sir dabs alot Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 I had a 2006 Rev-3 250now I have a 2008 Rev-3 250. I know there were some frame changes from '06 to '08. For what ever reason I'm just not riding the '08 as well. I pick up twice the points. My balance isn't as good on this one. Anyway, I've tinkered with suspension settings. My '06 suspension was a bit worn and soft and that may be the whole difference. Any ideas??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul w Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 thats strange................i had an 05 250 and bought an 08 new, my results also slipped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan williams Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 From '00 to '06 Beta had a primary side flywheel on the 270 and not on the 250. In '07-'08 the 250 received the primary side flywheel and the 270 didn't. The '08 has a Keihin carb that absolutely must be kept clean. It is much more sensitive to environment and if it gets a bubble of water in it's pilot circuit the bike will run awful down low. It won't evaporate either. It has to be disassembled and blown out. On my '08 270 the bike also comes stock with the fast throttle tube (white) I don't know if this is the same for the 250 but earlier bikes came stock with the slow throttle. I also went down one tooth on the countershaft sprocket whick made the bike much easier to control at slow speeds. Another big help was the use of V-force carbon reeds. The tractor torque added by the carb0n reeds helps make the bike a real trouper when I screw up at low RPM. There are a couple of other fixes I've posted about earlier including a clutch fix that cures the grabbiness/slip problems and a fix for the electrical gremlins. I think I should document the clutch fix better though. I'll work on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grahamjayzee Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 Dan, sorry for being a bit thick, but can you clarify the business about the primary side flywheel? What does this mean in real terms? The reason I ask is because I have a 2001 250 and am thinking about a replacement to something a bit newer. I've had rear brake issues so if I stick with Beta I want to go for the later 2-pot rear (I believe that's 2005 onward?). I'm pretty happy with the delivery of my 250; it doesn't seem too soft or too agressive. I don't really know the relative power charachteristics of the 250 vs the 270 but usually like the bigger engine's grunt and ability to 'plonk' and find grip as long as they are not too snappy. How do the bikes with the various flywheel positions/ years/ capacities compare in respect to power delivery? Thanks Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir dabs alot Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Well, I think I figured it out. My problem has more to do with suspension and body positioning than power delivery. I love the power delivery on the '08 and think it is at least as smooth as the '06. I have a 10t counter shaft sprocket, the rear is stock. I had an 11t on the '06. I may try a slow throttle. I had one on my '06 and liked it. I like for my bike to be mellow with no surprises. As close to electric as possible. I don't like my suspension springy feeling either, just predictable. Anyway, when I had my '06 I had a hard time adapting to it coming from a Gasser. I put some 1/2" set back and 1/2" lower pegs on it and loved it. Well, what was the first thing I did to my '08? I put the set back pegs on it. The more I thought about it the more I realized the bike just didn't have the same fell as my '06. I thought I had my suspension too tight or maybe my rebound setting was too quick. Today I put the stock pegs back on it and rode around in the yard. It was quiet a bit easier to balance than with the set back pegs. The seems to have me more "centered" on the bike. I had read somewhere that the '07 or '08 one had gone to lower and farther back pegs. Maybe it was just the mounts were situated lower and farther back. I can't find the article now. I guess a few rides will tell the tale..... Now, back to the comment above about the V-Force reeds. The first Beta that I ever took a spin on was an '06 Rev-3 and it had V-Force reeds and I think the guy said he had it ported and polished. Maybe just polished??? I will tell you, that was the sweetest motor I have ever been on. It was soooo easy to ride, so predictable and so tractor like. Does anyone know if any jetting changes are necessary when going to the V-Force reeds and if so, how big of a hassle was it to sort it out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pa. Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 The foot pegs moved in 2007 from memory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan williams Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 V-force,no jetting changes just bolt them in and ride. As for the differences in the Betas over the years that's almost impossible to quantify. Beta tends to oscillate between clubman bike and expert bike. The situation the 270/250 was meant to address I believe. The big difference with the primary side flywheel weight is the same as adding any other flywheel weight. The bike won't rev as quickly with the weight and more energy is stored in the rotating mass whith the flywheel. What this means in practical terms is an engine with more flywheel will be less jumpy with the throttle in tight rolly rocks but also slower to respond when instant power is called for. When riding steep hills with the '08 270 a burst of throttle will lift the front end for the transition and the throttle must be held above a certain setting. Bump on the way requires a flick of the wrist to load and unload the suspension. The '05 with the extra flywheel is a little different. Starting at the bottom of a climb I'd rev the engine to store energy and dump the clutch to release it into the rear wheel. Similar acceleration but different techniques. At the top of the climb with the extra flywheel you just roll off the throttle and the bike finishes with the stored energy in the flywheel. Do the same thing on the bike with less flywheel and the result is usually a stall just before you're successfully on top of the obstacle. It's not all bad with less flywheel though as the more responsive engine lets you make corrections you can't make on the heavy flywheel bike. Having ridden both I can honestly say I prefer the less flywheel/quicker engine but it really has to be running right or it can be a real handful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grahamjayzee Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 Thanks Dan, that really clears it up! I hadn't grasped that the primary flywheel equated to additional weight. Obvious really... I personally find an over-soft bike difficult to ride on anything that isn't a flowing section. That's fine for most clubman trials in the south midlands region of the UK, but I find that (as you said) clutching to release the full moo at the transition of a climb is more likely to see me lose grip. You can 'wind on quickly' with a slightly snappier bike that just seems to load the rear tyre better. At least for me it does! I remember borrowing a really soft TY mono years ago when I used to ride a 260 Zero and completely failing to lift the front over a 3ft log across a descent. I got over it. Shame the bike didn't... Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.