2010 TC 250 versus 2009 TXC

Over T-giving, Cody and I did some PA Coal riding. I got some serious "comparison" hours on the '10 TC and the '09 TXC and wanted to post a summary of my opinions about both bikes.

I'll try to be concise.

Motor comparo: The TC will rip the face off the TXC. I think I said this already in another post, but it was confirmed beyond a shadow of a doubt this weekend. The TC motor revs quicker (MUCH quicker). The TC motor has a mid like I've never felt before. The mid has what can best be described as "eternal pull" which I'm sure will be a big positive on an MX track. On the bottom, I gotta give the TXC its due. It lugs better than the TC and requires less clutch "finesse" to get launched. Top end kudos goes to the TC by a noticeable margin. It just won't quit pulling. To be fair I didn't use 6th gear on the TXC.

Handling: A mixed bag but definitely in favor of the TC. The TC's light weight is felt from the very moment you attempt to mount. VERY obvious. It's more throwable, flickable, pointable... all the things you'd expect from a lighter bike. HOWEVER... there were times when I appreciated the TXC's extra weight. Dust-like coal is worse than sand. It's almost like talcum powder. The TXC seemed to be more at home in this stuff, especially when transitioning from more gritty terrain. I think this had a lot to do with Kelly's steering damper, but whatever it was, the TXC would definitely be my choice in sand.

Since it rained the day before we rode, we encountered plenty of slippery stuff, ranging from wet leaves on rocks to hidden (by leaves) mud slicks. I gotta give the nod to the TXC here... again probably due to the damper and the extra weight. It just felt more "sure footed" in the slippery stuff.

In rocks, roots and ruts I prefered the TC simply because, when I ricocheted off course, I could wiggle my fat A$$ slightly, flick the bars a bit and quickly correct to a more favorable line. The TXC was much more of a chore in similar circumstances even though the damper made things more tolerable. I much preferred the ability to toss the bike versus wrestle with it.

Brakes: TC. By a WIDE margin. 'Nough said.

Suspension: I think I finally got the TC dialed-in, but admittedly, I'm not skilled enough to offer a fair assessment. I'll say that the TXC's Zokes have grown on me after break-in. Initially, the TC had a tendency to feel like a pogo stick on rough terrain. But with some break-in and some adjustment, I'll just say that both suspensions can be made to work for an old fat guy who will NEVER have the skill to use them to their full potential.

Starting: The TC is still a 1 or 2 kick starter 95% of the time in all conditions. I've never kicked this bike bike more than 10 times (and the 10 times was after a fall). The TXC is E-start. E-start is HUGE for old fat guys like me.

Summary: I love both bikes. I thought I had myself talked-into selling the TXC, but after this weekend, I'm re-thinking. I may keep both bikes. I can't explain it other than to say it's like having a stash of two premium beers in the fridge that you can't decide between. You open the fridge door and say... "DAMN, I'm not sure which one would taste better..."

I'll boil it down to this: When I'm in the mood to feel like I'm 18 years old again (and my body will cooperate), I'll be on the TC every time. When I'm stiff, sore, bloated, and aching... I'll choose the TXC.

I will also say that if the TC had Kelly's steering damper and E-start, the TXC would be for sale... NOW.

Very nice comparison Krieg. We had my son's TC on the MX track again today and that bike is a MX scalpel! My son turned his fastest times today on it and just won't stop talking about the bike. He said he doesn't have to follow others lines with the TC you can cut your own; just look there and you will be there. I love the power delivery and like you said the mid is a "eternal pull"; good description. I was a little hesitant on getting him a 250F after we rode a friends Yamaha 250F. The Husky IMHO is WAY better in every way especially in the power delivery. Thanks for the comparison.

Well if the brakes are that much better, they're too good!!! Great comparison by the way. I just re-jetted my 2009 TXC 250 and wow, I am going to be so much faster this coming year. I can't imagine having too much more power and being in control through technical stuff. The 2010's sound like 18 year old on speed (makes you feel young...if only for a moment) and definitely a racer. I am going to keep my bike as is, but an Athena 300 kit sounds like it mike be the ultimate set-up! My '09 TXC 250 is much lighter than my '08 TE 450 in every way. Any way you slice it, this new generation 250 (2010) is going to explode onto the race scene.

I think the "better" part comes from the fact that they're stopping less weight.

Well, that makes too much sense.

nahhh, my pads were newer than yours on that ride. That was the first ride on new EBC MXS pads front and rear.

Later,

I should have been more descript. I was referring mainly to the lugging capability and not so much the low end power it makes or how explosive it is from the bottom. There's got to be some 1st gear ratio differences in the TC versus the TXC, because the TC seems to be steeper, trickier to launch, and less willing to lug without fancy clutch work than my '09 TXC and apparently the '10 TXC. Once launched, there is definitely more bottom end power than the '09 motor. The mid is incredible.

It sounds like the 09 TXC 250 is like my 09 TXC510; just dump the clutch and 1st gear is so low it just craws foreward no throttle or clutch work needed. My son's 2010 TC250 needs to be feed a little clutch and throttle to get things going from a stand still then it's game on. Krieg does the 1st gear on your 09 run out shorter than your 2010? Krieg I like you suspect the TC 1st gear is taller and would make sense for MX tracks.

I belive that the luggability factor is greatly influenced by the more precise efi vs carb.

I don't know about that HomeFinance, my 09 TXC 510 is a complete lugger and it's carbed. I think it's more in gearing and cam selection. It's the only big bike Ive ridden that I didn't feel the need for a Rekluse Pro on for slow lugging trails.

Yep, the TXC is pretty much a "clutch-dumping-lugger" And the TC has got to be steeper but I can't find any info on actual final ratios. But suffice it to say that it needs a little clutch work to keep things tame while taking off and sometimes lugging.

You know, I didn't even think about that. Duh.

The old heavier flywheel effect... now that and a lower 1st grear sounds about right to me.

...and even more so with the TE's compared to TXC's.

Has anyone had an opportunity to ride a new TE250?

Are the 2010 250cc bikes with 6 speeds using similar tranny ratios as the 04-09 versions? ie. very close ratio.
Or, has Husky listened to the riders and widened them out a bit?