KDXRIDER.NET

Will I notice much of a difference between the 200 and 220 if mainly using for trails, forest service roads, OHV parks (except MX track), maybe and its a big maybe a novice race? I am 47 y/o, 6'2" 180lbs and live in Northern Cali...

Stock vs stock, the 220 has more torque down low and the smaller carb gives it some great low end throttle control, 200 with it's larger carb has more overrev and a touch more of an upper midrange "hit". Totally personal preference, but I like to ride with it wound out most the time, so the 200 suits me much better overall.

I ride in norther cal, and I prefer the torque of the 220. If you ride at places like Hollister, not too many trails where you can open it up and use the upper rpm's to an advantage. If you put an fmf rev pipe on the 220 it will help it rev out well and still retain most of the torque that makes tighter trails easier to manage.

Personal preference, I like the 220. I ride in a lot of slick, muddy conditions. The ability to lug in a gear higher and maintain traction all the way to the top end is better. Her 200 had too much of a hit around mid range that always seemed to break traction. I do find myself wanting a little more top end in races, but not nearly as much as I use the grunt of the motor.

I personally prefer the 220. With an RB head mod, an FMF desert pipe and a carb off of a 200, the 220 will have the top end of the 200 but retain the 220 low end power.
I'm also in NorCal.

can a person put the smaller carb off the 220 on the 200 and perhaps a flywheel weight to get better low end lugability ? I am not to concerned with top end. I mainly ride 0 - 1/2 throttle on single track. the more I read, I think I should have got a 220.

Physically, yes but I'm not sure what the performance would be like because I believe the cylinders are ported differently. If you're wanting bottom end focus on the "torque mods" such as a pipe, etc.

If you truly never go above 1/2 throttle, then experimenting with some different gearing ratios could give more of what you are looking for at a low cost.

anyone reading this tried the 33 on a 200 ? like to hear experience. I know in the trial world a smaller bore is more efficient until you get to larger throttle opening. more air velocity sucks out more fuel.larger throttle openings ( wot ) need bigger bore. trials is more slow speed manuevers. kind of like slower trail riding. I did drop a tooth on my counter sprocket. I had a gnarly woods pipe but was so bent up it would not bolt back on. got stock pipe off Ebay. turned out to be rusted through. cut rust out, gutted inside of pipe. had some insulation & screen around walls & full of muffler type packing in the middle. rebuilt chamber housing, welded up, grind down. looks pretty good. still not a gnarly but flows better than stock. maybe a new gnarly in the future. Has anyone tried the FRP torque ring ? can you feel the difference ? all kinds of things to try. never ending fun owning a kdx. always learning always riding. Thanks for input !

We ran the 33mm carb off my 220 on my son's 200 for a couple years.

It really smoothed out the power. Yes , it lost top end but we can't use it where we ride.

His bike is now a modded 220 with 35mm carb , RB head , ect and he LOVES IT !

What we like best about these 220's is that there is NO power band ,,,, THEY HAVE GOOD POWER EVERY WHERE :)

I had a friend of mine ride one the other night who used to ride 250's years ago and he came
back with a big grin on his face ,,,, man has this thing got some power !

Intake spacer plate works far better than exhaust torque ring.
Mainly because the stock reed cage partially blocks the rear boost port.

I've tried the 33 carb on a 200 as well, (briefly) and it did exactly as you'd expect: added torque and response in the low range and a flat mid through top. I've found on a stock 200 motor that the d series needle at the fourth clip does good things for the 200 lower mid-range, while also adding to the top. (With woods pipe). I like it just as much as my 220, but realistically it will never have the same low end the 220 does.

When you say "intake spacer plate" and blocking the rear boost port... is that on the 220 or 200? Can you please provide more info on this intake spacer plate thing?

BamBam wrote:When you say "intake spacer plate" and blocking the rear boost port... is that on the 220 or 200? Can you please provide more info on this intake spacer plate thing?

i would guess he is talking about a reed block spacer

greener200h wrote:can a person put the smaller carb off the 220 on the 200 and perhaps a flywheel weight to get better low end lugability ? I am not to concerned with top end. I mainly ride 0 - 1/2 throttle on single track. the more I read, I think I should have got a 220.

Don't bother with a FWW on a kdx. If you want the 220 grunt, do the carb and gear it the rest of the way. One nice thing about gaining low end through gearing is that you can swap gears for different types of riding. I go up 3 in the rear on technical and muddy riding, run a 14/47 set up in more open or faster terrain and stock 13/47 in dryer harescramble races. My son, on his 220 and me on my 200, both stock gearing, he can barely keep pace and when it gets fast, I'll dust him. But I don't care for the stock 220 at all. Even when I geared his up, I still didn't like the flatness of the bike. Both my 200s are more fun to me.

Sent from my KIW-L24 using Tapatalk

The stock 220 felt terrible to me but after the RB carb and head mods and a FMF Gnarly desert pipe I think it has the perfect powerband. The 220 is the best after it is set up/modded properly.