2012 KTM SX models (quick 2 stroke test rides)

Was up at Cahuilla MX , KTMs Mike Sleeter hosted a 2012 ride day at the MX Ride for the Cause. I only rode the 2 stroke models in this order 125SX,150SX,250SX. Motors are fierce, chassis are nice, overall for MX the machines are really good for expert level MX guys out of the box. For me the 150 was the best. the suspension (which really is irelevent) were all super stiff even for me (I like Enduro bikes) and the power was as mentioned fierce way too explosive for my ammie/enduro minded taste. The 150 had a good balance to make it a fun machine. My lap times were probably best on the 150SX, to add to that I really think my lap times on my 97 RM125 were faster than any of my rides on the new Katos. At my skill level the RM with its 7oz flywheel weight is very controllable, those new SX Katos were spinning wheels all over the place and bucking me around. I am much more comfortable on enduro spec machines. Oh yeah all this was on the new Vet track not the main, the main was filled with very fast experts and (familiar named)pros that were guests of the event, on this day the water was a little over my head out there so I never hit the main track. I was out on the vet track on one round with one pro and under him the 250SX was working fine he was hitting everything hard and the bike was looking right and balanced, so again out of the box I am sure they have it tuned for expert/pros, not for Nov/intermediates or old guys like me(or most of us for that matter)
PS for locals, the all new vet track is super fun and technical with up hills,down hills, drop offs and lots of crazy corners (hairpins, off cambers, banked cambers, low berms and high berms) with hard sections and sandy sections. Its a good offroad training track, I will be back for sure. R

How would you compare the 150 SX to the CR 150? (I'm assuming you've ridden the CR 150?) We've owned both and I'd be curious how others felt.

Krieg, sorry Ive never ridden a Husky 125/144 for comparo. Ive just gotta say that the 125SX was very pipey and had a hard instant hit the 150 was more controllable (but that is tunable for personal taste). The chassis were very very solid (all the SX models with linkage rears) and like I said for my intermediate level speed and weight they were all harsh for me. KTM builds great machinery no doubt, they have all the Euro good stuff on them and the build/hardware quality is high. My problem is that they were all the SX versions, I am not designed to fit them very well.

We actually raced a 2008 144 (150) SX and a 2010 150 SX. Both these models were pre-linkage KTM's. Both of them were screamers on the track but we were afraid of the 2008 due to the well-documented issues with 150 motors exploding. We liked the 2008 so much, we decided to wait a year for the motor issues to get resolved and bought the 2010 150 SX... only to learn that the 2010's were also grenading. Even though the bikes performed well, the motor issues pretty much turned us off of KTM 150's. Two years is plenty of time to solve something as serious as melted pistons IMHO.

That said... Cody swears our '11 CR 150 will suck the orange out of the KTM's plastic. I'm just dying to see if that's true. My own "seat of the pants" assessment tells me the motors are pretty close but the Husky would win the handling contest... (remembering that we had non-linkage KTMs).

I recall some dyno results showing the Husky150 putting down a good bit more power than the Pumpkin 150. Krieg it looks like Codys SOTP dyno is calibrated better than yours. I do know for a fact my CR144 Husky is rocket!

I rode a KTM demo day last week at washougal mx. Rode the 125sx and the 150sx and XC. The 125sx beats my CR in stock form. I like my CR144 motor better than the 150sx. The 125sx was superior to the 150sx, hard to explain, just felt better, the 150 just seemed off. The 150XC is a different story, it was perfect on the GP track they had. The KTM tranny feels better than the husky in the offroad stuff (i do both mx and offroad with my CR). The XC handled great to, just a great chassis. The SX models where death traps on the GP course, way to twitchy on the front end. Long story short, i can buy about 1.92 husky CR125's for the price of one KTM, so it doesnt really matter to me if the KTM's do a couple things better or lighter or faster, it will never be .92 better Oh, and the hydro clutch is lousy, no feel/feedback, they should drop the hydro on the 125/150 and knock a few bucks off the price.

Dang I must be a cheap skate I payed the orange crew 5 bucks for the test ride!!! (it was all for the charity).
T I agree, the Vet track does have weird corners and off camber strange stuff on it, for me slower is better and for my "enduro" minded self I like weird corners and strange balance features. (I like to practice in uncomfortable riding) and taking unused weird lines, outside and inside.
And yes the vet is more packed down on the race line but still has some good sand/soft riding zones off the main line. I do like the main track big time, but the experts/ pros (some nat caliber guys) kept me off it on my wee RM125, didnt want to get landed on.

Husky- "Price/Value/Selection nobody even comes close" (quoted from a local mens clothing store)

Was the gear ratio on the 150XC the same as the SX? The only gripe I have with my WR150 is the close ratio MX tranny. I keep trying to find a 7th gear on the longer straights.

AFAIK the XC and SX share ratios. Rode some 4 strokes and the 300XC as well, all the 4 strokes were boring. 300XC could be cool but the demo model was running bad, like a clip off and two sizes on the main. Still made power though.