KDXRIDER.NET

The KDX is a heavy bike, but it's still nimble. It's achilies heel is that it carries so much of the weight up high, as fuel. I notice a huge difference in the feel of the bike when it's down to a half tank or less, vs a full tank.

Slick_Nick wrote: 09:26 am Oct 10 2023 The KDX is a heavy bike, but it's still nimble. It's achilies heel is that it carries so much of the weight up high, as fuel. I notice a huge difference in the feel of the bike when it's down to a half tank or less, vs a full tank.

Working out of town living in hotels, I took my street bike in the work truck with me often... When tinkering on the 1977 Suzuki GS750 at the hotel, I once took it for a spin around the parking lot to load it in the work truck, without the gas tank (they'll run 45 seconds or so light throttle just off the fuel in the bowls).
WOW... The difference in feel just doing a wide 25mph circle and up the ramp into the truck was mind blowingly different! Such a light feel losing that weight up high...

This is how an H-Series KDX "feels heavier" than a Beta XTrainer which actually tips the scales a bit more hefty...

SS109 wrote: 09:52 pm Oct 09 2023 I know it's a bit more work but don't forget about the '04-'05 Kawazuki KX250F/RM250F chassis'. They handle great, are steel framed, etc. These bikes were great other than the Suzuki designed engine they came with.

I really don't care for the stylings of those, & those are beyond the Revolution 2 vintage/post-vintage race classes, so no go for vintage events.
I don't even care for the '03-'05 stylings honestly, and each year 03-05 uses different swingarm and linkage parts, but 04-05 may be interchangeable - same design but slightly altered.




There seems to be a ton of parts support for the '99-'02 era, based on looking at the IMS website, Devol Racing, and Clarke Mfg.
https://imsproducts.com/pages/product-r ... 25~yr_2000


But really I'm now seeing the mass centralization design fully when browsing photos of the 95-98 vs 99-02 & 03-05. The KX's handle and feel better than the KDX because they not only have a 2.17-2.2 gallon fuel tank vs 2.9+ on a KDX, BUT you're basically SITTING ON TOP of a larger majority of the fuel tank on the '99-'08 KX125/250, moreso than this same positioning on the '95-'98 even. This also makes the bikes taller, and also on the 99-08, makes the seats very thin on padding... The 95-98 era have the thickest seat, which would be more comfortable for trail riding. BUT that also probably screws up the clearance to fit a SmartCarb SC2 36 in there.
95-98 has the least options and least desirable looking options for oversized fuel tanks. The custom order 3.1 gallon requires cutting the upper fuel filler cap area of the shrouds off, and IMS doesn't even have a photo of it.
The '99-'02 3.1 gallon IMS tank is he best looking, but another big concern is that the oversized tanks will have interference issues on a hybrid with the engine, petcock, spark plug, etc, and the 3.1 gallon hangs extra low at least on the pipe side. They offer a 3.2 gallon as well,which doesn't sit so tight to the pipe and carb/head which may be the better choice for a 200/220 hybrid as the 125 engine's cylinder jug is absolutely tipped forward more vs the 200/220. I'll have to read into this a bit more to figure out exactly where the clearance issues lie, but I only recall the build thread reference stating "desert tank" clearance issues requiring heating up the tank and forming some clearance into the plastic.
IMS 3.1 gallon '99-'02:

IMS 3.2 gallon '99-'02:


I think if I ran a 95-98 125, I'd absolutely have to keep stock 220 port height (which is always the preferred route if you wish to preserve the best traits of the 220) and run a Lectron Billetron Pro Series carb, both done in order to get better fuel efficiency. On long hauls, I could always attach a small auxillary fuel tank behind the left rear side plate, which would also keep with the theme of lower center of gravity and mass centralization... Keeping the factory 2.2 gallon tank on the '96-era.

The 99-02 still have excellent geometry for tight woods riding and hard enduro, so some aesthetic alterations may be in order here.

I browsed for a cheap basket case 95-05 KX125 last night, but nothing much available. A guy parting out a roller with no engine in Kentucky, 2001, that was it... I'll be watching this winter for one!

If 03-08, I'd go 03 for the shorter swingarm. The 27° rake is a bit more high speed friendly than I'd care for, but forks could be dropped lower to get 26.5° or 26.25° and also lower the ride height slightly. The wheelbase will still be a noticeable bit longer than a KDX200/220 and 94-02 KX125. I'm aiming for a lighter weight lower center of gravity nimble agile & highly flickable hard enduro weapon here... And the 220 engine with a modded head and supporting pipe, carb, & ignition mods I've already determined is an absolutely awesome engine for this type of riding... Noticeably more suited to this type of terrain and riding than a KDX200 or KTM 200. The 220 chassis with suspension mods does pretty darn well, but it's just that high center of gravity top heavy feel that bothers me a bit (and also makes it a bit harder to pick up in very compromising steep gnarly hillside flops, which is why I was even considering a 144cc, 151cc, or 167cc big bore or big bore/stroker engine).
I still have a lot of titanium to swap out onto my 97 or 99 220 to drop the weight down, but the weight is significantly more noticeable up high than it is down low, so the fuel tank positioning/shape issue is a hard issue to work around, and really the only reason that I would consider building a hybrid over a modified H series chassis. The slimmer seat on the '99+ and an aluminum subframe will also drop a little bit of top heavy weight on a hybrid, I should add.

Really I'll probably end up swapping out the forks on whatever I'd build for a set of '98 RM125 forks and possibly an '01-'04 RM125 shock or '05+ RM125/'06+ KX250F/'07+ RM-Z250 if more length was needed on the KX chassis of choice.
I've got several sets of the '98 RM 49mm Showa Twin Chamber forks stockpiled now enough to build 3 or 4 good pairs.
One big advantage however is that the '03+ have a taller steering stem, so I'd be able to directly swap in a pair of 2013-ish KX250F SFF single function Showa Twin Chambers in. Those are really the ultimate as far as smoothness goes with a closed chamber fork design... Only available in inverted format, no right side up versions of these were ever made, the 96-98 RM right side ups are as good as it gets with right side up fork technology...

In summary, for what I'm wanting to do - hard enduro and tight woods riding, very little in the way of high-speed 55+mph riding where long wheelbase and more relaxed steering angle would be preferable, the shorter wheelbase and steeper steering rake angle on the 95-98/99-02 is definitely preferred, and although I really want a 96 for the purple plastics and the thicker more comfortable seat, the '99-'02 really seems to be the best candidate for me in terms of aftermarket parts availability. The amount of oversized tanks available is fantastic, lots of options, skid plates, radiator guards, rotor guards front and rear, etc....

1996: 1999-2002:

I think I could get the 1996 KDX style shroud graphics printed on a full sheet with no cutout, so that I could get all black plastics for the 99-02, and lay my own cut out of the 96 KDX graphics on top of it, like what I have now custom, with the KX checkered flag.
This 99-02 picture here helps me visualize it better with graphics on it to break up plain or less desirable looking shrouds and side plastics on this era.

On the larger side plates looking goofy to me, if I did all black side plates with a white background in just the number area, that will take away from the goofy 99-02 appearance, although I would much prefer the 95-98 style... Also, 95-98 would put me in Revolution 1 racing classes at vintage events...



I think either of these would do well for me although I might have to custom make some radiator guards for the 96 era and just deal with a smaller gas tank, as well as struggle to fit a SmartCarb SC2 36 or else go with the proven fitment Lectron Billetron Pro Series. Carrying less gasoline is critical for handling, and the only way to go the same distance and carry less gasoline is have a perfect week tuned bike with a metering rod carb. Even the best tuned PWK setup will use more fuel than a metering rod carb...


Also, Guts offers a stepped seat foam insert to glue on top of the rear of the seat, which gives you thicker padding in the thin rearmost areas as well as giving a slight step or bump to act as a stop to keep the rider forward more when seated during aggressive maneuvering. I think this would help out a fair bit. I could even shave it a little bit so that the bump up to the stepped portion isn't noticeable if I want to be able to slide back and forth on the seat to my preferred position depending on cruising versus attack mode / preparing to attack... Most of the time when hitting aggressive sections we should be standing up, but there are times where you need to keep low in a corner and be seated or near seated and tucked, while staying forward.

Hybrid...hybrid...hybrid
You know you wanna...

Chuck78 wrote: 08:52 pm Oct 08 2023
H-series KDX chassis:
26.5° rake / 4.3" trail
56.5" wheelbase
36.2" seat height
2.9 gallon tank
223lbs claimed dry weight



1994-1998 KX125:
26° rake / 4.3" trail
1,455mm (57.3") wheelbase (KX250 = 1,460mm)

1999 KX125:
26° rake / 4.3" trail
56.5" wheelbase

2000 KX125:
26° rake / 4.3" trail
56.3" wheelbase

2003 KX125:
27.5° rake / 3.9" trail
57.3" wheelbase

2004 KX125:
27° rake / 4.4" trail
57.9" wheelbase

'03-'04 KX125 Rake/Trail: 27.5° / 3.9 in.
2005 KX125 Rake/Trail: 27.5°/ 4.3 in

After my last 2 rides, doing some really steep hill climbs, granted without enough speed at the bottom l, I definitely was wheelie'ing up the upper steepest parts almost to the point of looping as I had to give more throttle to make it up on my H-Series chassis.
I was thinking that perhaps a longer wheelbase wouldn't be so bad, especially after talking to a guy who swore his 2019 Beta 250RR was the best handling bike he's ever ridden, better than his KX/KDX hybrid. That has over a 58" wheelbase... '04-'05 KX125 is 57.9".
Perhaps this is workable for me with hill climbs considered. The '05 triples/forks have more trail, so they'd do a lot better with sliding the triples down over the fork tubes to drop the lazy high speed 27.5° rake down to 26.5°-ish like the stock KDX (a 1" drop approximately), so this could really work out decently.

94-98 KX125 have a very slightly longer wheelbase vs the KDX H-series (57.3" vs 56.5")
99-02 have virtually identical wheelbase and rake/trail vs KDX H-series
2003 KX125 have 1.4" longer wheelbase (56.5 vs 57.3) vs KDX H-series
04-05 KX125 have 0.8" longer wheelbase (56.5 vs 57.9) vs KDX H-series

I think all of these would be workable as a tight woods bike, but I'd now probably choose at least the '05 125 triples (and forks? upgraded?) if running an '03-'04.

Ideally, I'd still gravitate towards an '03 in that generation in order to get the shorter swingarm with still a leverage advantage on steep climbs vs stock KDX, but I'd likely be selling the forks off and running a pair of my '98 RM125 49mm Showa Twin Chamber conventionals anyways. Then I could lower the front 1.1" from stock, and get nearly the exact rake and trail I'm after 26.4° rake / 4.3" trail, while having the slimmer chassis, and also having a VERY REASONABLE seat height on the '03+ (It's already close to the KDX, then lowering the front 1" to get the rake & trail specs I'm after would put it in the upper 35" range.

I'd personally try and upgrade the side cover plastics to KDX or 94-98/99-03 if in any way possible. I like the more retro looks, but now a 2003 still looks like quite a good candidate.
With my '98 RM125 forks, the 26° rake on the 94-02 would give 4.19" of trail, a bit faster steering again. 4.3" of trail would require running less shock spring preload to drop the rear down 1/2" lower, while keeping the fork tubes flush with the tops of the triples, and would give a taller seat height regardless. With rear sag set back up proper, a set of DRZ400E triples for the '98 RM125 forks may get the trail back to around 4.35".

That has way more to do with improper body position on the bike than it does the length of the chassis. Get your weight up off the seat, chin over the front fender.

Slick_Nick wrote: 08:55 pm Oct 18 2023 That has way more to do with improper body position on the bike than it does the length of the chassis. Get your weight up off the seat, chin over the front fender.

Easier said than done in my examples referenced! When the climb seems close to vertical at the top (in reality over a 60° or perhaps 65° slope, STEEP!), it becomes increasingly more drastic of required body positioning that one needs to shift into. There is definitely a reason that hill climbers have extended swingarms on their bikes.
So really, I think it comes down to the combination of 3 factors,
1.) Giving it more throttle at the flat bottom and where the slope is 35° or 40°, so that less or minimal throttle is required when the slope picks up above 50°
2.) Intentional body positioning more forward over the bars/fender
3.) longer wheelbase

I suppose one could do a lot of moderate hill climbs with any variation of those 3, but when the hills get real steep and long, I bet all 3 in full effect will be a bonus...

Also, I have been stuck running my KDX chain/axle in the front half of the swingarm axle dropout slots perpetually for years. Next time I'll go back to a clip style master link perhaps, so that I can run it longer and shorten up the chain if I run out of adjustment.
Hopefully my next chain & gearing change to 13/48 will yield more favorable axle positioning on chain length.

Hmmm..... 2000 KX125 bare rolling chassis, $60 + fuel/time! I need to try and sneak this one in somewhere somehow, so the wife doesn't kill me!!!!
2 hours from home, or 1 hour off the 1.5 hour route to get to the furthest riding area that we hit once or twice a year in southern ohio...

Having an airbox & seat would be nice, but it's tough to beat for basically $100 & a half day!
I revisited this last night after thinking about the potential weight differences between an aluminum seat subframe and steel. I was looking KX frame subframe mounting points by the top shock mount, and thought that drafting a 99-02 KX aluminum seat subframe and probably airbox and rear fender onto a KDX frame, the beneficial to have a strap KX frame to cut points off of, and this would also give us smart carb, as shock mount frame crossmember area is an arched front half back half press formed piece, instead of a straight round tube with a slight dimple pressed into the bottom for carburetor clearance, that the 95-06 KDX has.


If this frame or not able to be titled, I could at least use it as a donor for that.




The KX front upper perimeter frame sections do appear to mount about a half inch lower than the KDX, very slightly reducing the center of gravity for the fuel tank weight, but the bigger difference is the KX's standard 2.2 gallon capacity versus 3 gallon capacity of the KDX. Both are perimeter frames, and I feel that using all the race spec steel bolts from a KX with dished out heads, and the lower fuel capacity, say using 2.2 gallons in the KDX instead of 3 gallons filled to the brim, would get rid of most of the difference in the top heavy feel KX hybrid vs KDX. KDX seat is really not as thick as it appears, and didn't seem alarmingly heavy to me, and also that is one area I would like a little more comfort in all day rides the point of exhaustion. You can't stand up for 7 hours out of a 9 hour riding day (w/ 2 hrs of breaks total).


My 98 RM125 4.6kg purple shock spring weighs in at 2lb 15 oz, & my 98 RM250 4.8kg purple spring @ 3lbs 1 oz, Diverse Spring's Chrome-Silicon lightweight steel 4.8kg spring is 2.5lbs iirc, 1174 grams they said, and the RCS / Renton Coil Spring 4.8kg Titanium spring is 2.1lbs iirc, so this is another area of substantial potential weight savings to compensate for the KDX seat and extra fuel capacity.

I'll be looking into long case cover bolts as well if Partzilla lists the dimensions of all. Mettec & Titan Classics have some really good prices on Ti bolts, although unless on clearance for $175, the Mettec axles cost an astronomical amount at $300-$500! No thanks...

I've also got a guy who has the remnants of his '98 KX125 parts bike, frame, swingarm, some plastics, stock tank, airbox etc 3 hours north. 98 has no desirable looking oversized tanks due to the shrouds wrapping over the whole tank and requiring aftermarket o.s. tank shrouds, or else cutting the factory shrouds top portions, and no radiator guards available, but they do fit the OEM purple plastics and have better looking side plates and shrouds

I'm speculating from KDX carb clearance photos on a "A Path Less Traveled - 97 KX hybrid" posts, I'd possibly have to modify the frame to fit a SmartCarb SC2 36 on the 220 transplant, but if I'm already modifying the frame substantially to fit the 220 engine, what's the diff?!
Compact geometry is nice.

I'd run some of my '98 RM125 forks and hope that a 98-04 RM125 shock would fit.

No radiator guards available for 94-98, so perhaps I'd try to graft KDX radiators on, or custom fab my own 94-98 KX radiator braces.
No frame guard hoops are welded to the motocross frames to my knowledge, so if I added these protections, a KX skid plate wouldn't fit. Perhaps use my Hyde Racing H-Series KDX skid plates, especially if I go the route of the guy's hybrid build here titled "A Path Less Traveled - 97 KX hybrid" and chop the engine cradle section out of the KDX frame to graft it into the KX frame. A guy in New Zealand that I'm online KDX buddies with, Mark Webb, he has a 96 or 98 KX125/220 hybrid and did not cut the frame up and graft the KDX cradle in. I'll have to evaluate his build as well.

viewtopic.php?f=111&t=25913

As far as carb fitment, all I did was clearance front to back. Im not sure how big the smart carb is, but you may need to also raise the bottom a bit. I want to get a vforce, and will have to do this as well.
Engine cradle wise, the way I did it isn't mandatory, but for me it provided motor mounts, pipe clearance, and the loops. I didn't want to reinvent the wheel. If you have any questions, just let me know.

Well, I missed out on the killer deal on the $60 2000 KX125 rolling chassis due to the 4 hour round trip not being something I could just immediately schedule...

I did however start chatting with a guy in a KX group who lives 2.5 hours north of me, and has an extra 98 125 frame, swing arm, tank, and a bunch of miscellaneous parts... It would be more to piece together since everything is in pieces, but this is also an option to keep on the back burner.

Apparently 97 and 98 were improved frames over the 94-95, and the 96, and a much more stout swingarm 97-98, yet they all take the same plastics which I really love a lot more, and they also have the thicker seat foam than 99+... But same compact geometry as the 99-02.
The 98 frames I've looked at have more carb clearance on the crossmember by the upper shock mount vs the older frames, as instead of a round piece of tubing bridging from one side of the perimeter frame to the other, it's a stamped clamshell type piece made from two halves, and is arched in the middle over the carb.

Art Simmoneau (I forgot his name here on the forums but he has a couple hybrids) really disliked the 3.1 gallon Clarke tank that he just bought for his KX hybrid, said it was too wide and tall and pushed the shrouds out further, totally changing the feel and look of the bike.
Art came up with a brilliant method of taking the stock KX tank on his hybrid, pressurizing it with air, and using a heat gun externally to heat up the plastic and allow the air pressure to pop out all of the dimpled indents in the KX tank's underside that were not necessary for the KDX engine in the KX chassis. He thought he gained perhaps even close to a half gallon of extra capacity, which will really help with those small tanks.
This was very encouraging, as I think you could probably expand most of these tanks on the bottom side a slight bit to get a little extra capacity without making it more top heavy like the KDX tank sits, up high in and above the perimeter frame. And also preserving the stock appearance.
This really brings the 96 or better yet 97 or 98 with purple shroud graphics on black shrouds, and a purple seat, back into the running. Every time I would look at a 99-02, I liked them better than the 03 Plus or the four-stroke steel frame or aluminum frame bikes, but nothing looks as awesome as the purple 96 KX 125 and it's siblings of the same generation.

I've still got a lot of big plans to rebuild at least one of my two KDX220's with a ton of titanium parts and all the other go fast parts and suspension goodies that I have, but I really am hoping to get a 125 chassis for a good deal and build up a hybrid as well in order to see how much lighter of a feel I can get.
Finding an AC Racing aluminum subframe for the 94-98 is a bit difficult, stock was steel, that was another reason for going with a 99-02. But apparently a 99-02 aluminum subframe will bolt onto the 98 frame, but apparently you need to use all 98 plastics tank. I might try and do some sort of hybrid of a hybrid and use the 99-02 aluminum subframe and air box, and draft on mounts for the 98 side plates and 98 seat and possibly rear fender.

It's all a pipe dream now and just brainstorming ways that I can get even further weight reduction on my 220 builds, especially with a lower center of gravity. I'll already be swapping different suspension onto both the KDX's and the proposed KX 125 hybrid, so the 125 suspension is not really of concern to me (sell it to another KDX'er as an upgrade) because I'll go with something better suited for tight woods riding anyway. I have at least three rebuildable sets of 98 RM125 forks + several more for parts with a few rust pits and chips in the chrome etc. Those are my go-to woods/enduro forks. DRZ400E & 96-98 RMX250 forks are right behind. And 01-04 RM125 shocks & other related 05+ Showa 50mm shocks on KXF, RM-Z, & RM '05-'08 models.

Things have taken a slight change of plans as of late, and now I'm thinking that instead of trying to build up a KX125 134cc woods converted bike, I may shift to the 220/KX125 hybrid plans with my spare 220 engine, in addition to my two complete KDX220 bikes. One of the 220 bikes I'm going to put the Gnarly Woods pipe back on with a KDX 220 SR head and make it a low speed Hard Enduro technical terrain type machine.
The other 220 has been my main ride for over almost five seasons now, and has more mods waiting on the shelf for it.
If I build up a very similar bike with the same/similar Showa Twin Chamber 49mm fork and Showa 50mm shock and other mods, but in the '97-ish KX 125 chassis, then I should have a very nice comparison to a heavily modded KDX versus complete chassis swap of the KDX engine.



I've now found a New Old Stock still in packaging 94-98 KX125/250 Acerbis desert tank, which has integrated shrouds which also carry fuel in them, and of course this is a problem for my wallet, because it was a PURPLE version! SOLD! The 1990+ KX125/250/450F/etc tank normally sits within the perimeter frame with the shrouds bolting to tabs on the top of the frame, with the shrouds wrapping up the tank to the seat and the filler neck, almost entirely concealing the tank. On this Acerbis desert tank, with integrated shrouds, since the shrouds would normally go on top of the outside of the frame and cover the top of the tank, this tank with integrated shrouds actually hangs over the outside of the frame and carries additional fuel outwardly and basically at the same height as the rest of the tank top to bottom.
All of the wishbone type KTM enduro bikes also have their fuel tanks similarly exposed on the outside of the bike unlike the '95+ KDX and standard '90+ KX125/250 configuration, so this is similar to the KDX200E as far as the tank exposed. There is actually a currently available Clarke or IMS tank for the KX500 frames that is also of the integrated shrouds fuel-in-shrouds variety, but it's for the center spine wishbone type frame still (and can fit a KDX200E if swapping to a KX500 seat!).
It may be an interesting fit, but I'll try it out and see how it feels, and still could pick up a stock tank or the IMS 3.0gallon oversized 94-98 KX tank that is just a slightly expanded version of the stock tank but then requires you to cut the top of the shrouds off as it bulges up above the filler cap.

Since my buddies on modern 300s have a very short fuel range with their "modern" 2.2 or 2.3 gallon "enduro" (1-2 hr race capacity) tanks and larger engines, a KDX220 with a Lectron Billetron or SmartCarb SC3 34mm certainly isn't going to be any issue on range in comparison, even if I just ran the stock KX125 2.2 gallon tank with this pair of original OEM purple shrouds that I've been sitting on for a year...


The very next day, I found the aftermarket aluminum AC Racing seat subframe for the 94-98 KX125/250 that I'd been searching for over a year for, popped up on eBay! A bit distressed with a bolt snapped off in one of the lugs, & basically all other threads stripped out, but all fixable... (default photo from AC Racing website is shown)
(The stock seat subframes on this generation are steel, not aluminum like basically every other KX generation 1988+, and these aluminum subframes are reportedly significantly stronger than stock and also look cooler in polished aluminum!)
Additionally I'd also recently found a New Old Stock Acerbis 035 spark arrester silencer for the 94-98 KX250, which is the spark arrester application that most hybrid builders of the 94-02 KX125 chassis KDX200/220 hybrids end up using in conjunction with a 95-06 KDX pipe...

That kicked off a Marketplace search late last night as well as eBay search to buy all the parts individually. I'd found 95-98 KX125 frames for a $125-$325+ shipped. Several air boxes, one lot of rear plastics with the fender and side plates, several '97-'98 KX125 swing arms & linkages ( I could also go with a '97-'98 KX250 swing arm if I wanted longer wheelbase even, for hill climbs)... Rear brakes to fit that swingarm and frame as well.

The seats were a little harder to come by. Only 4-5 of those on all of eBay. I haven't reached out to any of the KX groups with WTB parts postings, but I suspect I might find a lot of parts there, though I was having luck finding some eBay sellers asking very reasonable prices - I might be able to pick up the majority of it for about $450-$550.

I found complete KX125 with a blown up top end for $900, 2 hours away, & another 5 hours away near our favorite trails with a blown up big end rod bearing for $1200. I'm going to keep my eyes out for a deal, but now that I have a good idea of what it would take to build one of these up out of parts, I'm very much leaning towards the hybrid now vs a 134cc woods build. A deal on a complete bike, however, still may tempt me to do the 134cc woods conversion build...

The 220 hybrid seemed like a worthwhile experiment to compare to a very similarly built up 220 chassis (upgraded front and rear suspension with a taller Showa shock, weight reduction mods, etc), for a more direct comparison, as I really lean heavily on how well the 220 engine lugs in a lot of technical situations - a 134 or 144 may potentially mean a big change in riding technique is required, as well as another engine model to stockpile spare parts for... Although in the end, if I can sell off a few of my street bikes and get rid of the wife's camper van, it might end up with me having the current two KDX220 bikes + a 220/KX125 '96-'98 hybrid + a 134cc '98 KX125 woods conversion build + perhaps even a '97 265cc KX250 woods conversion...

If the 220/KX125 hybrid still doesn't feel significantly more nimble than a well modified KDX with a taller modern shock and fork swap and other extensive mods (I'm sure it'll be fantastic though), worst case I could pick up another unmodified KX125 frame and 99-02 KX125 engine or a complete bike to do the 134cc woods build out of....
I have a feeling the slightly lower tank on the 125 as well as the more minimal length removable seat subframe, 18mm longer and much fatter swingarm, and higher ground clearance will definitely be a slightly different feel than the similar geometry KDX220 chassis with heavy mods, but it will be a good comparison regardless. 26.5 degrees KDX head rake angle vs 26 degrees on the 1994-2002 KX125, even more sharp, which also shortens the wheelbase just a hair, but then an 18mm longer swingarm out back to give the KX125 just a hair longer wheelbase than the KDX, with all of the additional and then some being added out back.

Those are some cool finds!

People are still wanting Covid price for blown up bikes that have sat for a decade.

KDXGarage wrote: 12:54 pm Nov 17 2025 Those are some cool finds!

People are still wanting Covid price for blown up bikes that have sat for a decade.

While the gold Excel Takasago rims on the complete/needing-fully-rebuilt $900 '97 KX125 were appealing (but still 19" rear I believe), & knowing I'd not find myself missing some bracket or odd fastener here or there in build, I found enough of the major parts on eBay to put together a hybrid build for about $530-ish, shipped to my doorstep, including a couple of $100 frames and several around $195-$250...
If I hold out for a little while going into winter, I bet some of those eBay sellers may start sending out even lower reduced price offers if I re-add the parts to my watch list at a later date! Adding parts to your watch list is a great way to sit on things to wait for deals, as sellers often will send lower priced offers to people who have done such, or sometimes even to people who simply viewed the auction listing.

I'm unable to do any bike work for the remainder of this calendar year due to day job + renovation efforts to get my old house sold, but will get back to these fun projects late January as well as some car/truck projects... I'm ecstatic to find the buy-in for the pieced together hybrid build to be reasonable for me, but I do have engine, spare laced up KX 18/21 wheels (my KDX spares), a KX450X fork and triples, extra 98-04 RM125 Showa shock, etc... and these other very cool and scarce aftermarket parts pictured above... It'll be quite a bike for sure! After it's done and I've had a chance to compare it to a heavily modified KDX with titanium fasteners throughout, I'll then have to start watching out for the sales from Race Tech Titanium, Mettec, Ti64, etc, and start decking out the hybrid with some titanium hardware as well!

As far as the frame and parts browsing goes, from sales brochures and reviews, I'd gathered some notes....

-'94 should be avoided unless very convenient. This year had very crack-prone frames, with riders saying they're made of glass (very fragile).
-The also have the KDX style brake pedal welded on stud.

*It may have been '95 that added additional gusseting around the shock mount to the frame, although I'd read someone saying that was new for '96 (I believe '95-'96 may carry the same frame part # though? Commenter was perhaps off 1 year).
*'95 was the first year of the brake pedal removable pivot stud as well. It's replaceable, and larger diameter than the older style welded on stud. I know the later models have o-rings on the pivot stud as well, to seal out sand and contaminants that would wear out the brake pivot more rapidly.
*'95 got a new rocker linkage knuckle/arm, and had very unpopular rear suspension.

*'96 was virtually the same as the '95, but reverted back to the '94 model rocker linkage knuckle/arm to "fix" the handling.

'97+ got more improvements:
*New footpegs/mounts with a much wider spaced footpeg frame mounts for a more stable longer wearing footpeg (this width difference is quite plain to see when comparing frames, if trying to ID the year).
*New redesigned swingarm with a very tall fat box section for added rigidity (very easy to spot visually), and was 18mm longer than the previous swingarm. Bonus for a slight bit of added KDX hill climb stability vs our very short wheelbase stock KDX's, honestly this was a big part of what made me justify taking this plunge with my spare engine while having two complete 220's already.
*New rocker linkage knuckle/arm for '97, as well as new pull rod links, both I suspect were to tune for the slightly longer swingarm and it's added leverage advantage against the shock.

*'98 got yet again a new rocker linkage knuckle/arm... same pull rods '97-'01, FYI. Reviews said 98 was a very stiff suspension. While this could be due to valving and spring rate entirely, I suspect this rocker linkage change may have something to do with it.
*The 1998 KX125 shock was 1.5mm shorter to give the bike a slightly lower center of gravity for better cornering. I suspect the 1999-2002 shocks were of the same length after that change, considering the very high ground clearance I'm seeing on all KX bikes through 2002.
*'98 also got a "revised frame," according to Kawasaki literature, but I'd found more info stating that the only revisions were added brackets to fit the new 1998 model year electronics to work with the power jet carb etc., so the frame was virtually identical to the '97.


'98+ KX125 engines got a shorter connecting rod, and much better power valve design which unfortunately was revised every single model year change from 1998-2002 ( = making parts sourcing more difficult/scarce as PV top end parts must match the cylinder year), before 2003 brought a total engine redesign which all but copies the venerable YZ125 mill, but is a high rpm screamer that's gutless at lower to mid rpm range until the revs are pinned to the moon. '98-'02 seem to be a very good candidate for one to build a 134cc woods ported engine, which is still a possibility for my long term whenever I work through or get rid of a backlog of projects


Due to my fanatical love for the purple and green '96 KX/KDX aesthetic, and '97 still being mostly purple minus the shroud plastics, the '97 with the upgraded footpeg mounting dimension is the top pick for me, as the '96-only purple shrouds will mount up just the same!
Any of these frames '95-'02 would be just fine though. The '03-'05 were the best engines and the most slender chassis, with great forks and shock, lower center of gravity, etc, and while some love the feel of the bikes those 3 years, the last 2-stroke generation, the geometry is too "modern/Euro" for my likings with lazier steering rake/caster angles, more offset to the triple clamps to compensate for the lazier steering, etc... There's some good commentary somewhere here from SS109 on this topic. I feel the 95-02 are the best candidates overall for the geometry, ground clearance, and chassis parts interchange.


I'm keeping my eyes peeled for some good deals on '97-ish KX125 chassis parts from here on out! I'll have to send out a cylinder and head to Tom Morgan Racing or Boyko Racing here real soon to get it back in time to get to town in late January on making this build a reality.


From what I'm gathering, it's the FMF Gnarly Desert pipe (and the very scarce Bill's pipe) which have major frame interference issues on these KX frames, requiring the chamber be spaced out forward considerably, up to an inch, or else cutting and welding the frame. I'd seemed to have read that perhaps the Pro Circuit pipe has a bit better fitment, but a friend in NZ with a '96 KX125 / 220 hybrid has the Gnarly Woods pipe, and it surprisingly seemed to clear with no modifications... Perhaps the torquey KDX220SR-head engine build and the Gnarly Woods pipe (for a low rpm grunty engine for technical singletracks) might be the best engine to fit this chassis/build if frame clearance was a major issue? I do very much love the Pro Circuit Platinum 2 pipes for the '95-'06, however, so that's the first choice.

Chuck78 wrote: 12:35 am Nov 18 2025 Any of these frames '95-'02 would be great for a hybrid build. The '03-'05 were the best engines and the most slender chassis, with great forks and shock, lower center of gravity, etc, and while some love the feel of the bikes those 3 years, the last 2-stroke generation, the geometry is too "modern/Euro" for my likings with lazier steering rake/caster angles, more offset to the triple clamps to compensate for the lazier steering, etc... There's some good commentary somewhere here from SS109 on this topic.
I feel the 95-02 are the best candidates overall for the geometry, ground clearance, and chassis parts interchange.

Here's what I was referencing in addition to my personal handling and chassis geometry leanings:

viewtopic.php?p=191224#p191224

SS109 wrote: 03:49 am Nov 28 2017 ...the '03 and up KX's, IMO, the handling is sub-par to the '96 to '02 models. They changed the offset of the triple clamps from 22mm to 25mm on '03 and up and, in '03 only, they removed the high speed compression from the shock. The '99-'02 shock will fit the '03 chassis so that's a fairly cheap and easy fix. The triple clamps are another story.

The 25mm triple clamp offset causes some weird handling quirks with the front end trying to knife and push, back and forth, with no predictability or reason. Do some research on the net about this on the '03 and '04 bikes. The '05-'07 bikes were better but even they work better with 22mm or even 21.5mm offset. Anyway, in '02 the KX's switched from 46mm to 48mm KYB forks. So, only the '02 stock clamps have the better 22mm offset and will fit the '03-'04 KX's if you swap stems (I'm not sure if they'll fit the '05-'07 bikes) and they are about impossible to find. That only leaves the aftermarket for triple clamps that fix the problem and they tend to cost around $450+.

and in reply to that:

bufftester wrote: 08:08 pm Jul 21 2018 I like the 99-02, I used an 01 125 frame with an 99 250 front end.
I agree with SS109, the handling on the later bikes with the larger offset made the front end hunt pretty bad (the older ones do it as well, just not as badly) and they didn't track like the KDX does. A steering stabilizer helps.

I feel the same as those comments on the 03-07 geometry. Not to my likings vs the KDX and the '95-02 KX125 geometry.

soup-n-sandwich wrote: 08:40 am Jul 21 2024

Well...

@soup-n-sandwich's KDX200H/220 bare frame
30.30lbs above (I do see the rocker linkage knuckle still bolted on, actually)


-vs-

26lbs 5.0oz (26.31lbs)
'97 KX125 frame
(missing the 4 seat subframe mounting bolts, but has the 2 aluminum headstays & bolts , exhaust hanger mount, & 2 chain rollers/bolts...







So the KX frame is about 4lbs lighter than the KDX frame...

I'm searching for a junk KDX frame for it's case saver hoops to weld onto the KX frame to better support the "wings" of the KDX skidplates that I'll be fitting to this (SxS KDX skidplate definitely should, hopefully the Hyde Racing pipe guard skid plate combo also as that's my #1...)
That'll add a little bit of weight, but worth it for rugged woods riding.




***The '97-'02 KX swingarms weigh 1lbs 10.5oz (1.66lbs) more than my KDX220SR swingarm (1994+ KDX220SR street legal models have a proper frame mounted - NOT unspring weight - upswept enduro kickstand, unlike our US market off-road model KDX220R/KDX200X/KDX200E/KDX250 with klunky heavy beginner's dual sport type kickstands @ 2.40lbs UNSPRUNG weight, which weigh twice as much as a Trail Tech billet kickstand which is frame mounted and NOT unsprung weight),
The much heavier swingarm partially negates the overall weight savings of the KX chassis vs the KDX *IF* you still latch on to the stock KDX kickstand, BUT is overall lighter than a 200E or 200H/220R swingarm with the garbage stock kickstand mounted where a kickstand does not belong as unsprung weight.
Meanwhile, the 4lbs frame weight reduction, & a smaller lower fuel tank, & 8oz lighter seat (or lighter uncomfortable MX seats on 1999+) will reduce the perceived weight and feel of the bike more, meanwhile, forcing you to ditch the 2.4lbs of unsprung nuissance kickstand weight aka the root/brush snagger that bites you badly when sliding backwards down a hill with the bike on it's side, entangling the kickstand in the worst possible scenarios occasionally...

The KX axle is not quite as wide as the KDX due to the MX style chain adjuster bolts vs snail cams and wider axle on the KDX, so a slight weight savings is due there (very miniscule), but titanium axles are readily available for the 20mm KX diameter and approximate width for many classic models and for larger diameter 2003+ non-current models' rear axles, Titanium chain adjuster nuts and bolts even from Chinese Ti sites for the adjusters will shed a slight bit more, + the KX rotor bolts, while the same diameter and pattern as the KDX, use smaller diameter rotor bolts and are a slightly thinner rotor as well. Aluminum rear sprockets (wear faster than an o-ring chain but boy are they light) or a Renthal TwinRing aluminum sprocket with steel outer toothed ring, or the Dirt Tricks superlight version steel sprockets (the $$$ premium ones that are the rainbow zinc chromate finish) are all nice weight savings to help offset the addition of the swingarm's unsprung weight, but tire selection can also be a big source of weight savings especially if you run Tubliss and can afford to run a thinner carcass tire like the Kenda Ibex hard enduro tires etc. MotoZ Arena Hybrid Gummy was a nice lighter medium carcass that grips pretty incredibly, if looking to save weight but definitely not saving dollars (pricey Australian tire but very nice).


The '97+ KX swingarm does add some weight, but at a bonus of a 16mm minumum to 31mm longer wheelbase for technical steep hill climb stability without being as long as modern bikes (which I can never really get fully accustomed to the slugging uninspired handling of that modern full size 250/300 feel), and more torsional rigidity under hard acceleration with the fatter swinger. '94-'96 have the older version swingarm which is the same box section size roughly as the KDX, but with MX style chain adjusters still, so that would be the best choice if REALLY trying to save weight.

.


Seat differences - the KDX seat is only around 5.5-6.5oz heavier roughly
(2.5oz lighter as pictured minus the weight of the second seat cover under the green ribbed outer cover - the KX125 seat has a black/purple cover underneath the visible cover, FYI... I'll edit this soon when I get a chance to weigh just a replacement cover)








I've got this NOS Acerbis oversized integrated shrouds / fuel-in-shrouds purple tank that was an impulse buy and incredible score, & which really re-lit the spark to build either a KX134X woods build, or a KX125/KDX hybrid...
But these orange/pink-ish/yellow Acerbis graphics are very likely to at least get covered up (if not removed/replaced) by some more proper purple 1996 OEM-style KX checkered flag full protective cut heavy duty vinyl graphics from TSB or Ringmaster Images / Action Sports Decals, or perhaps I'll get an enlarged version of that off a custom template to cover (protect) more of the exposed purple plastic tank....







I may pick up a green or translucent version of this same tank to ride firstly just to make sure the added width and fuel weight out to the sides doesn't give significantly undesirable handling/balance traits, before christening the rare purple beast.... The fuel-in-shrouds tank barely adds any width to the knee area at the rear (still probably a hair narrower than the KDX200H / KDX220R), but it DEFINITELY adds some thickness/width up front at the radiator area, but at the same time, allows you to run stock capacity (not filling the OS tank to capacity) and keep the weight much lower than stock, I'm just uncertain about how the weight out to the sides further will feel vs carrying it up higher... the IMS 3.1 gallon tank that requires a small portion of the tops of the OEM shrouds to be removed might be the best bet overall really, I might as well cut the beat up OEM purple shrouds I have to remove the top filler neck portion of the shrouds (they completely cover the black stock 2.2 gallon fuel tank) instead of tossing $150 shipped at a used 30 year old plastic tank if I go that route and decide against running the big purple tank. I really should preserve that rare piece for only when the added capacity is necessary, really... Run a stock or IMS 3.1 gallon tank most of the time, as I'd like to avoid more of the high risks of damaging the big tank's outer shroud areas under my frequent hard-enduro-inspired adventures...


Here's a shot of the OEM graphics for 1996 that I love so much, I have the KDX version of this with the KX checkered flag as well on my primary ride + one set of spares:









I'm really liking these '94-'02 KX's, particularly the '97-'98 with the latest updates in the frames but still retaining the classic '94-98 stylings... The really stout '97-'02 swingarm (tall box section, slightly longer), needle bearing swingarm pivot thrust bearings instead of thrust bushings is nice, as well as the oversized hollow swingarm pivot that weighs less than the KDX/KX500 version but is more rigid, & 18mm longer swingarm than the KDX & '96 & earlier KX swingarm, the 20mm narrower frame (at the perimeter frame tank area, maybe 12mm narrower at the pegs), and a tank that doesn't protrude well above the steering neck... As well as '97+ having larger foot peg mounting for newer pegs + less wear on the peg pins, + the removable seat subframe...

I'm still working on rehabbing my old house (then rental) to sell ASAP, no time or further funds to drop on the bike until that's sold, unless of course I stumble upon more scarce parts! I've made a good list parts and mods needed for the build, including more titanium hardware. Since I don't have a lot of the nuts and bolts parts, I figured I may as well aim for titanium if budget allows, although a goal was to compare a hybrid build vs a Showa shock & fork swapped KDX220 with a full titanium hardware package and all the mods I could pull off on it for upgrades as well as weight savings...

The KX platform has lots of perks, I'm sure I'll love the finished product quite well, although a fully built and titanium fastener equipped KDX220 will still come pretty close in real world riding experiences,but the KX hybrid will have a slight edge on it... I'm keeping both for sure though!


Oh, and the '97+ KX frames will fit OEM Yamaha footpegs, including the OEM titanium versions, with minor mods - 1mm of material ground off the frame mating side, and a spacer on the top side of the pin to fill the 1mm gap on the peg mounts. Used eBay titanium YZ pegs are a score, 45% lighter than steel! Yamaha actually has a really nice selection of factory footpegs, 8 different styles with a very long range of compatibility as expected of the Japanese 2-stroke stalwarts. More material can be removed from them to fit the '95-'06 KDX frames and the '96& earlier KX frames as well. The KX footpeg pins will be required still, & probably slightly tweaked KX springs (they don't wrap around the extra thick KX frame peg mount so well vs thinner Yamaha, perhaps the steel frame Yamahas had different springs vs the 2006+ aluminum frame years?

I'm real excited about these bike projects as well as riding in 2026, to say the very least...