125 Vs 250

[sirdabalot]

Been wondering if a 125 will be of help to a 50 year old clubman rider who's ability is in a steady decline.

Majority of bikes have been 250's but I once had a 2004 Sherco 200, (I miss that one).

The 125's look ideal in cobbly streams, but I wonder how they do in mud, would I miss the torque combined with higher gears I currently use on my 250.

I weigh 11 stone and mainly do local events with the odd road based trial for fun.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

[nelly1]

i had a go on a mates evo 125 and it was so easy to ride im just shy of 15 stone and it didnt feel underpowered

[ross brown]

I wonder how they do in mud, would I miss the torque combined with higher gears I currently use on my 250.

Dear Sir Dab

“There is no replacement for displacement”. Bollocks. At least that’s what’s I’ve just learned these last three rides. I too am 50+, 90 Kgs, Clubman and (riding) time-starved. I’ve added a Beta 125 to the stable for my son and in the process of getting to know it have been truly surprised; to the point where I wonder why more folk do not have one. I haven’t owned the 125 long enough to comment on riding in really muddy conditions yet. My experience of the pros and cons of 125 vs. 250 ownership are below.

Pros of 125s:

Full lock turns: 125 wins with its light weight and great steering.

Tight lines: 125 wins as it’s size is forgiving eg. I can ride along the top of a log for longer than on the 250.

Up waterfalls and crossing streams: 125 wins as it can ‘Foil on Water’ (think Amercia's cup). I can now jump up rocks and float across water as never before. It’s is a magical state not normally found by me on my 250. Where the 250 has extra earth-moving torque it also carries the extra weight and so ploughs through and around rather than over.

Short, steep up hills with axle high tree roots at the very top: 125 wins. When wound-up (revved) the 125 gets me to the top of the hill, albeit with less torque in reserve, and the lighter front makes it easier to loft the whole bike across the roots. The 250 would get me to the top with more in hand, but I might dig a hole and spin rather than dig-in and go over the roots. I know, this is a weight distribution thing rather than a torque thing.

When it all goes horribly wrong: When I screw up, and need more torque to get out of trouble and it doesn’t happen I can extricate myself or pick an alternate line on-the-fly more easily. Light weight again.

Cons of 125s:

Logs: Less grunt on demand means I'm having more of an issue with logs. This is a technique Fail of course rather than the 125s fault, but I can no longer open the throttle and the bike rolls up the log. I have to 'think ahead' of the bike more. It forces me to be sharper with the clutch and throttle.

Hills. I carry more Energy into the start of a section: To compensate for a reduction in torque I carry more energy, which can be converted into forward or vertical momentum, or let slip away with the clutch. So I'm using more throttle and clutch control. When I screw up, and need more torque to get out of trouble, it doesn’t happen so I again I need to have thought through exactly what I'm going to carry to the top in terms of speed and body positioning.

Usability vs. capability

When on the phone to my brother and having to describe why the 125 had surprised me so with its appeal, all round fun-factor, I realised it had made me more aggressive in how I approach an obstacle and that the reason may well be that it is being ridden at say, 70% of its capability, whereas I’m riding the 250 at 50%.

If I only had one bike would be a 125?

Up until month a go I would have said no way. Now, I could easily live with a 125.

I hope this helps. Go beg or borrow one for an hour or two.

It does make me wonder if a 200 is in fact the perfect Trials Tool.

Edited December 8, 2013 by ross brown

[2stroke4stroke]

I've ridden a 200 Sherco (actually approx 150cc I believe) and it is not the equal of my Beta which is the full 200 and combines all you said about the 125 with just enough extra bottom end to avoid the problems I would get in to with a125 due to my old-fashioned riding style (from such 125s as I have had a shot of). The 125 is, I suppose, essentially designed to be ridden in the modern full bore and abuse the clutch style which I can't do whereas the 200 is deliberately developed to be easy to ride (as it has no place in World events I suppose it can be just what it is).

Edited December 8, 2013 by 2stroke4stroke