Oh, look.
It's another "helpful" retard from a motorcycling message board here to set you straight on what you should know and do.
Have I told you this one?
Sorry if I have.
A couple of months back, I read a post on a forum where a guy wanted opinions on the bike I'd sold a couple months before:
The Yamaha WR-250RX.
That's the dual-purpose bike I'd ridden from June of 2009 until September of 2010, and I rode it everywhere, both street and dirt.
7,500 miles worth, so I got to know the bike well.
This guy wanted opinions on comparing a 2008 Yamaha WR-250RX to a 1989 Kawasaki KDX-200E1.
The KDX is an off-road (not street-legal) motorcycle, intended for trail riding and general off-road riding.
I've ridden them, had friends and relatives that owned them, and even had a 1986 model, myself, back in the day that I bought brand new.
Anyway, the guy wanted to know how the Yamaha WR-250R compared to the KDX as far as feel, power, and suspension went.
I wrote with what I knew from experience:
The WR-250RX is a good dual-purpose bike that, once uncorked with the mods to get rid of the EPA restrictions, will be a decent trail bike and run with traffic just fine on the street.
It will weigh about 50 pounds more than the KDX, which is a serious chunk of weight for an off-road motorcycle, and have suspension that isn't as good as the KDX, but, I wrote, that's how the dual-purpose bikes typically are with their stock suspensions:
They look like the latest and greatest, but simply don't work like them.
Why?
The Yamaha factory cut corners to save money, and basically had no intention of equipping the bike with top-of-the-line suspension, lest they end-up with a bike costing more money for them to produce.
The guy asking the question basically couldn't believe that I'd write saying the modern-looking suspension of the WR-250RX was anything other than excellent, or at the least, very, very good as it comes off the showrooms.
He went on to ask me questions, trying to comprehend what I'd written for him to read.
After several replies by me, it was obvious that he wasn't only not getting it, but he was basically in denial over such a notion.
So, he did what lots of guys will do:
Concentrated on asking others the same questions, sticking with the individuals that were giving him the answers he wanted to hear.
Basically, he told me (without actually writing it) that I was all wet and this could not be the case.
I had to laugh when I found out why he was asking about comparisons to the 1989 KDX-200E1:
He wrote, later, that this KDX was the ONLY dirt bike he'd ridden since the mid-1970s, and he only rode the KDX around in a parking lot before selling it shortly after he's bought it!
Yeah, that's right.
The guy last rode a dirt bike in 1973, back when they had very short and crude suspension, and, basically, knew nothing about riding a dirt bike since then.
Also, I then shortly afterwards read his advice and answers he was giving to other people who were asking questions about the WR-250RX, themselves, and he was more than willing to provide his opinions on that bike.
I guess it wouldn't surprise you to find out that the guy not only doesn't own one of those, but never even as much as rode a WR-250RX, either.
Nice, huh?
Yup.
That's what you can run across on a forum:
A guy who is very vocal and opinionated, but has more ambition and meaning-well-to-do than experience on the subject.
Off to jerk,
-John
No comments:
Post a Comment