_ray]

You guys have got this bike nailed it seems ... All this info might need to be put in a TC250 sticky somewhere for easy access for the future...

 

[NumberCruncher]

Kinda, I never worried about dyno numbers much as how the bike delivers the power and how it actually feels makes more difference to me than power figures.

And if the dyno showed 40hp at the rear wheel would you feel differently???

NC

 

[typeone]

i've got an '07 TC250 and still love it for everything. goes really well in the woods and on track. only extra or additional mod i wish i had was a spare 18" rear wheel. the 19" spooks me in the rocks. i have HD tubes in now but i've pinched plenty in the past riding MX.

will the 18" rear off my '09 WR144 fit the '07 TC? havent tried because i figure it's a no (plus i cant stop grinning on the WR!)

 

[dfeckel]

I can speak from experience that a 2007 TE 250 rear wheel will not interchange with a 2008 CR125 rear wheel. Not sure about the '09-up wheels, though.

 

[jmetteer]

It should fit, I am running the 18 from my 08 Txc250 on my 09 cr125.

Later,

 

[Motosportz]

I don't see why it would not work ether???