KDXRIDER.NET

The first one is a 1997 missing top end, exhaust, carb and fuel tank. The second is a 1991 missing seat, left hand engine case but came with a newly sleeved jug ( still has the honing marks ) three carbs and a new wiseco piston and topend gasket set. . Which front end is better for the conversion for my 2002 KDX?

The 97' front end doesn't have the disc or fork guards they do look as they would accept the ones off of the 91 maybe?

CoronasAndChips wrote:The first one is a 1997 missing top end, exhaust, carb and fuel tank. The second is a 1991 missing seat, left hand engine case but came with a newly sleeved jug ( still has the honing marks ) three carbs and a new wiseco piston and topend gasket set. . Which front end is better for the conversion for my 2002 KDX?

The 97' front end doesn't have the disc or fork guards they do look as they would accept the ones off of the 91 maybe?

your 91 250 yokes have the same part number as the 91-93 kx500,so really it should bolt straight in!
best regards
john

I believe that the 97's should be 46mm units while the 91's should be 43mm.

doctord23 wrote:I believe that the 97's should be 46mm units while the 91's should be 43mm.

correct,
the 97 forks may be better? but the 91 set up he has will bolt straight in,where the 97 setup will need stems changing + extra bits & bobs etc.
depends how much work he is willing to put into it really.
best regards
john

Thanks for the quick replies. The 91's are the same tube diameter as my 2002. The 97 looks much more impressive but one of the axle cover studs are broke off at the outside of the cover. I also think those bigger forks might be overkill for the 200.

You can buy a 6mm x 22mm stud to replace the broken one.

There was an old thread on here from 2005 or so about the part number.

Please note that the stud is 6mm in diameter and sticks out 22mm. It is not 22mm long.

CoronasAndChips wrote:I also think those bigger forks might be overkill for the 200.

Isn't that why most people replace the stock forks? Not that they are over kill but less flexible?

rbates9 wrote:

CoronasAndChips wrote:I also think those bigger forks might be overkill for the 200.

Isn't that why most people replace the stock forks? Not that they are over kill but less flexible?

I've had some time to monkey around with the bikes. I pulled the axle cover that has the broken stud and turned the fork to see what what i had to work with. The fork leg just dropped down and there is "something" rattling around in there no resistance at all. So, I swapped out the 91' front end and the 97' rear 19" wheel ( the spokes were cleaner and it has a brand new cheap rear tire. I took it out for a short ride around the block to see how different the front end felt under breaking but with snow in the yard and slippery roads I will have to wait until spring. Mean while I'll pull the 97' forks apart and see what's up.

Jason wrote:You can buy a 6mm x 22mm stud to replace the broken one.

There was an old thread on here from 2005 or so about the part number.

Please note that the stud is 6mm in diameter and sticks out 22mm. It is not 22mm long.

Thanks, I found a thread with the part number. Now I just need to fix them and rebuild them.