Trike Questions: Trike comparisons and feeedback requested...

[EvilMooseofDoom]

Howdy again....

I thought I posted this question earlier, but either i neglected to hit the "post" button....or.....

Well, I have a few dollars to spend on a trike, finally....but before I rush out and buy one, I would like to get some feedback as to which one I should buy...the problem I have, is that I am 6-foot-1, a former weightlifter at 300 lbs (not gross fat, I am just built like a tank, I was 255 lbs. in the ninth grade, and scrawny), and I want a 2-stroke trike to ride. Here are my local choices:

1986 Tecate 250
1984-1986 Tri-Z 250
1983-1986 250R (either air or water cooled)

My primary allegiance is to Yamaha. The Tri-Z just looks evil, especially in red and black. However, I haven't ridden one in 22 years, and from what I gather, 300 lbs. is not something I would want to throw around on the Z footpegs, given that I am hearing they like to break off, in addition to poor handling/suspension on trails. I haven't ridden either of the two other choices in quite some time, although I don't hear as many problems about the Honda and Kawasaki, the Kawasaki is supposed to be the fastest, with the best suspension....I guess what I would like to know, personal devotion aside, and given that most of my riding will be trail-oriented (the ATC 350X is too slow, sorry), what would be the ideal bike, given the circumstances? This isn't entirely a pointless thread, the results could be used to create a "which bike is best for me" article later....at any rate, feedback would be appreciated. I don't care which bike I go with, anything with three wheels and two-stroke power would be ideal, I just want to make sure what I pick is somewhat reliable and won't break if I beat on it a bit...or at least break all that badly.
Any feedback will be appreciated....thanks a bunch.

[Dammit!]

Tri-Z would fit your size best. The footpegs are a problem but, that's something that could be beefed up a bit. If you know a good welder, anything is possible. In stock trim they have a more trail friendly power delivery.

You'd feel a little cramped on a stock 1985-86 250R most likely but it's fixable. Taller bars and possibly a desert style seat would probably help a lot in the comfort department. None of the other choices are as reliable (not to mention plentiful). The R is also the most well rounded imo. It can do just about anything well.

The 2nd gen Tecates make 2 more hp than the R and is supposedly 2mph faster stock. They vibrate like a mofo, are a blast to ride but will cost the most in the long run and some of those parts are very rare. First gen are easier to find but the suspension is behind all the others except the first gen 250R. Still fun bikes and very quick off the line.

All that said, you obviously have a preference for the Z. I say just get one and address the problem areas. Beefed up pegs, a better rear shock, some progressive springs up front... good to go. I've been saying for a long time that the Z is far and away the performance bargain in the entire ATV world. You can find them cheaper than any other high performance machine and with a little work they can scream with the best of them. I wouldn't choose one over my 86 R personally (then again, there isn't an ATV on earth I would choose over my R) but they're awesome trikes.

[Huffa]

You say your riding "will be trail-oriented", are you sure you would not rather have a 350X with power that is more suitable for the trail?

Even though the 350X does not produce horsepower #'s of the 2 strokes, I feel it produces a far wider powerband and more controlable low end grunt that you might find more to your liking?

"255 lbs. in the ninth grade, and scrawny ".......... That's scrawny at 6' 1" ??

[Derrick Adams]

I have an opinion on this as well. Having owned the Z and the R, they are both good bikes. I'm 6'4" and 250lb. I really like the fit of the Z, but thats it. They are rattle boxs with they're unbalanced engines and the suspension is crap. Now with that said, if you can get past the engine vibrations the rest is fixable, but really not worth it. If your dead set on the Z first you will need an 86, the 85 forks are too little for you. Then you will want to have the pegs modified (I'm working on a kit right now) and you will want to add a new custom shock for your weight. You can have one built to your specs from a Banshee. The swingarm bearings are prone for failing on these bikes too, contact X-system here on the boards for poly bushings.

The 250R has much more going for it when it comes to setting the bike up for you and your weight. If you get the 86 model it will have a 1" taller seat which gives you alot more room. If you still feel cramped you can do what i'm doing and lower the pegs 1". A very easy mod on the Honda. Also the 250R has a much better rear suspension. Almost every aftermarket shock company make shocks for that bike. So you can custom order one for your wieght and riding style. You can even have the stocker revalved and sprung if you want to. Add some progressive springs to the forks, like said and you've got a great bike. Not to mention all the parts availability.

This is just my view on it. Take it or leave it.

[iowarotax]

For me, I weigh 215. The Yamaha is alot different handling trike than the R or Tecate. When I ride a Tri-Z, I feel like I have to use alot more throttle control to steer it than the other two trikes. They are all LEGBREAKERS, but any are great. My favorite is the R.

[Mosh]

and Derrick said it best.We have both machines 85 R and 85-Tri-z.I am not as big as you guys so fitment does not affect me.The only complaints I have on the tri-z are the same as already stated.They vibrate,The suspension lacking,and the footpegs can be a problem.I feel The tri-z handles better than a stock 250r,but you have to work the z to get it to handle.

On the other hand The 250 r I really am beginning to like better than the tri-z.It was just designed way better.It is a 50-50 call for me.The r does feel smaller to me,but it is easier to throw it around.I have been thinking of selling my z to get another. 250r.

I would say a 85-86 r would be the way to go.there is nothing wrong with the aircooled 250r's, there is just way more potential with the liquid cooled 250 r's.
I feel either way either machine has to be set-up or tweaked in one way or another for your style.The tri-z will be much cheaper to purchase,but finding z parts is getting kinda of tough to do.
I have nothing against the 86-87 tecate 3's.I have not spent much time on one.I have ridden them some and I like them.They are (unique)! But you will really run into parts availability with those.Very hard to get some of the parts for those.

[DixiePlowboy]

I'm 6'2" but only 200lbs., so I can speak to the height issue more than I can the weight.

I second the opinion that the 350X may be worth considering because it's just got more grunt in low speed department, and for most types of riding would be better suited for heavier riders. You wouldn't have to slip the clutch and nail the throttle as often for hill climbing/mud riding.

If you're addicted to 2-strokes(as I am), I'd say the R for suspension and reliability, but the first generation Tecate's seat/footpeg/handlebar relation may fit you better than the R. You definitely would need porting aimed at good low-midrange powerband.

There's several factors to take into consideration with either machine.....so I suggest you get together(if possible)with people who have these machines and take a little test ride to find what suits you best.

[Huffa]

and Derrick said it best.We have both machines 85 R and 85-Tri-z.I am not as big as you guys so fitment does not affect me.The only complaints I have on the tri-z are the same as already stated.They vibrate,The suspension lacking,and the footpegs can be a problem.I feel The tri-z handles better than a stock 250r,but you have to work the z to get it to handle.

On the other hand The 250 r I really am beginning to like better than the tri-z.It was just designed way better.It is a 50-50 call for me.The r does feel smaller to me,but it is easier to throw it around.I have been thinking of selling my z to get another. 250r.

I would say a 85-86 r would be the way to go.there is nothing wrong with the aircooled 250r's, there is just way more potential with the liquid cooled 250 r's.
I feel either way either machine has to be set-up or tweaked in one way or another for your style.The tri-z will be much cheaper to purchase,but finding z parts is getting kinda of tough to do.
I have nothing against the 86-87 tecate 3's.I have not spent much time on one.I have ridden them some and I like them.They are (unique)! But you will really run into parts availability with those.Very hard to get some of the parts for those.

Why do you say that? Are you referring JUST to the motor or to the whole overall design of the 85/86 verses the 83/84 R?

[edog]

I say a 350X.

[sandpuppi101]

Well being 6'1" and 230lbs & haven been riding a R for many years I can say that it fit me like a glove ,on the trails! The '86 seat would work better for you as Derrick said it's 1" higher and I would suggest going with taller bars or the possibility of taller risers.. I have ridden the other pingers' ,and I have too say that the R was for me,not saying I did'nt like the others ,but I could throw the R around with ease.Now on the flipside ,I have trailrode the R vs a 350X hard against my brother who is a equal rider too me and he was on me like flies on S$#! the whole time ,and when it got tight ,I was getting tired as my brother justed lugged along,ready to pass if he could,but when the trail opened up ,that was a different story.my 2 cents are that the 2 stroke wears you out more trailriding vs the 4 stroke ,but if you want a pinger' the '85 -'86 250R would be my choice!!

[EvilMooseofDoom]

Concerning the Honda bikes, the 350X and 250R, how much power is gained with stroker/big bore kits (namely the 310 kit for the 250R, and the powroll 400+ kit for the 350x), and how much durability is sacrificed? Anyone here have the 350X stroker kit, or the 310? How was power delivery changed? The Tri-Z 310 kit?
Sorry for being irritating....

[SYKO]

theres nothing erritating man!! your not asking ANY dumb questions, Im a big dude to, but not as big, Im 225-230 and 6 ft and I feal comfortable on my 85 R but even more comfortable on my 83 air fooler R My buddies tri-z fits the best, but im not happy with the suspension and his first gen tecate fits me well to, An air cooled R mainly the 83-84 models are wicked in the trails, even mine is fun and its a 300 they are realativly easy to come by as well and cheap to mod to, what you really need to do is find some people on the board here that might be close and ask to try ou tthere machines so you can get a better feal for what you may want to get.

[EvilMooseofDoom]

Update:
Well...can anyone tell me if the footpegs on the TRI-Z's are supposed to flex when I simply stand on them? The guy had two, both low-use, both had footpegs facing down, and my standing on them were bending them further down....I don't see any logical way to beef up that area....I think that I am going to pass on the Z's for now, until I find something effective to fix the footpeg issue, the parts bike I sold a year ago had the same problem...It's not the pegs, it's the way they attach to the frame; there should have been a third bolt, towards the front/top of the footpeg attaching plate, or at least something that doesn't look as flimsy as that area does on the Z. The same guy had an 86 250R....hell, I was practically jumping up and down on the R pegs...no movement.

Question: Does the 350X and 1985-1986 250R have exactly the same frame layout, meaning the bikes are dimensionally the same size?

[random-strike]

Update:
Well...can anyone tell me if the footpegs on the TRI-Z's are supposed to flex when I simply stand on them? The guy had two, both low-use, both had footpegs facing down, and my standing on them were bending them further down....I don't see any logical way to beef up that area....I think that I am going to pass on the Z's for now, until I find something effective to fix the footpeg issue, the parts bike I sold a year ago had the same problem...It's not the pegs, it's the way they attach to the frame; there should have been a third bolt, towards the front/top of the footpeg attaching plate, or at least something that doesn't look as flimsy as that area does on the Z. The same guy had an 86 250R....hell, I was practically jumping up and down on the R pegs...no movement.

Question: Does the 350X and 1985-1986 250R have exactly the same frame layout, meaning the bikes are dimensionally the same size?

pretty sure no.

350x are awesome for trails. definatly the best.

mine was 393cc 11:1 and it was pretty fast... depends what type of trail riding you're going to do. if you're going to do really tight stuff, tight hill climbs, over obsticals, the 350x owns every trike.

350x absolutely have to have good oil in them, they get extremely hot if you dont keep moving, if you're mudding or climbing hills, etc... this will be a problem

[kb200x]

pretty sure no.

350x are awesome for trails. definatly the best.

mine was 393cc 11:1 and it was pretty fast... depends what type of trail riding you're going to do. if you're going to do really tight stuff, tight hill climbs, over obsticals, the 350x owns every trike.

350x absolutely have to have good oil in them, they get extremely hot if you dont keep moving, if you're mudding or climbing hills, etc... this will be a problem

A Stock 350x doesnt have any problems with heat. I can see where a 11:1 with a 393cc would though. Just wanted to clairify that.
I say go ride a 350x before you jump on the 2 smoker wagon. Those R's and Z's are wicked fast but for trail riding the 350x is the top dog. The low end grunt a 350x has is just so much better for trail riding. A 2 stroke in tight trails will flat wear you out. The 350x is more than at home trail blazing. They dont have the speed or acceleration as the R's or Z's but you really don't want that in trails. Ride them both in trails you will see.

I know all you 2 smokers blah blah blah I know your R does great in the trails.