The KTM Page

I've been an on-again, off-again KTM guy over the years, first with a 1999 300EXC and most recently a 2016 350XC-F. Anyone familiar with off-road racing knows these are the go-to machines in the woods and on the track. But it wasn't always that way. In my early years of racing, European woods bikes were common and generally well received by magazines and the internet. They were also quirky, slower-handling and less refined than their Japanese counterparts. KTM apparently understood this and decided their long-term survival depended on staying ahead of technology. When I bought my first KTM, this strategy was already underway.

In 1999, the 300EXC was in its second production year with a hydraulically actuated clutch. The Japanese manufacturers wouldn't embrace hydraulic clutches for another two decades. Later, KTM would be the first to add electric starting to nearly all two-stroke models. Many scoffed at the idea that such easy-to-start motorcycles would benefit from the added weight and expense of starter motors...that is, until they spent some time with the e-start bikes. Ditto for transfer port injection, also a first arrival for large-scale two-stroke production. KTM dirt bikes seem to lose weight and gain horsepower nearly every year, and somehow the company has found a way to develop air forks which actually work well. Technology is their game, and KTM is winning.

Rewind to December 1998, and I could not have been more excited to ride my first KTM. I'd been ready to upgrade my 1996 Suzuki RMX250 and found limited options from Japanese manufacturers. Most had largely abandoned the two-stroke trail bike market in favor of heavy, carbureted, kick-start four stroke models. I was unconvinced and unimpressed and began looking seriously at the more expensive KTM models.

The KTMs were attractive in part because they were purpose-built racers right out of the crate. Unlike my previous dirt bikes, I wouldn't have to modify anything to get the performance I needed. The 300EXC was, for the most part, ready to race the day I bought it.

On the other hand, some of the 300EXC's components lacked durability and failed quickly. In the first 6 months of 1999, I bent the handlebars, bent the upper and lower triple clamps, bent both brake rotors, cracked a small piece off the rear hub, tore my seat cover, and dented the pipe so badly that it had to be replaced at the end of the year. In many cases, KTM had sacrificed weight reduction for strength. Once I replaced those parts with more robust aftermarket alternatives, my mechanical issues reduced dramatically. On the other hand, my bank account never recovered.

After four years and 250 engine hours, I sold the 300EXC and bought a 2002 300MXC. As usual, finding a deal was more important than buying the bike I wanted most (another 300EXC), so I settled for a reasonably priced 300MXC. This bike was very similar to my 1999 300EXC, with the exception of the front suspension and the transmission. KTM switched to an "upside-down" 43mm fork, which was much lighter than the 50mm conventional forks on the 300EXC but not nearly as plush. The transmission was geared more like a motocross bike, with closer spacing. I gave up top speed, but actually preferred that type of gearing in the woods.

KTMs of the 1990s and early 2000s were notorious for spotty jetting. The internet was alive with jetting debates. How could so many KTM owners have such varying opinions on jetting specs? The answer may have been this: The KTM factory wasn't manufacturing engines to its exact specifications. Whether this is true or not could also be fiercely debated, but my personal experience with the 300MXC seemed to suggest gaps in manufacturing tolerances as the culprit.

During break-in, the 300MXC's engine suffered from pre-detonation at 1/4 throttle, no matter the jetting combination. On an internet discussion group, it was suggested a 50/50 mix of pump and race gas might help. This worked, but I constantly had to track down race fuel. It didn't make sense.

Then, in September 2003, a lengthy discussion appeared on ktmtalk.com about cylinder head intolerance causing pre-detonation and inconsistent jetting across the same engines. A small company in Texas claimed that machining the cylinder head to proper squish band parameters would solve pre-detonation problems. I sent my cylinder to Texas and $40 later, I had an engine which ran fine on pump gas.

Front brakes were also a hot topic in the online world, with some complaining and others praising. I was on the complaining end, suffering from a mushy feel. That problem was never solved completely, although using the stickiest (and shortest-life) brake pads helped.

Next came a transmission problem. Less than 30 hours into its life, the shift drum bolt came loose, costing me 4 weeks and $250 to fix. I found no evidence of thread lock on the bolt, even though the factory parts guide indicates thread locker must be used.

The 300MXC was my primary bike for the 2003 and most of the 2004 seasons, but after that I was done. I took a KTM sabbatical for several years, riding converted Kawasaki KX250s while KTM invested significantly in improving its manufacturing.

By the mid-2000s, KTM began catering to serious racers with its launch of XC models. These were heavily based on motocross models, modified minimally for off-road use. In effect, KTM was doing motocross woods conversions for their customers.

After several years of racing woods-converted Kawasaki KX250 motocross bikes, I was ready to give KTM another chance with their XC line. I bought a 2009 250XC and found it to be every bit as refined as any Japanese dirt bike I'd ever owned. The jetting was nearly perfect, it had the quick handling of a motocross bike, and...wait for it...nothing broke. Almost nothing, that is. The only issues I had in 9 years were a minor malfunction of the power valve actuator, and I had to rebuild the starter motor. Otherwise the bike ran flawlessly.

When I bought the 250XC, I owned two other dirt bikes. Within a year, I sold both. The 250XC was a true do-it-all motorcycle, and I needed nothing else. My initial thoughts on this bike are here and the many aftermarket parts I added.

Of course the first thing I did was spend a bunch more money to set it up to my liking, with lots of aftermarket stuff. My first focus was on the steering damper. This is consistently my toughest challenge with any new bike, as I prefer the Scotts damper mounted on top of the handlebars. Apparently nobody does this anymore, as the options were pretty much limited to the damper being mounted under the handlebars, which means the bars end up being raised higher. I wasn't sure I'd like that, but it turned out just fine.

The other thing I wanted to preserve was the vibration-dampening system KTM uses for handlebar mounts. BRP was about the only option with rubber mounts that would also allow for a steering damper, so I spent the money and got a pretty nice system.

Switching to a 4-stroke put me on a serious learning curve. These things are just...different. They sound weird. Mine was loud enough to hurt my ears when I cracked the throttle wide open. Under the seat and tank were more electronics than I'd ever seen on a dirt bike. In stock form, the 350 XC-F stalled easily, partly because it was geared for GNCC champions. After experimentation, I dropped a full tooth on the countershaft sprocket. I also set the idle speed at a pretty healthy RPM. After that, stalling was less of an issue, but it still happened.

On the good side, the 350 cruised awesomely through any kind of conditions which involved sketchy terrain. In the rocks, the 350 hooked up better than any 2-stroke I've ever ridden. I can see why, when I moved to St. Louis in the late-1990s, the Missouri off-road guys embraced 4-strokes so quickly. The rocky terrain was made for this kind of bike. The 350 was also a little smoother in the mud.

This smoothness was countered by less throttle response than a 2-stroke. Fuel injection helped, but the 350 wouldn't lift the front wheel quite as quickly as the 250 and 300 two-strokes I've owned over the years. The 350 also didn't turn as well as a two-stroke. I had read about this, and it's true. However, it's not very noticeable in the woods. I felt it mostly on grass tracks. Much of my practice riding is grass tracks laid out on my pasture land, and sometimes I had to manhandle the bike around turns. The turning traits of the 4-stroke are more than offset by how smooth the bike handled grass, especially if wet. It was actually a bit difficult to make the rear wheel break traction in dry grass, unless I was really leaning into a turn.

I can see why 4-strokes took over the motocross world and are so prevalent in GNCC and World Enduro Series racing. I can also understand why 2-strokes rule in extreme enduros. Sometimes you just need a quick blip of throttle to loft the front wheel in an instant.

As far as maintenance, the answer is yes, the 4-stroke engine requires a little more TLC than a 2-stroke. Oil changes are more frequent, the fancy oil required for these engines is expensive, and you need a lot of oil filters. It's like most things...tradeoffs.

To work on the noise, I bought an FMF "Q" muffler ( "Q" meaning "quiet"). As usual, the manufacturer's claims were dubious. A sound meter might say it's quieter than stock, but when you're trying not to anger your neighbors, in actual operating conditions the bike was still too loud. Likewise, the dyno may indicate more power, but I couldn't tell a lick of difference. So basically I bought an expensive spark arrestor.

One thing I did not buy was an aftermarket seat. Amazingly, KTM actually sold me a bike with a seat that didn't feel like concrete. I did buy the fancy Enduro Engineering complete headlight/taillight combo with a wiring harness. That marked the first time in about a decade that I had an actual working headlight and taillight on my race bike.

Final Conclusions

In 2019, I installed a Rekluse clutch, which cured all stalling problems and helped me be lazier with the clutch. It was an expensive way to fix an annoying feature of a racy dirt bike. KTM's XC line of bikes is clearly designed for more open terrain than what I ride in the Midwest. I was able to make my old 250 XC work because 2-strokes aren't as stall-prone as 4-strokes. I could slow-ride through tight trees and not hear the dreaded tick-tick-tick of a 4-stroke motor about to stall. And I didn't have to spend $1,100 to fix the problem.

I also discovered the downside of the mass of electronics that make a modern fuel injected engine run. When the engine wouldn't fire, I had to get professional help. In 20+ years of subjecting 2-stroke engines to unspeakable abuses, I was always able to make them run again. Not so with the 4-stroke. At my stage in life, I was unwilling to take on the added responsibility of being an electrical engineer, just to make the engine run.

After less than 50 engine hours, I sold the 350XC-F in April 2020...and bought a 2-stroke.

Certified World Wide Website

"Orange" you glad
you ride a KTM?

I'm a dad and I tell jokes.

Put some Austrian engineering between your legs.

Experiences with pumpkin bikes

Searching for deals and finding one

Switching to a 300MXC

Then came the problems

KTM suffers quality control issues...maybe.

The Amazing 250XC

Finally, Japanese-style refinement.

My first Four-Stroke (race bike)

That time I decided to buy a 350XC-F

So let's explore my feelings and talk about this bike's personality.

I made the 350XC-F into a winter bike. It was fun.

Last photo before I sold the bike.