From MXA's website: The MXA wrecking crew has started testing the 2013 Husqvarna CR125 (shown hereat Piru MX Park). Once we run it through the complete test cycle as a 125, we are going to build a full-race project bike, using the 144 kit, for the World Two-Stroke Championships on April 7.MXA will field a large team for the 125 Pro class—including a Husky CR144, Yamaha YZ125 and KTM 125SX for Dennis Stapleton, Trent Pugmire and Daryl Eklund. Sweet!! http://motocrossactionmag.com/Main/News/MOTOCROSS-ACTIONS-WEEKEND-NEWS-ROUNDUP-I-DID-NOT-S-9866.aspx
MXA, be sure add a tooth to the rear sprocket.... truth is MXA has deep respect from their old school mentality for the Husqvarna Marque and has the old school love for all 2 stroke racing bikes. They will definitely get the 125/144 dialed for natural terrain MX racing, for those listening they will add the right stuff for MX focus racing. Nice
They are 4 years to late, we are all on board already :>) And that bike will be probably be gone next year or the year after to be replaced by the KTM. There is no way they will build and maintain 2 125 class engines.
I don't see why the Husky 125 would be gone in a year or two. KTM is offering the 125 again in the states after one year of non-importation so "KTM" offers the KTM 125 and KTM 150 in the states; plus, they offer the Husaberg 125 2-stroke in Europe. That's three tiddlers right there. Yes, having three 125s (KTM, Husaberg, and Husky, in Eupore, at least) might be a bit much but if they were to cut something, perhaps they would just have the Huskies shipped with the 144 kit installed.
But KTM and Husaberg have essentially the same engine. Having two completely separated production lines of 125/144 engines... that's an awful lot of tooling for several very closely targeted models.
Here's the full test: http://motocrossactionmag.com/Main/...RNA-CR125-TWOSTROKE-TEST-RIDE-IS-I-10222.aspx Enjoy!
This was pretty cool. They rode it out at Milestone - rippin'!!! View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LY9AGxkqEpE
It really didn't sound like they knew anything about setting up the CR125. Thought the stock carb and jetting was good ???? We all know that it needs at least a 52t rear sprocket. I am not impressed by MXA at all. Never mentioned the problem with KTMs blowing up mid year. Says the Husky has a narrow powerband ? Really ?????
Nor should you be if you are expecting an enduro evaluation of a 144 or a 165 . Pretty much spot on in the context of moto. Jetting? Fine. 51 tooth sprocket? Perfect. KTM's blowing up? It's a Husqvarna test why would they mention KTM's blowing up? Narrow powerband? Good peak but narrow PEAK compared to a Yamaha or KTM (low and mid are as usefull as a reverse gear in MX). They tested it as a 125, at Glen Helen! I found the test to be pretty accurate and reflective of my experience living with mine, hardcore MX only. Really. ( I give the handling quite a bit more credit ). I thought it was a pretty positive review? To each, their own!
Stock jetting Sucks. Too big a pilot jet. Didn't even mention the too high float level. 51T ?? Everyone goes to at least a 52T. The Husky has a very wide powerband also. Suspension ? Didn't even mention the soft rear shock spring and the way heavy fork spring. I weigh 185lbs and had to go down to a .40kg fork spring. Rear spring is a 5kg. I had to go to a 6kg to get the correct sag numbers. Why should they mention the KTM problems ? What good is more power if it doesn't survive ? Personally I like Huskys power output much better than a KTM. Haven't ridden a Yamaha so I can compare there. Piss poor review.
I had a 2009 YZ125, my 08CR125 (when it was stock) and my friends 2006 CR125 (still stock) both had more power and better power than the YZ. Honestly I don't think the YZ has anything better than a CR Husky especially the power plant.
I stopped giving my opinion and criticism on other people's preferred offroad/woods/trail setups because, frankly, I don't ride that stuff, so maybe what I liked for MX actually sucked for them. Same on bike models, I tried to stop judging everything through my eyes, unless it represents the way I ride. With all due respect, and you deserve tons of respect, Dwight, I think calling this MX review "piss poor", by comparing it to your offroad setup, is naïve. Here's my take, on your take! Stock jetting is close, pilot is a little rich. Doesn't load up on the track (maybe it does picking through a technical rooty sidehill?), picks up cleanly and revs hard, a tad lean on top I run a 42 pilot and a 470 main and lowered my float height 1mm. They say it has a 35 pilot which IS misinformation I think. But I agree, the jetting is "in the ballpark", it doesn't suck for MX, richer pilot picks up when wacking the throttle and cools a blistering motor when off the throttle. They didn't say it's perfect. 52t sprocket runs out too quick in 2nd clutching out of slow corners but still won't pull third. I like the 52 in upper gears but can't sacrifice the slower-corner behavior, 51 is where it's at. I like the Husky powerband, haven't owned a 2012 yam or KTM, won't comment. Suspension? I weigh 155 lbs and this is one of the best stock forks I've had. If I went to .40kg springs, I WOULD DIE, not dislike it, I would get hurt as it bottomed and deflected of the face of bigger jumps, it would be just plain ridiculous. Springrate is about perfect for me, I'm considering a revalve as I do bottom it hard sometimes and heard there are big improvements to be had in midstroke action. They say lighter riders may want .42's sounds accurate but I'll stick with stock and wouldn't rule out .44's. Rear springrate is about right, I could go up a small step and think I will, but a 6.0 wouldn't be right for me and a 125 target weight is 165 and under, glad you settled on a good springrate for you. None of the KTM's raced around here (know a few guys, see a bunch more) have blown up. My Husky hasn't either (I'm the lone ranger). I have utmost confidence in the Husky but certainly don't think there is a KTM grenade epidemic. Accurate test in the context of the bike's intended use, represents my findings pretty closely. AWESOME bike, decent review, they like the bike! I'll defer to you for my offroad/woods setup, you seem to have it dialed and I'd fark it up!
I have to agree, but I never rode mine as a 125. I didn't care for the powerband, and that's coming off a RM125 with a SST pipe. It was fast, and very useable, but peaky, and narrow. Much better with the Fatty pipe. Based on what I've read, I was prepared to change my rear sprocket to a 51, but I find now that if I get on the gas on high speed down hills, the front wheel starts to come up, so I don't think I need more gear. Not only that, but it has as much low end as I'll ever need. Maybe the pipe is the difference. My bike had a 35 pilot., and I've changed it to a 30 (spooge), but otherwise have found it to be very close. Even in the woods, I have no problems with how it runs. Now, as far as handling, apparently the front springs were changed to the next lightest spring (whatever that is) before I got it. At 150 lbs, I find front and back to be perfect, and this is, by far, the best handling bike I've ever ridden. I think the test is almost a carbon copy of their previous CR test in '12. I'd say it was accurate then, and accurate now.
