Leon |
Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:00 pm
Subject: 86 is a 0 gen |
|
Great engine, revs even better than the 88+ I suspect it has the soft valves like the '88- early 90s so it won't last much past 30K miles. The frame is different, the wheels don't swap over. It's not the same bike.
I agree, fun bike well ahead of it's time. |
|
|
jvhjgh2006 |
|
|
Diddy Kong |
Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2014 12:24 am
Subject: Thank you for the carb advise |
|
What I know about MC mechanics is: righty tighty/lefty loosy. I have gone from there to teach myself how to tear down and rebuild my 250 mostly with the excellent advice I get from this site. The 250 will one day be my track bike. I will keep this advice in mind as I continue to work on it. |
|
|
SRH |
Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:31 pm
Subject: Carbs |
|
+1 to what Ian said. My '05 was exactly as Ian stated from the factory. Just tweaking the pilot screws to the same adj. made a huge diff. Also, before doing ANY carb tuning/jetting, it's imperative to learn HOW to jet the carbs. More is NOT always better. I've been using a K&N filter w/stock air box, #110 mains with Factory Pro adjustable needles, and 15-39 gearing for 2 years and still getting 62-67 MPG ( depends on riding style), and 100+ MPH on the Interstate.
I've wanted a 300 since they came out, but after hearing of lacking performance from new owners I'll keep and enjoy my 250 and watch for Ninja 300 performance enhancing info. |
|
|
Ian |
Posted: Mon May 19, 2014 6:06 pm
Subject: Your statement is inaccurate |
|
DiddyKong wrote: | I do not miss having a carburetor. That was the 250's greatest flaw. It had to sit and warm up for at least 20 minutes before it would go without stalling. I know this was a common problem. My 300 is very reliable and gets lots of respectful looks from other riders. They are always surprised it's a 300. |
The only reason why any Ninja 250 needed that long to warm up is because of two possibilities:
From the factory, the stock mixture screw settings were poorly done, and caused the bike to run too lean at idle.
Removing the plugs over the mixture screws and enriching the idle mixture always made the bike run better.
The carbs are gummed up from sitting for a long time, with gasoline left in the float bowls.
Only cleaning out the carbs properly, and then adjusting the mixture screws ever resolved this issue.
I've corrected enough Ninja 250 since 2002 with these two issues over the years to know that once the carbs are corrected, you have a fantastic running bike for many years.
Or, until the valves need adjustment.
But yes, you are correct in stating that it's common for Ninja 250's to have issues with the carbs.
There is no denying that little fact of reality.
Ian. |
|
|
BrianM |
Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 8:40 am
Subject: You had a Serious problem then... |
|
DiddyKong wrote: | I do not miss having a carburetor. That was the 250's greatest flaw. It had to sit and warm up for at least 20 minutes before it would go without stalling. I know this was a common problem. |
I've owned 4 250's myself, have worked on dozens more, and not a single one of them needed to sit and warm up for longer than it took to put on my helmet and gloves before riding off. That's ignoring the dozens of other bikes I've owned and hundreds->thousand I've worked on in my time as a MC mechanic. It my be 'common' in that people allow it to exist/don't know any better, but it is hardly "common" by way of being normal, acceptable, or something that can't be corrected. |
|
|
djrussell |
Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 8:39 am
Subject: Your carbs need work |
|
It should not take that long to be useable. They either need a good cleaning or rejetting. |
|
|
DiddyKong |
Posted: Wed May 14, 2014 11:49 pm
Subject: Bought a 300 still have the 250 |
|
I do not miss having a carburetor. That was the 250's greatest flaw. It had to sit and warm up for at least 20 minutes before it would go without stalling. I know this was a common problem. My 300 is very reliable and gets lots of respectful looks from other riders. They are always surprised it's a 300. |
|
|
Leon |
Posted: Tue May 06, 2014 2:11 pm
Subject: My 300 is faster, but the old Ninja liked to rev better. |
|
Now that I've got more than 1000 miles on my 300, I feel I can answer this question.
I owned three of the older Ninja 250s. I haven't ridden the 2007-2012 250. The torque curve on the old Ninja looked a lot like the Horsepower curve on other engines. The faster the old 250 was going, the harder it pulled. (Q: If you're riding on the highway and look down and see that the tachometer on your Ninja 250 says 7500 RPM, what action should you take? A: Downshift, get the RPMs back up to 9000 where the engine runs best.)
The 300 isn't like that. It has a LOT of torque down low and continues to pull all they way up to the red-line. If you're used to the older 250, the 300 feels flat at high RPM. The 250 encourages hooliganism, the 300 allows it. |
|
|
MyLittleGreenRocket |
Posted: Fri Dec 13, 2013 9:40 pm
Subject: gearing has changed? |
|
I just did a test ride on the new 300 and it can get up to 70+, of course, but it just takes time and some serious revs.
I'd forgotten how high these smaller bikes need to rev, and was shifting a little too early at first. Given a long enough stretch of highway the bike should easily be able to top 100 mph, but if that's all someone wants from a bike I would suggest something bigger. I was impressed by the way it turns in so easily (compared to my 650R) and at how it revs about 2,000 rpm lower at 70 than my older 2008 250R. |
|
|
florida-rider |
Posted: Mon Dec 02, 2013 4:43 pm
Subject: Limiter? |
|
If it was at a show and was for test rides maybe they had some sort of a limiter on it for the test rides |
|
|
zaneyard |
|
|
TonyKZ1 |
|
|
Burt |
Posted: Sat Nov 30, 2013 3:03 am
Subject: Has any new 300 owner OWNED the first generation 250? |
|
I owned a 2003 for 75K miles. I finally rode the 300 at the IMS in San Mateo
a month or two ago and I was stunned at how slow it was. I remember my
250 as being faster when it had low mileage--as in it would run up over 90
indicated if I wound it up. The 300 didn't seem to care how high the revs
were--it didn't pull any harder and seemed out of breath much over an indicated
65 mph.
Is my memory severely faulty? |
|
|