KDXRIDER.NET

I am really excited! I just won a set of '94 kx 250 forks on e-bay. I see that most people have used '96 and newer forks when they converted. I was wondering if any of you have any experience with '94 forks and whether they will be a noticeable improvement over the stockers. Should I keep looking for a newer set or will these work ok?

The reason I bought them is that the previous owner had already swapped out the stem for a klx stem (should be the same as kdx), so I would just have to bolt them on . According to the seller, they were revalved by pro-action for woods riding. Another reason was that I would still be able to use the 43 mm seal driver I have.

I have a '98 wheel. I cross-referenced the parts and it appears that axle, axle holders and wheel bearings are the same part number. I hope this means that the wheel will bolt right up. The springs are 0.38 and I weigh 170# without gear, should I look into stiffer springs?

I'm just trying to get a feel for any issues I may be overlooking. Any comments or advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!!!

Tony.

Sounds like a good deal!

I put 95's on my brothers which are the same as the 94's and they work great!

I was going to use a set of 94 forks for the conversion on my bike. When I tore down the forks to put new seals in the tubes were bent. Had to pick up a set of 96 forks instead. The 94's should work just fine however. The 98 wheel should bolt right up. KarlP has a set of 94 forks on his KDX as well if I remember right.

Indawoods wrote: I put 95's on my brothers which are the same as the 94's and they work great!

Same size, no mid valve on the 94's though.

Thanks for the info guys! I cant wait to get them on my bike.

For your weight i'd start with the 0.38's and move up from there.

I would agree with mOrie on that. I have .43 springs in my 98 forks and they are stiff compared to the .40 springs that were in the stock forks.

m0rie wrote:

Indawoods wrote: I put 95's on my brothers which are the same as the 94's and they work great!

Same size, no mid valve on the 94's though.

Personally... I think mid-valves suck in the woods. Mine will be replaced with the traditional check valve this winter.

Thanks guys!

Indawoods wrote:

m0rie wrote:

Indawoods wrote: I put 95's on my brothers which are the same as the 94's and they work great!

Same size, no mid valve on the 94's though.

Personally... I think mid-valves suck in the woods. Mine will be replaced with the traditional check valve this winter.

So it seems I may have been better off with the '94s anyway. Looks like the mid-valve and spring rate are the only differences as far as I can tell by the parts diagrams. The forks I bought were re-valved for woods riding anyway, so I should be good to go! Thanks for the info guys!

Tony