KX/CR-500--Here we go..Again!

[KDXnoob1]

Hey everybody! I know this question has come up thousands of times and everyone seems to want to know something different. Well, now it's my turn to ask this question, but my way.

Anyways, I'm looking to buy a big bore dirtbike this upcoming fall after I finish restoring my '86 KDX 200.
I know both the KX 500 and the CR 500 make similar HP numbers but different folks are on different sides of the fence about it. Some people say that the CR 500 has better suspension and better resale value. Others say the KX 500 is the biggest, baddest king of the dunes.

Me? I don't really care, although I do lean towards the KX500 as I have a 1991 KDX 250 and a 1986 KDX 200 and LOVE the "hit" when the powervalve opens at 6k. But I am open to other brands as the Honda is easier to service I've been told. I'll be riding at a local track, not competitively, atleast not yet ;).

Personally, I want a bike that is Rip-my-arms-off fast. I want a bike that goes from Zero---The Hospital in 3 gears.

I am an experienced rider and the power doesn't scare me, its what attracts me to these bikes.

I live in ontario and its hard to find a KX500 for less than $2000. However, I can easily find CR500's any year, from $1500-$800. In fact there is one here a 1984, air cooled cr500 for $950 and I've heard the '84 is one of the fastest years. Needs a carb clean and I'm very mechanically inclined so doing work isnt a problem if more needs to be done. In fact, I'm actually in school to be a diesel tech so access to a shop to perform work isn't a problem.

Help me KDXrider.net!

I am undecided!

[SS109]

...and better resale value...

I live in ontario and its hard to find a KX500 for less than $2000. However, I can easily find CR500's any year, from $1500-$800.

That pretty much answers that question! The KX's command a higher price because they are a better engine design and fewer people sell the ones they have. Servicing. I can't see how the CR is really that much easier to service than the KX unless you get an old air cooled one (which I wouldn't do!). I think the CR had a more updated chassis, IIRC, but the KX did get suspension upgrades even if it was on the older chassis. That old chassis worked fine for Jeff Ward.

Of course, I am biased towards Team Green. What else would you expect on a Kawasaki forum?

[Julien D]

I prefer the powervalved KX5. Obviously I am biased toward the Kawi as well. As you can see from your shopping, the statement that CR5's have better resale value is BS.

[dude541]

I have a kdx220,
my brother has a crm250ar,we are based in the uk, over here Honda parts are a fortune compared to Kawasaki! and they never have any stock! so you wait months for parts! my local Kawasaki dealer has had everything I needed on the shelf!
that alone would swing me towards the kx,and I owned a 84 cr250 over 20 years ago, great bike,but still sold it for a kx.
parts may not be an issue in the usa though?

just my 2p

[bcdonyo]

I've never owned either bike, but have ridden several examples of both over the years. The more recent CRs seemed leaner and more MX-like than the KX500. The KX has a broader powerband (powervalve) and turns a bit slower with more stability. I'd go KX for off road and CR for MX. Dune riding would be a toss up, KX has the engine and the CR handles. For the record the KTM 550 had more power but a crap chasis, and there are wild claims about the Maico/ATK 700 making over 70HP.

The KX500AF should be the baddest open smoker ever if you won the lottery.

[KDXnoob1]

Thanks for your insightful answers everyone, glad theres no "cr vs Kx" typical arguement when people are die-hards.

I'm still undecided about which one to get as like you all, I am biased towards team green also.
Does the CR have a "powervalve" system? Maybe just a honda varriation? my only concern with buying the CR is that I will lack that satisfaction of feeling the power come on when the valve opens like it does my daily driver. 250 KDX.

Damn these decisions!

[Julien D]

No, the CR500 has no powervalve. Just to point out, I think you may be misunderstanding the purpose of a powervalve. You will notice a change in power delivery when it opens up, but it was actually designed to create MORE low end power by reducing the size of the exhaust port at low RPM. This has the effect of broadening the powerband and lessening the hit. Non powervalved bikes tend to have less low end power, and can hit violently when they "come on" to the pipe. Either 500 is going to have a pretty impressive hit. If possible, you should ride both before deciding. Any 500 smoker is going to make that KDX250 seem pretty docile though, so I don't think you have to worry about that too much!

[B737driver]

Not sure about the KX. Here's a homemade dyno test for the CR. You can't make this stuff up.

[youtube][/youtube]

[KDXnoob1]

Thanks so much for your response Jullen, I do understand a powervalve system but not as much as I thought I guess. I had no idea it was for power down low, I thought it was for up high. But seeing as both bikes are basically the same, I may be forced to get a CR as they are more available around Ontario, but that KX has the reputation!

I probably will try to ride both before I buy, like I said, I'm just worried that "hit" won't be everything I'm hoping for.

Anyone have personal expierience on a CR and can enlighten me about the power delivery? What years should I be looking into?

I want to have to fight to keep the front down on whatever bike I get.

[B737driver]

Just saying, but there is riding fast and riding a fast bike. These do not always coexist. I've ridden big bore 2T's (that try to rip you arms out of socket) and if your on a track (mx), good luck because you spend more time trying to contain the energy, which leads to fatigue. If your in the woods, better ride fast to keep it from overheating, which is fatiguing as well.

I understand the fascination, but to go fast.....at a competitive pace???? Not many TT tracks or 500cc outdoor nationals to let these bikes shine.

Just my opinion.

[KDXnoob1]

Yes, I've heard that the power these bikes offer is what makes them not track worthy as nearly no one will use the bikes full power. I dont plan on racing this bike competitively. I just like the idea of having almost "limitless" power as these bikes are difficult to tap out on the track. Still undecided though! haha

[sarrant]

In fact there is one here a 1984, air cooled cr500 for $950 and I've heard the '84 is one of the fastest years.
Help me KDXrider.net!

I am undecided!

The 1984 CR500 is one of the most despised bikes of all time. Maybe mostly because Honda replaced the beloved grunty and great-handling 1983 CR480 with that peaky, impossible-to-jet, pinging, 30-kicks-to-start, poorly-suspended, backkicking beast.

Even though it was a new-from-ground up model, it was so reviled that Honda quickly recognized the market response and replaced it with another new-from-ground up watercooled 500 for 1985, which was once again well-received.

[KDXnoob1]

Damn! haha, so many opinions! I must be mislead as I was under the impression the air cooled '84 was one that was pretty solid, that works in my favor though as I prefer a liquid cooled system!
Thanks sarrant! :)

[fuzzy]

I'd probably have to go with a 380EXC